economy and creating jobs. i think the answer to that is no and we will have more ideas to put forward. he mentioned clearly about the things that are already up on capitol hill that can be acted upon immediately in terms of the trade deals that have already been negotiated that will support or create something like 70,000 american jobs, the need to get patent reform through and free up innovation and then obviously a measure that we believe will have bipartisan support to create an infrastructure bank to help private sector businesses to help build our bridges, highways and airports. congress can act on that when they return from recess. >> after the bipartisan struggle we have seen over the last weeks and months they are trying to

pass unemployment benefits which republicans will probably call more stimulus. going to be a hard sell? >> i don't think there is anything we assume as an easy sell in washington, because these are tough issues. we believe there will be bipartisan support for doing the right thing, which is in this case is extending a tax cut for working americans that will help them deal with high energy prices and also give them more money to spend, which, in turn, spurs economic activity, allows businesses to make decisions to hire more people and has a very positive effect overall on the economy. so we need to do everything we can in washington to make sure that we're taking measures that help the economy and help americans and help them find work. as the president said, it should not take a crisis to get us to come together to get us to do the things we need to do to help

the economy and he looks forward to further bipartisan corporation -- cooperation in the coming weeks and months. >> i couldn't help but notice the president's tone in his remarks and seems disgusted with washington, d.c., and you don't think that is fair? >> i think the american people were appalled by what they saw, the willingness to even hint at the possibility of even allowing the united states to default for the first time in its history in order to advance a specific agenda that had already been rejected by a majority in congress and certainly by a majority in the american public. now, the fact is, in the end, as we calmly predicted would be the case, cooler heads prevailed and compromise was achieved. the frustration that we all have

is that shouldn't take something this dramatic to force that kind of compromise because in the end, everyone is here for the same reason, which is to make washington work in a way that is good for this country and good for the american people. >> i revise my remarks to frustrated. >> i'm not sure -- go ahead and ask your question. you take issue with the substance? >> we have expressed frustration on the process on a number of occasions. >> the president has he learned any lessons from this experience that will help him deal with this congress perhaps any better? and does he accept any responsibilities for the quote, unquote, service that we have seen in the last month. >> i think this president from very early on in this process

made abundantly clear his willingness to compromise, his willingness to accept the fact that he would not in this environment, divided government, get everything he wanted, that whatever the end product would be would not be the ideal legislation that he as president would have written or democrats would have written in the congress. i certainly don't think and this view is shared by the majority of the american people don't think he was unwilling to compromise. >> majority of the americans thought he needed to compromise more. >> i think that reflects the general view of his approach and why people thought he was more willing and demonstrated his willingness to compromise. there is a lot of time for after-action reports and evaluations on this process. through every stage, including the talks led by the vice

president and the negotiations approached them in good faith with a willingness to compromise and that good faith and willingness helped allow in the end for everyone to come together and achieveal result that while not ideal, did avert a crisis and did allow us to make a significant down payment. >> no responsibility and no lessons learned yet? >> characterize it however you want but i answered the question. >> there was language on capitol hill yesterday that said they were felt pick pocketted by this deal. senator reid said on the floor before the vote, the tea party direction of this congress in the last few months has been disconcerting. does the president agree? >> i think the process that created a situation where -- in some ways, we are reliving it is

something i don't particularly want to do. but if you remember when we encountered this situation where the house in particular was passing measures that did not have any chance of getting through the senate, that did not have the support of the american people, that did not have any chance of being signed into law by this president, doing it once to make a point is pretty standard operating procedure in washington, doing it again and again with the deadline looming before us that could have resulted in economic catastrophe seemed to us unhelpful. so in that sense, we would -- wouldn't labeling the members or categorizing them, there needed to be and evently there was a recognition by the majority of republicans and democrats that the only way to avert this crisis was to reach a come

compromise which by definition would require each side to give. >> is there a so-called tea party direction that made this more challenging? >> there was a sentiment held by some members of congress, especially in the house, that -- there was certainly some slice of membership in the house who thought that default wouldn't matter, that they wouldn't vote to raise the debt ceiling regardless and we should never raise the debt ceiling. imagine if you understand what the debt ceiling is and raising it and paying the bills, that position is untenable and nonsensical. so, again, without categorizing or labeling those members who had -- held those views were not helpful to reaching an agreement that was good for the country. it was clearly an impediment to

getting the compromise sooner than a day before the deadline. >> does the president sign this begrudingly. >> no, the president has said and this was a compromise that was good for the economy, that averted a catastrophe, that allows us to reduce -- cut the deficit by guaranteed more than $2 trillion, that does it in a way that protects our vital investments in education and research and other areas that are the foundation for future job creation and sets up a process where by hopefully we can come together and do the second stage. while not perfect, it's a lot more than nothing and it's a lot more than just averting a

catastrophe. >> do he thank any members of congress for their votes? >> i think he was appreciatetive to a number of members of congress for the role they played, for constructive ideas, for their willingness to accept less than 100%. but i don't know he has called any members post-vote to thank them. >> i did notice that he thanked them in his remarks today. he didn't congratulate congress in their work. >> there are a lot of things that aren't in speeches. he didn't talk about the weather. >> no, he believes a suitable compromise, not what we could have done. as you heard him say, was disappointed that we were not able to achieve something bigger and he fought throughout this process, argued, tried to

persuade leaders in congress to go for something big because, remember, he made the point and he was correct that anything less than big would be just as hard as big and we saw that. we saw how hard getting this done was. and the president thinks that a bigger measure that addressed all of these issues at once would have been no more difficult than this ended up being, if there had been the will to put it before the congress. >> does the president share the view of lamar alexander that these cuts -- what are the long-term deficit drivers. >> that is self-evident in the initial cuts because they are limited to discretionary spending, defense and non-defense. the second stage will, as the

special committee sets up and puts forward a proposal, we believe that and most people believe that the issues remain to be addressed are entitlement reform and tax reform. so the answer is, we certainly agree with that as an obvious assessment for the initial rounds of cuts that are embedded here. and the president has made the point as he has made all along, if you are concerned about consequential deficit reduction, the kind that affects the fiscal outlook for the country, you need to go beyond discretionary spending. it is not a substantial part of our budget -- unless you are willing to eliminate programs that are absolutely necessary and very popular and i don't think members of congress will want to go that route. so you have to do it in a balanced way. if you don't, if you rule out defense and rule out revenues,

as the house republican budget did, you have to do drastic things to medicare, medicaid, potentially social security and that's not the right approach, we think, for the american people. >> were a lot of women inspired for congresswoman giffords. has the president spoken with her by phone and will she be here at the white house with her husband? >> i don't think he has spoken to her by phone. >> after she was shot in january, there were a lot of people who said enough with these ridiculous analogies and harmful metaphors and yesterday the vice president was on capitol hill and some described terrorists -- as terrorists. does the president think that is

proper discourse? >> no, they don't. he didn't say those words and the congressman in question has said he regrets using them. a number -- it was a product of an emotional discussion, very passionately held positions in this debate but does not mean it's not appropriate, the vice president and president doesn't think so. any kind of comments like that are simply not conducive to the kind of political discourse that we hope to have. >> last thing when you were talking to jeff about various economic policies that way or may not come up. the president came to office about spending money to get out of the recession. no need to talk about the stimulus. some think it worked some think it didn't. doesn't the debt deal suggest that the coffers are empty and

the president is going to have a hard time coming up with something dramatic to make this recovery morrow bus. what's his message to the american people? >> i think you heard it from the president today and it is simply a fact that in a time when we are tightening our belts, you have to be careful and focus how you invest federal money and the president approaches it that way and that's why in this process he was so committed to ensuring that key investments that help create jobs, build a foundation through education or innovation were protected and that's the approach he'll take going forward. it's important to remember, we are responsible and the elected members in washington for both parties are responsible for making decisions and choices to ensure that the economy grows and jobs are created. and it is simply not the case by

anyone's serious economic analysis that placing discretionary spending is going to, by itself, ensure that we continue to grow and create jobs. it can be helpful if it's done carefully and if things are phased in a way that is not harmful to growth, if you take those big steps, can send a signal to investors that the united states government has its fiscal house in order and that can have a very positive impact. but there are other measures that the government can and should take, including ensuring that the regulations we pursue appropriately protect americans, their food and water and air, but do not unnecessarily impinge on businesses and things like the payroll tax cut that the president talked about today. we should not sit on our hands and say there is nothing we can do. in fact, that would be irresponsible and there are many

things that this president believes we can continue to do to ensure that the economy grows. let me say that the president has signed the bill and turned it into law. >> going back to gabby giffords for a second, what was the president reaction when she appeared? >> i wasn't with him, but i'm sure he was as moved by it, as anyone who was watching it was. it was a powerful moment and a wonderful moment because obviously her courage, her bravery, her unbelievable perseverance and commitment to service, but also it was a testament to how something like that can bring everyone together after such a contentious debate

and i think that was a great moment. as you know, the president met with congresswoman giffords down in florida when he went to witness the launch of her husband's space shuttle that unfortunately was scrubbed on that occasion. but i think we were all powerfully moved by that. >> in the end, more republicans -- house republicans voted for this bill than democrats. does the president now have a problem with his own party? >> no. i think we have said from the very beginning that the only way to get compromised legislation through the congress is to accept the fact that it has to be bipartisan and that in order to be bipartisan and therefore get votes from both democrats and republicans, you'll likely lose votes from republicans and democrats on any particular measure.

and you know, he is completely understanding and why some members may not vote for it. it's not perfect, but he is gratified by the fact that past the house democratic caucus and essentially more than half of the senate democratic caucus thought that this was a significantly significant compromise and essential one and we needed to get deficit reduction. >> one of their chief concerns is there are no new revenues. without redebating it, but what was the president's level of frustration? >> i think i answered this question a little bit, but the president believed this was an opportunity to get something truly significant in the $3 trillion to $4 trillion. that would only be achievable if

you did it in a balanced way and that was the approach he took. that was the approach that he argued to leaders of congress that should be taken. it was certainly the approach he took in his negotiations with the speaker of the house. he would certainly prefer if that was the legislation he had just signed today, but we don't live in the perfect world that allows for the things that we hope to happen happen all the time. and when it became clear that there wasn't the necessary political will or commitment to trying to get that through, we still had to deal with this issue and the president became committed to ensuring that the compromise we did reach achieved deficit reduction and did it in a way that retained the need for

balance and moved beyond the initial round of cuts that both sides had long previously agreed upon. >> and i know we will get information, but can you speak briefly about what the united states is going to do? >> well, as you know, the united states is the largest donor. yesterday, the united nations issued a warning that the familiarin is spreading and the situation is getting worse. u.n. has updated the number from 11 million to 12.4 million. the united states remains committed to assisting the people of somalia during this time. in the face of the extreme humanitarian needs coupled with an unpredictable situation on the ground, the united states has offered guidance to provide larger aid. this new guidance should clarify

that aid workers who are partnering with the u.s. government to help save lives under dangerous conditions are not in conflict with u.s. laws and regulations and i think you understand why that is because he controls so much of the territory and allowing for the flexibility gives the assurance to these aid workers that they can get that aid to the people who need it and not worry that they are operating in conflict with u.s. laws and regulations. >> does the president think that the debate has done any damage to investors or foreign leaders and feel a need to reach out and do any repairing in that regard? >> not that i have heard him express. i think most folks around the world who are watching this expected washington to resolve

this because it would have been so unthinkable had we not. and while we certainly saw some negative impact caused by this, by the doubt about whether or not the united states would deal with this and avert economic stroo -- catastrophe by allowing us to default, in the end, the specter of that happening compelled the leaders in washington to come together and achieve a compromise and send a signal that washington will not let the unthinkable happen and that we will continue to pay our obligations and honor our debt. that's very important. so i think nobody believes it was a good idea to wait until the very end to make it clear that that would happen.

we remained optimistic throughout that it would happen. the leaders of congress of both parties i think helpfully reiterated that they believed in the end that we would absolutely do this, that we would not let our borrowing authority expire and risk default. but there is no question it was a messy process and the messiness of the process was not particularly helpful. >> i mean -- [inaudible] >> we did have a number of debt countdown clocks. they have to be off the air now, right? >> [inaudible question] >> i think that we can say now with great authority that the united states honors its

obligations and pays its bills. we remain the safest of safe harbors and the actions taken by congress yesterday and today signed into law by the president moments ago that extends our debt ceiling through 2012, demonstrates that we will continue to meet our obligation and pay our bills and that that is a very good thing. >> as you move to the next phase of the deficit reduction battle talking about jobs, will we see the president deploy, calling members of congress and tweeting ? >> i can't really say what tactics he or we will employ to try to persuade congress on different measures going forward. you need to make your case and

he will continue to do that in all the ways that he has in the past. and predicting precisely how that will play out is hard to do. >> so it was successful? >> it was absolutely successful but it was successful in part because the american public was concerned and paying close attention to what was happening here. and the data was overwhelming that they were frustrated by the process and wanted washington to function and to compromise. >> do you think my colleague was referring to sort of a disfunction here. do you think that disfunction is an event that gives u.s. competitors an edge in the marketplace? >> i don't, but my opinion is probably worth what you paid for it. but, look, i think the united states of america is still the most powerful economy in the

world. it is an incredible engine for creativity and innovation and has the most smartest most effective work force in the world. we have a lot of things going for us despite the fractiones of our politics. >> when the president says government living within its means, does he mean zero deficits? >> no. he means you have to get your deficit and debt under control. we can get technical about deficit and debt ratios to g.d.p. and why those are so important particularly when you talk about debt to g.d.p. ratios and getting that trajectory in the right place for the long-term. and the only way to do that is to tackle entitlement reform and tackle tax reform. >> when the balanced budget

amendment has come up in each chamber in the fall, can we expect the president to argue against passage? >> the president's position on balanced budget amendments is very clear and i do not anticipate it will change, no. >> is the president going to propose a way to pay for unemployment extension, payroll tax continuation r&d tax credits? >> i don't want -- it's hard to know how that legislation would be creailted, what it might be attached to, so it's difficult to anticipate. it's important to note as was the case last year, that this is a one-year payout. it's not a significant contributor to the deficit. >> does he feel -- >> i don't know yet and we don't know how that will play out, but

he believes it's very important that we do extend the payroll tax cuts to give americans more money in their paychecks next year the same as they had this year. >> does the president believe that enough time between now and the end of november for a special committee to craft a full tax reform proposal that would deal with the bush tax cuts and take care of this whole battle? >> as we learned through the negotiating process, there was a variety of ways to skin that cat and ways to enact entitlement reform whether setting targets the way it was envisioned and one proposal was that the congress would be tasked with creating tax reform or else revenues would be generated through the expiration of the high income -- high end bush tax cuts. the answer is yes, in part

because the blueprints are there whether you look at the gang of six proposal or the bowles-simpson report. there are a number of ways to do this, especially when you narrow it down to the remaining issues, the entitlement reform and tax reform that there are only so many ways to get after this and they have been explored. there will be a complete menu for the committee to consider. >> we have a story, bloomberg says former new jersey governor corzine's firm sold -- >> where is this going and how i could possibly answer it? >> corzine's appointment by president obama. my question is governor corzine being considered for any white house jobs? house jobs? >> i have no