meaning fewer and fewer individuals will be covered under medicaid. at the endat the end of the days not only a funding issue. to ensure that it protect the health and safety of their patients. i want to make sure we have the highest quality staffing because we have all heard the nightmare stories when there is not equality staff taking care of someone slumped one. we made a commitment at the federal level, each and every american, that when we got older we would not have to live in poverty. for decades, americans have paid into medicare the expectation the government would honor its commitments. now we see an attempt to allow the government to back out of its commitment to seniors. that is wrong. it is not going to happen on my watch. i will fight to make sure that

social security and medicare are preserved for seniors and for generations to come. that is a commitment we made in america. it is what separates us from other countries. in the last congress, democrats made great strides to turnaround economy, protecting consumers in medicare and social security. we prevented bush from privatizing social security. when i go back next week i'm going to work to make sure this progress does not disappear. thank you for joining me this morning. it is a privilege to represent you. i would be glad to take any questions. [applause] i'm going to on hook the microphone so i do not have to stand behind the podium.

also make sure i do not fall. that would be dead. -- good. that would not look very good on c-span. the court is not long so i'm going to stand in the corner. we do not have a roving microphone syria fat -- if you have a question , over to this one here. i would be glad to take your question. >> good morning. yesterday, i know you like chris matthews and "hardball," the question that was posed to him is what was a labor looking for in president obama's speech on thursday? i think he gave a pretty good answer. it is not what we are looking for but maybe we are disappointed in what the president or the democratic

party has done. binder stand that, look, -- i understand that, look, any bill is probably going to shoot -- get shut down three full house. representative cantor is a good example of that. but we're looking for a presentation so when it comes to next year's election we can say this is what the democrats and the president did. it was the republicans who shot it down. we have to turn the house around. i just have a statement. >> i appreciate the comment. let me add. we are living in to evident -- divided government right now. we have a democratic president

and republican house. that signals we should be finding a way to work together. the top of my list, i obviously have a goal of political success, but it is a member of congress my responsibility is to the well-being of my constituents. that is why i am here. i go back and forth between washington to remain in touch with my constituents. i was disappointed that during the debt ceiling debate, during the debate to rid the budget or their republicans were on the brink of shut down, we were already, let me take you back for seconds two when president obama was inaugurated. the economy was on the process of disaster.

cipice of distaster. we were in freefall. now, although we have a long way to go and there are far too many people lot of work, we have made a lot of progress. we have added private-sector jobs for 17 months. we added 2.4 million jobs. we're going in the right direction instead of a free- fall. we have to pick up the pace. we can only do that if we work together. i think it is important that we focus on the jobs across america which is what president obama will talk about in his joint session address. i hope the republicans are focused on everyone because

right now they seem focused on one person's jobs, the man in the white house. if we work together instead of what happened during the debt ceiling crisis were they were more focused on protecting the most fortunate americans rather than a compromise that president obama wanted to put forest john boehner, there are more extreme elements this seemed to be controlling the decision making. that has not allowed for compromise and working together. that is unfortunate. i'm going to continue to push for common ground because i think that is the least you can expect. >> i am very happy to be here. i work for o.s.a.

gas has gone -- gone from a $60 gallon to four dollars a gallon. my food bill is sky-high. i do not have to tell you what has happened to the economy, i do not blame president obama. in that two years, we have not seen an increase in social security. my question to you is, what can we expect this coming year? are we ever going to get another increase? >> thank you for the question. it is a difficult situation economically. i want to answer your question in a different way. specifically on the cost of living, a lot of people perceive that congress controls and votes on the cost-of-living adjustment. we do not.

the trusties make that decision. it is based on a cpi index that is tied to inflation. tied to a market bracket that is out of date. the last couple of years, the trustees have said that because of the inflation rate, the cost of living has not gone at the same rate, it is gone -- down three calculation. it is crazy. it looks at a collection in a market basket. they take the cost of living of if you items and those items they look at are more like the items that families like mine spend money on as opposed to what senior suspended their money on. i support legislation that would

create a senior cpi. so that you would look at a market basket that is typical of what the seniors to spend money on and then you could see it is a truer reflection of inflation's impact on household income. then the cost of living adjustment would be more likely to come to you. the republicans refused to pick up that legislation. we tried to get it at the end of last year and they refused to take it out. we're stuck with the cpi that does not reflect the true nature of spending. two years ago, we did provide $250 to make up for the facts

that seniors did not get -- we did not do that last year because the republicans refused to support it. i know it seems like i'm being partisan. those are just the facts. we had support from democrats, not republicans. we have to make decisions together. to the rest of your comment, the lead up to your question on gas prices and food prices, the frustration i have over gas prices is that because we have such a divergence of opinion in washington between the two parties, the republican approach is to drill for more oil. really? there is an expression that says if you keep doing the same thing

over and over and expect different results, that is the definition of a word i will not say. but we have to make sure that we can make investments in renewable energy and wean ourselves off of oil. number one, that is not smart foreign policy. most oil companies are not our friends. to depend on countries for our energy needs that are not our friends, that is problematic. to say nothing of the fact that a lot of those countries have serious political problems anyway. we need to make investments. we need to have a universal agreement and an understanding that global warming is a problem. it is important for us to reduce our energy costs. we can do that by investing in renewable fuel here. that is important.

that will have an impact on food prices. if we're able to make sure that we don't have to move food around far distances, that will trickle down to the overall cost of groceries. it is in all of our interest to do that. i do not think that -- whether there's going to be a [unintelligible] . it is not my fault. tell your friends. it is a formula that i'm trying to help change. >> he said the magic words before about working together.

it hurts my heart to see how the country has fallen apart. i have seen some many changes in the last few years that i've never seen before. look of a hurricane's we have. look at all the flooding. never before. why is god punishing us? it is sad. i am 83 years old and i have never seen stuff like this. we have to wake up and smell the coffee and start believing in god or somebody that looks like a god. [applause] >> i do not want to blame god for natural disasters but i agree with you, i have been in public service for more than 20 years. i have been in the mint -- minority and majority.

i have worked with republicans were and democrats were in the leadership. one thing i have always worked hard on is to treat my opponents, people i do not agree with, with respect, and recognize that they may have a valuable point of view. even though i do not agree with them. right now what makes me so sad is i have never treated my republican colleagues, i treat them like they are my opponent's plan never liked my enemy. that is what i think we've reached to america in terms of polarization. that he party and the people who are running the republican party treats people they do not agree with a like they are the enemy. when they disagree with us, we're not wrong.

that is not how we do things in america. we should be working together. i go on the other side of the chamber of the time. hopefully through the -- try personality, and building relationships and trying to find issues we can work together on, i co-sponsored legislation with republicans all the time. that is what a democracy is all about. i also agree to disagree with opponents on the other side. and opponents on my side. i recognize, like i tell my children, and when they insist they want their way but i know it is not the right thing to do. they have to realize an important life lessons is that

it cannot always be your way. often the best outcome results from everybody giving a little. that might seem odd from someone with my political role but i think we have to commit to work together. that is what president obama has been working hard to do. that is evident to most people in the country. there is a contrast between the direction that we have been going, which we need to pick up the pace, he acknowledge is back, improved job creation, make sure we get people back to work. and the other direction which is proposed by our colleagues which would take this back to the same had failed policies of the past. and not focus on the middle class and working families and a

stop piling all the pain -- i have had to vote for cuts that were painful. i would have never voted for. i recognize i have to come before you and say we have to sacrifice. why are they asking nothing of the most fortunate americans? why do major corporations pay more to their ceos than they do in taxes? more bonuses than taxes. unacceptable. that is what i'm fighting for. [applause] thank you. [applause] >> goodorning, and thank you so much for taking the time out. the one thing i need to ask you, and it is sort of the segue into the gentleman's statement. there have been so many horrific and catastrophic weather

happenings all over r nation, whether it is tornadoes and hurricanes. the one thing i would like to say to you is, with the threat recently with hurricane irene, south florida was another target. to be an elected official or anyone looking for your budget issues, the one problem which seem to have is expediting refunds when it comes to fema. another nasa to work load, and i am not trying to criticize, but most of us have an emergency preparedness reserve. at the same time, we use it, but we need to refund its and deposit back in. we still are having difficulty getting our money from wilma,

and is in the tune of $400,000. is there some way that if we don't know the secret to expediting this, is there some secret we are missing here? our paper work, everything is in, but with so much coming, it is not just for me, it would be for everyone who has to deal with fema. i am not being critical, i am just asking. >> if criticism is warranted, you can be critical. >> i know they have a workload, and i appreciate it, but i also have to look at my home town, and i would really appreciate them expediting our funds from wilma and from francis. >> i am glad you raised that because i have been able to be

successf in helping the cities in my district cut through the red tape that fema has and get those refunds. i am surprised you are still struggling and have not called me yet to help you with that refund from wilma. talk with jody and vivian after an we can definitely start to put in some calls to shake that money loser. is not ok that it has been this long. we do have some good news with the mud. the director of fema now, unlike some of the incompetence we have had in the past, is craig fute, our former director of emergency operations in florida. we have a hurricane response system that is second to none, and other states sin katrina have come down and got an advice and been tutored by greg fugate. let me have my staff and me

follow up and make sure we can shake loose what is supposed to be coming back to you for sure. let me also point out that there is a little bit of a frightening debate going on right now related to fee must pacific fleet and to disaster funding. you might have seen in the news. the majority leader in the house of representatives, eric cantor, who is a colleague and friend, i would single him out as someone i have been able to work with on so issues, but he has actually been suggesting that we should not appropriate disaster funding to help communities that get hit by hurricanes like i read olike the floods that have happened in the midwest, unless we have a budget cut somewhere else. this is not something i am making up for misinterpreting. he said it point blank out loud.

we live in her cane alley here. can you imagine having to wait until congress acts on a different budget cut to ensure that we get the disaster relief that we need? that is just unacceptable. it is madness. i agree we have to reduce the deficit, but let's make sure that we make smart cut. let's make sure that we don't cut so deeply and so much that we put people in harm's way or leave people in harm's way. absolutely, let us know how we can continue to help you sort that out. [applause] >> i would like to get back to social security and medicare. next year i will be eligible for medicare. i not only have to get medicare but i will have to get a supplement as well.

i am confused because what you are talking about earlier, it seemed like eventually we would not need those supplements. medicare ds not cover everything, as you know. >> as the affordable care act regis pulp implementation by 2014, you may not. each individual has to look at their situation. my staff person is very familiar with the affordable care act. you should evaluate whether or not initially, because it is not fully implemented, you should take a look at what medicare will cover for you and what you are other needs are, what a supplemental policy would provide for you, and down the road, and a couple of years as the full implementation takes effect, you can decide wheer or not the preventive screens that are available now, if that

is what primarily you paid for a supplemental policy to cover, then you may want to let it go. that is one of the things that is really important, learning the details of how the affordable care act will directly help you, and we can help you with that. there are other organizations that can help you, too, but she can specifically help you ma 3 that dail. are you going on direct medicare? >> i have no idea. -- that can help you comb through that detail. when you sit down with shine, have them help you with the comparison of constriction -- prcription drug plans. that can be confusingand they have a good way of helping people sort it out.

>> the other thing is social security. last year, you had come to us and proposed two bills for increasing social security because of the cola increase for soci security. but they did not ps, and yet the democrats were in the vast majority in both houses at that time. that is why i don't understand why that did not pass. >> the reality is, in the senate, my collgue from oregon is the prime sponsor a that a legislation and i know he introduced it sometime in the last congress initially. while we have had a solid majority in the last congress and the house, effectively we did not have a working majority in the senate because of the way they required 60 votes for anything to pass. we did not have the 60 vote

majority in the senate, and as a result, every single thing gets filibustered. the house bill move the ltle bit, but then it did not go anywhere, and subsequently, there was republican oosition in this congress and we still have the same problem in the united states senate. >> my biggest concern is outsourcing. the economy is bad. there are no jobs here, but we continue to have companies outsourcing. and our utilities -- utility companies are doing it, and i think it is a disgrace. we know trickle-down economy never works. how about a trickle up? >> i am with you on the trickle up. you are 100% right. our tax policy under the bush

administration incentivized corporate operations to actually offshore jobs. there was a tax incentive for them to create jobs somewhere else oth than the united states. what president obama and congressional democrats have been pushing for is to give a tax incentive to onshore jobs, to bring jobs back to the united states of america and incentivize companies to do that. i hope we get the cooperation of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to do that, because we should be focusing on makin things in america. making its in america should be the focus. the good news is that over the st year, we have actually had a surge in american manufacturing, for the first time in decades. we have had manufacturi jobs created for 16 or 17 months straight. we have had a resurgence of the

manufacturing sector in america, which is fantastic. look at the rescue of the american automobile industry. in the early part of last yea or the early part of 2009,he tarp program, although it was unpopular, if we asked people what they thought of the park plan, people would say they cannot believe we did that, but the president's courage to overcome unpopularity and invest those funds come along them to the american automotive industry, which was about to go down the tubes, and which many republicans said let them, it would have met over a million jobs in the pipeline. you have so many suppliers to the automobile industry that would have folded if that happened. now we have all three american automobile makers operating at a

profit for the first time since 2004, and they have paid back the tarp funds to the federal government with interest. so president obama's judgment was right. it was also right to use those funds to prevent banks from being too big to fail and to prevent the entire financial system from collapsing, following up on what president bush was forced to do in october of 2008, and then we had to invest another infusion to make sure you could never again have a bank so big that failing would eck the economy. so the focus on manufacturing is absolutely a priority and needs to remain one. >> [inaudible] >> come to the microphone over here.

>> no one has ever accused you of not being able to be heard. >> we have only to allow time. -- we have known each other a long time. everything has grown in stature. there are two things. number one, the cola increase you talked about for social security. it has been on the books up to june of this year. it is true for veterans, it will be true for sial security unless something changes. if there is going to be a cut somewhere along the line. i don't think that is going to change. >> right now we are ok, what what happens later on, i don't know. they have already paid back 76%

of the total amount of money that has been brought in, with interest. $113 billion is what they took an $313 billion is what they paid back. but how many new that the financial-services industry and the automobile industry paid back the tarp funds with interest to the federal government. that is because my seniors are so knowledgeable and well informed -- fantastic. >> i don't see anyone else at the microphone. i am sorry, forgive me. right ahead. bill is not only the president of brouwer county veterans council but he shares my

military academy council the reviews all the met -- all the applications of the young men and women who applied for admission to any of our military academies and helps screen all of those applicant and health send the best candidates to the naval academy's, to the merchant marine academy and the air force academy. he has been the chair of that committee for all the time i have been in congress and i cannot thank you enough for your service. thank you very much. >> we have always been a consumer driven economy and it seems to me the investments we have made have not been directed at the consumer so much as that big business and so forth. talking about a jobs bill, if it were possible to take that investment and make available to every taxpaying citizen in the united states x amount of

dollars, whatever it might be, not in their pockets, is a bandit art lose that amount of money, so that every time they went in and wanted to buy new car, if it is a $17,000 car and they have $20,000, $17,000 comes off the top and if it is spent in america, in business, and whatever money is taken goes directly into the economy, towards american businesses, whether retail stores -- you want a new kitchen, you have the money to do it but you are spending it. you don't put it away, you don't save it, it is not money in your pocket. it is use it or lose it. if you p in a billion dollars, it goes directly into the ecomy so that american businesses grow and need more

employees and the consumerism starts up again th way. >> that is a good suggestion. let me share review the ways in which we have already done that under president obama's policies and leadership in a variety of ways. actually, the reason that president obama has championed tax-cutting policy that is targeted to the middle-class and working families and small business owners, rather than republican colleagues to focus on therickle-down policies that never worked and focusing on the wealthiest and most fortunate americans -is more likely it deep give a tax break to small business owner or someone in the middle class who has been putting off buying a new refrigerator for their kitchen, when they get that tax break, they are more likely to take that money that was not in their pocket before and go by

their refrigerator. what happens with wealthier people is the windfall does not mean much to them, so they invested or sit on it, and the money does not get put back into the economy. that is why president obama passed 17 different tax breaks last year for small businesses, including capital gains tax breaksnd tax breaks on equipment and things they could actually use to invest in their businesses. it is also why even though it was frustrating to have to extend bh the tax breaks for the wealthy and the middle class at the end of last year, i voted for that compromise because i recognize again that it cannot always be my way. i voted for that tax cut, but included in it was a payroll tax cut that made sure that we put some money -- we put it back into their pockets. we want to extend that payroll

tax cut when we come back. republics right now or refusing to extend it. that would do exactly what you are saying, keep extra money in the pockets of individuals who would go out and invest it in the economy. not the direct spending you uld propose, but there are ways to do its and ways not to do it, and we think our focus on tax breaks for the middle class and small business owners and working folks are a lot more likely to end use resources into the economy and do exactly what you are saying. i think president obama's jobs rollout next thursday ll include some of those good ideas, thank you very much. anyone else? ok. >> good afternoon. i name is mark and i am one of the contractors here at lauderdale west. i have a great question for you

concerni the edley committee of lauderdale west. they passed an energy efficiency act for rebates like they did with "cash-for- clunkers" last year. a lot of people have been receiving high efficiency air conditioning equipment. so we don't consume as much energy. i would like to know why the people of south florida that are spending the money on these high efficiency equipment are not receiving the rebates that they used to be entitled to. the obama administration actually lowered the federal tax credit rebate for these efficiency unit and they have almost cut theout completely, and i would like to know why and how we can get them back to the community. >> i will have to check this to make sure i am right, but the obama administration did not into them. they were part of the recovery act.

a portion of the recovery act, when president obama tk office in 2009, we passed the recovery act to make sure that we could make significant investments in infrastructure and job creation. energy was a big portion of that investment and that included those energy rebates. as the money has run out, it was $787 billion. as the money has been spent and invested in the economy, we have trd to get the republicans to re-up on those investments. created tons of jobs for people of -- contractor like you they can go out and installed a new air conditioners and purchase the equipment to do that. there are so many different facets to investment spending economy that rebate like that generates, but they will not make the additional investment. they are only focused on cutting

and not on balancing the way we deal with deficit reduction and job creation at the same time. it was not a policy decision, it was just a result of the recovery act beginning to run its course, and we cannot get them to re-up to continue the flow that ensures that we reduce our energy costs and put people to work at the same time. you don't have to write your congressman because i am standing in front of you. i assure you will continue to push hard to make sure we have investments like that and we need to make sure at the end of the day that after president obama makes that special address on thursday, i hope you talk to your friends and neighbors that have different representatives in south florida and ask them to have their representativ support these proposals. thank you very much.

>> i just want to say thank you. thank you for coming. we apprecie everything you do for us. >> thank you very much. the two of you will close us out and then i would just set couple of things and we can chat. >> what is the solution? i am behind you 100%. i know how you are stymied, but if you say yes, the republicans say no. i have never heard the republicans say yes, so we can get rid of that. what is the bottom line? where are we going? america is sfering. we areuffering. your children will suffer. >> this will be the most political thing that i will ha said, the only way i know how to respond. elections have consequences.

the solution is the decisions that we make in 15 months from now. we have to make sure that we have different people serving in washington that are going to be able to sit down and work together and move our country apart and work with president obama and make sure that we don't have the people who are there now that are committed to rthering the polarization. thank you. [applause] >> i live overseas. my question is, does the democratic party, or do the democrats have a pr person, and if they don't, they should. sometimes i don't feel like the message is getting out there. most of us listen to our programs, and i think the

majority of americans, whatever news they are watching, local news, it is not on there, and no one is tooting the horn of all the policies that have been passed. with everyone calling this obamacare, it gets put down, and i don't think anyone really notices how much has been implemented already and how much good that has done, except for the people who have already felt it. so you should get a pr person because there is a lot of good. also to do comparisons, because i am sure that by this time now, when nancy pelosi was running the house, she passed an awful lot more bills than have been passed right now. i am sure you had less vacation time, so please, get a pr person. >> i said at the outset that i was here with my congressional

hat on and not my political one. i will not get into a detailed answer of your question, but i will tell you that we do have them, and i will take your message to heart. thank you. one more question and then i will have to wrap it up. thank you for your sentiment, i appreciate it. >> what if we all made a concerted effort and just one day, as a suggestion, we buy nothing from china. >> by american -- that is a great way to close this out. we should all make a commitment to check those labels on the clothing and the things that you buy that are manufactured elsewhere. look a little harder to buy american, because that is how we can all personally contribute to making it in america. thank you so much.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> comments from sale of a payment. -- sarah palin. we will carry the event live on c-span radio and on our website. >> next, veterans gathered in washington, d.c. to commemorate the anniversary of v-j day. he recognized world war ii veterans who served. this is under 20 minutes.

>> it is my pleasure to introduce our speaker to date. he served in germany, belgium, and iraq. he has commanded at every level from platoon through corporate. most recently as a commander in iraq. i first met him when he was commanding the first calvary division in baghdad in 2004. in the -- of all the combat leaders i've known, i would say he is one of the finest. he is the kind of professional leader that i would want my son or daughter to serve under in a time of war. he is truly a soldiers general. one of the caring combat leaders and captains that have

come out of this conflict. in spite of all of his accomplishments, i believe his most significant contribution to our army has come in his service as a vice chief of staff to the army. for nearly three years, and he has led an effort to redress what he calls "the signature wounds of this war" -- a dramatic brain injury. he is taking on a difficult fight the, making progress, but there is much left to be done. we salute him for what has been accomplished. it is a great honor to have him here today to help bank and honor our world war ii veterans and their families.

the vice chief of staff, general peter carelli. >> thank you for that introduction. i am honored to be a part of this commemoration. everyone associated with the national memorial, other general officers, distinguished guests, and veterans of current and past wars, spouses and a special welcome to the soldiers of the 88 infantry division, the fight scene blue devils. you honor us by your presence. [applause]

what a spectacular sight. here at this beautiful memorial would national monuments in front of me and the reflecting pool and the linkedin -- lincoln memorial and the distance. it is a fitting tribute to the brave and selfless and men and women of the greatest generation who gave so much of themselves in service to our nation and the cause of freedom. i will it met -- admit i have a special affection for this generation. my dad served in a tank battalion. he saw action in north africana and southern france, austria and germany. he was a butcher by trade. during the war, he earned a silver star. very few people knew that about

him including relatives, neighbors, and friends. as a kid i asked him to tell me more about his exploits. he would change the subject. he never talked about his experiences or the achievements on the battlefield. soldiers are typically humble folks. when asked for details, they respond with a simple explanation that they were just doing their job. many jews never to speak of their experiences that respect for those who did not make it home. with their personal accounts of tragedy and triumph in europe and the pacific during world war ii, they are known only by a

few. a great example is the story of the 88 industry division. i admit that while i consider myself a history buff, i was unfamiliar with the his return -- with the story of the blue devils. theirs was referred to as a quiet for, over shower -- overshadowed by more publicized events in other parts of europe and the pacific front. are read as much as i could about the division. unbelievable stuff. every account of the division's actions reads like a war novel. filled with episodes of intense fighting, heroism, gallantry, and crucial victories. their story may be less well known as compared to those who

fought at normandy and iwo jima, but the blue devils seats were equally remarkable and no less critical to the outcome of the war. according to accounts, on july 15, 1942, captain john quigley, president of the 88 division veterans, a challenge to several soldiers gathered around the main flagpole of the campus to "take up the job we did not get to done." in response, john sloan promised "the glory of the colors will never be so lead to as long as one man of th 88 still lives."

such an austere beginning and day ise vow made that embraced by the soldiers of the new division. it reflects the collective, altruistic attitude of that generation. there were prepared and willing to do whatever was required on behalf of the nation, even if it meant losing their own lives. over the next several months, the men trained to prepare for battle before heading to africa. in february, they advanced into naples, italy, becoming the first division to enter a combat zone in world war two. then the division began the drive to rome.

along the way, they engaged in intense fighting, quickly earning a reputation among the army as a force to be reckoned with. according to german prisoners, the division battled like blue devils, hence the nickname. the soldiers successfully broke through the gustav line, capturing a number strongholds including hill 316, mount rec ondo. in the subsequent weeks, they faced heavy fighting as they pushed across highway 6. after a brutal battle on the outskirts of the city, the blue devils entered rome, successfully capturing the eternal city for the allies. this represented one of the most significant victories of the war. after a brief respite the

continued to preserve germans. over the next 10 months they fought fiercely, winning crucial battles, two of the battles for which units received a citation. nt carvalle, elsewhere. forces surrendered unconditionally. the war in europe ended a week later. in total, they spent 344 days in combat. amassing an impressive number of military awards and decorations including two medals of honor, 40 crosses, two distinguished medals.

absolutely amazing. their achievements were truly extraordinary. major-general shirley -- schultz told interrogators that division is the best we have fought against." this is high praise for from a worthy opponent. the braves a man of the blue devils with us here today played a most decisive role a in the defeat of the german army in italy. to some that may seem odd to recount the endeavors of a unit of the served in europe events commemorating vj day. however i believe is appropriate.

they may have sought -- fought in a separate theaters, but their cause was the same, and to secure peace around the globe. their efforts were linked. victory would have to be one on all fronts. there could be no compromise. world war ii was fought with globally against the axis powers, and germany, italy, and japan. when the forces surrounded due to the efforts of the men of the 88 division, thereby ending the war in europe, it relieved the pressure in the pacific. it enabled americans to apply our full measure and attention to the war in the pacific. this surge led to japan's surrender and the official end of world war ii. today gathered at this memorial,

the most fitting tribute to the men and women who fought, we listened to the incredible stories like the one i just to share about the 88 division. we marveled at the service of an entire generation. men and women from all over this nation left behind their jobs and families and went overseas. many of them were 17, 18, 19 years old. they had never been away from home. suddenly they found themselves advancing across north africa and the pacific. they were gone for months and years at a time. anxiously awaiting orders to go ashore. charging hundreds of miles under better conditions. seeing the devastation and death

around them on a daily basis. to read any of the accounts of what road or ii -- world war ii, is to be absolutely amazed and humbled as well as inspired. back then, men and women young and old did their part in ways big and small to keep a struggling nation together the during incredibly difficult days. the selfish -- selflessly fought, sacrifice until the war won in the last soldier returned home safely. and they did not talk about what they had done. they resumed their lives, quietly mourned those who were left behind.

unfortunately, there are few who served in world war ii still with us today. many have passed on. not forgotten. it is their memory that will remind us each day of the responsibility of every generation to repay the debt owed to those from previous generations. i can assure you this same sense of duty is never far away from the men and women serving around the world today. just over one week from now, our nation will mark the 10th anniversary of september 11, 2001. looking back on the past decade, we have much to be proud of. it is remarkable, all of our men and women have accomplished in iraq, afghanistan and other

locations around the world. i believe they represent the next greatest generation. [applause] war is a terrible thing. that said, in every conflict, amid the darkness and tragedy, routinely emerges the most incredible accounts of courage, selfless service, and sacrifice. that is what we remember as we look upon this beautiful memorial and pause to recount the details of soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and coastguardsman. at the dedication had

ceremony, what we dedicate today is not a memorial to war, rather a tribute to the physical and moral courage and that makes heroes out of his farm and city boys, and inspired generations of americans to lay down their lives for people that will never meet, for ideals that make life itself worthwhile. [applause] that is what we are called to do in our profession, the profession of arms. to carry on the peace won by the past generations, to preserve it for our children and our children's children, while passing the sense of duty, love of country, and selflessness that ensures they will do the

same for future generations. thanks to all of you here for your service on behalf of our nation. for your continued in strong support of our young men and women serving around the world today, and their families. may god bless the united states of america. armstrong. [applause] >> next, a discussion on trends in mortality rates in america. then up for rahm focusing on social justice and jobs in america. in a town hall meeting with pennsylvania senator pat toomey. >> machiavelli has become an adjective. i doubt many people in this town would like to have themselves described as a machiavellian. although many read "the prince" at night next to their bedside,

but not many would call themselves machiavellian. >> his name is synonymous with the selfish pursuit of power. miles unger argues that his theories may have been a reaction to the corruption around him. >> a discussion on trends in mortality rates in america. from "washington journal" this is about 50 minutes. 2012. >> "washington journal" continues. >> we are joined by dr. michael o'grady, and dr. edward sondik. good morning. 65% of americans live to the age 65 in 1965.

today, it is 84%. what does this tell you about the longevity of americans and the impact it has on our society? guest: the longevity has been going up since 1900. if you look at the string of data that we have, you can see that it continues to improve. i think this figure is particularly important, not only in the probability, the likelihood of living to age 65, but also the probability of living to age 85. it is probably dead figure that is the most surprising. somebody born in -- that figure that is most surprising. somebody born in 1940 had a one in 10 chance, and a baby born today has almost a 40% chance of living to 85. the good part of that is life. there are a lot of policy issues that come along with that. we have a population whose

demographics are changing rapidly. host: as we look to some other figures, this is the leading causes of death around the country. heart disease is on the decline. stroke is on the decline. chronic lung disease has increased. cancer has been pretty steady. guest: actually, cancer is going down, but when you look at the chart, it is going down slightly in this chart compared to heart disease, which is going down much more rapidly. as you can see, we project, using simple projections, cancer is going to become the leading cause of death in just a couple of years from now. the declines in heart disease, cancer, and stroke are very much due to the changes in smoking. smoking has declined tremendously in this country -- a real public health victory,

although clearly the victory is not completely one, but smoking rates are down from what they were around 1970. host: dr. michael o'grady, what do these numbers tell you? guest: there is what you see the data, and what the policy implications are. the good news is we are living longer. it is not bad news, but it is important news that we need to think about how we handle things like social security, medicare, and other programs to make sure there are enough funds to handle the longer life people have. he see a number of different trends are all generally good -- you see a number of different friends are all generally good -- trends that are all generally good. you also see things like obesity, which is a complication of diabetes. we have made this progress, but we need to be smart about, so

that people did not level off or go up again. host: there was a huge uptick in hiv death rates. what are the lessons in this case particular case? guest: let me start with detection. these statistics and to identify the there was an aids problem. it was not called aids then, but there were causes of death that were on usual, and very localized. that was kind of the first clue that there was something going on. if the death rate increased very steeply -- the death rate increased very steeply until we see the treatment change, and that is a 75% reduction -- really just a tremendous, in a sense, public health victory.

a victory for this very serious problem. this data helped us track treatment, the tension, treatment, and intervention. -- detection, treatment, and intervention. guest: they did not know what this was. was it environmental, was it poisoning? what this highlights for as is the way you think of the multiple components that go on here. great work done at the national institutes of health, and great work getting that out to the public, and changes in the individual behavior as well. where you often see is a multi- component improvements -- good science, good treatment options, good drugs, and also the individuals themselves making the changes necessary. host: we will go through four

different stages of life and the to the leading causes of death. it comes as no surprise that for ages 1-24, accidents lead the list. homicide and suicide, in a close second or third. as you get older, a decline in car accidents, cancer increases, suicide is significant, as its heart disease. as you get older, heart disease and cancer begins to grow, and stays that way 65 and over. guest: what you see early on is the major causes of death are external. if they're not disease. there accidents, homicides, suicides at up to age 24, or thereabouts. in the next quarter, the major diseases, and, but it is really to 65 four fivet -- 45

range that the disease is coming in. i think people expected in the older ages, but not so much in these ages. i think it is surprising to many people that cancer is s large a cause of death as it is prior reaches as large a cause of death as it is prior -- as large a cause of death as it is prior to age 85. host: cancer can be detected in your lead-40.0 and early '60 -- late-40's and early-60's. guest: a generation ago, they would have been dead and 65 from a heart attack. some of the alzheimer's you see is because we have a higher percentage of our population in their 80's that we had before. it does not mean that there are

not these very serious responses that are necessary -- good science, good practice, and the individuals taking the steps they need to take. guest: over time, the population has changed. 100 years ago, when the leading causes of death was senility. we do not see that today. in part, it is not ascribe to as many deaths, but there are many other problems that have come in -- house members, dementia, and -- alzheimer's, dementia, and other problems that give us much more detail on the causes of death. it is interesting, these are the leading causes of death, but there are literally thousands of causes of death, and most of them account for tiny percentages of death. these are the big ones. so, we're talking about, as it shows on the graph, 25% for

heart, 25% for cancer, when we get into the upper ages. host: we are focusing today on the u.s. mortality rate -- what are some of the leading causes of death at various ages. we are dividing our phone lines regionally. 202 is the area code . host: dr. o'grady, how does the u.s. stepped up to western europe? guest: there are some things there different. what you see, is one, which i will point out in the beginning, is we do a much better job of collecting the data, i would argue. there is no partisan, one way or the other. it is a very rigorous process that ed and his staff go through to make sure policymakers can trust this death.

as we move into other countries, you see things like the way infant mortality is measured, and you are saying is that with the average person thinks of when they think of infant mortality? there are a number of things. there certainly are broad differences among the american population. we have a much more diverse population. europe is becoming more diverse. there are clearly heads up to policy-makers and individuals for what we need to do. things like differential mortality rates by race. clear warnings set there are things that need to be done, it changes the need to be made. we do not tend to see that from european data as much. as they have larger and larger immigrant populations, you might see those rate differences there, too. host: we know the basics -- exercise, do not smoke, did not drink, avoid fatty foods, are

there things other countries are doing? nearly half of this country is facing obesity, and in certain parts it is even higher. guest: from what i have seen, europe seems to be taking our lead and focusing on the factors we are focusing on. in terms of obesity, that is rising in europe. there might be a delay there. i think these problems are really universal in developed countries. perhaps they are associated with being developed. i know my colleagues at the center for disease control talk about the build environment, and the role of the built environment, and having people walk less, take a car, and so forth. there was an article the other day about people in cities who seem to walk more.

we need to think about these kind of factors -- these kinds of factors that influence the various factors you talk about -- how we live. we need to continue to work to identify risk factors like blood pressure, cholesterol, obesity, exercise -- all of these things are factors. there may be other factors that we just have not put our fingers on that make a difference here. i think the critical area for me is the area of 45 to 64, and how do we intervene? how do we help people to change with their prospects are in terms of developing disease, and in terms of treating it, and living with it?

the hiv situation is a good example. the disease is not cured by any means, but the death rate is cut by three-quarters, and people can live with that. host: we're talking about the u.s. mortality rate with dr. edward sondik, and dr. michael o'grady who is with the university of chicago national opinion research center . gary joins us from roanoke, virginia. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. i appreciate what you are talking about. my mother suffers. a concern that i have is the young teenage violence that i notice everyday, regardless of what location you go ahe. it seems like some house some type of money could be focused on this because that is -- somehow, some type of money could be focused on this because

that is our future. i am astounded by what i see on teenagers being killed, kidnapped, shot, and so forth. i think the world is not balanced the that well. that is something to look at, so some of these people could live a longer life, and give more back to our society, and 12 government in a tax pain bracket. iraq -- give back to our government in a tax paying bracket. i appreciate what you do. host: i want to go back to michael o'grady. if you look at this figure, and i will summarize, but almost two-thirds of accidents from ages 1 through 24 result from homicide, and accidents, or suicide. guest: i think that points to

why you need a more global approach. shop is a great operation, but there are things that really have to do with more things like law enforcement and gang the violence. there are things like traffic laws, but we still have problems with accidents and losing a lot of these young people that way. -- and losing young people that way. it is important to go beyond the silos that people think about. if you want to bring down the use death rates, it is not like the emergency room they get taken to needs another infusion of money. i'm sure they would take it, but it has more to do with things like policing, traffic, gang violence -- those issues, not directly our medical system. host: our next call is tunisia

from philadelphia. good morning. -- anita from philadelphia. good morning. caller: the morning. i watched the chart. you think there is a correlation between the alternative medicine that people are using to help treat diseases that other conventional medicines are not taking care of? that might be one variable. i know there is an increase in the use of alternative medicine. maybe that is why the disease rate is going down. one more thing, as far as health is concerned, our main problem is the lack of exercise from two things -- the remote control, and the mouth. if people get up and turned the channel -- i think people sit down and watch channel -- television. they sit in front of the

computer, and they use the mouth. sometimes you have to get up from the computer, and take a walk. i am a computer technician, so i am not anti-computer, but that is the problem with this obesity thing. we have to exercise come heat better, and sometimes use alternative medicine. thank you for taking my call. this is a very interesting show. host: dr. sondik? guest: she is right about exercise. on alternative message -- madison, we work -- on madison -- alternative medicine, we were doing a survey. it is hard to identify the root causes, but the kind of research that nih does is crucial at getting at those causes. i think the point she is making is under research. host: we learned yesterday that

among the worst places to drive washington, d.c., and baltimore, maryland. among the safest are in iowa and all -- i hope. fire deaths are staying the same, and poisoning is seen an increase. guest: poisoning should be noted that much of what we are talking about is the way we label these things. so, what you see there is no influence of the misuse of drugs. it is labeled by the epidemiologists who track these things as poisoning, but it is part more -- probably more reflective of what we think of as drug abuse. it is not heroin, or marijuana, but there are things that when you think about them, physicians

would see them as poison. to readthose spikes that have nagged our society for a long time. host: our apologies for our radio audience, because we are showing some charts, but let's look at suicide and homicide rates divided between whites and blacks. on average, 12 to 13 deaths among white americans as a result of suicide, and five of 100,000 for black americans. a big increase among african- americans or blacks reaching almost 20 deaths per 100,000 as a result of homicide. guest: socio-economic status has something to do with this on the homicide side, and also suicide

as well. understanding the science behind that is difficult and there is research under way, but the difference here is really start. host: dr. o'grady? guest: agreed that when you see these hard problems like this, -- i agree that when you see these are problems, you'll need to look at multiple causes. is there anything about being black that would cause this? i think it is hard -- i would be surprised. i think it has to do with living in poor neighborhoods. this is a reflection of that. what you really want to do -- the next step, is really to try to tease out what percentage has to do with a person's race or ethnicity, white neighborhoods they live in, their income, -- what neighborhoods they live in, their income -- we need to know all of the factors.

you would hate to have an intervention that somehow misinterprets what the real causes. it's called the unemployment rate among african-american teenagers -- host: the unemployment rate among african- american teenagers is upwards of 50%. guest: right. you can see that contributes to the sort of internal strife that we see in some of these neighborhoods. to my earlier point, is that necessarily a function of the health system? that might be more a function of the education system and the local economy. host: jason joins us, albuquerque, new mexico, good morning, with dr. edward sondik and dr. michael o'grady. caller: good morning, doctors. i work mostly in emergency rooms. i wanted to ask you a question about the role of the epa and

fda, and regulatory committees that prescribe remedies and those sorts of things. there are situations where people are not abiding by laws. also, i am a democrat. i have been a democrat since i was born. i propose that government is a vital source toward people living longer and healthier. i did not want to get political because i did not believe you guys are political, but i notice you said something about marijuana deaths, but how many have there been? i know what i'm getting off track. host: we will talk more about drug abuse -- we were talking more about drug abuse, but we can get a response, dr. sondik? guest: let me pick up on the role of government.

this is a non-partisan, but the role of what we do is information. it is crucial that the elements of government, the elements of the private sector picked up on that information, it picked up on that information, and use it. -- pick up on that information and use it. the last slide you showed on race, this is crucial because we are not looking at the overall suicide rate. we are going below that, and cutting it on the basis of race, which gives us clues, which should be able to give us clues as to understanding the causes behind us. so, the role of this information is really crucial in society, and it is also a really crucial that the battle be as untinged by political issues as it can be.

host: for every 1000 live births in this country, 8 to 10 children die. as you get these charts, you can see that in iceland, sweden, finland, and japan, it is much lower. where these countries during the u.s. is not doing? guest: that is a great question. i'm not sure whether might can answer that question. he is very difficult. a lot of work is going on to change -- i'm not sure whether my can answer that question. it is very difficult. let me tell you that the work has been significant. infant mortality continues to go down, so we are making improvements. there is no question that we are not at the top of that chart that you are looking at. there are some issues in data

collection, but i think these issues are really very minor compared with some real differences. differences might be in terms of .renatal care differences might be in terms of access to physicians. differences might be in nutrition on the part of the mother, the use of smoking, alcohol -- that sort of thing on the part of the mother. it is difficult to get the issues. the one. that is not shown on the chart is that if we look at the different -- the one thing that is not shown on the chart is that if we look to the differences in the u.s. by race and ethnicity, they are star, and while it is disturbing to see what ranked we are, what is even more disturbing is the in fort -- infant mortality rate of the black population is twice that of the black population, -- of the white population, there has to be a national priority

to change that. host: is it possible these messages are not getting to the population? guest: i think it is more about the prenatal care, and things like that. when you think of the tools we can bring to bear, we can see the technology and tools physicians have has greatly improved. we certainly have differences that are stark and troubling. at some point, you have to figure out what kind of been for mention -- intervention needs to go on, such as more of an outreach program to pregnant mothers that is more likely to help them come along. or, is this something that is more societal in terms of delaying childbearing for a number of years until a woman is in a better position to get that

kind of care? you want to bring down your number of 15-year-old mother. -- 15 year olds that are having babies we probably lead the worl -- babies. if we probably the world in technology, but we like other countries. it is clear other tolls me to be brought to the front. there is technology to help new parents. are we doing on/off preventative? -- are we doing enough preventative? guest: based on what the chart says, i would say we are not doing enough. what we should do, and how to do it is an open question.

i had a friend that said to me parents need a how-to a manual before they become parents. it is probably true. especially in today's society, where people do not necessarily live where their parents live, and they do not have the direct involvement, and they do not have the benefit of their parents looking after them, and over them, when they're having children. this might be an issue. so, prevention would be terrific, if we really knew how to do it. it has to be a priority. host: dr. edward sondik is a director of the national health senator for statistics, and dr. michael o'grady is now at the university of chicago's national opinion research center, and also serves on the board of the senator for disease control. ernest joins us from san antonio.

good morning. caller: the morning, gentlemen. -- good morning, gentlemen. i am 81 years of age. i am x military. my father died at the age of 65. a massive stroke got him. he was never sick. he was of very good health. he was a very strong man. i was 10 years old when a fellow picked a fight with him, and he hit him so hard and he flew through the air. i asked him after he calms down, because he was a quiet fellow, and he said i gave him the punch, jesus took care of the rest. that was his explanation. one thing in my family, the males, most of them died of heart attacks at a certain age because of the personality, you now. things come to us in the blood.

the other thing i remember my father talking about, appendicitis. a lot of children died of appendicitis. a doctor in the san antonio, texas -- i don't remember the name, my father talked about him. they had a beard, the old- fashioned type, but these doctors or good. in our family, we were four brother is -- we have four brothers. my name is ernest, my mother and brothers name is -ephrim. what killed ephrim was agent orange. he was a vietnam veteran. the other thing was, this doctor treating, one day a ranger called him, the boy was sick, and he called the doctor and said, "dr., my son has a little stomach ache." "give him some castor oil."

the doctor said, "you crazy? you want to kill your boy?" it just came across real strong. host: thanks for the call, sharing your story. you brought the issue of a stroke, unless you want to respond to ernest's personal story. guest: the one thing about ernest's story that is very important is that when people think about these things, especially when ernest talked about his father and what took his father, there is tremendous value that is under-utilized by many of us on prevention of coming in and getting that test. there is nothing that says that they could have headed off that stroke for his father, but many of us seem a vigorous, we don't feel bad, but checking that blood pressure, checking that cholesterol, all those sorts of things, getting to the physician and just getting those tests done, even if they don't put you on medicine or anything else, can be very, very important in terms of extending your life. he also brought up -- --

guest: he also brought genetics. genetics is extremely important. these factors -- exercise, but pressure, cholesterol, genetic propensity to develop heart disease, they all interplay in a very complex way. it is very important for people to understand what their risk is an to factor into this their family risk as well. just doing it can release save lives. i would like to find out the secret to the punch as well. [laughter] host: you can see from this chart, 2005-2007, the greatest stroke rate, bright red, can be seen in the deep south, also, utah, new mexico, much

lower rate. also, new york, new england. guest: this geographic distribution has been known for some time to read this area we call the stroke belt -- host: this circle. guest: is likely due to the very height smoking rates. they have gone down, just as they have across the country during the peak of smoking years, 1970's, the rates were extremely tight there. we don't see the impact right away. this is what we continue to see. this as another indication. this is data from the national system of vital statistics. it is mortality data. we also get the data. with this kind of precision, it is really important for health officials and the public to understand what there this situation is, what the health

problems are, on a very detailed basis. it comes from this data source, which in turn comes from the state's. their collection of data, when it they register deaths and cause of deaths. talking about the foods we eat, car or a grea -- carbohydrate foods are cheaper. guest: is one of those no good turn goes unpunished. the farmer has done a fantastic job producing large amounts of food very expensively. it is one of the most efficient sectors of the economy. one farmer feeds 99 of us, etc. that also means that food prices have not grown anywhere near as fast, and you see these difficulties where you see that sort of corn-based, wheat-

based, and it comes through in our fast-food and snack food. i don't know necessarily what you are going to do to change that that is what are people's individual behavior needs to help them. you will see various progress by various groups to get healthier, grocery stores in the-income neighborhoods and those sorts of issues. it gets back to the southeast, heavy smoking. regional cuisine at there, a delicious, but i think we understand, that combination of smoking and that can of diet is going to lead it to these kinds of health effects. guest: these kinds of data, too, it should be a signal to physicians and other health personnel in those areas that there really is an extraordinary problem here, and they need to be up on this and how to treat this short-term as well as long

term. the long-term is particularly important. smoking in children, making for the rates are as low as they can begin -- they can be. host: stroke is caused by barbeque? guest: one of the main downside of the obesity problem is that it triggers type 2 diabetes. if you look at diabetes, type 1, tie 2, they can be a heart attack, stroke, blindness, agitation and kidney disease. if you get off the track of obesity into type 2 diabetes, and a person develops complications of the disease, yes, it will contribute to these sorts of the facts. host: new york, good morning. walk into the program. -- welcome to the program. caller: i am 71 years old and

very interested in a longer life. my question is, what role does alcohol -- i have not heard anything about alcohol in their bank. i know many people who have committed suicide, and i myself once retrieved 25 years ago and have been able to abstain from alcohol -- i myself went through treatment 25 years ago and have been able to abstain from alcohol. my liver was not functioning. i wonder what effect alcohol has on the national death rate. host: thank you for the pointer to would like to take that? -- thank you for the point. i would like to take that? guest: i don't know. [laughter] guest: he doesn't know, he turns to me. alcohol has many effects, and it is from these effects that you see can lead to increased morbidity and increased mortality. the actual identification of

alcohol as a direct cause of death is not that high. j that is not to say that it is not a significant problem. it would be interesting to look at the suicide figures and see if one could parse those out in terms of the role that alcohol had, or homicide figures, for that matter. question thatno there is a lot of concern about alcohol, a lot of research related to alcohol, but we also have a lot of mixed messages that come across to the public on this. some studies say, well, it is good to have a glass of wine occasionally, or some say once a day, for that matter. i think of the jury is complete -- is not fully in on that kind of recommendations -- on those kinds of recommendations brought again, it is something we need to do research on.

host: leading cause of death across the board for the african-american population and white population, heart disease and cancer. guest: yes. with heart disease, certainly we see the kinds of factors we've talked about before in terms of diet, exercise, access to care, some of these problems. cancer, again -- perhaps dr. sondik has the feel -- is there a differential smoking rate between black and white -- guest: there was a very differential smoking rate between black males and white males. but now the rate between black males, white males, black females, white females, all about the st.. even the rate for kids in high school is all about 20%. again, it does not show up in the chart -- for almost every cancer, the black death rate is

significantly higher than at the white death rate. i don't think the reasons for that are completely understood. smoking -- again, the effects of smoking take years. that may be a factor. but there are many other things that he bought when it to -- that people have pointed to -- diet, environmental causes. that is some of the starkest for me differentials we have, the race basis. host: good mon -- good one for preventive care -- are you're more likely as a white person to go for protective care -- guest: there are variables to

what you just said -- health insurance, are you worried about the financial, out of pocket, to see the doctor? you don't feel that, but you know you probably should stop by any way and get the blood test and sort of be checked out. it is not have to be the thousand dollar physical, but you should stop by. there is an economic incentive to do that. among males, black and white and hispanic, there is a notion of i don't want to be a cry baby and run off to the doctor every time. you want to be careful about that. he set up an environment, a culture of seeking care that we understand is just prevented it, preventative, just checking your blood pressure and cholesterol, keeping in the game. come on, i am not a crybaby, i am not going to run off to the doctor every two seconds. many of us are brought up in

those cultures where, especially among the men, at say, it don't do that. that could be shooting ourselves in foot. guest: on your point, one of the things that makes a difference for many cancers is early detection. early detection means that you have to visit the health-care system in some way, whether it is colonoscopy, breast exam, whether it is a cervical cancer test. these are important, and we know they can make a difference. , or did i put it o -- if people don't have access to health care, or they put it off, that can make a difference in outcomes. that may be one of the factors in this tremendous differential rate between blacks and whites. host: tennessee, good morning.

caller: back when i was a young we hadck in the 1960's, the power lines were we all were growing up at. they would spray them with some kind of spray. over a few years, i don't know if this spray got in the water system, we had hundreds of people who just got cancer and different things -- diabetes, heart problems. i have heart problems and diabetes. now what a is, but it just seems like people in the community in the last three years, 150 west died -- well,

not me, but anyway, we was just wondering if there was something in ithe spray acrobat 9 and a water system -- host: ok, thank you for the culprit could there be outside factors like that? -- thank you for the call. could there be outside factors like that? guest: there could be outside factors. at first i thought he was going to be radiation from -- he was going to be referring to radiation from the power lines. there is no conclusive evidence that that is the cause of disease. this is a significant role for the public health system, to investigate this and understand just what these causes are. it is one of the most difficult areas, i think, in epidemiology, to try to understand the role of these kinds of factors, because

the problems themselves, even though we all die, and a high percentage of us develop either heart disease or cancer, still, at younger ages, they are relatively rare. connecting these events with these environmental causes is a real challenge to the statistical sciences. but this is where public health comes in and research. host: one of the comments on the issue of public health is from our twitter followers on the issue of obesity. obviously, as we heard from the first lady, obesity is a huge and growing problem in the u.s. guest: the concern i have on that is there is many reasons people end up having obesity problems. genetics, other things.

underlying that is sort of a presumption that somehow, this is something that these folks control. some certainly do, but some don't. i would hesitate to use that kind of tool for this sort of situation. i think what i would not be surprised that we tended to see over time, especially as we know ithat health care spending continues to grow and things get tighter and tighter, is that there will be an emphasis on helping people through their entrance to lose weight. -- through their insurance to lose weight. the new health care reform bill had an option to differentiate things like premium costs. would you give non-obese people the " land of a good drivers discount on health insurance? -- the equivalent of a good drivers discount on health insurance? we might see things like that. if you don't smoke and keep your

weight within a range or things like that, he would get a break -- you would get a break? i think that is more and more feasible as time goes on. host: diane in california, good morning. caller: my god, it is like a marathon out here getting to a telephone line. host: you get your exercise that way. thanks for waiting. the forum is yours. caller: my comment references cancer, and i would like to see the president budget more towards cancer research. my son has metastatic melanoma, and has for years. he is 40 years old, he is educated by meet. -- by me. he is a lawyer, is working 12- 18-hour days, as great insurance. we have an oncologist in

california, and i'm to tell dr. ine marshhat two of my university of chicago graduate. -- are university of chicago graduate. you're welcome, sir. as i listen to you. -- it is great to listen to you. the and colleges to treating my son right now is on a new drug -- the oncologist treating my son right now is on a new drug which came out recently, which i believe the pharmaceutical company is urtext. this has not been clinically tested in numerous sightings, and my son currently is almost a dying of this drug. i know that, because it took care of my fiancee, a retired of capt., went to university of at california-san diego, died of liver cancer, but he lived

almost two years because of the treatment at the fantastic hospital and cancer center. host: let me use your experience and get a response from the doctors. it was at 40 years ago that president nixon declared war on cancer. from what you have seen with your own son and your peers, are we doing enough to battle the war on cancer? caller: the answer is now. we have lobbyists in washington, d.c., who are holding these companies in congress and these congressmen and women are voting for these and letting them come through, and these lobbyists are -- this particular drug will -- the companies will receive close to $1 billion, and it is $120,000 for four infusions over a three-month period. host: thanks for your call,

thanks for sharing your story. how do you respond to her point of view? guest: i used to be in the national cancer institute, more than 15 years ago. i used to look at the statistics. i kept wondering, with all the effort we're putting into it, when are we going to start to see some of these turnaround? in the last 15 years, many of these have started to turn around. there has been a lot benefit that clearly goes to science in general that comes from this. the chart that we showed on hiv -- the major benefits and treatment was started by the national cancer institute. there are lots of benefits that come from it. she really asked, though, a policy question, and really, i would turn to mike for a policy answer. host: in terms of the a number of things she brought up there, the funding and how that works,

candidly, we talked earlier before about the area of international comparisons. when you look at -- i cannot think of the last time i heard of a breakthrough that came out of the nih equivalent in germany, france, italy, spain, any of those. the americans are clearly making a significant investment. nih is sort of the tool in the crown in many ways of what goes on in federal government spending and development. there was a little bit in terms of the diane's question that gets to the cost of the drugs. i don't think anyone has ever accused fba of moving too quickly -- fda of moving too quickly and pushing something out due to political pressure. i have not heard it, i have not seen it. i think they are very cautious about how they do these things and very clear before they go forward. she has a good point about the

idea that you have a clinical trial and it has maybe 500 people in it and it does not have a significant number children or elderly or people with different things. you really don't find out some of these effects until you get to a broader population. host: let's conclude where we began with these figures, from the 1940's. the average age, living to 65. 60% of americans were approaching 85% of those 65 and older. guest: these figures are actually the key measures for the country of its health status. even though we are not getting into the great detail, these are the figures that are really used to compare the hell in this country versus canada, england, -- health in this country versus canada, england, france and so forth. we really have made tremendous progress, at no question about it. but when we cut it, we see that there are racial the retz's,

differences -- racial differences, and differences might economic status, some of that -- a significant challenges. even though we have made progress, there are still major concerns with a number of diseases, at a is a major challenge. host: dr. edgar sondik thank you both for being with us. >> tomorrow, yuval rosenberg discusses the latest on employment numbers and the state of the economy. edward wyatt discusses the justice apartment's effort to block the merger between at&t and t-mobile.

"washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. next, a forum focusing on social justice and jobs in america. then we will show you a couple of town hall meetings. the first with pat toomey and the second with debbie wasserman schultz. candidates, see what political reporters are saying, and track the latest campaign contributions with c-span's website for campaign 2012. easy to use, it helps you navigate the political landscape with twitter feeds and facebook updates from the campaigns. candidate bios, the latest polling data, plus links to c- span media partners in the early primary and caucus states, all at c-span.org/campaign2012. >> next a symposium on social

justice and jobs. speakers include mary frances baker. this is about one hour and 35 minutes. >> token to the second panel on this national symposium on jobs and the american dream. our next panel is focused on justice and the american dream. it will examine the contrast between dr. king possible vision for a just america and our current reality. before it started, we have a very important elected official with us here today from los angeles, california, the county board of supervisors, the second

district, who has been sitting with us here today. [applause] who i think was on his electronic device just now because he is an avid re ttweeter. nearly half a century later, how close have become to realizing the dream that dr. king had for our country? has america fulfilled its promise of equality and justice for all citizens? dr. king worked, thought, and gave his life so that all people would be afforded these rights, basic rights. we have to ask ourselves -- why can we, we've, everyone in this room, what can we do to make sure that dr. king's struggle was not in vain, that equality

and justice are not accorded only to the rich and the powerful, but to all people? today we know that our communities are facing difficult economic, political, and social challenges, in the week as leaders and activists must continue to heed his words, cannot fly, then run. if you cannot run, then walked. if you cannot walk, then crawled. but whatever you do, you have to keep moving forward." [applause] together we will keep moving forward.

>> i have the pleasure of introducing pat toomey. he was elected on a ptform of restoring fiscal responsibility.

since joining the senate, he has distinguished himself as a leader on economic and into services and budgetary issues, trying to restore fiscal discipline to washington and economic opportunities for all americans. he has introduced aeam here balanced budget proposal that received more votes in the senate than any other budget plan this year. he has successfully cut the red tape for local communities and job creators in pennsylvania. he serves on the budget, nking, commerce, and joint select committee on deficit- reduction and the joint economic committee. he is also the ranking member on the consumer protection products safety and insurance committee. he previously served in congress as a member of the house of representatives from pennsylvania's 15 congressional districts. in the fulfilment of his preterm

pledge, he retired from the house in 2004. in addition to his public service, he has also served as president of the club for growth, owned and operated a small restaurant chain in ligh valley and work in the financial-services industry. a graduate of harvard university, he lives with his wife chris and their three children. please welcome senator p toomey. [applause] >> i ask that you all join us for the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the lack of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> thank you, kim.

i would like to thank our host for providing a terrific forum. this is a great spot and a great place to do this. i thank everybody for taking the time to be here today. these series of round table discussions and town hall meetings i have been having have been helpful to me, helpful in bringing me up to speed about some of the challenges we face in getting this economy moving. i am grateful for them. just yesterday, we had a town hall meeting. i see a couple low folks who are back with us again. -- of folks who are back with us again. a wide range of opinions were presented. that is what we should be having, a free and open debate

about the challenges we face as a country. it is eat for me to be back in this county. my family was here last weekend. my daughteis a girl scout. her troupe had a white water rafting expedition. we decided to make its eighth family outing. we left our 16 month old with -- make it family outing. we left our 16 month old with a babysitter. it was a great afternoon. such a great resource to have in this part of pennsylvania. i am will give a quick overview of the two big agenda items that i have been focusing on since i have been in the senate for a months. -- 8 months. i will use a few charts so that i will not wander off of my train of thought. i would like to have your

comments and observations and thoughts. the two big items for me have been trying to move washington policy in a direction that will encourage economic growth rather than discourage it. i believe a lot of the policies being pursued in the last few years are costing us jobs, not helping us to create jobs. i am tried to move us in a direction where we will be able to -- i am trying to move us in a direction where we can have job growth and have a strong and viable economy and create job opportunities for people who need them. that is focused number one. the second is to try to restore fiscal sanity in a place that has lost its. i am not overstating the case when you consider the budget disaster we have going on. i will speak more about that at the end of my comments. we have a chart.

these are some of the town told me -- town hall meetings i have been having all over the commonwealth. let's look athe next one. what i have been hearing from constituents is remarkably similar at these meetings. i think everybody gets that we need to get our fiscal house in order in washington. it should be a high priority. it isreated -- it is related to creating jobs. as long as washington is running excessive deficits, that has an effect on our ability to grow in the private-seor. i have heard about how existing regulations, newly proposed regulations and the threat of new regulations are blocking job growth, business creation, business expansion. i will tell you the one that appears to be the worst offender from the pennsylvania and i have spoken to. the epa.

what they are doing and what they are threatening to do -- i will give you some examples of how it is absolutely costing us jobs. i have been working hard to push back on the regulatory excesse'' of the epa. the obamacare, the big health care bill, a huge problem for employers, a huge problem for job growth. i want to talk about its impact for pennsylvaa, which disturbs me a great deal. lastly, even local governments are being adversely affected by some of these new regulatns. we have some good news on that front. it is also a problem. if we could go to the next chart. if we ask the questn, where have the jobs gone, part of the answer is, the jobs have gone here. the excessive regulation and this wave of new rule-making and controls exceeds that of the bush administration and the clinton administration's.

it is starting to add up. -- bush administration and the clinton administratio. you have heard of this act for them, mact. it is a way the epa uses to impose more stringent regulations on industrial america. power companies and manufacturers of all kinds. i am in favor of moving in the direction of cleaner air. we have cleanerir today than we did 20 or 40 years ago. that progress is good. i hope we can continue to make progress. we have to be careful how we do it. the new proposals that the epa has put out that would require all industrial companies -- all companies -- to replace the boilers they use is devastating to huge segments of industrial

pennsylvania. when example, in particular. a paper manufacturer. they are the biggest in player in their county. the millions of dollars it would cost them to replace their boers could jeopardize their ability to keep everybody that they have working working. it is an example of the kind of problem that is caused by these regulations. the chesapeake bay regulations. runoff rules that put a huge portion of the burden o further improving the water quality of the chesapeake on agriculture when it is not entirely clear that agriculture i the source of the problem. i am concerned about the impact that is having on pennsylvania firms. new ozone standards. we have made progress on reducing the level of ozone. the epa wants another generation of rules to come out. if they have their way and their

rule becomes effective, most of pennsylvania will be not in compliance. most of pennsylvania will be out of compliance. what that means is, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to open up a new facity that they perceive might contribute to the level of ozone. that is baffling to our ability to create new jobs. -- that is stifling to our ability to create new jobs. i talked to a company where they employ hundreds of people at good paying jobs. they decided they are going to grow and build a new plant. they will hire part of the reason is the new ozone rules would put in a burdensome set of costs on them if they were to expand in pennsylvania. so they're going to grow. they're going to hire new workers. it's just not going to be here.

that's the kind of regulation that really disturbs me. yesterday, i was -- i started the day in mckeon county and went to a fascinating company. the north america's oldest continuously operating oil refinery. it's a small oil refinery. they are -- occupy a little niche. and they take pennsylvania oil, exclusively, and tn they refine it to a series of niche products. they don't make their money competing with the big guys and making gasoline and diesel. their business is making lubricants. and waxes and other things that you can make from oil. well, the e.p.a. has a new set of regulations they want to apply to refineries ineneral. there are huge fixed costs in complying with these regulations. if you're exxonmobi or you're conoco, you can probably absorb those costs because you can spread them out over the millions of barrels of oil that theyefine. but if you're an american

refining group, one of the biggest employers in mckeon county, you only do 10,000 barrels a day. they will not be able to afford these costs. this is what i nene when i talk about these consecutive regulations. i think we all want to have a clean environmt and continue to make progress on clean air and clean water. but we've got to do it in a sensible way. and i think some of these regulatory agencies are not. the next one is specific to -- you went backward. go to the next chart. i just -- i'm moving alon quickly here. the health care bill, i think, is profoundly problematic at many levels. but just a couple that are specific to pennsylvania, we've got a big successful relatively young life sciences industry. these are medical devices, some of them are in the pharmaceutical field. the discoveries and inventions are breathtaking. the job growth has been impressive. but it's threatened by this new

tax, not on their profits, but on their total sales. a lot of tse companies are small and they're startups and they don'tave profits yet. they will nevertheless be forced to pay taxes on their sales and we have some quotes here from some of the folks who have been hiring regularly including fujirobo in suburban philadelphia and bo surgical. and they're saying this tax could be enough -- actually it's already stopped them from further hiring. it could have even worse consequences. this is a problem. we've got a tax on ohan drug makers that's a huge problem. let me touch quickly on some of the things that i'm trying to do to push back on these regulations. i've introduced a bill that will affect the e.p.a. i was shocked to discover that they are not required to consid the impact, adverse impact on jobs that their regulations could have. i don't think that's very reasonable. i think they have to make that consideration. because that's part of the costs they need to weigh

against any perceived benefit. my bill would require that for any future regulations, the e.p.a. would have to weigh the costs of jobs lost and publicize that so that the public and congress and the various states affected would be ablto weigh in and hopefully push back. i mentioned the orphan drug act. i'm looking to repeal the medical device act. and we have some broad support for that. i don't know if we've got enough but we're going to keep working on it. some of the unfunded mandates. this came to my attention earlier this year. that we had a transportation department rule that was going to require every municipality in america to replace all their street signs. anybody hear about this? replace all your street signs. talk about a solution in search of a problem. this costs millions of dollars for your average municipality. how many municipalities in pennsylvania are sitting on millions of dollars of excess cash? i don't know of any. right? and so that means property taxes would necessarily go up to pay for this, totally

unnecessary mandate. now, to the credit of the administration, ray lahood is the secretary of transportation. is former member of congress. i served with him in the house and got to know ray. and reached tout him early on. and requested a waiver for one particular municipality that had a good argument they wanted to preserve the historic and unusual character of their street signs. and he immediately granted the waiver. much to his credit. and we continued the discussion. we've joined a group of other leslators and municipal leaders from across the country. and they have decided to suspend that regulation altogether. it's not going to go into effect. so every once in a while you have a win here d that's important. and that's part of why i'm here today. if you have a specific example of a regulation, a mandate, a cost that is not reasonable, that is consecutive, that is preventing you -- that is competitive, that is preventing you from getting a job, creating a job, that's what i would like to hear the most. let me wrap up.

one other success in terms of job creation for pennsylvania that i was delighted to have a modest role in but the shipyard tkoup in philadelphia -- down in philadelphia, and very little work for a long time. but they just won a big contract. to build two tankers for exxonmobil. it's hundreds of millions of dollars and will allow them to bring several hundred, maybe more, skilled workers back to work in building these tankers. i was delighted to be invold in that. let's go to the lastne. and i'll just sum up here. these are the things that i think we ought to be doing to maximize job growth and economic growth. one, we need fiscal balance. i personally would like to see a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. i introduced a budget that balances over 10 years. i don't think it's realistic to balance the budget overnight but over time. it's a very reasonable goal. and i think we ought to get there. i think we need to have stable tax rates. i will tell you right now i'm not in the camp that believes it's a good idea to raise taxes.

i think that will do more harm to our economy than good. and we're not undertaxed although i will say we have an absurd tax code that has so much -- so many ridiculous features that are there because special interests carved them out. i'm all in favor of reforming it. so that we can get rid of those kind of features. as i mentioned we certainly need to reduce regulations. we need sound money. we could talk about this if yone would likto. but i've been a critic. fed's policy. and we need open markets. i was just at a farm in lehigh county where the farmer exports hay. and i didn't realize this but a substantial portion of the hay that's grown in pennsylvania is exported. he believes that our exports to south korea will double if we passhe free trade agreement with korea. because it lowers the tariff on american sales into south korea very, very constructive. last thing i want to mention is the joint select committee that i've been put on to address

this fiscal challen. i said earlier, i don't think you can overstate how bad a mess we're in. we're running 1 1/2, almost $1.5 trillion deficits each year. we are borrowing 40 cents of every doll that we spend as a government. does anybody think that that's -- that's sustainable? it's totally not sustainable. we've racked up a level of debt that's unprecedented. and in my view, the threat of higher inflation, higher interest rates, higher taxes, that that poses, is already having a chilling effect on our economy. i think it's desperately important that we get this under control. i'm looking forward to working with the other 11 members of this committee. it's bipartisan. it's bicameral. six republicans and six democrats. house members and senate equally balanced. and we have an extraordinary opportunity because if we can agree on a package to reduce this deficit, then both the house and the senate are required to have up or down votes in a very short time frame. it is not subject to obstruction. it cannot be amended.

it cannot be filibustered. if we can pass this in congress, i feel quite confident the esident will feel compelled to sign it. and if we can -- if we can use this opportunity to put ourselves on a sustainable fiscal path to just moving in that direction, i know we're not going to solve all of these problems by any means, but if we can move the direction it can be very constructive for the sake of job growth for our economy and for our future. so thanks very much for being here. and i welcome your questions, comment, observations. --omments, observations. >> good morning, senator. >> gooto see you again. >> good to see you again. my name is dan from philadelphia. unemployed worker. >> yeah. >> laid off from express script with 650 other people due to corporate greed and outsourcing of jobs. so yesterday, up in countersport, myself and gentleman from tayoga county

asked a direct question we feel was not answered. so we want to know why you will not support taxing corporations and millionaires to bring more revenue instead of asking the working folks a the working poor to bear all the burden o xes. the tax breaks they have now from the bush era, all of that done -- all they've done is create a big deficit. the job losses that we have now started during the bush era. so we need to get those folks that are not paying their taxes to start paying their taxes, you know, they get tax breaks. and also get a federal refund every year. and i'm paying my taxes still on unemployment. i know yesterday you said you didn't -- you didn't know that unemployment you have to pay taxes on. but yeah, i am paying taxes on my unemployment. and itill have to pay federal taxes. i may get a refund at the end

of the year but still got to pay it now and i'm hurting now. and so are 14 million other people in this crinlt. andspecially pennsylvania. -- in this country. and especially pennsylvania. bringing jobs to pennsylvania, it hasn't happened. all we hear is you going to lobbyists and business people. to meet with them. but nothing has happened. when are we going to have jobs? when are you going to support us? >> i thought i answered it yesterday. but i'm happy to answer the question again for you today. and i will say i'm really not going to apologize for meeting regularly with groups of small business owners, chambers of commerce, when they invite me there. and let's face it. those are the people that are going to hire unemployed workers and sthare going to crailt the -- and they're going to create the jobs that we need. [applause] mitch, if could you bring up chart number 24, let me make a few observations. and this gentleman brings up a point of view that is -- is fairly widely held.

he's not in a tinyinority here. i don't share his point of view but it's understandable. the question is whether we should raise taxes on corporations and wealthy individuals. my own view is the problem is not that we're undertaxed. the problem is that we overspend. and the federal government has grown its spending as a percentage of our economy by 25% in two years. that is a staggering expansion the size of government. and that itself has a huge cost on our ability to create jobs to grow an economy because the more the government consumes of our -- the results of our hard work, the less growth we're going to have. this is well documented. this is historical. it's around the world. it's an american history. politicians don't allocate resources as wisely as markets do. as wisely appearance individuals do sitting around -- as individuals do sitting around the kitchen table. that's what it comes down to. who will allocate the results of hard work of productive people, politicians or the people who produced it?

i'm in favor of the hands that produced it rather than in the hands government. there's also an important point about competitiveness. because it's not the case that corporations and millionaires don't pay taxes. you can believe that they don't pay enough, but you can't argue that we don't have corporate taxes. i would argue that the american corporate tax rate is too high. and here's why. this is a chart, it's not my data, by the way, this is the peterson foundation that produces this. they're a nonpartisan, actually mo people think they lean slightly center-left. but be that as it may their data is certnly credible. it shows something that's widely known. the united states is here. we have the second highest not only marginal corporate tax rate in the entire industrial world, but the second highest effective tax rate. in other words, after you take into account the deductions and the fact that some corporations pay little or nothing in taxes, on avera, our businesses, and therefore our workers, are at a

competitive disadvantage with the rest of the world. i don't think that makes sense. and that's the case. but that's why i don't want to raise this burden and make us even less competitiv and encourage multinationals to leave the united states and go somewhere where the tax burden will be less. having said that, the gentleman makes a very valid point when he refers to corporations that pay no taxings. when one of the biggest most successful and famous corporations in the world pays no income taxes, that's outrageous. and it's wrong. [applause] totally indefensible. but let's also consider some of the reasons why. they're complying with the tax code. they're not breaking any laws. this is congress' fault. and part of it is because there is such huge tax giveaways for so-called green energy projects that you have the tail wagging the dog. they're making decisions based on the tax code. they're choosing to produce things that are not

economically competitive. but they get a huge tax break and so they do it. and at the end of the day, they pay nothg in taxes. that's an outrage. and i am in favor of dramatically reforming the tax code, simplifying it and making it much more fair and eliminating these diculous giveaways and loopholes that special interest groups have carved out, and at the same time, using that opportunity to then lower rates so that we're in the competitive end of this graph and we start winning against our competitors in europe and asia. [applause] >> thank you for holding this town hall. my name is gene barr, vice president of government public affairs for the pennsylvania chamber of business and industry. we're the largest broad based business advocacy group in pennsylvania. and i represent the people who would love to hire people like dan and others in this room and elsewhere in pennsylvania. i want us to pass on to you a survey that we jus completed of hundreds of businesses across pennsylvania. just within the last week or tw and we asked them an open ended

question to go to some of your previous points about what is the problem in job creation now? what are they seeing? what are they concerned about? number one wax the economy, not a surprise -- was the economy, not a surprise. number two, hindering job creation, the competitive regulations, the -- the consecutive regulations, these business people are all across pennsylvania and all sizes and all kinds of businesses. one of those things was one that you hinted at which is the federal health care. and i'll talk about one point specifically wigs the provisions of the federal health care kick in when you have 50 or more employees. if you're a small busineswith 45 employees, particularly in this time, you're going to think long and hard about adding five employees to your rolls to pick up costs that are undrmed at this point. the question would be, do we have any chance -- the goals of health ce are laddable. do we have any chance of going back in and crafting a health care proposal that really does what it should do which is lower health care costs for everyone and not hinr job creation?

thank you. >> it's a great point. [applause] i often will ask small business groups at a chamber of commerce gathering or some other roundtable how many people believe that the result of obamacare is going to be to lower the cost of providing health insurance for their workers. and i've never seen a hand go up. it's a huge problem. and you're absolutely right. when you create this threshold that says all of these new burdens are going to kick in if you hire more than 50 workers, well, guess what? we're going to make sure they don't hire the 50th worker. terrible policy. we don't have a consensus in congress to repeal it. we had a vote in the house to repeal it. we had a vote in the senate. and unfortunately, it went on party lines. i spo full repeal of this bill -- i support full repeal of this bill and replacing it with an alternative series of reforms that would lower the costs andmprove access without all of these mandates and huge expense and the government's consecutive --

excessive intrusion into the delivery of health care. we don't have a consensus receipt now. what we're trying to do is work around the edges where we can. you ght recall -- i know you recall the 1099 provision in this bill. this was a provision that would require every business to file a form with the i.r.s. every time they spend more than $600 on anything. now, stop and think about that. a small contractor is going to spend more than $600 filling up his pickup with gas. you have to keep track of every gas station that you go to and when you reach $600 that's a 1099 for that one. can you imagine the administrative hassle of trying to keep track of this sort of thing? that was in the bill. we we able to get that repealed. it took three votes on the senate floor before we could get majority. but we finally did. i mentioned that because it illustrates that occasionally there are little risme shot improvements we can -- little risme shot imprfments we can make but not solve the problem until we repeal it and replace it with an alternative set of

reforms. [applause] >> my name is rick elbert and i work for the postal service and they claim they're going through some hard times. i would like to know why we can process a bar coded piece of mail, meaning a letter or magazine, for 2 1/2 cents, why are we paying places like pitney bowes 10 1/2 cents to do the same mail? what this ma does then is it comes back to our facility and it's presorted. but you have 100 trays of other mail that also has to get sorted. so this presorted mail just gets dumped into the mail stream. i don't know. it just doesn't seem right. and we only process about 17% of the available mail out there. and my otheromment about it

is the postal servi was mandated by congress, the only government agency to prefund future retirees' benefits. i believe there was $39 billion in this account to begin with. what happened last year was the postal service overpaid this fund by $60 billion. they're trying to recoup this money. who makes that kind of mistake and keeps their job? >> yeah. in government it happens all the time. >> you know, let's say -- we can deliver a letter from lentown to allentown. talking about praoistizing for less than 44 -- privatizing for less than 44 cents. that includes training me to go to oklahoma anywhere from two days to six weeks. there's a thousand mechanics, technicians there coming and going all the time. they house us.

they pay us. we get trained. and that's in with your 44 cents. i don't think fedex would do that. another thing when the post office does a study, like where to put a new processg center, they pay big bucks to have this survey done so they can place it in the right area. well, within six months, guess who's right around the corner? the fedex, u.p.s., they don't pay a dime. and it's -- it's just a shame. there's so much mail out there. and sure, email has cut back a bit. but why are we only processing 17% of the mail? that means private companies are doing that. work that we can do in house for like i said 2 1/2 cents as opposed to us paying 10 1/2 cents. thank you. >> well, thank you.

that was certainly informative. and i hope it will be the first to confess that i know nothin about the postal service's sorting system. [inaudible] to fund the postal service. we don't pay city tax or whatever -- >> property taxes, right. thanks for your input. let me- i am not familiar with the status of the pension system. but we'll take a look at that. and i appreciate your bringing it up. >> hi. my name is pat senafane and thank you for coming to inform us of your progress in congress. i have a two-part question. the first part is this. most people today feel that congss has relinquished its authority and has given it over to czars. we have never had a situation where we have people who have

never been cross-examined by congress as to their background. we even had a communist -- registered communist working in the white house earlier in this administration. and i would like to know what you feel should be done so that this country never gets into this situation again. and secondly, the other part is the national labor relations board in boeing, and how it's tilted to the left and unions and how they stopped a thousand jobs in south carolina, how now they're making rules and regulations. and here i believe it to be an advisory capacity of this board, not a government agency. why are they allowed to do this? thank you.

[applause] >> i think it's -- it's hard to dispute the idea that congress has voluntarily relinquished authority that i think the constitution intended congress to have to the executive. and to the bureaucracy of the executive branch is stunning in its scale. and i think it's just way too big. one of the ws that we have to provide a check on that is through the power of the purse strings. this is also by the really brilliant forsythe and design of the -- foresight and design the constitution by the forefathers. in the annual funding bills that fund the government including the executive branch, congress can go through and decide how much money they're going to get and what they get to spend it on. so this is actually a very useful process by which we could decide, for instance, that money used to fund the

national labor relation board, would not be permitted to be spent to have them telling companies where they can locate their future plants. i think it should go without say, but obviously it doesn't. so we could force that issue. here's the problem. congress has become so dysfunctional that we don't have a federal budget and we're not doing appropriation bills. senator reid made it very clear. very open about it now. for more than two years in a row, the federal government, by his decision, refuses to produce a budget. now, i went on the budget commtee because i wanted to play some role and whatever i could do to change the fiscal path we're on. believe me, i was shocked and i'm still furious that we didn't even have a budget. it's required by law. the 1974 budget act requires congress to do it. so this is a flagrant violation of the law. more fundamentally, it's an abdication of a basic responsibility. the government's the biggest enterprise in the world. we spend $3.7 trillion and to

think we have no budget. and so i introduced my own. and we -- and force a vote on the senate floor for my own. but i wasn't able to get cooperation from the other side. so we couldn't pass that. but i tnk it's appalling that we don't have a budget. now, why do i mention this? in part because one of the consequences is that this is the first step in the process that then leads to a series of individual funding bills that are supposed to be consistent with the overall budget. we have done none of those. and that means guys like me and the other 99 senators have had no opportunity to go down to the senate floor and influence policy by offering an amendment to change the funding for a czar tore an nlrb or an e.p.a. or any of the others. it's ridiculous. and we're going to go back into session in september and the first point of discussion is going to be some giant humongous funding bill for the whole government because we haven't gone through this process. and i assure you we will not

have the kind of opportunities we should have to affect policy the way you're describing. and i know it sounds like procedural minaya and tedious and i apologize -- minutee and tedious and i apologize. but this is the way the congress can reflect the will of theeople we represent and if we don't have a process for doing that you end up with government by the executive branch without being able to hold it in check. pplause] >> senators, thank you so much for coming to carbon county. my name is robert dages and i'm a businessman and own three businesses. and so does my wife and children here. i do it entrepreneurial style. it's my opinion, my conviction, sir, that the biggest problem to business is government. government being in competition th private business.

sir, there's three parts to this issued question. it has to do with the bill of rights. it has to do with government moving outside their charter. and it has to do with transparency in government. first, moving outside their charter, we have the situation here in carbon county, also known as packard and ginyards, a big cost, my understand, the excise tax on gbling went to fund that projt when it was supposed to come back for a tax relief. sir, when i pressed issues, they said they had constitutional authority to move outside provisional

authority to do what they're doing. they would never give it. when i pressed it in court, horrendous decision came, which now allows any official, there's actually case support move outsi of category in kind, and move away from government crter into corporate law, corporate charter, a use -- and use corporate law, litigation issues, to argue for client attorney privilege with an affidavit to being the appropriate roadblock to deface us from making redress of grievances which is our bill of rights. i've taken this to a new level and i would like you to call the chief clerk of commonwealth courts and follow case 1415. and see that it gets the attention that it needs.

so would you tell me, please, senator, what you are doing for transparency in government? >> well, first, let me say that i think it would be helpful if you could spend some time with one of my staff afterward. i really didn'tully follow some of the aspects of what you are referring to. i think some of it is specific to state government and probably -- i probably don't have much of a role in some aspects. t maybe i do and i would be happy to try to determine that. as a general matter, i'm a believer that transparency is a good thing. and sunshine is a good disinfectant. and the government ought to operate with as much transparency as possible. and then citizens can hold their government accountable. so i would like to work with you if we can on the specifics of the issue that you raised. thanks. >> senator, i am a businessman.

i have built and sold three businesses in pennsylvania, including a manufacturing company. i have dealt with government regulation all my life. i have to respectfully request that you take it easy on the environmental protection agency. i am also the father of four children. i have a stake in the next generation. while i recognize that the paper mill you will meet with tomorrow in pennsylvania need to create jobs and to maintain production, i also recognize that what they are asking you to do is make it so they do not have to invest in state of the art clean oilers. they are asking you --to you- clean bo -- clean boilers.

i believe in capitalism, free markets, and liberty. i believe that your liberty and swear in french of -- enfringe -- infringes on my right to exist. the paper mail is asng you to let them pollute. the coalower -- mill is asking you to let them pollutes. the coal power plant is asking you to let them pollute our air. i disagree with that. i think it is time that we stop thinking of our atmosphere as a sewer for toxic waste can we stop letting companies dumped mercury, carbon monoxide into the air we breathe. that is not liberty.

i do not care if my electricity went up 5%. i would pay that to have clean water and clean air. i just had to respectfully suggest that to you that maybe take it easy on the epa. what i wanted to askou about is our precarious dependence on oil. our entire economy is dependent on oil. as i think you probably know, the united states has 2% of the world's oil. 2%. if we had to rely on our own oil, it would last four yrs. to me, as a business person, it seems reckless and irresponsible that we let our business model for the country cling to that precarious dependence. 81% of the oil is in saudi

arabia, venezuela, russia, libya. they controlled 81% of the world's oi my question is this. america has done so many great things. why are we not rising to the occasion and creating clean energy technologies that we can deploy throughout our country and get off of the foreign oil and stop importing foreign oil and exports this technology? i think that is what will create jobs for america and the clean energy f the next generation. why is the senate not embracing the concept? -- that concept? >> thank you for that. you are the first person to suggest that i go easy on the epa. it is a good alternative point of view. i would just remind everybody that we all pollute.

most of us probably got here by a car. there is some pollution that comes out of the back end of a car. there is a certain amount that is part of our lives. we have made enormous progress on the missions we put in our atmosphere. i am in favor of -- the emissi onwe put in our atmosphere. i am inavor of the process. we have to be careful about doing this because there is a cost. when that costs us jobs, that is a price a family is paying. it has to be weighed against the hope that there will be a benefit in the form of cleaner air. i want to move on to your point about oil. it is an important additional point. i doubt there is anyone in the room who doesn't believe we should continue to strive for

cleaner air and cleaner water. it is a question of the pace at which we do it and how we do it. we have to do it in a rational and careful way thatoes that damage the economy. no question we have a huge dependence on foreign oil. it is a huge national security vulnerability for us. we have not done anything about it in a long time. we did not leave the stone age because we ran out of stones. we figure out a better way to make tools. in time, we will figure o alternatives to fossil fuels. right now, fossil fuels are more affordable as a means of producing energy and transportation. one of the things that is encouraging to me about our dependence on foreign oil is the natural gas we have discovered here in the united states, specifically pennsylvania. in the first time in our history, it is plausible to see an alternative to oil has been a

transportation fuel of choice. natural gas is already cost competitive to gasoline. we do not have a natural gas refueling infrastructure the way we have a gasoline refueling infrastructure. it takes less infrastructure to ke it from the ground. we have a staggering supply. we have a huge sply just in the marcellus shale. it is equivalent to half of all the oil in saudi arabia. there are other comparable fields throughout the country. we also have our own oil, which i think we should develop more of. that would diminish our dependence on foreign oil. we have in alaska and offshore. i think we should be developing every source that is economically competitive, of which there are many.

over time, the technology will emerge that will introduce new sources. as that happens, we should embrace them. i am in favor of most of the above when it comes to an energy policy. [applause] >> hi, i live in harting, pennsylvania. my question will not change because of what you were talking about about oil and gas. the gas industry -- the natural gas industry is not exactly sure of the outcome that they are projecting with the chemicals that they use and the contaminion from the dissolved

solids and a lot of things that are involved. there has been no study by our government to protect us. my original question was about the epa. one of the reasons we have, as you stated, the best ever, is because of the rules and regulations from the epa. the epa relies on science. science tells the epa that this chemical is bad. that chemical is bad. we should not have in our bodies more than 0.8%. my question is, how can you say, i am going to give you a job, but you have to hold your breath for 8 hours? how can i tell my child that he can only eat one fish per month?

how can we let companies pollute? it may create a job, but five years from now i will have leukemia. 10 years from now you are going to have something wrong. how does that -- how is that actually cost effective in the long run? how can we allow lobbying in congress? our d.e.p. is one of the lowest rate in the state. we are used as an example of bad d.e.p. regulations. trouble because of the gas companies lobbying our representatives that we elected to protect us. how is lowering chemical protection, epa protection actually going to benefit me or

my family? >> maybe i was not clear. i am not suggesting that we reverse the progress we hav made over these recent decades. what i am is suggesting is that the new way of regulations that the epa is trying to impose -- some of them go too far and happen to suddenly without examining the implication. if theenefit of a new regulation is actually going to save lives and it is measurable and we can clearly establish a signifant benefit, we need to do it. in some of these cases, the benefits are tenuous andhe costs are real. i have to disagree of your characterization of the d.e.p. it is my understanding that the

d.e.p. is qualified to regulate marcellus shale. that should be some comfort. the fluid that is being injected into the stone is being injected two miles below t surface of the earth. it is kept and contained in steel tubes. this is extensively regulated. i am in favor of regulating to the best practices out there. i am convinced that the best practices make for a safer approach. i have been too well sites. i have the -- to well sites. we should put whatever resources we have to make sure that that is what happens. i think the epa is capable of doing it. [applause] >> three more questions.

if you did not get your question in, raise your hand. >> my name is paul. i am a retired steelworker. you mentioned a big corporation that did not pay any taxes. i think you were referring to generally that trick. am i right? >> yes. >> i think they got some of the stimulus money. their ceo is jeffrey immelt. he was a big supporter of president obama.

genel electric is one of the biggest manufacturers of light bulbs. they are manufactured in china. there was a vote in congress a little while ago to ban incandescent bulbs. is the band going to be voted on again? when they close all of these plants -- there were 40 plants that manufacture incandescent bulbs. they were sending jobs to china. am i right? tried to get rid ofhese fluorescent bulbs. you have a problem with the mercury in there. will that be another vote on ban that ban?

>> i do not know the answer to the question. i am personally in favor o libelled freedom. -- light bulb freedom. [applause] they emit different shades of light. let consumers decide. consumers can sort this out. i do not think we need a ban. >>y name is bob. i am a local resident. two quick items. back to the jobs. in order to create jobs, how do you come down on these three items. to me, you need consumption. you need to have people buying things so that companies will be forced to produce more. now you have roughly 12-14 million people who are out of

work. you have these companies that have high productivity that they are making 1000 gizmos and they need to make mor they can increase their productivity and they do not need to hire more workers. my second point is on this super committee that you are a member of. do you really think six republicans and six democrats sitting in a room are going to really come up with any ideas that 500 members in congress should be able to do? >> the first point you made those to the hearts of the debate that is raging across america about economics. should we be focusing on the demand side or the supply side? this administration is all about the demand side. i would argue that it h not worked. a massive stimulus bill -- the giant one was not the first.

the huge surge in spendings unprecedented. if the idea that the government can create demand and created by borrow-- create it by borrowing and spending, we would have a recovery going on right now because of the huge amount of spending. my view is that that is looking at economics in a backwards fashion. if the governmt can have policies that allow people to produc things that a lower cost, there is unlimited demands. who does not want a newer car, a nicer home, better things for their kids. the demand is there. the problem is we cannot provide the product at an affordable price. when the government at to th cost of the products, we separate the natural consumer demand from their ability to have that demands met. the focus should be how we

enable people to provide supply at an affordable price. as to your question about the select committee, i do not blame you for being skeptical about this. i have my concerns about whether we can get this done. it is not as though we do not have enough committees down there. my hope is that there is a greater sense of urgency now than we have had in the past. the deficits are massive. the debt is unprecedented. we see this volatility in the equity markets. we see on rest in europe. -- unrest in europe. i am hoping that this combination of the bids will help us come up with a reason -- of events will help us come up with a reasonableay to succeed.

[applause] i have a couple of comments. we need oversight on the epa. the burden of regulation on businesses and people is too much. people do not understand that the cost of the product to make is passed down to the customer. you mentioned tax loopholes. one of the things i have been hearing is that some of the mortgage interest deductions you were able to take on your income taxes will be eliminated. 52% of the american people do not pay federal income tax. everyone needs to have a stake in the game even if it is all the 5%. [applause] i am happy that you are on the super committee. we need a conservative boys. -- voice.

the problem i have with the super committee is, is it constitutional? >> good question. as far as the tax policy goes, nothing has been decided by the select committee or anybody else. the mortgage interest deduction is one of the most popular features of the tax code. the least likely thing to be addressed. because it is so popular and so widespread -- it has not been addressed yet. there is nothing in the legislation that creates and authorizes the select committee that forbids considering tax reform. i hope we will. the tax code is a disaster. we could encourage economic growth much better if we made some reforms there. at this point, i cannot be sure we will take it up, much less what the changes will be.

as far as the constitutionality, here is my view. the constitution specifically states that the congress is authorized to develop its own rules. the house is required to choose a speaker and it does so. beyond that, both bodies have, from the beginning of this republic, developed their own rules or proceeding. they have developed their own committee structures. every congress has some kind of change, even if it is only the ratio of members. it seems to me that the creation of this particular cmittee falls entirely within the purview of congress to decide how it will conduct its own business. at the end of the day, all we can do is produce a piece of legislation that congress passed to vote on. they can all take it down. if congress votes in favor of

it, the president has to sign it. it follows the constitutional process in that respect fully. as far as us coming up with something that the 535 members have been unable to, i do not know. we have to get this done. i am in favor of giving this a try. thank you, senator toomey. i have a concern. there is talk, and you probably heard this, that sometime next year before the election president obama intends to circumvent congress and give amnesty to the illegal aliens in this country. this will virtually assure his

reelection. i am wondering if that is possible and, if so, are you and the fellow conservatives planning to stop or have some method of stopping this action from happening? >> i do not think it is likely that that would happen, to be honest with you. the president probably views immigration issues differently than i do. he has acknowledged that it needs to go through a legislative process. if he attempted a dramatic and large-scale change that was profound -- to attempt to do that unilaterally would be disastrous for him. i doubt that. you hear these rumors from time

to time. i think it is quite unlikely. thanks for raising that. i want to recognize a couple of people who have been kind enough to join us. where is dave? [applause] i appreciate you coming. and representatives, thanks for being here. i think we have run out of time here. i want to thank you for taking the time to be here and providing the input. people have a wide range of opinions here. they are all valuable. i appreciate the fact that we were able to have a reasonable and civil discourse, including on those matters that we disagree. if you have a question and we did not get to it, please reach out to our staff. send it to us. if you have a suggestion or an idea about something that we can and should do, please. we would love to hear from you.

thanks again for being here this morning. [applause]

[random conversations]

>> on thursday, the joint select committee of which senator to me is a member will hold their first organizational meeting at the capitol. the committee's first public hearing will be held on tuesday, september 13. we will have continuing coverage of the committee hearing here on the c-span network and online at c-span.org. >> next, a town hall meeting with flora -- florida rep,

debbie wasserman schultz. live at 7:00 a.m., your calls and comments on "washington journal." >> 2008 republican vice- presidential report vice- presidential nominee sir pailin will be at a restoring america rally in iowa. live coverage begins today at noon eastern on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. >> what's more video -- video of the candidates and track the latest campaign contributions with the website for campaign 2012. it helps you navigate the political landscape with twitter feeds, can it biographies, and the latest polling data. linked to c-span media partners. all at c-span.org/campaign2012. >> next, representative debbie wasserman schultz has a town hall meeting for senior

citizens. she discusses disaster funding, bipartisanship, and the upcoming agenda. this is an hour and 10 minutes.

>> even though we see you on the nightly news now and in the national arena, she is not a shrinking violet by any means. she is a friend of plantation. she has always been just a phone call away. her office meets with our staff on a regular basis. we have to thank you for that. as the mayor, it surely means a

lot that her presence is always here in our hometown. when i say she is just a phone call away, i want to tell you this personal experience i had. this tells you how she keeps the pulse on our city and the other cities she represents in our area. i was recently elected in march 2011. after you are campaigning all day every day and you get the returns, i was fortunate enough to be the winner, i went home and put my feet up. i had to savor the victory. the phone rings at 12:30 at night. i thought, oh my gosh, what has happened? a voice of the other end of the phone says, "hi, diane. congratulations. i called to congratulate you on your victory." 12 akaka 30 at night -- never

too busy. -- 12:30 at night -- never too busy. that speaks volumes about who you are, debbie. ladies and gentlemen, debbie wasserman schultz. >> thank you. i have to step up on my little steps because i am still kind of a small package. mayor, i want to make sure i do not cut one of your names off for you. it is an absolute privilege to represent you in washington and to be here in the city of plantation, which i have represented for all of the 18 years i have been in public office in the state house, the state senate, and now the united states house of representatives. i have literally grown up and watched almost every major

thing that happens in someone's adult life. you have lived through that with me. it has been a wonderful experience to represent this community. you have all made the absolute best choice to select the only strong mayor left in broward county. she does a fantastic job. the tradition of strong female leadership in plantation continues. i seek the legacy of the family through the leadership of the mayor. at a time in our country where that public service is often denigrated and considered a bad thing by far too many people,

having a family who has devoted their life to public service and, specifically in plantation, devoted their lives to the city of plantation, it is remarkable. i might serve in our nation's capital and have a little bit broader stage these days, but i am still always go to the hometown girl. i walked door to door in my first race -- 25,000 doors -- and still what door to door to this day. i cannot thank you enough for the privilege to serve you. i want to talk about what is going on in washington. i am here as your u.s. representative in washington. if if you have a more politically campaign oriented

question, that is why i am not here. the other day someone asked me a question about what i thought about the president of st. question -- the president's chances for reelection. i want to make sure we cover the issues that are so prevalent on everyone's mines. this town hall meeting is being taped by c-span. you should know that in advance. you might see yourself on c-span this evening. we have a lot at stake in this country right now it cannot be overstated. i want to thank joanne hill for having me here at the waterville west clubhouse. i want to thank you very much for hosting us here this morning.

i am also pleased to tell you that i have three wonderful advocates for seniors here. someone from the social security administration. eve, where are you? there you are, i am sorry. right in front of me. forgive me. barbara gordon, who is here from shine, serving the needs of elders. also, kathy bowers from the senior medicare patrol. kathy and i started i young democrats together 20 years ago. it is wonderful to see you here. these advocates are here to answer any questions you may have about your specific situation. at every town hall meeting that i do, particularly when there is a large group of senior skier -- large repair seniors, -- large group of seniors, we have

someone to help you with your problems. i want to introduce vivian, a senior assistant who handles healthcare, medicare, medicaid, social security, and any problems you may have in those areas. i want to give each of the senior advocates a couple of minutes to tell you what they do and how they can help if you have a problem. thank you. >> yo all -- i am also a small package. thank you for inviting social security here today. we are happy to answer your questions. i have a couple of pantalets down here on retirement, disability, medicare eligibility. i invite everyone to visit our web site at socialsecurity.gov. thank you. [applause]

>> barbara? please. >> i am proud to be a volunteer counselor with shine, serving the health insurance needs of elders. we are a free, unbiased service of medicare and the state department of elder affairs. we have no affiliation with any insurance company. there is no fee for our services. the first thing i want to do is remind you that the open enrollment period has been moved up to a october 15. it will run from october 15 until december 7. you do not have at the last three weeks in december as you did last year. keep that in mind. we would like you to think about

your medicare insurance. does the plan that you have give you easy access and convenient access to services? can you get into the doctor easily? is there a hospital near your home you are allowed to use? are your copays reasonable? are you treated with dignity and respect? do you want to think about cutting your medicare costs? does your plan still fit? maybe you bought this plan five years ago. maybe your medical needs have changed. you need to look at that. do you have questions or concerns about the content and coverage or the way your needs have been handled? shined can help with that.

most of you have picked up a brochure with the broward county phone number on it. again, we are a free, unbiased source of information. you call the number and a trained counselor will get back to you. again, remember, things have moved up this year. october 15 to december 7. thank you very much. [applause] >> last but not least, kathy b ower. >> thank you, debbie. i am so glad to be here today representing senior medicare patrol. i am decided to see my friends from plantation. i am here representing the senior medicare patrol. senior medicare patrol.