obamacare as soon as possible? [applause] >> as you know, we voted in the house to repeal the act that has been sitting over in the senate . nothing will happen with health care being reformed. it is so important that we change that law before 2014. you are talking about bureaucracies, taxes, new irs agents -- those at the types of things that will kick in. we can go back and reform health

care, but we can do it by using the right type of market principles that put you in charge of your health care and of the government. >> there have been some recent court cases about the constitutionality of obamacare. what is your opinion on whether this is a constitution measure or not? >> atlanta ruled that the individual mandate was unconstitutional, but when you go back and read a study of previous supreme court decisions, the federal government does not have the authority to mandate individual citizens that they must go out and buy commodities. some people try like that to automobile insurance. thing is you do not have to go out and buy a car. if you do, you operate on public road systems, then you are required to have automobile insurance, but to say a mandate to the american people that they have to purchase health insurance, that is not constitutional, and i believe this will be coming up in

supreme court sometime next year. >> you discussed a little bit about medicare earlier, but what do you think are some things -- >> [inaudible] >> i am asking the people's questions, sir. >> [inaudible] >> ok, if you all do not mind, i would be happy to say whose name is on each of these questions. i am moderating this. i am sorry. we're going to get to as much as we can. the next question is from palm beach with questions about medicare. he asked if you expand on what types of things you can do to get medicare spending under control. >> one of the most important things we can do is we have to move from the fee for service to the defined benefits. i think you have defined benefits based upon the income of the individual, and that puts them in charge of their plan here right now, people are going in and getting service, and they

do not know what the bill is that goes forward. a lot of times, you see a service that is, for example, $200. they actually billed medicare for thousand dollars. we have to have a cleaning up of that system. one of the most important things we have to do is get rid of defense of medicine being enacted by so many of our doctors. so many doctors are requiring people to have a certain amount of tests that we are not necessary, and the reason they are doing that is because of " reform. one of the things we need to have not just for medicare but our entire system is tort reform so that doctors can go in and do what they want to do in protecting the patient. we talked about fraud, waste, and abuse in the system. that is one of the key things we have to start looking at an rectifying. millions, billions of dollars we could say, but as well, let's start talking to some of the medical professionals like i did over here with the group

that has been practicing anatomical pathology for some time, and how do we streamline and make sure the copays we are putting on our seniors are less because every time a senior goes in and gets one of these tests, that is another little copiague. suddenly, the 20% co pay you have, you are being told you have to have 12 of these tests -- it adds up over time. those are the types of things we need to talk to the professionals about. >> we have about six questions regarding military action currently going on around the world. why do you continue voting of finance the war is? >> you look at a guy that says we should not be in libya. i was one of the most outspoken people about the war powers resolution of 1973. we should not have been supporting any actions in libya because it did not meet the war powers resolution test. after we found that of some of the law and was killed in pakistan -- after we found that

osama bin laden was killed in pakistan. we're about to celebrate the anniversary of 9/11. 10 years ago, none of us would have never thought that their planes would fly into buildings viewed the enemy has a book, and whether or not you like that, you have to do something about it. the united states of america can do a little bit better in fighting the 21st century battle because it is not about nation- building. it is not about occupation-style warfare. we should be focused on with the enemy is and taking the fight to the enemy. we are not responsible for fixing everything that is broken. that is the key thing -- [applause] but you have an enemy that is not going to go way unless you crush it, and if we do not get back to the void of understanding that sometimes your enemy has to be crushed --

the last time the united states of america fought a total war where they were committed was world war ii. [applause] every time you five have measured warfare, you get residual effects. you did not finish the job in korea or vietnam or does it storm -- desert storm. you have to close the door and develop the right type of strategically maneuverable military that takes the fight to this enemy. give you a great example -- 1990, united states of america have 596 navy war vessels. today, the united states of america has 283. who just two weeks ago launched their first aircraft carrier? >> china. >> how do you extend the power of a nation? 70 percent of the mass of the earth is what? in my case. -- i end my case.

>> there are concerns of united states going to bankruptcy over financing these wars. what is your opinion over those unintended consequences? >> - standing is this -- when i look at the minutes of the constitution, it says to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare, provide for the common defense, secure the blessings of liberty. i could make you as populous as you want to be as a people, but if i do not protect you, what difference does it make? [applause] there were people going to work 10 years ago on september 11, 2001. the world changed on that date. the fight came to our shores, and if we could get back to having a government that understands this constitutionally mandated responsibility, then we can set it straight as far as our fiscal situation in the united states of america, but if we have a government that continues to create government agencies that

never meet their intended purposes -- there was only one reason why we created the department of energy in the late 1970's -- to make the united states of america energy independent. no one has yet to be able to explain to me why we have a department of labour. what do they do? department of education -- as the department of education has grown, what has happened to the performance standards of education in the united states of america? it has gone down. when we get a federal government that understands its proper roles and responsibilities, we will have a federal government that you do not see these large debts and deficits. [applause] it is about making hard decisions. it really is. i am telling you. be specific. i will go on and tell you.

anything that does not meet the constitution -- like the form of energy? why do we have the department of energy when they are not producing anything according to their mandate? we do not need to have that. education should be a local- level issue. it cannot be 5000 people in the federal government, okay? [applause] those are the types of things we have to do, and then we can get this budget on its right track. one of our viewers wants to know why you feel it is necessary to be in so many wars at once. >> first of all, i have never felt it necessary to be in so many wars at once. the one day a soldier, sailor, and marine understands is they took an oath to support and defend the constitution. they took an oath to protect you, but we really would like to stay home with our families. we would like to come home every single night and see our wife

and kids, but when we are told to go and do something, we go and do it. we do not have that right. let me tell you what is the important thing have happened. after world war ii and korea, 75% of legislators in washington, d.c., had served in uniform, had been in combat. they knew what it meant to send men and women into what appeared now, you have less than 10% -- let me correct myself -- they do not have a freaking clue. [applause] i know what it means to stand over an american soldier that has been shot. so the decision to say the we're going into a combat operation is something personal for me because those are my friends. those are my brothers and sisters, my nephew that is out there. if we can get more people that

have been on that side that understand what it means to tell someone at 2:00 in the morning to answer that phone call, have your things in a duffel bag and we do not know if you're coming home -- that is what we have to do to fix the situation as far as commitment to conflict and combat operations. >> i wanted to move on to an area regarding tax reform. there are a few questions. can you comment on fair or flat tax? >> that is a great question. i think there are a lot of misconceptions. flat tax means we just flat net out. you eliminate we have very few deductions when you talk about personal income tax rate. that is why i say with a flat tax, every wage-earning household with a 13% 16%, and then on the corporate business side, 21%, and you have no

loopholes, you have no substance. when you talk about a fair tax, consumption-based tax, that is basically what we had until about 1916, when we created the 16th amendment, irs and all of that, based on what you consume, what you went out and bought the theory that is fine, but what you have to make sure of -- if you are going to institute a fair tax, all levels of federal income taxation have to be done. if you are not careful, you get what is called a value added tax. you have your basic federal tax, and you have the fairfax based upon your consumption and national sales taxes on top of that here you have to get rid of capital gains taxes, dividend taxes -- what is the other one? the death tax, the estate tax. you have to get rid of the irs if you want to have -- [applause] if you are going to have a fair tax. that means you have to repeal the 16th amendment.

i believe that the fair tax can be in any state that we get to, but a flat tax can be a bridging mechanism. member, 47% of wage-earning households are not paying any type of federal income taxation right now. what a shock it would be if they suddenly went out and had a 23% national sales tax on goods and services. ok? that is where we have a flat tax as a means by which we can slowly but surely -- remember, incremental is and is not a bad thing, get people accustomed to this, get more people into the tax base, and then get people accustomed for having a fair tax. >> congressman, i know you mentioned that the corporate tax rate is in that explanation. one questioner wants to go a little bit further and ask about lowering the tax rate with no loopholes. >> that is exactly what i said. i look at if we keep our states

with a 4% -- 46% corporate tax rate, and corp. tops out about 25%. i think 20% would be the right place to go teary that gives them a competitive tax rate with the rest of the world. we cannot lower it down to 12% or 13%, but that 20% or 21% is competitive for them, but then there are no loopholes. we just give you a competitive tax rate. the more question a wanted to know your opinion on the value- added tax. >> value-added tax is what is chilling europe. it is not a good thing. you are just increasing the level of taxation on people. you are going to have a fair tax, you have to eliminate all other forms of federal income taxation so it does not become a value-added tax, which at this time would crush american households. >> i wanted to move onto an area of the environment.

one questioner wants to know you recently voted to roll back the clean air act seriously compromising public health and clean air. will you promise to protect our future from danger from fossil fuels? >> a possible -- i absolutely believe in clean air, but this is a thing you have to look at as well -- with a lot of these regulations coming back, it is the epa tightening of regulations to the point where you are putting americans out of work. i do not think that is what we want to have happen. i will give you a great example -- the head administrator of the epa set before a congressional committee -- i believe it was the energy and commerce committee -- and when she was as if she did an to the -- into consideration the economic ramifications of the legislation she sends down, she said absolutely not. now's the time when we have this regulatory environment on steroids that in the killing our small businesses in america. i believe in protecting our air.

i am a. masters of the diver. i want to have good, clean reefs. i want to have a clean everglade. say again? >> [inaudible] >> well, i have to tell you something -- i sit around and look at it here plans far as 70% to 75% nuclear capable, and it is recognized as one of the cleanest forms of energy that you can have out there. was >> one question asks about tourism being alive lot of florida for the economy and many industries like hotel, boating, recreational fishing, rely on clean water. how will you ensure that water quality standards for take these businesses from harmful pollution? >> it is very simple. when you have the third largest beef system in the world right out here, we are not going to

have any type of pollution of our water systems. one of the things we're doing is looking at how we can enhance and develop energy resources from the gulf stream. if he takes the opportunity to go down to fau, you will see how we are looking at the opportunity to harness the ocean and use it to power our systems. no one is looking at how they can pollute. one of the critical things that will be happening been quite soon -- in 2014, the panama canal is going to expand, and you will have bigger cargo ships that will be coming here. we have to look at how we can be an end to the dredging necessary for their ships to come in, but you have people see how they can make sure that they can protect our raese systems, even while they are thinking how they can accommodate these larger vessels to come in here. the thing is we cannot continue down a path of sacrificing americans and jobs over these

types of things which are not really proving to be so. no one is poisoning our oceans right now. our oceans in south florida are some of the cleanest around, and you can laugh about it, but i was down there diving a couple of weeks ago, so i think it is ok. [applause] >> again, on water, 1/3 of florida residents get their daily water supply from the everglades. how are you working to promote everglade restoration projects? >> not just everglade restoration, but between richmond projects. that is also part of our tourism industry. i think that michele bachmann said something that was an thatfaux pas yesterday when she mentioned possibly looking for energy resources in the everglades, so when i see her, i'll straighten her out about that -- that was an incredible faux pas. >> a question about the xl

pipeline. >> that is the pipeline i think it's coming out of canada, an oil pipeline. >> christina wants to know if you support the five blind to solve some of our energy needs in this country? >> yes, i do. i think right now when we look at -- [applause] i would rather have a pipeline coming from canada continue to send our money -- then continue to send our money to saudi arabia or venezuela. [applause] we need to be very concerned about a spanish company that is right now looking to drill off of the international waters of key west about 10 miles away, and they are going to go into deaths that are deeper than with the deepwater horizon did. you can offset a platform about

40 miles and go into the continental shelf theory the thing is they are going to establish that platform in cuban waters, which means we cannot say or do anything about it. if there is some type of incident, that will go into the gulf stream. this is where i believe -- and i got legislation to prevent these companies, to prevent cuba from allowing it to come in and flat drill and drew within a certain number of miles of our international water line. we cannot allow that to happen. [applause] >> i wanted to move on to some questions regarding jobs. there are some broad ones and some specific ones i wanted to ask. "what do you feel is the best way to improve employment in florida as well as in the united states? kenny specifically focus on florida?" >> we have an unemployment rate that is i believe about 11%. there are three things we have

to have, and i call it confidence, capital, and certainty. we have to have confidence in the economic policies, the tax policies, and the regulatory policies coming out of washington, d.c. you have small businesses out there looking to grow, but because of the tax burden they have, because of the regulatory burden we are putting on them, because of such things like the health care law when they are putting -- taking people off of their health care plans and putting them on part-time because they cannot afford the increased insurance policies -- those other types of things we have to turn around here when you look at access to capital, you have small banks who want to lend to our small businesses, but when you read the dodd- frank, it does not include a lot of small banks under the large net that the large banks have been caught under. regulators are telling them they have to reclassify good loans as

- assets because they cannot carry them. it is about the access to capital that will help our small businesses to grow. the last thing is the certainty. people do not know what is going to happen day to day to day in the physical environment of the united states of america. if we can rectify those things, make sure we restore the confidence in the small business owner, but of that access to capital for small businesses said that they can grow and hire more americans and we can provide that certainty so that they know what is going to happen as far as tax rates a year from now, which is once again why i support a flat tax -- small businesses operate as subchapter s corporations. we have to provide them certainty so that they know what their rates will be. >> if you have a question, if you could write it down. we have some cards. we would be happy to get yours

if we have a chance. the next questioner wants to know -- sir, if you have a question, we would be happy to ask it he could just write it down. that would be really helpful. congressman, you are putting in place -- what are you putting in place to help those unemployed get jobs? specifically, are you in favor of tax deductions for outsourcing? >> no, i am not. when you look at the problem in the united states of america, we are outsourcing too many jobs. there was a little bit of an urban legend going around that there were certain -- light fast food restaurants that were outsourcing their drive-through lanes even. we do not need to do that you're the most important thing is how we give competitive tax rates to our business is so that those jobs come back to the united states of america? then you do not need to have loopholes and subsidies. they continue outsourced, if you

had every right to find them, but right now, we are creating the problem. we are pushing businesses away from the united states of america and finding them for having these incredibly high tax policies that are not enabling them to grow. they want to come to america. they want to grow. we just need to set the conditions for the private sector to be able to grow in the united states of america, and that is not what we are doing right now. [applause] >> charlotte says that you were elected to bring jobs to the country, specifically what types of jobs bills have you filed for introduced in congress to do that? >> i can tell you that if you look up h.r. 1663, a small business and encouragement, which says we're going to extend the worked opportunity for small businesses who in the previous

years had $50 million or less in revenue, 100 employees or less, we will give you $6,000 of tax credit for every american you hire off the unemployment rolls and if you are in a county that has double-digit unemployment, you get an additional $6,000. the legislation is sitting in the ways and means committee. please, call the chairman and see if we can get that push through. but there are nine pieces of job-promoting legislation passed through the house as early as march of this year sitting over at the senate. nine pieces of legislation. that is the very confounding thing in washington, d.c. we're doing everything we can. i know that we have helped open up a new facility just west of palm beach. we are also talking to the military about possibly bringing a repair facility for

the combat ship down to west palm beach as well in the month of october, we're going to bring the small business committee down for the fort lauderdale international boat show to talk to the marine industry, and small subcontractors about how we can alleviate the tax and regulatory burden on them so they can grow. [applause] >> marsha hoffman seems to be frustrated with congress and their inability, in her opinion, to create jobs in the near and medium term future. she wants to know when congress is going to get to work and focus on this job the matter what it takes. and i think when you say ideology aside, if you have to understand there is an incredibly i alogical chasm in america view there is a group that believes that the way forward for the that the states of america is to have more people were added to government

either by is subsistence check or employment check. there is a group that believes that the way forward for america, the pats of prosperity is to set the conditions for private sector growth so that they are the ones that create the jobs and opportunities for the united states of america and for american citizens, and that is a very big chasm that is widening each and every day, and if we continue to believe that the best way forward for america is a bigger federal government, then who pays for the public sector? 13% or 14% public-sector growth over private sector. two to one public sector compensation over private sector compensation. it is only a matter of time. centrally controlled economies have never been successful anywhere in the world. but yet, remember what winston churchill said -- americans will always end up doing the right thing after they have tried everything else. we're trying that year, but that is the antithesis of who we are.

235 years we have been in existence. i will ask you one simple question -- what built america -- big government or entrepreneurial spirit? [applause] >> i know you spoke about your trip to israel already, but there are a few questions people ask, and forgive me if these are repetitive. this is from jim hunter in west palm beach. what options does israel have to protect itself from iran and iran satellite nations. >> they may have to take aim give action to defend themselves, and that is their right and responsibility. prime minister netanyahu is responsible for safety and security of the israeli people. when you think about 50 or 100 rockets or missiles during the two southern israel that was --

almost every day when i was over there, thinking about how hezbollah has 50,000 rockets and missiles and the capability to strike every single major city in israel from southern lebanon and think about that iran is developing intercontinental ballistic missiles, which may have nuclear warheads, which definitely can have, you know, other type of dirty war heads, they have a responsibility to do that. i want you to do some homework before you go tonight. i want you to understand where the word palestine comes from hearing a lot of people think it is associated with a certain individual, but it is not. the word palestine comes originally from a roman word here in 7380 when the romans conquered and suppressed the jews to billion, the emperor decreed that the plan would no longer be called judea, the derivative of one of the 12 tribes of israel, but it would

be called palestina, they got tracing back to the original word for phyllis seen, but the philistines were not from that region. they were great. when you hear people talk about freeing palestine and returning palestine to the original owners, the original owners are very simple if you understand history and fact. the original owners are the jewish people. [applause] it is time that we look at the situation in the middle east and understand the facts and history and not irrational emotion and not being a puppet of the information media that is put out there. i do not think a lot of americans -- a lot of people talking about the earthquake and what was going on with goingirene. there were not a lot of -- what was going all with hurricane

irene. there were not a lot of stories about what was going on in the middle east at the time, and it is only intensifying. >> that has some concerns about the obama administration as a position on israel and asked if there is any hope they might reconsider their current position. >> i have to tell you, when you talk about free-1967 lines, that is untenable for israel because you are talking about at some point, the modern-day state of israel alone be 9 miles wide, and that is not feasible. when i talk to leadership over there, and it is the uncertainty even in the middle eastern situation that is causing a lot of concern. the saudis are really angry at america because they saw what happened with those new bark, and they believe that now, they are on their own, and they are cutting deals with others. there are a lot of questions out there peary the most important thing the administration has to do is make sure that they vote

no against the unilateral declaration of a palestinian state, and when it goes into the security council, we have to veto it. that sends the right message. if they want to proceed forward, funding has to be cut off from the united states of america. the amended from west palm beach wants to know how's the food in israel. [laughter] >> it was too much. [laughter] let me tell you, it was a very, very good trick. it was an incredible experience. the cultural, religious aspect, the political aspect, every bit of it was so important. if you have never had the opportunity to visit israel, i would recommend it. >> i want to top in a broad category of more administrative issues in washington, d.c.

that as the response from fellow congressman in response to spending more work time in washington. earlier, you question the work schedule that was put out. >> there were some people that were not happy with me. back last december when the congressional calendar came out and we only had 153 days of being in session in washington, d.c., i fired off a letter to the majority leader, and remember, i had not even been sworn in yet, and i basically told him that the calendar needs to work because i did not see how it would be possible for all the things that were facing us as a house of representatives that in 153 days we could get everything done, and look where we are, you know? we have only done six out of 12 appropriations bills.

that is on us. that is on us. because when you look at those 12 appropriations bills, one of the questions is -- what is the priority in washington, d.c. what is the most important appropriation bill? with tears can we establish? maybe some of these appropriations bills should be on a two-year cycle and not a one-year cycle because we are never going to catch up if we have this continuing resolutions, which means the united states federal government never has a budget, so i think we have to spend more time making sure we have the right have a schedule, right type of priority, wright had a focus to get things done, and then we can come back and maybe in the final last week of the month, we could sit down for two or three days with our constituents, but there are a lot of initiatives we need to attend to in washington, d.c., and like i said, this schedule is a little bit lacking for me, especially when you come

from a military background. when you are in a combat zone, 24/7. >> peter from west palm beach wants to know -- will we actually ever cut any federal government staff in washington, d.c.? >> i will tell you this. you laugh but one of those appropriations bills does deal with the legislative branch, and we have cut ourselves i think another 7%. udc a lot of cuts. i told my chief of staff that with the money allocated, i want to make sure we come in -- i think i said 10%? 10% below the money we are allocated because i want to be able to turn that back to the treasury. those are the types of things we have to have people that are doing. [applause] >> these are a couple of questions that are more election-related. david wants to know what will be

done to prevent voter fraud in coming elections. [applause] >> i know that we have the chairman of the home page boating executive committee. one of the things that's -- regardless of your party affiliation, this is what you need to do. you need to get involved in the process he would volunteer to be a poll watcher, to venture we do not have some of the nefarious things that could happen happen in self lapierre let's be honest -- south florida has a bad reputation when it comes to elections. -- to make sure we do not have some of the nefarious things that could happen in south florida. we need to make sure we do not -- we do have good, fair, proper elections and not have some of the things we have previously seen. >> jerry has been following the presidential race because he wants to know why you think

governor perry has become so popular so quickly. >> i do not know. maybe because he wears cowboy boots. i do not know. i cannot tell you, but i can tell you this -- it is still pre-season football. you have a lot of people cut off the roster, and it is a marathon, not a sprint. let's see what happens by november or even the end of the year. it only takes one single thing to flip here i remember back -- which election was it? remember, howard dean was way ahead, and one single thing, and then howard dean was forgotten. i mean, politics in the united states of america are very interesting, and i think we have to just be patient and watch this process and continue to talk to people about the issues that are pertinent to each and everyone. understand this -- there is a difference between a midterm election cycle, the electorate that comes out for that, and a presidential election cycle.

the midterm election cycle, you get people that really understand the legislative process, people that understand what a congressman is, with a senator is. presidential election cycle, we see an incredible increase of people who participate becomes -- because it becomes more "american idol." there are people who do not know who they are going to vote for a week out, and suddenly, "i like his sued" or "i like his smile" or whatever. what we have to do is educate ourselves and really sit back and be attuned to the issues as we go forward. like i said, it is preseason football still. >> there were a couple of people here who were going to talk a little bit about the budget and go back to that. i know you expressed some opinions about that early on. john from west palm beach is concerned about having a budget that is not balanced. what are your opinions of the

balancing of the budget? >> i think you have to. when you look at many of our state, i did the 47 or 49 of our states have held the budget amendments. the federal government needs to have that. we continue to do what you see happening in the fed where we are monetizing our debt, keeping interest rates at an artificially low level, printing more money. we are just exacerbating the situation even more. you go back and study what happened in japan in the 1990's. they tried nine stimulus packages that kept them in that recession state. we cannot continue down that path. i think we have to get away from this baseline budget, which means that each year, we raise it up and then say we are going to cut it. those are the types of structural reform things that have to happen. remember what i said -- it takes 5 miles for an aircraft

carrier, and a lot of these things have happened over 30 years. financial meltdown of 2008, trace it all the way back to the community reinvestment act. think about all the things that happened along the way. think about how all of a sudden, we created fannie and freddie, how we repealed the grass the black. -- the grass spiegel act. it continued to go on and on. then, 30 years later, you have a meltdown. we can get to the point where we do not have financial election cycle sound bites, we really start to forecast and look at 10, 20, 30, 40 years and understand the policies and ramifications, then we will get things on the right footing in the united states of america. >> there are concerns about the $14 trillion deficit. what is the most important thing the thing can be done?

>> the debt is what we owe and the deficit is the difference between the spending going up, and the most important thing is that we have got to institute fiscal responsibility in washington, d.c. we have to understand the constitutional mandates of the federal government and get the federal government back on the right side with the right skills to perform their duties, and remember what i said -- what built america? big government or entrepreneurial spirit? if we continue down to the government have, debt and deficit will get bigger. if we believe in on for for nervous baird, we will have the right type of tax policies and regulatory policies to the financial sector, which means we will reduce the debt and deficit, so that is what we have to do. >> [inaudible] [applause] >> i think you need to repeal sarbanes oxley as well as part of that. >> that was my next question.

h r 1489, do you support reinstating that? >> you have to. we have blurred the line between investment banking and commercial banking. there are people in the big bank will batter into things they should not be into. dodd-frank does go after some of these, but if it is with regulating sometimes, people believe it is worth over regulating. timothy geithner testified before the small business committee that i said on, ask a simple question -- when are we going to go back and review dodd-frank and clean it up to make sure we are not penalizing small community banks, and he told me he would look into it. [laughter] >> julie is obviously concerned about some of the spending in washington, d.c.

she says can congress cut off their ridiculous -- [applause] >> do not mess with julie. >> julie wants to know if congress can cut off the travel allowance to the president and his family? [applause] >> this is on c-span, isn't it? look, i think that is something that -- you know, in the military, they teach you one simple thing -- leadership begins with the leader, and it is about setting the right example. i think if the president is going to be watching the camera, sir, we need you to lead by example. the american people are

watching. [applause] >> congressman, this is a question from judith from north palm beach, and she specifically wants to know what we can do to make public schools more accountable. >> [inaudible] >> we will get to that. and as i said, in the 1970's, the decision was decided to make a department of education. it had about 500 employees, a budget of about $18 billion or $19 billion a year the department of education today has closer to five dozen employees and a budget of 80 or 80 -- $80 billion or $85 billion. education as a system is broken. i can say that because i talk for a year and it was such an

enjoyable experience that i volunteered to go to afghanistan. [applause] what we have to do -- seriously -- we have got to make education relevant in the 21st century. we cannot believe that teaching a kid how to take a test is teaching a kid. it is not. so let's start involving our private sector to go in and teach the practical applications and some of the theories we are trying to teach our kids. my 14-year-old daughter who just started high school can do things with a computer that are just unconscionable to me. i cannot know how. but if we do not tap into that level of intellect, that level of inclusiveness, then what happens? they are not challenged. and if we had kids who continue to leave at the age of 16 if

they fail the fcat, they have no future and they drop out, then what happens? they become victims. become dependent upon something, which is probably government, said the government has to take care of them, which means less for the entrepreneurial spirit, and less for education and innovation. what we have to do is completely scrap our education system and get it in line with the technologies and types of things that our kids need to learn and be able to contend with in the world today so we are producing next-generation that can go out and be productive citizens. not every kid is going to go on to college, and it is not a right to go to college, but if every kid can leave high school with a defined talent, there is -- did trade, something that they can say, but what i can do this." there's nothing wrong with having summer apprenticeship for

these kids that can go up because they have studied and done well -- they can take that trade they are focused on and stuck to put it into practical application. you are creating a future employee. you look at some of these things -- there's nothing wrong with automobile mechanics. plumber's need to learn metric systems. that is nothing easy. we should be training for our kids on all of these different things so that they can apply their talents and be productive members in their local society. we have got to reform education. [applause] >> the second part to that question was that a 2005 federal mandate was passed for k-12 universities receiving federal money to observe september 17 as constitution day, providing education programs. how will you be observing constitution day, 2011? >> i need to ask my staff if i am going to be in washington,

d.c. if i will be, i will be supporting and defending the constitution here if not, maybe i will be speaking about the constitution and my responsibilities in one of these local schools, but this is what we have to do -- to many of our kids do not understand physics, not just on constitution day, but every day, we need to start teaching our kids about physics. >> speaking of the constitution, johnny is asking about the repeal of the 17th amendment and it will restore accountability to our senators and many people, many are calling for term limits and believe it would restore that accountability from some of this establishment. would you report the -- support the repeal of the 17th amendment? >> i am not a senator, and i think we could do better as far as accountability of our senators. i think we do need to have term limits in washington, d.c. [applause]

one of our constituents down here who lives in atlantis, florida, is pushing for a plan that has gotten to the house of representatives that max's you out at 12 years of legislative service in the senate and 68 years in the house. the reason why it is set like that is because if you are in the house of representatives and want to run for senate, and you can do that, but he still cap it off at 12 years. the longer people are in washington, d.c., the less connection they have to the people here. [applause] that is not what our founding fathers intended. they never intended to have a political elite class. they never intended us to have career politicians. they intended us to have citizens servants who went to washington, d.c., made certain pieces of legislation and came back and had to live under them. i think that is what we have to get back to.

[applause] >> i want to talk a little bit about some aspects of the budget, particularly social service programs. stanley wants to know more about the growth of the welfare population and the condition of some of the programs that service them. >> i have to tell you this -- when i went back to my old neighborhood in atlanta in march of this year, i did not recognize it. we have a 41% increase in food stamp usage in the united states of america. we are going in the wrong direction. people came to america because they believe it is the land of opportunity, but if we start to get to being the land of the handout and suppressing the opportunity, we start becoming a land of equal achievement and not equal opportunity where government can decide how far you can go in your life, and i think we lose the essence of the united states of america. you are looking at a kid, inner- city atlanta, georgia, 1961 -- i

guarantee my parents would have never thought i would rise up to be a lieutenant colonel, commended the tell which command a battalion in combat, and the eight ads its congressman, but the fact that we live in a country where it is possible and the only thing that can hold to that is what is between your ears -- it enables me to be where i am today, and that is what my parents stressed to me. if we continue to have a breakdown of the family structure in america, continue to make kids believe that there is only a certain thing they can do, we will continue to see those failings in the social side of the united states of america. look at what is happening in philadelphia, okay? there is a reason why something like that is happening in philadelphia. when we were growing up, when we went too fast food restaurants, especially during the summer, you saw one adults in a fast- food restaurant. that was the manager. all the others were kids.

high-school kids. you go in these fast food restaurants today, what do you see? they are all adults. what we're doing is we are now affecting those young people and their hopes and opportunities even at that early age of 13, 14, 15. we have to turn this thing around. we have to, we have to. >> congressman, this is more of a general broad question regarding the budget. richard asked about the reconciliation of the fiscal year 2012 budget that passed by the house and the need for continuing resolution as of october 1 and what you will do to work with the congressional gang of 12 to make sure that a budget is in place by november 23, 2011. >> i cannot do too much to work with that gang. i am not head over heels about that happening. i was upset that we did not have many freshmen members of the house side to be represented there because a lot of those folks have been there for quite

some time when some of these policies were enacted that got us on the wrong track, but it comes back to what i said. we have only passed six out of the 12 appropriations bills. unless we do some type of herculean effort between september 7 when we go back in session and september 30, i do not see any way where we will get the remaining six bills voted on in the house and the other 11 voted on in the senate so that we can have a budget as we go forth and get the president to sign it for fiscal year 2012. that is why we have a 13% approval rating. because we are not staying there until the mission is accomplished. all i can do is continue to be squeaky wheel. even if i do not get any oil, i will continue to be squeaky wheel, but this is something where you all have to start up saying that we want something different. we need to have the right type of structural reform to how

washington has been operating. >> i wanted to ask a couple of questions again about the environment. there were some other ones that came up. one of them dealt with -- and i am not familiar with agenda 21 from being implemented. i think it deals with losing particular land rights. what kinds of things are you doing to ensure that individuals land rights are protected by the u.s. congress? >> nothing has really come up since i have been up there in the eight months about losing property rights, but i understand the concern about agenda 21. i understand the concern a lot of people have about losing american sovereignty to the united nations. such thing as the treaty were we could lose our waterways over to the united nations. that is one of the things i will make sure i stay on top of. the child rights thing they are trying to push through the united nations. we have to make sure we maintain our sovereignty, and part of that is securing our borders as well because we have

a huge problem. [applause] >> there was one question on csf bulbs. i know the kinds of light bulbs people use has become a big issue. is that something you have been looking at? >> we could not even reveal that in congress. fact that the government is telling you what kind of like old you can have in your home, and we could not even reveal that mercury level, which if you drop it and break it in your house, you have a hazardous waste site in your home. i do not know. we will keep trying to fight for the light bulb. [laughter] >> ok, a question regarding our involvement around the world. what is your position as far as

united nations involvement, and how closely do we need to continue working with them? >> i have to tell you something -- i have always -- i see the united nations as a failed organization right now. [applause] i do not want to see american soldiers having to wear that a light blue beret because there is a difference in the standards, a difference in the style of leadership. as i said, the united nations intervention force in lebanon right now, spanish soldiers are being picked off and killed by hezbollah in southern lebanon fearing nothing going on. they refuse to go out and to the missions now. i want to see us have leadership in the united states of america. strategic level leadership that understands when you commit our forces in the united states of america, that you give them the right guidance, give them the right quarters.

you allow them to do the mission they are supposed to do. you expedite the situation, and you redeploy them once they have committed that mission, but they have to understand clearly what the mission is. when you look at how at times, our -- how we are tying our soldiers' hands behind their backs, that is not enabling them to be successful on the battlefield. it comes back to having people that have been on the receiving end of an ak-47 or rpg because we know what that is like before we send somebody else's daughter or son to do that. were a couplere questions about tea party politics. there were notes of some of the racial tensions that some people believe were at the center of the tea party attacks. can you comment on that? >> i think the week before i went to israel, i spoke before

the palm beach t party group with close of 400 people there. last time i looked, i was african-american. [laughter] i mean, they did not, like, try to run me out or attack me or anything like that. one of the things people have to understand -- what is this thing called the tea party? i think there is a lot of media misinformation. let me tell you something -- that which washington, d.c., does not understand, they attack. [applause] that is either side. all you are talking about is the constitutional conservative grass-roots movement that believes in four basic things -- they believe in an effective and efficient federal government. they believe in social responsibility. they believe in national security. they believe in free market and free enterprise systems. anyone who does not believe in that, i do not know what you

believe in in the united states of america. other going to be some folks that get off on the fringe on that side or the side? yes, but if you understand those four principles that they stand for, who would not want to embrace that? because that is what america is about. [applause] >> we have a few more questions. this one from barry, and he was asking about obama's executive dream act. why have we not heard republican leadership screaming from the rooftops? >> once again, that is not -- that is why i do not believe in going away for five or six weeks. he is talking about when the secretary of homeland security came out and said that we would only in for certain types of illegal immigration deportation. you do not get to pick and choose what you want to do when you are the executive branch. our laws are our laws, and have to abide by them, but i can tell you, that is one of the things

we will be contending with when we get to washington, d.c., next week. [applause] part of being a republican, the most preeminent thing about being a republican, is respect of the rule of law, and if we do not have that come out of washington, d.c., then we lose our country. [applause] >> what is your opinion on the increase and lobbyists in this country and is there any plan to eliminate the substantial increase? >> i cannot make them go away. i can allow them not to go near me. in washington, d.c., you have 435 legislators and the congress and at last count, there were 35-40 lobbyists per legislator in washington. there is a street called k street which is the lobbying

street. you just have to close the door to them. there was a contentious thing about the second engine for the f-35 fighter aircraft and ge one to to come in and get a bid to have that second engine. the ge folks heard there was a freshman congressman from florida that was telling people that that would not happen. he said in the armed services committee. one of the top executives from ge decided to visit him in his office. it did not make a dent. that is what you have to be able to do. [applause] people will promise you a whole lot of things up in washington, d.c. but you have to stand under principles and understand that i don't work for lobbyists. i work for you. [applause]

>> there have been some calls by individuals in congress about disrupting town hall meetings like this i want to thank all of you today. if i think this has been a very civil and productive meeting. what are your thoughts on some of that discussion between your colleagues in washington, d.c.? >> since i have been up there, i have been told that i want to kill women and i want to kill babies and i take just about everybody. maybe i even hate myself. name-calling is what happens when people don't want to stick to the issues and talk about the things that will make this country great we have to get away from that. whatever your ideology is or whatever your belief is, let's talk about it in the eye rina of -- in the arena of ideals.

not cheap shots. if you poke me in the chest, i will fight back. [applause] ynn sheppard wiest youtube -- wanted to come through your commitment to visit san diego. >> we need to be in washington, d.c. san diego is a beautiful place. i flew in there on my way to play around with marines at camp pendleton. maybe one day i will get a chance to go out to san diego or maybe i will get to visit the seal training in coronado. we have let things we need to do in washington, d.c. and being with the folks in south florida. god bless you from coming over

four separate it from san diego. >> i think we have gone for just about everybody's question, believe it or not. some of them were similar and if i did not call your name out i apologize for that. i think this has been a great town hall meeting. congressman, we appreciate you being here and answering questions. [applause] >> i want to thank all of you for coming out. there are better places you could have been. the weather out there is pretty nasty. thank you for participating in this process and allowing me to share my thoughts and ideas. god bless you all, if god bless america. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> live pictures from detroit this afternoon where president obama is expected to address a labor day rally. the crowd is being treated to music right now by a wreath at franklin. the president is expected to talk about an effort to create jobs and strengthen the economy. this is a head of his speech to a joint session of congress thursday where he will unveil his new jobs plan. we will have live coverage of those remarks at 7:00 on thursday here on c-span. right now, aretha franklin is singing to the crowd. the president is expected in about 10 minutes and we'll have live coverage here on c-span. until then, remarks and the president of the afl-cio in ohio. he talks about restricting

government bargaining rights. s today to get your perspective on that. we're joined on the phone by tim burga. i want to start with the strength of unions in ohio. guest: there are near 1 million union workers in the private and public sector in ohio. all workers in ohio find themselves under attack. now. host: i want to show you and the viewers the latest polling showing how americans view unions. 52% of americans approve. that is one of the lowest that gallup has seen. what is your reaction? guest: i can assure you that is not the case in ohio. we have found that when union workers in the public sector were attacked from all , we are finding unions and

collective bargaining are used quite -- seen quite favorably by the general public. we have had opportunity to have a real conversation about the value of unions and collective bargaining. our public sector workers delivering essential public services make our communities work. host: our last best represents a group for right to work states. he made the argument that what you saw in ohio and wisconsin was not an effort by the governors to stop collective bargaining. instead, it was to curb union privileges. what is your reaction to that? guest: in ohio, said that built senate bill 56 to do both. -- senate bill 5 6 to do both.

we need to get our private sector workers back on the job and back in the middle class. senate bill 5 -- people believe it is not fair and hurts us all. when you do that, you break a promise to those who serve our communities. the people of ohio are upset about that. there is an unbelievable groundswell of opposition to the bill. that was indicated by the 1.3 million signatures we got to put the issue on the ballot. i am convinced without energy level going forward, we will be able to vote no and repeal the bad bill. host: the ballot measure will be available in november to repeal senate bill 5. who are you working with and how much money are you spending on the effort? guest: we're working with ohio

ans in every corner. public and private sector union and non-union have come up to say this is an overreach. jobs are the number-one issue in ohio. ohio is number one in the country in ways sauce over the last decade. decided to pursue this. it is a politically motivated agenda. it will hurt families across the state. ohio has seen through this as a politically motivated attack. we believe it is not fair. it allows politicians and upper management to have a special exemption. it does not allow for nurses, police officers, and firefighters to negotiate staffing levels, receive critical trading, or equipment to keep us safe. ohioans know that going forward

it will hurt all workers. when you take away basic rights in the workplace, you will drive down benefits and wages and will see layoffs. you cannot improve the economy by lowering the bar for all workers. host: gov. kasich was our guest yesterday. here is what he had to say. >> i reject the notion that we are disrupting people's bargaining rights. you will be able to continue to negotiate for your wages and working conditions. nobody in the private sector that i am aware of negotiates for their pension or health care. we're asking public employees to share some of the sacrifices that the private workers have shared. let me tell you what we're asking public employees to do. we're asking them to be 15% of their health care. i know a lot of people in the private sector who would like to sign up for that.

we're not asking public employees to pay the 25% of a lot of private sector workers pay. 5%.re asking them to pay 1 guest: is not accurate. it has stripped the most basic of rights. it makes it illegal to strike. it takes away binding arbitration in disputes resolution. this labor day is the time to reflect on the value of workers. working people will always be the backbone of our economy. public policy needs to validate this. senate bill five is the guy opposite -- is the exact opposite of public policies that stand up for the workers. are we going to see a shared sacrifice when the wealthy carry their share of

the burden? the middle class is topped out. we need to get private sector workers back on the job and in the middle class. for the last 10 years, ohio has been number one in the country for wage laws. this will drive us further to the race -- in the race to the bottom. i believe it is the design of those on the far right. ohio will not stand for it. i am confident they will reject it and vote no on it. host: i want to get your reaction on what the governor said to this. >> the opposition to the bill has a website with nothing on it about the bill. once we start talking about the bill, the public buys into it. we tried to sit down with the unions, but they would have no part of it. this is important to the local communities, the city councils,

the school districts. they have high personnel costs. host: what is your reaction to what you hear from the government? guest: more inaccuracies. organized labor and working people tried to testify. they often found they were not welcome. we were trying to be a part of the process. it was on the fast track. they were not about to listen to reason. it is not about that. it is about a politically motivated bill to try to get complete control of the public policy agenda for corporate ceo's and wall street to create a permanent low-wage work force. ohioans know that some of the five is unfair and hurts us all going forward. -- senate bill five is unfair

and hurts all of us going forward. ohio is tired of the politics. they want us to work together. we need to raise the bar for workers. this drive to the race to the bottom p >> we are live from the renaissance center in detroit. president obama is expected to give a speech on jobs this afternoon during this labor day rally. one in four detroit residents is jobless. the president's message will not go on deaf ears. this is ahead of his speech to a joint session of congress thursday. he will unveil a new jobs plan. remarks are from the afl-cio president richard trumpka. >> doctors to look out for our

health, thank-you to the construction workers who build our cities. thank-you to the autoworkers who make the cars and trucks that brought us here today. [applause] thank you to these civil servants and secret service agents keeping our president said today. [applause] -- safe today. take a moment right now and turn to your brother or sister next few and say," thank you for what you do." this is also a time to think about the millions of men and women who went to work but have been unable to find work for weeks or months or even years. we all know someone who is out of work. think about the sacrifices and the scarring in those families.

then think about this -- think about the outrage of ceo's getting paid millions more than their companies pay in federal taxes and still refuse to create jobs. brothers and sisters, if that makes you mad, let's make a pledge right here, right now. to all those sisters and brothers out of work, let's pledged to do everything we can to insist that our elected leaders and our companies create jobs and put america back to work. [applause] will you make that pledge? today we will hear from our president, barack obama. [applause] he is the man who worked with the autoworkers and the companies to save america's auto

industry. that is the kind of bold politically courageous action that we need right now from every elected official at every level because america wants to work. if we pledge and follow-through and stand together, we can't lift up detroit. can lift of working families. we can lift up america. i want you to know that we will not let michigan become a right to work for less state. [applause] we will defeat financial martial law by standing together, fighting together, and winning to gather. i am proud to stand with my brothers and sisters from detroit anytime, anyplace. god bless you and happy labor day. [applause] now i am very pleased and honored to introduce the woman

who stands with working people every single day, a real warrior for working men and women who has lifted up the department of labor so that it works for working families again and again and again and again and again. please welcome our warrior and friend, the secretary of labor, hilda solis. [applause] >> thank you. all right, how is everybody? is labor in the house? [applause] happy labor day, detroit. [applause] it is great to be back in the motor city and especially with my good friend, r,ich trumpka

and all of our union leaders and a former congressional colleagues also here. give them all round of applause, please. [applause] and of course, it is so exciting to be here with you in detroit. the auto industry is roaring back in [applause] president obama is in the house. [applause] are you fired up? [applause] fired up? [applause] fired up? ready to go? [applause] i know i am. the president could have chosen any city in america to spend a labor day but he wanted to be here with you all. [applause] a beautiful city that gave birth to the american middle-class, a city that is full of talent, a

seller -- a city that never gives up has, as we say in my language, - the power to say yes recanted yes we can. detroit is proof is that when america innovates and when america builds, guess what? america wins. is the uaw here? [laughter] [applause] i can't hear you. [applause] america owes you and the entire labor movement so much. you not only give us the world's greatest cars, you stood up but to also sat down for good jobs for everyone and you build the social safety net we are fighting so hard to keep intact right now. you said a lifetime of hard work should mean something, that

working people deserve the opportunity to provide for themselves and for their families. today on labor day, our struggle continues. we know these are tough times, hard economic times for so many of our families. that is no excuse for what is happening in other states across the country like wisconsin and ohio and right here in michigan. some politicians say they cannot afford unions right now, that labor unions are the problem in this country. [boos] i think they just got a plain wrong. unions help rebuild america's middle-class they are now and always will be a part of the solution and not the problem. [applause] my parents taught me that as a

youngster and i am proud daughter of a teamster and a mother who was a steelworker. [applause] i know what it means to be union-proud. it is the voice at the table to negotiate good wages, health benefits, and safe working conditions. and a chance to step into the middle class. it is about working hard. it is about taking care of each other and it is fighting for what we know is right. it is like a aretha frankland said -- it is about getting r-e- s-p-e-c-t-, respect. president obama and i continue to speak out against governors who want to take the country backwards by attacking workers' rights. this is no time to be attacking collective bargaining with

workers like firefighters, police officers, and their teachers in all public servants to do so much for us because . this is no time to undermanned -- under my project-labor agreements. working people want to get back to work. no device of right to work laws -- we know that is the wrong way to go. our community is still need a voice at work and especially at the ballot box and we will not let others suppress our votes. right? i know there is a lot of autoworkers back to work now in the great mother city. -- great motor city. i saw this firsthand when i went to the chevy plant, the ford plant, and all the big three. i know we all want to thank our good friend and our president, barack obama.

[applause] for his bold actions to save the automobile industry, to say that we are making things in america once again, to save and create good manufacturing jobs for everyone. that is what this administration is fighting for every single day. i am proud to be part of it. i know times are still tough year for too many workers here in michigan and across this country. that is why we need congress to work with us to take common- sense action to create good jobs for everyone. president obama is going to take his case straight up to capitol hill this week. i hope you all will be listening. it will not be an easy thing to do. we know some will fight us and they will say no. it seems that they say now to just about everything.

we will say that we can't afford it -- some will say we will say we can't afford to reinvest in our work force and we can't afford to rebuild our roads and our schools and that we can't afford to continue that social safety net that we all thought -- fought so hard for. here is what we will say back -- we can afford not to rebuild it -- we can't afford not to rebuild this great country. we can't afford to turn our backs on working families will make america is so great. on this labor day, for all working people, the millions looking for work and their children and grandchildren who depend on them, this is what i say -- let's not lose heart. let's stand with our president in this tough fight ahead. he has got your back. do you have it? [applause] are you ready? are you fired off?

[applause] because i am fired up and i'm ready to go. we need you all to be ready and fired off to go. the sacrifices of those who came before us as we honor all american workers in this great city and in this great country around this world as well. thank you, detroit. thank you for welcoming us. happy labor day to all of you. god bless you, the americans to make this country so great. god bless the middle class americans and god bless these united states. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, to introduce the president of the united states please welcome uaw member , could win -- d

onna goodwin. [applause] >> good afternoon. my name is gone up goodwin dye and i'm not proud member of uaw local number 9. i think the uaw for the great honor of allowing me to introduce our president, barack obama. [applause] president obama was elected during the height of the worst economic crisis since the great depression, leading the auto industry in dire straits. my plant and many other plants were shut down for more than one month. we did not know if our company was going to survive but we did it. we came through 100 percent

siberia we proved them wrong. we proved the media wrong. we proved the naysayers wrong and we are here to survive. [applause] we have more than 1 million workers that did not lose their jobs and they are still working today. gm has repaid their loans to the taxpayers. [applause] gm, ford and chrysler are all investing in our plans and communities. [applause] they are adding tens and thousands of good paying middle- class jobs across the united states. [applause] thank you, president barack obama, for having the courage to stand up against those who wanted to liquidate our companies. [applause] thank you, president obama, for having the courage to stand up

for the american worker [applause] and the american auto companies. [applause] thank you to the michigan delegation for supporting our president on his job creation policy to bring more work into the united states. [applause] now it is time for us in labor and our community to stand with our president as he stood for us. we must stand with the president in the fight for good jobs for all of our communities. it was not for this great president, we would not be standing here strong and fighting the good fight for all working families. [applause] the american auto industry is back thanks to our president, barack obama. [applause] we need you, president, to fight for american workers.

mr. president, and welcome to detroit! [applause] then is now my honor to introduce our great president, barack obama! [applause] ♪ ♪ >> thank you, detroit.

[applause] thank you, mich.. [applause] ah, this is a -- [applause] thank you. [applause] [cheers and applause] >> thank you. thank you, everybody. thank you. [one more year] thank you. thank you. [four more years]

thank you, everybody. i can tell donna got you fired up. thank you for that introduction. thank you all for having me. it is good to be back in detroit. [applause] i am glad i was able to bring her a friend, a proud daughter of the teamsters, your secretary of labor, hilda solis in the house. [applause] we're thrilled to be joined by so many other friend. i want to acknowledge first of all two of the finest senators in the country, carl levin and debbie stabenow in the house. [applause] outstanding members of the congressional delegation come john dingham, john conyers, a

evans [applause]muel the president of the metropolitan detroit central labor council, our host sandra williams. [applause] afl-cio president rich trumpka, president of the michigan afl- cio, mark gaffney. [applause] , and some proud sons and daughters of michigan representing working people here and across the country, seiu president, mary kay and i, teamster president jimmy hoffa, the uaw president bob king. [applause] utility workers' presence mike langford. we are proud of them and brought of your congressional delegation who are working every single day

with your state and local elected officials to create jobs and economic growth and prosperity here in michigan and across the country. i am honored. we are honored to spend this day with you and your families, the working men and women of america. this day belongs to you. you deserved littler &r. a little barbecue. [laughter] a little grilling. you have been working hard. you have been working hard to make ends meet. you have been working hard to build a better life for your kid. you have been working hard to build a better detroit. that is not all i will talk to you about. i also want to talk about the

work you have been doing for decades, work to make sure that folks get an honest day's pay for honest day's work. [applause] work to make sure that families get a fair shake. the work you have done that helps build the greatest middle- class that the world has ever known. [applause] i am talking about the work that got the 40-hour work week and weekends and paid leave and pensions and a minimum wage and health insurance and social security and medicare, the cornerstones of middle-class security because of your work. [applause] if you want to know who helped lay these cornerstones of american middle-class, you just have to look for the union label. [applause]

that is the bedrock that this country is built on. , hard work, responsibility, sacrifice, looking out for one another, giving everybody a shot, everybody a chance to share in america's prosperity from the factory floor to the board rooms. that is what unions are all about. that is something that is worth keeping in mind today. we have come through a difficult decade. in which those values are all too often given short shrift. we have gone through a decade where weld was valued overwork and greed was valued over responsibility. and the decks or often stacked against ordinary folks in favor of the special interests. everywhere i went while i was running for this office i met

folks who felt their economic security is the away, men and women who are fighting harder and harder to. to. -- to stay of los. that was before the economic crisis and that made things even harder. these are tough times for working americans. they are even tougher for americans who are looking for work. many of them have been looking for work for a long time, a lot of folks have been looking for work for a long time here in detroit and across michigan and all across the midwest and all across the country. we have a lot more work to do to recover for a fleet -- to recover fully -- to recover fully from this recession. i'm not satisfied to get back to where we were before the recession are if we have to fully restore the middle class americans [applause] . and america cannot have a strong growing economy without a strong growing middle class and without

a strong labor movement. [applause] that is the central challenge that we face in our country today. that is at the core of why i ran for president. that is what i have been fighting for since i have been president. [applause] everything we have done has been thinking about you. we said working folks deserve a break so within one month of me taking office we signed into law the biggest middle-class tax cut in history putting more money into your pockets. [applause] we said working folks should not be taken advantage of so we passed tough financial reforms and ended the days of taxpayer bailouts and stopped credit card companies and gouging you with it in fees and unfair rate hikes and set up a new consumer protection agency with one responsibility sticking up for you.

we said if you are going to work hard all day to provide a better life for your kids, we will make sure that those kids get the best education possible. we helped keep teachers on the job [applause] we are reforming our public schools and investing in community colleges and job training programs and we ended wasteful giveaways and went to the big banks and use the savings to make college more affordable for millions of your kids. [applause] we said that every family in america should have affordable, accessible health care. [applause] we said you should not be discriminated against because you have a pre-existing condition. we said young adults would -- without insurance should be able to stay on their parents' plan and we got that done for you. [applause] here is what else we said,

detroit -- we said american autoworkers could once again build the best cars in the world. [applause] we have stood by the auto industry. we made some tough choices that were necessary to make and succeed and the big three are turning a profit and hiring new workers and building the best cars in the world right here in detroit, right here in the midwest, right here in the united states of america. i know it, i have seen it. [applause] i have been gm plant. i have been put to the chrysler plants. i have seen detroit prove this and it's an amazing. is wrong with not just stop there. we said american workers to manufacture the best product in the world. we invested in high-tech manufacturing and we invested in clean energy have right now,

there is at best battery industry taking root here in michigan that barely existed before. [applause] half of the workers at one plant in detroit were unemployed before a new battery company came to. town we are growing our exports so that more of the world buys products that are stamped with three simple words -- made in america. [applause] that is what we are fighting for, michigan. we are fighting for good jobs with good way. just we are fighting for health care when you get sick, we are fighting for a good retirement even if you are not rich. we're fighting for the chance to give our kids a better life and. at that is what we are doing to restore middle-class security and rebuild this economy the american way based on balance

and fairness in the same set of rules for everybody from wall street to main street [applause] an economy or hard work pays off and gaming the system does not pay off where everyone has a shot at the american dream. that is what we are fighting for [applause] 4. home on thursday, we will lay out a new way forward to grow the economy and put more americans back to work right now. to give everything away right here. i want you all to tune in on thursday. [applause] but i will give you just a little bit. [applause] bridgest roads and across this country that need rebuild.

we've got private companies with the equipment and manpower to do a. the building we've got more than 1 million unemployed construction workers ready to get dirty right now [applause] . there is work to be done and there are workers ready to do it. labor is on board, businesses on board, which is the congress to get on board. let's get america back to work. [applause] last year we worked together, republicans and, democrats to pass a payroll tax cut and because of that, this year the average family has an extra $1,000 in their pocket because of it. that will expire in a few months if we don't come together to extend it. i think putting money back in the pockets of working families is the best way to get demand

rising because that means business is hiring and that means the government's -- that means the a government -- that means the economy is growing. i will propose ways to put america back to work that both parties can agree to. i still believe both parties can work together to solve our problems and given the urgency of this moment, given the hardship that many people are facing, folks should be able to get together. but we are not going to wait for them. [applause] we will see if we have some straight shooters in. congress we will see if congressional republicans will put country before party. we will give them a plan and we will say do you want to create jobs and what are construction workers back to work rebuilding america. do you want to help our country

succeed? open up new markets for them to sell their products. you say you are the party of tax cuts prove he will fight just as hard for tax cuts for middle- class families as you do for oil companies and the most affluent americans. show us what you got reported [applause] . [applause] the times for a washingtongames is over. the time for action is now. no more manufactured crises and no more games. now is not the time for the people you sent to washington to worry about their. jobs now is the time for them to worry about your jobs. [applause] now, let me say a word about labor in particular. i know this will not be an easy time.

it is not easy when there are some folks who have their sights trained on you. after all that unions have done to build and protect the middle class, you got people trying to claim that you are responsible for the problem the middle class folks are facing [. boos] you let some republicans saying that you are the ones exploiting working families. imagine that. the fact is, our economy is stronger when workers are getting paid good wages and benefits. [applause] our economy is stronger when we got broad based growth and broadbased pressed. varity -- broadbased prosperity. i was on the plane flying over here and carl levin was with me and he showed me a speech that

harry truman had given on labor day 63 years ago right here in detroit. just to show that things have not changed much, he talked about americans had voted in some folks into congress who were not very friendly to. labor he pointed out that some working folks and even some union members voted these folks into now they were learning their lessons. he pointed out that "the games of labour were not accomplished at the expense of the rest of."nation it contributed to america's prosperity of [applause] .

back in 1948 it was true and it is true in 2011. working families are doing well and when they are getting a decent wage and they are getting decent benefits, that means they are good customers for. business that means they can buy the cars that you build. that means that you can buy the food from the. farmers that means you can buy from silicon valley, you are creating prosperity when you share prosperity. when i hear some of these folks trying to take collective bargaining rights away, trying to pass right to work laws for private-sector workers that really means the right to work for lasts and lasts [boos] when i hear this talk, i know it is not about economics. it is about politics. i want everybody here to know as long as i am in the white house

i will stand up for collective bargaining. [cheers and applause] [four more years] that is why we have reversed decisions that were designed to undermine those rights. that is why we passed the fair pay act that stopped pay discrimination. that is why we appointed people who were actually fulfilling their responsibility to make sure that the offices and factory workers and mine workers that they are safe on the job. we will keep at it. having a voice on the job and a chance to organize and a chance to negotiate for a fair day's pay after a hard day's work, that is the right of every man

and woman in america not a c dustyeo in the corner office but the janitor who plays that office after the c.l. goes on. everybody has the same rights. [applause] that is true for public employees as well. the recession had a terrible effect on state and local budgets for it with all understand that. unions have recognized that and have made tough concessions. in the private sector, we live and a more competitive globally, make it unions like the uaw understand that workers have to work with management to revamp business models, to innovate so we can sell our products around the world. we understand the world is changing. unions understand the world is changing. unions understand the need to help drive the change whether it is on the factory floor or in the classroom or in the government of.

office. what unions know is that the values of the core of the union movement does not change for those of the values that have made this country great. that is what the folks trying to undermine rights don't understand. when union workers agreed to pay freezes and pay cuts, they're not doing it to keep their jobs, they are doing it so their fellow workers and fellow americans can keep their jobs. [applause] 1 teachers agree to reforms and how schools are run at the same time they're digging into their pockets to buy school supplies for those kids, they do so because they believe every child can learn. they do it because they know something that those who seek to divide us don't understand. we are all in this together. that is why those crowds came out in madison and columbus.

we are one nation and one people and we will rise and we will pull together. -- we fa willll together. everyone who does not believe that should come to detroit. it is like the commercial says -- this is a city that a h as been toeck and back. while there are a lot of challenges here, i see a city that is coming back. [applause] you ask somebody here and they will say times are tough but we are tougher. look at what we are doing to. overcome look at what we're doing to rebuild and reinvent and redefine what it means to live in this great city. look at our parents to catch a bus to work and our students to stay up late to earn a degree for a look at our workers on the

line who are building the best cars and the world for a look at our artists who are revived -- revamping our city and our young people figured out new ways to make a difference that we never dream. duff ed of. that is why we chose detrick as one of the cities we are helping revitalize. [applause] -- that is why we chose detroit. we are teaming up with everybody, mayors, local officials, boosting economic development, rebuilding your communities the best way which is a way that involves you. despite all this change and all the work that lies ahead, this is still a city where a man built the greatest middle-class the city has ever known and women rolled up their sleeves and help build an arsenal for democracy to free the world and

this is a city where the great american industry has come back to life and the industries of tomorrow are taking root for this is a city where people brave and bold and courageous and clever are dreaming up ways to prove the skeptics wrong wr andite the next chapter in our history. that is why i wanted to be here with you today. [applause] for every cynic and every naysayer running around talking about how our best days are behind a, a us for everybody to keep going around saying no we can't, for everybody who can always find a reason why we cannot rebuild america, i made americans every day to in the face of impossible odds have a different belief. they believe we can. you believe we can. yes, startup of we have been

through tough times before. i dunno about you but i am not scared of tough times. [applause] i am not scared of tough times because i know we will be pulling together and working together and rebuilding together and i know we don't quit. [applause] dreams andve up our settle for something less. we roll our sleeves and we remember a fundamental truth. we are strong when we are a. united we are firing on all cylinders. the union movement will be at the center of it. if all of you are committed to making sure that the person standing next to you and their kids and their grandkids, that everybody in this city and everybody in this country can only his or her potential, if you work hard and play by the rules, you'll get a fair shake and a fair shot her that is the

country i want for my kids. that is the country you want for your kids. that is a country we will built. together thank you very much. god bless you and god bless the united states of america and [applause] . ♪ ♪ [your love is lifint me higher] [jackie wilson music] ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> president obama addressing a

labor day rally in michigan. you could watch the speech again on our website, c-span.org but we also reair it tonight at 8:00. the present will outline his latest job plan for a joint session of congress this coming thursday. we will have live coverage beginning at 6:00 p.m. eastern. for a number of republican presidential candidates are campaigning in north carolina today. rick perry went back to texas because of wildfires in his state and they will not attend the candidate form posted in south carolina - hosted in south carolina. ♪ ♪

[i'll take you there] ♪ ♪ [staple singers music]

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ i'll take you there ♪

♪ >> president obama wrapping up in detroit. republican presidential candidate, mitt romney, was a key speaker at 80 party rally yesterday in concord, new hampshire. this is about 15 minutes. >> thank you. i brought the better half with me today. my wife of 42 years, the mother of our five sons and the grandmother of our 16 grandkids. thank you for being here. i see i have a few friends here

and i know the folks in back want to see. i will let my friends go to the sides and i can let you say hello. >> i'm so delighted to be here. we are as a family so committed -- i guess they want the signs down. all lot of people have come to hear mitt and we want to let them do that. i want to let everyone know that we thought about this for a long time. after the last campaign, there was one thing i knew for sure. i was so tired and exhausted and i said i would never do this again. and here i am. [applause] mitt new maybe not to listen to me because i said it after each pregnancy. but i am so committed to seeing the country get turned around, i've been by his side and all of these situations. i've seen him do it in business and i've seen him do it in government. if there ever had been a time when this country needs a

turnaround, it's now and if there's a guy who could do it, it is mitt. >> thank you, sweetie. i was at a home couple of weeks ago and i said are we going to do with our kids and our grandkids what my mom and dad did with their grandkids? my mom and dad, when their grandkids got to be 11, 12, 13 years old, put them in a ford chicano van, and drive them for 30 days across the country and go to different national parks. i knew what my dad was doing. he was not just teaching my kids about the beauty of the land, he was teaching them about the character of the people that made this land and the values that made america the nation that we are. i had been on a trip like that myself with my mom and dad and they read for me from a book called "command to match my mountains."

a man in the audience said the unit a poem from which that title is taken? he said it was written by someone named samuel walter fosse in new hampshire. he wrote a poem in the 1800's and i learned the words. it is only four lines, even i can do that. it says at bring the meat man to match my mountains. bring me than to match my planes. men with empires in their purpose and new year as in their brains. -- new eras in their brains. this is a land crafted by men with empires and their purpose. we're not talking about conquering other nations, we're talking about values of pioneering, innovation, creativity, america would lead the world and change the world by virtue of the extraordinary brilliance of our founders. just give ust

political freedom, as powerful as that is. their brilliance in saying the states should be the servant and the citizens should be the sovereign was groundbreaking and change the world. but they also gave us another freedom. the freedom to choose our course in life -- individual freedom, economic freedom, americans could be free to do with unwanted. as a result of these freedoms, people from all over the world wanted to come to america. come here to craft for themselves and for their children a better life. this is the greatest nation in the history of the earth in part because of the brilliant of these founding parents to understand the power of liberty and freedom. we are going to make sure we keep it. [applause] we did an unusual thing three years ago as a people. we elected a person who had never worked in the private

sector, who never had a job in the private sector, had never really been a leader anywhere. didn't have a track record. people ask what would happen if we chose someone as the president had no experience? now we know. it's not a very pretty picture, is it? you know the numbers. we have about 25 million people out of work or have stopped looking for work or are in part- time jobs that need full-time work. we had last month the 0 job creation. a shutout is ok and baseball, but it's not good when you're talking about jobs. we have zero faith in a president who created zero jobs. it's time for someone who knows how to create jobs and get the economy going and that's something i know. that's something in my wheel house and i will get america working again. [applause] ann mentioned i have not spent

my whole life and politics. of the people running for office, i don't know that there are many have less years in politics than me. i spent four years as governor. i joked that i did not inhale. i'm still a citizen. i'm still a business person, a i started career in business, i got my first job and began to work in an enterprise and became successful there and started my own business. i have the experience of helping start small businesses and helping larger businesses that were in trouble. i learned from that experience, sometimes successfully and sometimes i was not successful. but i learned how the economy worked and how you create jobs and how you lose jobs as a nation. then, i became fortunate enough to ask -- to be asked to run the olympic games in salt lake city. there were in trouble and they wanted somebody who knew something about turnarounds' to run the games and i did. from there, i was asked if i

would come back to massachusetts and run for governor. things were tough in massachusetts and i said i would come back. you may know a bit about that state next door. some here are from massachusetts. the people in new hampshire are concerned about border security. i'm surprised they let you in. when i came into massachusetts, we were losing jobs every month and we had a $3 billion budget shortfall. we went to work to turn things around. we added jobs and were able to have three years where of the four years i was in office, the unemployment rate was below the national average. we put in place a $2 billion rainy day fund. i know something about turnaround's. then, i watched as president and i see what he has done. he has done just the opposite of what american needed. what he did was the one thing enterprise can deal with -- enterprises of all kind can deal with bad news. what they cannot deal with this

uncertainty. he pushed the heavy hand of government into the affairs of our people in such a way that he created more and more uncertainty. cap and trade would have made america -- would have made energy more expenses and businesses pullback. card check and stacking the national relations board with labor stooges and a decision like the boeing decision, terrible decisions. obama care was the worst example. we have to get rid of it. [applause] again, pushing the heavy hand of government, crushing the rights of states and individuals and as a result, people in that sector pulled bank. dodd/frank made it more difficult for enterprises to know their futures and they pulled back. i don't know how the president was so misguided and i don't know why he made such bad choices. in some respects, i think he took his cue from the social democrats in europe.

europe is not working there. it sure is heck is not going to work here. the right course for america is not the european course. i believe in america. i believe they got right and we got wrong -- we got right and they got wrong. i believe that our political freedom. i believe in our economic and personal freedom. i believe in free enterprise and i believe in capitalism. the other day, i was at a meeting with some folks in the iowa state fair. they were talking about taxes. they said white and she raise taxes on corporations and i said corporations are people. the democrats said he's in big trouble now. don't they understand that we work for corporations and our retirement is based on the success of corporations and corporations have employees their people and customers that our people and shareholders of people. we want employees to have a brighter future, so we want

businesses, corporations and enterprise to thrive. i believe in free enterprise. [applause] i believe in our constitution. all of the amendments. most governors of the 10th amendment in particular. those powers not specific granted to the federal government are reserved by the state than the people. that allows states to compete with each other and try different ideas. i learned what that was like when i was a new governor. i got the governor of california, came to massachusetts, arnold schwarzenegger. he was coaching jobs from massachusetts, a fellow republican. he had a big billboard with him saying come to california. what was i supposed to do. i put a billboard in his stay with me in a t-shirt that said smaller muscles and much lower taxes.

i know we face extraordinary challenges and i happen to believe career politicians got us into this mess and career politicians cannot get us out of this mess. it's going to take someone who understands how the private economy works because he's worked in the private economy. i have. i am a business guy. [applause] i want to mention one more thing. you know the challenges we have. $14.5 trillion in debt, unfunded liabilities of roughly $62 trillion. a huge number. usa today calculated to be $532,000 per american household of unfunded liabilities. it is unthinkable that would be the legacy we leave our next generation. we have other challenges around the world, jihadists who want to

kill us, iran becoming nuclear, russia becoming resurgent and china becoming a great power. but i believe and the patriotism of the american people. i salute you for being here on an evening like this because you care about the direction of our country. i have learned something about the patriotism of america's people. i want to tell you a brief story. i was at the last year in my term as governor and i got calls from the airport. the airport authority said it was the body of u.s. servicemen coming home on a u.s. air flight. they had been unable to notify the family in time to get there to receive the body and they wondered if i could come received the body in their stead. i said of course. so we drove from massachusetts state house to logan airport and the state troopers drove me out on the tarmac. the jet came in and the people got off the jet. the luggage came off the conveyor and finally that casket came off the conveyor and the

trooper saluted. i put my hand over my heart and i happened to look up at the terminal. there's a big glass wall there in the boston terminal at u.s. air. it seems the people getting off the plane had seen all of the troopers there and they were pressed up against the glass to see what was going on. then people walking down the hallways of the people against the glass, so they came in behind them. they were all looking there. as i looked at them, every single person i saw had their hands on their part. i could not see through the gas -- see to the glass to know there were tears there, but i could see the appreciation and the sorrow and sympathy and affection. we are a patriotic people. we are the most patriotic people in the world. i'm convinced that given the patriotism of the american people, despite the challenges we have, we can overcome those challenges of we draw on that

patriotism, if we have leaders who will tell us the truth, who will live with integrity, and to actually know how to lead. and i intend to be one of those leaders with your help. thank you very much. great to be with you today. thank you. [applause]

♪ >> thank you for being here today. >> tomorrow, mitt romney will way of his jobs plan.

he will be at the mckennas international trucks company in las vegas. live coverage starts at 3:30 eastern here on c-span. it will also be available on c- span radio and c-span.org. tomorrow, rudy guiliani will look at the 9/11 attacks and talk about security changes since then. that starts at 1:00 eastern. >> next weekend, the 10-year anniversary of 9/11 on the c- span networks, with live coverage from each of the memorial site. here is our live schedule. saturday on c-span, the flight 93 dedication ceremony from a shanks will, pennsylvania. sunday morning, a memorial ceremony the new world trade center site with president obama and former president bush. on c-span2 at 9:00, vice-

president joe biden from the pentagon. then, honoring those who lost their lives on flight 93. 9/11 remembered next weekend on the c-span networks. >> the naida's secretary general told reporters in his monthly briefing today that progress had secretary-- nato's general. rebels had taken over in most of libya. >> it has been two months since i last met you all. in libya, hour operation to protect civilians has moved significantly closer to success, but we are not there yet. in afghanistan, transition has begun.

afghan forces are now providing afghan population. that is a very good start. i expect the next day to be announced in the coming month. in kosovo, our mission played a vital role in stopping a crisis from escalating. nato forces did what was needed and i thank them. two months ago, some of you asked me if there was any chance of progress in the libyan operation in august. some asked whether nato had the resources to keep going. those questions have now been answered. our operation is not yet over, but the direction is clear. the libyan people had taken

their future in their own hands. they have made history. so has the international community. this operation has an unprecedented mandate, their responsibility to protect, that is history. nato has been implementing the mandates with unprecedented precision. no comparable operations in history has been so careful in avoiding harm to civilians. our operation has had an unprecedented effect. in five months, we have degraded a war machine which was built up over more than 40 years to stop moammar gadhafi

from murdering his own people. we set out to protect civilians and we will see this through. nato and our partners will be there as long as we are needed, but not one minute longer. when we assess the threat is over for good, we will conclude operation unified protector. i cannot give a precise date, but i believe it will come soon. it is now for the libyan people to shape their future. the national transitional council at the paris meeting impressed us all with their plan for this future. the united nations reaffirmed it

will play a leading role in supporting the libyan people. nato stands ready to help if we are needed and requested to do so. but operation unified protector will end as soon as our mission is completed. of those, we can already start learning the first lessons. most of those lessons are positive. all will play an important role as we start to prepare our summit in chicago next may. first, the crisis shows nato's flexibility. nobody saw it coming, but nato decided to act within six days.

we set up the operation and we adjusted it when we needed to. second, it shows nato's openness. we were joined by partners old and new from the middle east and northern europe we agreed was needed to be done and we agreed how to do it and we did it. because our partners no less, they trust us, and they're ready to work with us, -- work with us. third, shows nato's strength. this was the first alliance operation or european allies and canada took the lead. the alliance got the job done.

this mission could not have been done without capabilities which only the united states can offer. for example, drones, intelligence, and refueling aircraft. let me put it bluntly. those capabilities are vital for all of us. more allies should be willing to obtain them. that's a real challenge. we will have to find the solutions at the next nato summit in chicago. [speaking french]

[translator speaking] -- we have to take the decisions which will enable us to do it. let me give you some examples. in lisbon, we agreed ballistic missiles are a threat. in chicago, i would like us to declare the initial operating capability for nato's territorial missile defense. i hope we will be able to agree with russia on missile defense to tackle new threats and

eliminate old suspicions. we agreed on an enduring partnership with the afghan government. in chicago, i would like us to agree on a concrete package of support measures. to make sure afghan security capabilities continue to develop. also in lisbon, we agreed nato must have the full range of capabilities to deter and defense against threats. in chicago, i would like to take these decisions which would allow less to -- allow us to

maintain as capabilities. in these difficult economic times, few nations can afford such capabilities alone. we cannot spend more, so we must spend better. we must prioritize. specialize. and encourage cooperation. that is what i call smart defense. >> we must identify the areas where smart defense can deliver capabilities we need.

we must ask nato heads of state and government for real and tangible support for multinational support. as libya showed, we can never tell where the next crisis might come from, but we know it probably will come and once it does, it may be too late to start shopping. with that, i'm ready to take your questions. >> please don't forget to introduce yourself. >> regarding libya, is the

example of catching gadhafi and are you already planning for after gadhafi and missile defense, there was a lot of harsh criticism today toward turkey to deploy and allow radar, etc., so do you have comment bearing in mind chicago? >> thank you. on the and states of our operation, in libya, the possible capture of gadhafi is not a decisive effort, but it is

an element. individuals, including khaddafi, is not a target of our operation. what will play a crucial role is the capability in the national transitional council to actually insure effective protection of the civilian population because that is the key in our un mandate to protect civilians. of course, in our assessment, we will attach very strong importance to the capability to actually protect the civilian population. the nato council will take its decision based on an overall comprehensive political military assessment, including what i have already said, the capacity

of the ntc and our own military assessments come as well as which decisions might be taken by the un security council. the nato council will take into account this broad evaluation. the agreement to deploy certain facilities in turkey, first of all, i would like to congratulate the turkish government on that agreement. i consider that agreement a in the nato- based missile defense system we approved at the summit in lisbon.

the nato missile defense system is a purely defensive system. it is not directed against anyone, except for those who might have an intention to attack nato territory. it is a missile defense, and i stress the word defense. >> secretary general, according to resolution 1973, your aim is protecting civilians in libya and now the strike is still on. you are protecting the civilians from home since there is no control anywhere in libya?

-- protecting civilians from who since gaddafi is no longer in control in libya? are you devoting resources to finding gadhafi or you are not doing anything in that? >> once again, let me stress that individuals, including gadhafi, are not targets for our operation in libya. we are in libya to protect civilians against any attack. gadhafi forces still constitute a threat to the civilian population in libya. this is the reason why we have to continue our operation until these threats do not exist any

longer. that leads me to the first part of your question. who are you protecting? we are protecting civilians against all attacks and, as i said, we have, unfortunately seen this threat still exists and this is the reason why we are continuing our operation. >> ap. >> at the start of this campaign, you made a big deal about the need for regional cooperation for the arab league and the african union.

i have noticed you completely left out. is this because the african union has been quite hostile to their campaign, the unrelenting bombing has detracted from efforts to achieve a peaceful solution? >> i did not quite catch the question, but let me stress that we have not sidelined the african union. on the contrary. i attended the meeting in paris on libya and the african union was represented. so was the number of african countries and we still attached a strong importance to the regional engagement from the

arab league to the african union from individual countries in the region. a still pleased to see stronger support for the national transitional council, also from the region. >> we can take a couple of questions in french. >> you were saying the operation is not yet completed and you will remain until such time as the threat will be eliminated but not one minute more. since the fall of tripoli, has the operation changed its nature on the ground? have you focused on different regions?

what can you tell us about the geometry of the current operation? what is your focus? have you changed the number of air strikes or decreased the number of air missions? where you stand with the operation? >> would you mind repeating the central part of your question? >> the unified protector as it stands now, is it different from the unified protector we saw 10 days ago? one recurrent priorities of the operation? how would you describe that? >> quite obviously, we have tailored our operations. taking into account the situation on the ground, our

main objective, however, remains the same. we seek to protect the civilian population against any attacks. >> a newspaper stated they had documents proving china was negotiating with moammar gadhafi in july in order to supply arms despite the embargo. and particular, ground, air missiles to be able to shoot down coalition aircraft during the operation. i would like to know if you any information on this.

if this is confirmed, what would be your analysis for comment on this attempt by china to sell weapons to gadhafi? >> i do not have any information as regards to this situation with china, however, as far as i know, china has in fact denied this information, but i have no further information.

>> german television said at the same time there were reports that china supplied -- when china was supposed to try to deliver weapons to the pro- gadhafi forces, there was news france delivered weapons to the anti-gadhafi forces. what part of the nato mission was the arms embargo? did nato know anything about france delivering weapons to the anti-gadhafi forces?

we had the rebels ask for a cease-fire or for the other side to hand over the weapons to end the war, but at the same time, nato was bombing three cities in the southeast of tripoli. was it part of the tactics to go on with the bombs and offer a cease-fire or handing over weapons? i don't understand the strategy behind it. >> as far as france is concerned, nato has not been informed about such delivery of weapons. we got information afterwards

when this issue was discussed in the mia and in the public. i understand the purpose of this operation was to protect civilians against attack from gadhafi forces, but let me stress once again it has not been part of the nato operation. >> can you repeat the question? it was not very clear what the question was. >> i will try to make it more clear. the web -- the rebels offered a ceasefire, offered to hand over the weapons. at the same time, we got reports

from nato that nato was bombing the southeast of tripoli. i wonder what is the strategy behind that if you are bombing and offering a cease-fire, normally you say there will not be shooting anymore and then you have the chance to hand over weapons? >> let me stress that we all free -- we appreciate all efforts to find a peaceful solution to what might be left of this country. i think the ntc has demonstrated a very responsible approach to solving this conflict by offering the remnants of the gadhafi regime or forces a peaceful solution.

that is my first point. secondly, as far as nato operations are concerned, we continue as long as we believe there is a threat against the civilian population. we are very careful in conducting our operation in strict conformity with the un mandate and as long as threats against the civilian population exists, we will continue our operation and there is no contradiction between the protection of civilians according to the un mandate and the ntc efforts to find a peaceful solution underground. >> "wall street journal." >> good afternoon.

[inaudible] you mentioned refueling and drones -- it's no secret this effort exposed [inaudible] >> to the list, i could add transport capacity. that is not directly related to the of libya operations, what -- but a more general challenge to make sure that european forces

become more mobile. i personally think it is one of the weaknesses of the european armed forces that we lacked strategic airlift capacity. i could add that to the list we have already outlined and all of these issues will be dealt with within the context of a smart defense. the command transformation located in norfolk and the u.s. is currently working on a paper where they identify a number of areas that could potentially be

subject to a multinational corporation. we try to identify a number of areas where a group of countries could prove and share resources and hopefully at the nato summit in chicago, we could identify a number of elite nations that could carry forward these projects. this initiative will build on what we decided. as you may recall, we identified 11 priority areas where we would focus our defense investments in the coming years, including missile defense, cyber defense, counter-roadside bombs, etc.

it would be a comprehensive defense package that would contribute to make more efficient use of our resources, but also, aimed at narrowing the economic and technological gap between the united states and europe. that is my ambition. the libyan operation has demonstrated that despite economic austerity, despite defense cuts in a number of countries, maybe all countries, it was possible for european allies and canada to provide the majority of assets for our libya operation, strike aircraft, and the maritime assets -- all maritime assets were provided by canada and european allies

and aircraft. there is absolutely a positive lesson to be learned, but the whole operation made visible and that will be the focal point from now until chicago. >> to what extent are you in contact with the european union envoy is in libya and what is the plan for transition to hand over when you decide the mission is over? the second question, on the 9/11

commemoration this week what do you feel the need for europe to do in fighting terrorism? >> i have had regular contact with the european union during this libya crisis with all institutions, including by rep. we have had close staff to staff contacts to make sure we work with each other in a complementary way i expect that coordination to continue.

the european union could take on a major role in assisting the national transitional council and the libyan people and the reconstruction of libya. maybe the term reconstruction is not appropriate because for the new authorities in libya it is really to build from scratch what has been demolished by the former regime. it is for the libyan people, the national transitional council to shape the future of libya, but if they request assistance from abroad, i do believe the european union could and should play an important role. also in that respect, i am pleased to see how closely we have coordinated through this whole crisis.

as regards to the 11th of september, i think we all agree that what happened 10 years ago really changed the perception of security. very important steps were taken in the wake of this horrific attack on the united states. as far as nato is concerned, we invoked article 5 for the first time in the history of our alliance. european allies and canada agreed that the attack on the united states should be considered an attack on all as

was stated in article 5. this is also the reason why we are engaged in afghanistan today. we will continue with the aim to prevent the country from once again becoming a safe haven for terrorists. now we are in the process of handing over responsibility to the afghan security forces. of course, a number of other measures have been taken. it's also part of this story that may countries have introduced heavy controlled measures to make sure they can protect their populations effectively. of course, this is all the time a delicate balance to protect

the freedom we believe in and, at the same time, to make sure people and our country's can continue to live their lives in security and safety. in many ways, what happened 10 years ago has changed our lives. but the bottom line is i do believe that today we have a safer world that we had 10 years ago, though we have seen terrorist attacks since 9/11. the overall picture is the international terror networks have been significantly degraded since 2001 and that's

the good news. >> we have only a few minutes left. it now seems that there will be no international peacekeeping mission in libya, mostly because the transitional council does not want one. do you think this is a good development? will the country be stable enough without an international presence? >> yes, i do believe the new authorities in libya that have the major responsibility to shape the future of the country and to secure the libyan people. it is also my firm belief that

any international presence on the u.s. leadership in libya should be based on a clear request before the new authorities in libya. i am confident the national transitional council will be able to ensure that the transition to democracy in libya can take place in a peaceful manner and based on a spirit of reconciliation, i am content that the national transitional council will respect the basic principles of human rights, will of law, and

democracy. i do believe they have a sincere desire to see the development of a true democracy in libya. having said that, i would reiterate the international community has clearly stated its preparedness to assist the ntc and the libyan people if requested. that statement was reiterated at the paris meeting last week. first and foremost, it is for a thentc to take the lead. >> won a final question goes to the bbc. >> i know you have answered these questions may times before but whether you exceeded your mandate to protect civilians in libya and you have a well rehearsed answer.

perhaps i could ask something specific. given the current balance of forces, could you explain how a rocket launcher operated by pro-gadhafi forces is more a threat to civilians than a tank or a rocket launcher operated by opposition forces who may be about to attack either of those places? >> the fact is, the ntc forces have been very, very careful to avoid civilian casualties. we have no reason to believe what so ever that the ntc forces constitute a threat to the civilian population in libya. i think there recent initiatives to find peaceful

solutions to the remaining conflict testifies to that cautiousness. that is my clear point of departure. the ntc forces did not constitute such a threat to the civilian population. contrary to what we have seen from the khaddafi forces and the remnants of the regime. not long ago, actually fired a scud missile from one of their strongholds. from what we see we consider these gadhafi forces to constitute a threat toward the civilian population, we will continue our operations, and we will be careful and i define legitimate military targets, but now and then, we see such movements that could constitute

a threat to the civilian population. in that case, it's in full accordance with the un mandate to hit such targets. >> thank you very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> during the congressional summer recess, c-span has been covering a number of congressional town -- town hall meetings. coming up next, maryland center ben cardin. that will be followed by my colleague of utah and later, debbie, auster's -- betty wong

osterman schultze. >> c-span's web site for campaign 2012 is easy use. it helps you navigate the political landscape with twitter feet, facebook updates, candidates bios and it is all at c-span.org/skycam payne2012. >> coming up next, senator ben cardin in catonsville, maryland. it is just outside baltimore. this event is about one hour, 10 minutes.

>> good morning. how are you? did you have a good summer? you all have electricity here. >> [inaudible] >> how is he doing? >> [inaudible] >> please tell him i asked about him. >> [inaudible] >> yeah, bua good person. how are you? >> [inaudible] >> great. thwarted you lived before?

>> houston -- where did you lived before? >> hughson. >> i'm actually going to be in houston. they have had a hot spell. like 110 degrees. it was hot. it was nice to meet you. >> thank you. >> did charles bring you here? >> yes. >> that is good. >> [inaudible] >> it is a good place.

>> [inaudible] >> you should be able to do better. the problem is that -- [inaudible]

>> good morning, everyone. welcome to the town hall with senator ben cardin.

in nice crowd here. we are fortunate to have our guests from c-span filming today's event, so others can share in the wonderful news that is going to tellin us about. we have delegate jimmy malone. you may know him. [applause] the chairman of our legislative political committee who helped set this up, charles tupper. [applause] from charles town board of directors, naomi mcafee. the president of the council, chuck nouchio.

and the vice-president of government affairs, adam kaine. [applause] let me tell you a little bit about senator gordon. -- senator cardin. with more than 20 years in congress, he has been a national leader on the economy, led security, health care and retirement security. throughout his career he has championed resources and services so that seniors can live independently in their communities as long as possible. first elected to the senate in 2006, he currently serves on the environment and public works and finance foreign relations budget and small business and entrepreneurship committee. he believes that medicare and social security are two of the most successful programs we have in our nation. he brings with him the expertise that he developed while serving

for 17 years on the ways and means committee in the u.s. house. during that time, he has made proposals to increase security in retirement. during the 111th congress, he supported the affordable care act and support provisions eliminating all co-payments for medicare and preventive services for seniors. i could go on, but i know you are excited to see him. give a warm welcome to senator ben cardin. [applause] >> thank you very much. it is a pleasure to be back in charlestown. you did not experience what i

experienced this week, no electrical power. we are still without power, as are many in our region. it is good to be back here. this is a great community. i have been here many, many times. i've had wonderful discussions over the years. i like to do town hall meetings in august when congress is in recess to get your views on what's happening in our community and for me to give you an idea of what is happening in washington. i hope we will have a pretty free-wheeling discussion. you are normally not very shy and the questions you ask. please, be prepared. i need to point out, jimmy malone does a fantastic job representing you in the house. i've known the family for a long, long time.

thank you, jimmy, for what you are doing in annapolis. the state has exercised great leadership and jimmy malone is one of those leaders in annapolis. thank you for being here very much. [applause] i want to talk a little bit about medicare and social security, about the budget in washington and the impact it could have on medicare and social security and programs that affect our seniors. and we will open it up for your comments and questions. social security and medicare, in my view, have been two of the most successful programs in the history of america. when social security was an active in the 1930's, seniors were very likely to live in poverty. the social security was the way in which we were able to allow seniors to live in dignity in america consistent with the values of our nation. that is what social her -- what

social security has meant over the years. it is the only lifetime guarantee inflation-proof annuity. euna you cannot outlived social security. you know it will be adjusted. you do not have to look at the stock market to see what you're she security benefits will be. it is guaranteed. is there for you. and we want to make sure it is there for future generations. medicare, which was enacted in the 1960's, was a direct result from seniors not been able to get private insurance to provide health care for them. private insurance companies were not interested in insuring older people. there is a reason for this. insurance companies make money by insuring people that do not make claims. as you get older, you make more health care claims. you are not exactly the market they are the most interested in.

we found out in the 1960's that seniors have a very difficult time with private insurance companies. congress enacted medicare. it it was controversial at the time. there were those in washington that felt we should not do it. it was the right decision. our seniors were guaranteed access to quality health care. that is what medicare was about in 1965 when it was enacted. since that time we have improved medicare by expanding benefits. i am particularly proud about the world that i played in the late 1990's when we expanded medicare to include preventive health care services through legislation that i offered. included mammography screenings and colorectal exams and pabst mirasol -- papsmeres and diabetes services.

i come here today to tell you that these programs are under attack in washington. we need to understand what this debate is about. let me just try to lay out some of the politics of what is happening in washington and the impact it could have on programs that affect your life. this is not theoretical. we know legislation passed the house of representatives. it did not pass the u.s. senate. and we know the president is not going to sign it, but it does indicate that there is support in washington to dramatically change medicare.

when it is fully implemented, it is estimated to cost seniors an extra $6,000 per year. seniors cannot afford another $6,000 per year for their health care costs. more and more seniors would be denied access to care. it also would have required you to go out and buy private insurance. it would make seniors beholden once again to the private insurance marketplace. it did not work in the 1960's. some of you remember when we had what is known as medicare plus choice where we had private insurance companies that came into maryland and then they left overnight. there is no guarantee that private insurance company will remain in our market. they have left before and they could leave again. i oppose what the house was doing. senator mikulski opposed what the house was trying to do. your local congressman opposed it. we felt it was the wrong thing.

we do not want to see a fundamental change in the medicare system where the guaranteed traditional medicare would no longer be available for seniors. we just thought that was the wrong thing to do. but it went beyond that. the house passed a budget that also blocked the medicaid block grant to the states. medicaid provides the primary funding source for seniors for long-term nursing care. by block granting program to the state, it is likely to -- unlikely to predict the future of medicaid. we know there is going to be guaranteed eligibility to participate at the national level now. if the federal government block grants it, it will be totally up to the states. we know the same -- the states

do not have the same budget that the federal government has. during tough times, we could see that the budget would be cut and the future of medicare is uncertain. again, not only impacting our seniors, but affecting american families. more and more children are covered under medicaid. they would also be in danger of losing their access to health care. these bills passed the house of representatives. there were not enacted and for not part of the compromise reached -- and were not part of the compromise reached in congress recently. one of the things that happen in the house of representatives that you need to know about, that is, they have recommended a repeal of the affordable care act. the affordable care act was somewhat controversial. i'm not sure exactly all of the reasons for that were well understood, but let me just go over what and repeal of the affordable care act -- that is the bill that president obama

signed into law in the last congress that provided at long last that every american was guaranteed to have coverage under our health insurance system. it said at long last that america joined every other industrial nation in the world to say that health care is a right, not a privilege. it took millions of americans who currently have no health insurance and gave them the opportunity to have health insurance. it told our small businesses that it would no longer be discriminated against as small companies in the insurance marketplace. they would be able to buy health insurance plan for their employees that was competitive with the largest companies, which they could buy. it told individuals who could perhaps not in -- not afford insurance that health insurance would be available to all americans. because we subsidize health

insurance for low wage workers, that was part of the plan. and we told private insurance companies that they could no longer discriminate against american families because of pre-existing conditions. but the affordable care act went beyond that. it also brought out the framework to bring down health- care costs. in the united states we have the best health care in the world kuala a -- quality-wise. later today i will be speaking at johns hopkins hospital in baltimore. we will be talking about efforts in surgery where surgical residency is were first initiated. we're proud of the quality of care one can get at hopkins. it is the best in the world. we have the best technology in the world. the problem is, is out of reach for more and more americans. they cannot afford it. they do not have access to that care. the affordable care act was an effort to say, let's bring the

system available to all and bring down the cost of health care. how do we bring down the cost? we bring down the cost by having everyone in the system. we say that everyone will be covered by the system, so we no longer have people visiting emergency rooms to get health care because they have no insurance. by bringing down costs and bring everyone into the system. we also bring down costs by better use of health information technology. you might be surprised to learn that if you've visited an emergency room in maryland there is very little chance that they would have your complete medical records. we would change that. they do not have your medical records, they have to put future tests that you otherwise would not need to do, adding to the

inconvenience of getting necessary health care. we can improve quality and reduce costs by improving the use of health information technology. the bill also provides for managing serious diseases. by keeping people healthier who have more serious problems, investing in wellness programs. i can tell you about a program that safeway supermarkets have for their employees, which if you agree to take responsibility for your health care from the point of view of exercise and giving with high blood pressure and cholesterol and managing your diabetes, and if you smoke, stop smoking, they reward you by lower premiums for your health care and more benefits. and it works, they have kept health care costs down. we have used the model and the affordable care act. and then in the affordable care

act, we deal with the cost of governments. this is not what i say. this is what the congressional budget office has said, that we will reduce health care -- government cause to health care off by hundreds of billions of dollars -- government's cost to health care by hundreds of billions of dollars. reduce the cost to taxpayers and make the system work more effectively. for seniors, it meant that benefits were expanded, more benefits covered for our seniors. the one you probably heard the most about was the coverage gap that we have in prescription drugs, falling into the so- called doughnut hole where seniors have to spend a couple thousand dollars falling into that gap where they have to pick up the entire cost of their

prescription drugs. starting last year, we started to fill in that coverage gap by sending checks to 55,000 marylanders who fell into that coverage gap. by 2020, it will be completely closed under the affordable care act. in addition, the affordable care act is invested in wellness were your annual wellness exam -- we used to call in your physical -- would now be covered under reimbursement. 9000 marylanders have taken advantage of this. perhaps the most important part of the affordable care act as it relates to seniors is that it expands the insolvency of the medicare trust fund by a dozen years, making sure medicare is not only here today but here tomorrow. it is here for future generations. i went through explaining all of that because the bill that passed the house of representatives would have repealed all of that. it would have repealed the

ending of the coverage gap for pushed corruption drugs. it would have affected the solvency -- for prescription drugs. it would have affected the solvency. it would have reduced the annual wellness exams and all of the other things i have talked about. it did not pass the united states senate that it will not. but it is an issue that we need to be aware of because, as i said, medicare and social security are under attack in washington. this recent budget debate underscored the fact that medicare and social security are very much under attack in washington. i want to talk a little bit about this budget agreement and what happened and how it affects our seniors. but first, we need to understand how we got here. i was part of the congress just

10 years ago that balance the federal budget. it was 11 years ago now. we did that when bill clinton was president of the united states. we brought the budget into balance. we had a surplus. that was 2000. we had a surplus 11 years ago. we were actually concerned that we might have paid off all of our debt, all of our publicly held debt and had no debt in our nation. george w. bush enacted certain economic policies that i disagreed with. i voted against them. i say that because i know we have to deal with this deficit, but it is important to know how we got here. george w. bush cut taxes not once, but twice. the second time he cut taxes we were at war with two countries. afghanistan and iraq. the first time that i know of that we went to war and cut taxes rather than paying our bills.

we use our credit card to give a tax cut. we used a credit card to pay for two wars. we use our credit card to expand government spending. and it was wrong. we then, of course, had a recession and when barack obama took the oath of office, this nation was losing over 700,000 jobs per month and we have a huge deficit. what barack obama did was suggest government spending in order to get down this recession, which is what most economists would tell you is the right thing to do, further adding to the deficit of this country. it is important to understand how we got to where we were and what happened in washington these past few months. we have a debt ceiling. a debt ceiling is an arbitrary limit as to how much the government can borrow. raising the debt ceiling does not increase one dime of federal spending.

the spending had already been incurred. the question is whether we were going to pay our bills or not. and what the house leadership decided to do was to use the debt ceiling debate as an effort to try to bring down federal spending using that leverage. we can argue whether that was the right thing to do or not. i do not think we should have to jeopardize the federal credit and i felt we should have talked about the budget in a more bipartisan manner rather than using the threat of the credit of america. i tell you as your senator that our current deficits are not sustainable. we have to deal with our current deficits. i will not try to sell you on what the budget agreement, whether it was a great thing or not. i will not try to sell that to you. the way we did it was certainly wrong, no question about that.

congress should have acted in the best interests of our nation in a bipartisan manner. we have got to work together in the best interest of this nation. but i do tell you the options we had available were eager to pass this budget agreement, which -- either to pass this budget agreement, which extended through 2013 so we do not go through this contentious defaulting on your credit verses defaulting on a credit. if we did not raise the debt ceiling, then something would have had to give. we would not have been able to borrow enough money to pay for leader social security checks -- either social security checks for the government work checks, or contractors to sell things to the federal government and

expect to get paid, our defense, our soldiers, or bondholders. something would have had to give. to me, that was not an option. if we could not the fault on our debt. i supported the budget agreement because it extended our debt ceiling, and quite frankly, i believe it gave us a framework to try to manage our deficit in a way that is balanced. let me just go through that quickly. i tell you i was disappointed that the budget agreement did not include a more comprehensive approach. and to become a more comprehensive approach would have included -- a more comprehensive approach would have included revenues. and we have a moral, legal, and an economic responsibility to have enough revenue to pay for what we spend. and yes, we have to reduce spending, but that we have to pay for what we have incurred. there are a lot of tax breaks out there, loopholes that we should close. i will get to that.

i was disappointed that the agreement did not deal with the number-one issue about bernie our budget into balance, and that is to get our economy back on track, create jobs. we do not have enough jobs out there. we need to invest in innovation and education and infrastructure in order to create jobs. that has to be part of this equation editor was not. i was disappointed with the budget agreement, but i felt was the best option available. it's a budget agreement does provide for an immediate reduction of $1 trillion over the next 10 years. that, to me, was the right thing to do. it is manageable. the $1 trillion is divided between security and on security for the next two years. you cannot say, let's cut the programs for seniors to fund our national events. you cannot say we will cut our student aid in order to fund the military.

we have a firewall on the budget for the next two years. the budget amounts are manageable. we reduce federal spending next year by about $3 billion on the domestic side and about $7 billion on the security side. what does that mean? let me give you comparisons. the house had already passed a budget for next year. the house-passed budget would have reduced domestic spending by about $40 billion. a 12% to 13% below current year spending, which was frozen over the previous year's spending. we would have gone over budget this year that is frozen from lester and then a 12% or 13% cut on programs that affect you. the older americans act would have been infected by that. it also affects our students and

held grants. it also affects our young this with the head start program. those who get the early intervention so they can succeed, they would have been affected by it. nih would have been affected. instead, the budget that has been agreed to by democrats and republicans and signed into law by the president is basically another freeze, less than a 1% reduction, that allows us to invest in innovation and education. it allows us to do that so that we can create jobs for the picture. it is a manageable amount of and much, much better than the way the house was looking at the fiscal year 2012 budget. there are no cuts in his first trillion dollars. -- this first trillion dollars

in medicare, a zeroth. no cuts in medicaid. there is no cuts in this and socialollars in medicar security. but then there is going to be a second round in which we need to do at least $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next 10 years we have this super committee made up of 12 members of the house and senate that will have the ability to make certain recommendations that are voted up or down by congress. it must be voted. it cannot be filibustered. this committee must make its recommendations by thanksgiving and congress must act on it by christmas. it is a short time frame. i do not know what they are going to do as far as the recommendations for another $1.2

trillion for budget cuts. but i will tell you what i would like to see them do. i would like to see them bring in more than $1.2 trillion in budget savings. i would like to see it be around $2.7 trillion in budget savings. that would give us $3.7 trillion so that we can maintain moving forward on a manageable debt. i would like to see them bring in what president obama once called "the grand bargain," where we can really manage our deficit and do it in a way that is fair. you can do that and read all of the budget elements to the table. we have what is known as the overseas defense spending, which is not part of the first half trillion dollars. we're going to be reducing our troops in afghanistan and iraq. they are going to be coming home. there is less spending on our

military. using the current base line of spending as a future barometer for overseas operations is not realistic. we need to bring our troops home. that will save us, we believe, over a trillion dollars in the next decade. we can get those savings. i spoke on the floor of the senate about the gas and oil industry. we created a tax break for u.s. manufacturers so they could better sell their products overseas. because of certain international trade rules, that tax credit has been extended to the gas and oil industry. they do not deserve it. they do not provide a product for manufacturing overseas. we have a hearing on the senate finance committee and i asked the question to the ceo's to the of large gas and oil companies. they could not justify these tax breaks. they've made $34 billion in the

first three months of 2011. $34 billion in three months while we were all suffering the higher prices at the pump. they were making record profits. they can certainly give up these few billion dollars in tax subsidies, which will help us balance the federal budget. there are lots of examples of loopholes. we spend more money in the tax code and we raise. we give back more in what is known as a tack -- tax expenditures, deductions and credits. and the wealthiest are those that benefit the most from it. we are talking about everyone paying their fair share of the current tax rate. and in doing that, we can bring this budget into a better balance. that is what i hope the joint committee will look at as an effort to bring our budget into better balance. if they fail, we have

sequestration. what does that mean? it is across-the-board cuts over the next 10 years. but here's the interesting point. it will be an equal amount of current -- of cuts from the department of defense and non- defense. i do not want to see this happen. to me, this is a failure. i do not believe in across-the- board cuts. congress needs to be selective in how they do their deficit- reduction. i do not want to see it happen, but if it were to happen to us to have equal pressure on all of congress. but we have to/party, which gives us the ability to work together as members of congress -- we have to divide it by party. it gives us the ability to work to other as members of congress, not democrats and republicans. there need to be no cuts whatsoever to medicare

beneficiaries. there will be cut limited to providers and insurance companies, but not beneficiaries. no cuts to medicaid. no cuts to the low-income programs. i think a budget compromise -- the budget compromise has provided the protections we need. and lastly, social security. it cannot be part of the budget agreement because it did not contribute one penny to the deficit problems. if anything, it made us look better because we used cash surpluses from social security to mask are two deficits. social security should not be included in any of the numbers i just mentioned. and i will fight for that. and i know a lot of my colleagues will fight to make sure that social security is not part of the budget numbers we need to manage the deficit. there are ways to strengthen social security. we should look at that. social security, we like to have

what we call a 75-year solvency. we like to put it on a stronger footing going forward. minor adjustments can deal with those issues. it does not take a lot of changes. for example, we can look at the wage gap. you may be surprised to learn that if you have an income, you pay on every dime of income that you turn into the medicare trust fund. but it is capped, at a little over $100,000 into the social security trust fund. those who make over $100,000 in salary find that their social security contributions are capped. if we could just that. there are things we could do to adjust the social security system, but if should be considered totally outside of the budget discussions dealing with managing the federal deficit because this is not part of the problem.

i want to come back to the main point. congress needs to work together. it is not going to be one party or another. we have to work together. and we cannot lose focus of the single most important ingredient here, and that is, job creation. if we're going to balance the budget in the best interest of americans, we need more jobs, pure and simple. if we need a level playing field -- we need a level playing field. and right now, with currency manipulations that affect manufacturers and producers. we have to deal with that. we need to fund a trained work force. we need to have better roads. and after looking at the storm, we need better energy infrastructure in this country. all of that will help create more jobs for the future. as we go through this exercise of burnie carnation together with a responsible -- bringing our nation together with a

responsible budget, yes, i will protect our seniors. to me, social security and medicare are the two principal programs that have protected the dignity of our seniors. and i will do everything in my power working with senator mikulski and others in congress to make sure that we protect the basic program. but i will also fight for a responsible, comprehensive budget plan that allows job growth in america. so that we can have the jobs we need for our economy to grow. with that, let me throw it over to your friendly questions. [laughter] remember, i have been to travel down enough i think i have otter a membership in the community. please welcome -- please remember that. we welcome your questions and use. [applause] >> remember, we are not real reporters here.

do not give a 3 minute, and then ask your question. just a brief question so we can get to as many as we have. let's start up front with phyllis. >> how can we, as citizens, tell this select committee that we need them to work together in a way that will produce a balanced approach to our budget problem? and then how can we tell the congress that we need for them to work in this same cooperative, a balanced way? >> we have just taken a giant leap forward in that by just being here. i hope my colleagues are hearing this in their communities. people are tired of the partisan division. they want us to deal with the issues in the best interest of our country. i think most people understand

it is not going to be one way or the highway. we are going to have to figure out a way to deal with a divided government. republicans won control of the house of representatives in the midterm elections. they have control of it. the democrats maintain a very small margin in the senate, not enough to overcome a filibuster. but they do have the control of the agenda in the senate. and of course, the president of the united states is clearly a dominant player in this discussion. put this all together and let's figure out a way to work together. i have listened very carefully to the comments from my 12 colleagues that are serving on the commission. they have seen to be very consolatory in their opening comments. i hope that carries forward. the important thing is to be open-minded and look for a comprehensive way. i must tell you there are certain principles that i would hope all americans would agree

with, and that is, there are ways of bringing down costs, but we have to create jobs. and number two, we have to deal with our most vulnerable. and 3, the dignity of our seniors depends very much on the strength of our shoe security and medicare systems. >> we have heard so much about the cost of medicare and social security. it appears to me that one of the basic things that we ought to do to stop these people from coming to the united states illegally and taking every damn time that we have -- dime that we have. send them back to where they came from. and on top of that, why don't we impeachment obama? he has violated the constitution so many times and it is pathetic that he goes on the way he is. >> let me take the two

questions. on immigration reform, i really do believe we need comprehensive immigration reform. but let's understand that america was built in large measure of because people were willing to come to america from all parts of the world. yes, they can legally. yes, we want people coming here legally. and we want an immigration system that makes sense for america. [applause] it starts with the controlling our borders. you need to know who is coming into america and people need to come in here in a lawful way. but there are people here, many of whom are innocent. they came here as young children and it was not their decision to come to america. they have been law-abiding and adding to the economy of this nation. we need to have a fair way to deal with people who otherwise have been legal, productive, taxpaying, and willing to read

knowledge their status and willing to pay the costs of remedying their situation and going to the back of the line, not a fraud. there has to be a way to unwind where we are today on immigration reform. i will take issue with you on your second point. the first part, no question we have an immigration issue that we have to take up. president obama is president during extremely difficult times. in the first two years of office he had a pretty productive time in getting legislation enacted into law. he dealt with the deficit. as far as the economy was concerned with an economic plan, he was able to pass the affordable care act. he took wall street on and passed a major environmental lands bill. it has been up for many years we

got the bill passed to protect women in the workplace. the list goes on and on the last year has been much more challenging because of divided government. i think we have to be very careful in how we express our disagreement. this is a political system where you can express your views and do not worry about -- and you do not have to worry about being arrested or tortured. but i think we have to be careful in the language that we use. the president is entitled to exercise the power of his office, and he is doing what he believes he is -- what he believes is right. you can disagree with him, but to challenge his legitimacy to maintain that office, to me, goes over the edge and is not appropriate. [applause] >> bluhm field business week,

the first issue in august noted that this $14 billion deficit problem that brought washington to a stop this summer was not really the problem that should be addressed. it is really the unfunded liability of about $211 billion -- or trillion dollars that should be looked at. it is the killer. will be a load on the economy that will come to a head the six to nine years from now. if you double the income taxes it will not make up for the deficit. is there any chance that there is political responsibility to take on this issue in the next few years? >> letty broaden that question because -- let me broaden that

question because we have a huge budget problem in washington. our budget system does not work well. do not let that distract us from trying to get what is known as the grand bargain or the $1.2 trillion deficit reduction. we have to get that done. it is important to manage our debt so that it does not exceed a certain amount of our economy. that we need to do, but we also need to correct our budget system in washington. it is badly broken i think you put your finger on the number- one problem. that is, the united states of america uses a cash basis accounting system for its budget. it does not use coal accounting. for those of you with business background, you know that really small businesses sometimes use cash accounting. once you get into any larger

sized business you going to look role -- accrual accounting i think we need to move more towards accrual accounting that -- and that speaks to the issue that you raised. we have a lot of accrued responsibilities. but on the other side of the ledger we pay cash for a building that is going to last a long time. we do not get the credit for capital expenditures that work to even out some of the accrual responsibilities that we have. we need to balance it out better and use more water is called general accounting principles in the way we present our budget. the other side of the argument has always been that the government is the government and we have such a large impact on the economy that every dollar is the same whether it is trust money or non-trust money.

that is an economic argument that i disagreed with. i agree with your point and i think we need to change our budget system. when i was in the house i worked with jim nussle, a republican from iowa and the budget director under george w. bush. the two of us worked in a very non-partisan way and brought out a budget recommendations that move us towards accrual accounting. i think that is what we need to get back to. >> senator cardin, thanks for coming. everything you said today seems very reasonable to me. i have one area of concern and that is with medicare a bandage. i am concerned that congress has departed from the simple concept of justice, the concept of fairness and having reimbursement rates for all seniors that are fair. is there anything in the current law that senator obama signed

into law that will address that problem? and how many years will it take to get us back to a fair system? >> let me try to answer this question because it is a little complicated. medicare advantages the private insurance option under medicare. if you are in traditional medicare, and as you know most seniors are in traditional medicare, and you are subject to a reimbursement system. the other option is to go to medicare part b and pay a separate premium for that and you can go into medicare part d for prescription drugs. instead of going into the government insurance program you can go into private insurance. the private insurance company must provide all the benefits in medicare, but they always provide some additional benefits. you give up some of your freedom

of choice. it is a managed-care program. you get additional benefits and you may pay additional costs depending on the plan you are in. it may cover prescription drugs and it may be part d also. if you go into the plan, you will generally pay your part the premium plus some. the government subsidizes the managed care plan. here's the rub. the government subsidizes the medicare advantage plan by more than it subsidizes those that are in traditional medicare. we are paying more money to the private insurance companies than we do subsidizing the majority of the people that are in medicare and pose a traditional plan. there is a second problem. for those who are in part because -- in part b, which is

99% of seniors, you are paying a higher premium because you are also subsidizing those that are in medicare advantage. that is just not fair in the affordable care act we started to equalize it. we do not equalize it in because it would have to dramatic an impact, but we start to reduce the disparity. you may have heard during the affordable care act, there were political science being put in the accused president obama of cutting medicare. the largest part of that was in the reductions of the subsidies to the private insurance companies. the second part of the criticisms were that he reduced rates, for example, to hospitals because medicare was paying for uncompensated care. as we go to affordable care, everyone in the system will be

left with compensated care. we are trying to equalize it over time, but we are moving in the direction of the affordable care act. >> i am a registered democrat. welcome to charlestown. >> thank you. >> my question is, what is your interpretation of the tea party? [laughter] >> i thought we were going to have from the question here. [laughter] -- i thought we were going to have friendly questions here. [laughter] let me make the point that the tea party is hard to generalize. but it was clear in the elections that people were upset by what was happening in government. too many people have lost their jobs, lost their homes.

too many people felt that things should have been better and they were upset. and they have had various frustrations. some of them, quite frankly, believe in less government. they would like to see as reduced expectations of what government should do. others are perhaps anti-democrat and they were making -- looking for a way to make inroads against democrats. and clearly, there were some pretty conservative elements that seize upon those opportunities and the tea party has become a home to a pretty conservative group. they have a significant number in the house of representatives, perhaps as many as 80 members of the house of 435 that have identified themselves as tea party members of the house.

the manner in which the house of representatives operates, that is, speaker boehner, the speaker of the house, relies upon his republican conference in order to develop plans. the tea party members have a tremendous amount of influence in the house of representatives. in the united states senate, there are a few members will identify as tea party members, but they do not have anywhere near the amount of influence in the senate chamber as they do in the house. in the 2012 elections will be the future of the tea party? i do not know. i truly do not. it will be a factor in the nomination process right now for the nominee for the president on the republican side and is playing a major role in a lot of primary elections throughout the country on the republican side. it is not having as much of an influence on the democrat side. what impact it will have in the

elections, i do not know. >> just by raising hand, how many people here are watching the tea party to see whether they are doing a good job? >> i will not put anybody to the test here. i think everybody has been views. i do not disagree with the right for the view to be represented. i just think the tea party has had more impact in the house of representatives than they should. as 80 members, they should have the impact of 80 members. and i think members should have broader views. i am old fashioned. i believe that after the elections are over you should work across party lines to get things done, and we have a

responsibility to do that. [applause] i believe in compromise. i will not compromise my principles, but i will compromise to get things done. those of you to know my record know that i have crossed party lines to get benefits it with medicare or retirement savings done. i have crossed party lines with a lot if human rights -- a lot of human rights issues. the last year has been painful. it has just been painful. >> senator cardin, can you give us an idea of how many eligible voters voted in the midterm elections? from what i understand it was very small, so that means very few of us elected the tea party. >> first, let me say, we did have a small number in the midterms. in 2012, we expect there to be a much larger vote. but i must tell you, i do not

understand why people do not vote. if you want to protest, come out and vote for would you think should be in office. i can tell you having seen what is happening in the middle to wo select their own government, in america, we say of the weather is bad outside, we will not vote, if the weather is nice, we will do other things. we do everything in the world to avoid voting. in the midterm election -- >> the federal government has grown rapidly over the last several decades, and it seems to be expanding without bound. do you first agree that we have

to limit the size of federal government. and would you support some sort of hiring freeze on the federal government to help hold the growth down? >> i think it is critically important that the federal government reduce its spending. i think that we can't lose sight of our principal responsibility at this moment, to get our economy back on track. we have to create more jobs. our top priority needs to be job growth. i look at our schools, roads, energy, research, the high

priority programs. we also want to maintain public safety. we need to do it in a smart way. freezes are unprecedented at the national level. we have a hiring freeze in almost every agency of government right now.

people that leave, lose jobs, they are remaining vacant. the government sector employment has dropped. every month, we have more and more jobs, the public sector has shown declines in jobs. we have over 300,000 federal workers in maryland and it is critically on foreign to our country. these are dedicated men levin -- men and women dealing with health care and creating food for a lot of families, creating jobs. i will be supporting their efforts because i think it is important for america's future. i agree with your premise, but we are actually losing employment.

>> we have time for two more brief questions. >> i was wondering if you have any correspondence or work with andy harris. >> i work with every member of our congressional delegation, and i'm close to senator mikulski. three congressmen for the baltimore region, key players in the house of representatives work closely with the ranking democrat on the intelligence committee.

steady hoyer is known for not only his strong leadership, but his ability to work across party lines. one of the best bridge builders we have. one of the brightest scions mind that we have in the house of representatives, environmental policies in the house on the republican side. and the newest member of our delegation we are trying to work

together to bridge some of our differences. the voting references are certainly very different. we have tried to work together as a team of maryland tries to represent the people. >> i want to thank you on behalf of all of us. i want to make a suggestion about the reason why there is such a low turnout is low was flecked with which congress is generally held. i wonder if this is due to the fact that some of the congressmen are more concerned about party than they are about

people. for more concerned about getting reelected than the good of the country. [applause] >> i agree with you about the low image of congress, but i will take exception to the turn out of the polls. we have never had a great turnout for midterm elections. perhaps it contributed in this midterm, but i don't understand why people don't vote. don't sit home and complain. there is no excuse for not voting, and i hope people vote in the 2012 elections. i couldn't agree with you more, i think your assessment is right on target. this may sound self-serving, but i did not get elected to the

senate to get reelected to the senate. i got elected to the senate to do things. it is an incredible body. it is a great honor and an opportunity. i don't want to waste a single moment. not a moment of getting things done. i am as frustrated as you are. i am not so sure it is a real election issue as it is my way or the highway tie. the senate was built on a compromise from the very first day. abraham lincoln was one of the greatest presidents of the history of america, it is a compromise that built this great country. we want perfect when we started. women could not vote.

we have figured out a way to get through all of that. people who felt differently didn't take the marbles and go home, they did as best they could. that is what this system needs to be about. to me, it is about using the opportunity. the greatest honor of my life was the voters of maryland's telling me to represent them in the united states senate. if everyone with a relaxed a little bit and listen to each other, recognize that compromise is not a nasty word. let's get things done to move this nation forward, maintain our principles. understand it might take more than one day.

if we do that, the reputation of congress will go up. let the elections take care of themselves. you will figure it out and you'll vote for the people that you think did the right thing. i have voted thousands of times. there were prole tons of times you disagree with my votes. does the way life is. i voted against the war in iraq because the thought was the wrong thing for america to do. you need to stand up for what you believe in, but use the system the way it was meant to be used. your question is right on target. congress should look very carefully at our approval

ratings. the way we are conducting business in washington is not what the people of this nation want, and we have to change that. [applause] >> thank you for coming here, thank you for your words. >> 0 was a pleasure to be here. if i officiate if. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> 0, my goodness. you have to be kidding me. >> [inaudible] >> i agree with you, we have to have secure borders. i wasn't aware of that. i will check it out.

>> why do they make maryland a hangout for these people? >> i will check it out. i could have mentioned that, there are no cuts in retirement benefits. there is nothing in the first round, no automatic illustrations. there is no question. i guarantee you that. >> thank you so much. >> mandating americans to buy government insurance policy, will the ever come around? >> i think it could come up, not

this time. >> congress returns this week from its summer recess, and tomorrow, we will talk about the congressional agenda. and we discuss health polling is done and analyzed. and a look at a new jersey law that gives students the ability to anonymously report bullies to police. and with unemployment at over 9%, president obama will outline his jobs plan. we will have live coverage starting at 7:00 p.m. eastern.

in 1844, henry clay lost, but he changed political history. he is one of the 14 men featured in of the inflow of the contenders. this week, live from his kentucky home. freshman republican senator might leak that constituents in utah last week. topics included the economy, deficit, and what is ahead when congress returns. he has introduced a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget. this is about 90 minutes. >> we have a beautiful state, most of it is beautiful. some of it less than others. i want to thank senator overland for introducing me and helping

set this up. all of the citizens that of been supportive of this. dave taylor, the city manager. i want to thank channel 10, and i am grateful for c-span for being here tonight. it is good for them to be concerned about utah politics and making sure they are aware of what we are concerned about here. it is a pleasure to be here in the peterson dance hall. the year that we became a state was a significant year. we went through a transformation. week left the stage of being a territory of the united states where our laws were subject of congress. we had to act with the

permission of congress and was always subject to veto by congress at any moment. all of a sudden, we were our own sovereign entity. the difference between a state power and a federal power was spelled out in this document. this document that has fostered the development of the greatest civilization ever known tells us where state power comes an end where federal power comes in. this was an important year because that is when we became a steak. we are still claiming the benefits of statehood. what i would like to do if it is ok, i would like to talk about the things we have been dealing

with in congress. that is the most important thing we will do tonight. you will see me taking notes from time to time. and we can know how best to respond in congress and i can serve you as a u.s. senator. shortly before we left washington a few weeks ago, to meet with constituents, we have dealt with in the deficit issue. you may have heard a thing or two about that in the news. we voted to raise the debt limit. to authorize annual amount of money that congress can borrow to an unprecedented degree. i would like to say some people

here in utah don't make $2.50 trillion hellhole year. that is the amount that congress is able to borrow. it has borrowed almost $15 trillion. year, our t willlated national deb be about $15 trillion. we do not use the word trillion in our day to day vocabulary. to put it in perspective, if you divide 15 trillion by 300 million americans, it works out to $50 -- to $50,000 a head. that includes people who are retired, infants, students, in addition to those who are working and paying taxes. if you measure it according to taxpayers, it could be everywhere -- anywhere to $160,000 per taxpayer.

that is a lot of money. at some point, tt becomes a problem. i voted against the debt limit increase because i did not think the legislation that authorized it did enough to take care of the underlying problem. it did not do enough to make sure we were not back in the same position a few months from now, or a year or two from now. it did not solve the underlying problem members of congress have. members of congress want to please their constituents. but it will do is approved a lot of spending, sometimes spending a lot more money than congress has. we have been bringing in about $2.20 trillion a year in tax revenue. we have been spending about $3.70 trillion a year. that difference is all made up for in borrowing. the reason that is such a problem is that at some point we will reach the limit not of our statutory borrowing power, not

the limit of what congress says it will allow itself to borrow. we will reach, at some point, the natural limits of our mathematical borrowing power. people will stop lending us money, at least not without charging us much higher interest rates. as that starts to happen, we will accelerate dramatically the rate at which we are moving to the day that h been acknowledged by the white house as something we are likely to hit the next decade or so, spending a trillion dollars every year just in interest on national debt. we are spending right now a little over $200 billion in interest. that is a lot of money. a trillion dollars is five times that amount. that is more money than we spend on national defense and a year. it is more than we spend in social security in a year. it is more than we spend on medicare and medicaid combined.

the closer we get to that moment, the more we potentially place in jeopardy everything. that money will have to come from somewhere. we will have to make up the difference somewhere. it will end up having to come from every federal program. we cannot borrow more at that moment. if we do that, our interest rates will jump so high we will not be able to borrow any more. we will find ourselves in a worse position. our tax system has prove capable of producing only about 18.5% of the money that mos through the economy every year. raising taxes might make some difference in the short run. in the long run, it is not point to make a difference and may damage us. we would have to make more severe and chromatic cuts and we would prefer to make. if we start the process now, and put in place the balanced budget amendment that will require

congress to put itself on a sustainable course toward balancing its budget, the cuts we will have to make will be more manageable. there will be more compassionate. they will be less likely to have adverse impacts on the most vulnerable members of society. those are some of the reasons why i voted no on the debt limit deal. i believe we should have had a balanced budget amendment. it should have been submitted to the states. with that introduction, let's open up the floor to questions. i am going to take off my jacket, if nobody expects. it is kind of hot, even re. i kissed the back from being on the -- i just got back from

meeting with e county commissioners. a beautiful place. the resources up there are phenomenal. i found it easy to imagine what it might look like with a reservoir there. i appreciate the county commissioners letting me see it. i saw a hand up. do we have a microphone? >> i am a long time libertarian. in has been a while i have been mu in this mess come about. we are currently living in a welfare state, as far as i am concerned. we have five unconstitutional wars going on. i cannot keep track. we apparently had troops on the ground in libya befor we said

we did. we are involved in all kind of stuff. we have 170 countries we are currently occupying with our military. when are we going to bring these people home, reinforced these borders with our people if we have to, and stop the bleeding of this nation anduit exporting our jobs? because of what obama has done, i would expect you to start the impeachment process on him for what he has done. that is important. >> tnk you. [applause] addressed quite a few issues. lete scribble some of this down as we're talking. i want to start on one of the final points you made that ties a lot of it together. you referred to jobs.

a lot of what we deal with in washington, a lot of the most important things we deal with, relate to job creation and job preservation. a lot of the things we do could make the job market worse than it already is. the cannot afford that. we needed to get better as quickly as we possibly can. we made itorse rather than better when we pretend to the federal government that we can take yr money, send it to washington, work through our own process, take our cut -- exactly. when we try, it makes it worse. that is a problem. i agree with you there. your comments directed to our presence overseas -- i think part of the natural process that will occur as we move in the direction of a balanced budget will be a waddling down of some of the things we do through our

military. people have asked in the past what of the sacd cows, what cannot be cut. people assume because of the political party i am a member of that i would say defense is a sacred cow that cannot be touched under any circutance. we have to look for efficiency in every corner of government. in order for our system of government to survive, we have to make it more efficient. we cannot afford to be fighting other people's wars. we cannot afford to be fighting a war for which there has never been in military jusfication expressed, much less a proper constitutional declaration of war. [applause] >> you say that you are for a balanced budget amendment. don't you think that is dangerous? wouldn't it beetter if we just follow the constitution and stop

spending money on things for which the federal government has no mandate, and get rid of a lot of things like the fda, the usda, the department of education? you could get rid of a lot of stuff that is not constitutional, and stop foreign aid subsidies -- foreign aid, subsidies to farmers and businesses. we could keep a lot of money in our pockets of that happened. we would be spending a lot less money. [applause] >> thank you. that is an excellent point. what is your name? but he makes an excellent point here. i do not know how well you could hear in the back. betting makes the poi -- why do we need a balanced budget amendment when we have constitution already and the

constitution, if followed, would put congress on a course that would stay focused on the few responsibilities given in the constitution, like weights and measures, regulating trade between the states, trademarks, copyrights and patents, and so forth? you raise a valid point. re is why i nevertheless think we need to amend the constitution. that document, and particularly that part of the document that tells congress its jobs are limited and its responsibility exists within a limited sphere has been so overlooked over such a prolonged time that we have almost forgotten as a society -- some of us feel passionate about these things. but we have lost sight of it. we have assumed there is no job that is too big or too small for congress to handle. members of congress do not like to balance the budget beuse it makes them less powerful. it makes it more difficult for

them to look constituents in the eye and say that looks like a good project that would benefit a loof people, and we cannot do it. they do not like to say no. until we restrict their authority to engage in deficit spending, they will not. we know that sed on a side track record in whi they have dollar by dollar mortgaged the future of our unborn children and grandchildren. they have spent money they do not have and buried our prosperity under a mountain of debt. it is a form of taxation without representation. the last time i checked, we fought and won that war. we need to win that victory by restricting congress's ability to borrow. [applause] >> mike webster. -- laid webster -- glade webster.

can you elaborate on the narrows project? we have been trying to get it here for over 80 years. it makes too much sense. >> i hesitate to answer the question from the same promise you started with. i do not think there is anything i can do to force it through. it is not quite the sort of thing that is amenable to being forced. it is something that is important to the residents of this county, and something the residents have waited pretty patiently for over the last 80 years, as you mentioned. it is something you waited for even in 1944, when the residents here were ready for that to be completed. but they put that off in order for some work to be done in schofield so that schofield

would not fail, which would jeopardize a rail line going through there. as i understand it, the environmental impact statement will be up. we expect aecord of decision could be issued by sometime early next year. when that happens, the process will move forward. there may be some litigation. there is nothing i can do to force it through beyond that process. if there is litigation, that will have to work its way to court. we have to have a couple of things happen. the record of decision has to be issued. litigation, if any -- litigation, if any, will have to be complete. i hope we are able to get that done promptly. we have had an awful lot of litigation. as i understand it, the water rights are not in dispute. they have been settled. they have been deemed to belong

to the residents of the county. i am optimistic that this will come to a resolution. a lot of that will depend on how the litigation goes. i will get to people in the back of the roo i just realized. >> i only have six or seven things here. [laughter] the president has agreed that the [unintelligible] he is going to propose a value added tax. however, he wants it on top of the income tax. is there anything you could do? [unintelligible] can you stop him from doing that? [unintelligible]

>> it is not the super committee. this is a top-level administration official. i know who you are talking about. i cannot remember his name at the moment, but i know who you mean. this is a presidential appointee who has been an outspoken advocate of what is referred to as the value added tax think of that kind of like a sales tax placed on items that youuy in the store, whether as a consumer or as a business, if you are buying a business in put and adding value to a product before you resell it. you are taxed on it, and a tax is imposed on it before the next person. value-added taxes are common throughout europe. they are frequently placed on top of income taxes.

i refer t this sometimes as burning the candle at both ends. they want to get more revenue than they can get through an income tax. they create the illusion that people are taxed less than they actually are. people who are paying income tax are paying a value added tax. the product has gone to several of the cycles where people have had a value added at different stages of the business input cycle. the product might be a lot more expensive. lot of the expenses related to government. i oppose that. i think we need to pick a horse and ride it as a country. [applause] what i mean is we either need to stick with an income tax system, which needs to be simplified so it does not occupy tens of thousands of pages.

nobody has ever read that thing. if they did, they would probably die. on the other hand, we need to go to a national sales t model, the fair tax, as they're referred to it. i would forcibly oppe that. i will likely oppose the confirmation of people who are in a position to bring about policy changes like that if they support those. that said, i looked at each nominee on his or her o merits. i haveet to that this nominee, whose name i cannot remember at the moment. i share your concern about a value added tax. [applause] >> was your hand up back there? we had a hand up. yes? >> senator, thanks for being here. i have three questions. >> you are the mayor? >> a balanced tax -- do you see

it coming forward again? the fair tax, you mentioned a little bit about it. but we do not tax 51% of the people in the country. the third thing is immigration. what are we going to do to protect the borders? it is two parts, protecting the borders, but then figuring out what to do with the people who live here. i am more concerned about protecting the borders. bu with a dictation from washington this last week, we are not going to take action on those people who are already here, unless they break some felony law, or something like that. >> i want to make sure i have got all of this. >> spending taxes instead of

bill and rising a particular group. >> these are all good questions. first, your question on the cup -- the cut, cap, and balance act -- this is a bill i introduced in the senate a couple of months ago. what it said was we will raise the debt limit to the degree the president has asked, because he is the president. much as some people may or may not want somebody else in there, he is the president. but we will raise it onlunder the right conditions, that will address the underlying problem and make sure we are not always accruing more debt, make sure we do not reach the point where we cannot find anything, fm entitlements to defense, from social security, medicare, and medicaid, to the celeries of marines. those conditions are we need to

propose a balanced budget amendment to the constitution, adopt a statutory spending caps to put us on a smooth path toward a balanced budget, and make immediate cuts. it almost does not matter how large they are. but we need a down payment right now, cuts that are real, and not smoke and mirrors. your question related to whether or not we will bring that back up -- it wadisappointing. i introduced it in the senate. a week later, a friend of mine from utah's third decade -- third district introduced it in the house of representatives. the house of representatives passed it. it then went over to the senate. the senate tabled it, meaning they pushed it aside so they did not even have to vote on it. there were members of the senate who did not want the pressure

associated with it. they knew it would be popular. according to cnn, three out of four americans believe we should have a balanced budget amendment. a comparable number of americans believe we should not have raised the debt limit. i continue to insist it is this approach that could have saved us, would have saved us, from a credit downgrade. i will continue to push for that very same approach. i do not know whether we will be able to get teed up for a straight up or down vote in the senate. will continue to sound the message so it cannot be ignored, as it was a few weeks ago. as to taxes, making our tax system fair, it is difficult when you have a tax system in which only about half of americans are paying anything. at that point, and youave a situation in which it becomes too easy for some americans to

be tricked into thinking that government is free. it is especially worrisome from the standpoint of those who are at the middle and low end of the economic spectrum. we worry about tax increases and rising top marginal tax rates, not because we are worried about the ability of the rich to survive and thrive. they will find a way to do that, one way or another. we are worried about the impact on the people who end up paying the higher tax rates, either in terms of increased costs of food and services, or on unemployment or underemployment or lower wages. it is the way it ends up happening. we trick people into thinking big government is free, when it is not. it ends up having an aggressive -- having a regressive effect, a tax on middle income earners. that is one reason why we have

to reform our tax system, make it simpler, and make it more equitable, so everybody has an opportunity to participate. finally, as to immigration, i sometimes say that problems arise in government not just with federal government ignores the fact that there are certain things it is not supposed to do, things that are supposed to be left to the states, rather than being done at the federal level. that can also happen when the federal government t so busy doing things it is not supposed to do that it forgets to do the things it is supposed to do, like protect our national security interests and our border. we've not been doing that. here is the problem. here is one reason you have not seen and likely will not see anything we could describe as a comprehensive immigration reform package. this leaves a bad taste in the mouths of members of congress. a few years ago, they tried to

do comprehensive immigration reform. some have described it as an amnesty or backdoor amnesty. you referred to another form of amnesty the president is proposing through his policy of the people who may be here illegally, but we may leave them here anyway unless they have committed a violent act. people have such a bad taste in their mouth, based on all these forms of back door amnesty, but they do not want to do any of that. what i am trying to do is look for surgical strikes into the problem so we can figure out wherehe problem areas are. we need to fix legal immigration, make it more possible. i will be introducing legislation soon. i think we will call it the

dairy and sheepherder act. it was the best acronym we could think of over the circumstances. it would make it easier for migrant labor to come in to do certain jobs, recognizing this is cyclical, seasonal labor. i will have a few other bills that try to fix legal immigration. i also co-spsoring the legislation that would end the automatic birthright citizenship practice we have adopted in this country. [applause] in the red. yes, sir. >> it goes along with what he said and you are saying. you said you want surgical strikes on immigration and things like this, focus on how you can do it. if you feed a cougar out your back door, he is going keep coming. if you keep feeding him, he is

going to bring his friends. that is one of the problems we have. rightow, according to the congressional budget office, we are spending their $500 billion to feed, clothe, take care of housing, take care of all this for non-documented residents in this country. isn't that a place where we can say if you are not legal you do not get social assistance? i know they say they do not get it out of social security. if you look to the back door, the refugee account is paid out ofhe social security administration. one non-documented resident can get $2,40 of social security. i see a lot of seniors here. most of them are tapped out at $1,100. is that a place we can look at? the second part to what was said

here -- with the flat tax resolve most of our issues in this country? [applause] >> your second question is easy. the answer is yes. flat taxes would make a lot of things better. the first part of your question. back to immigration. you are absolutely right. if we incentivize illegal immigration -- we have been this incentivizing legal immigration, which is what we want. i hope will always be a country of immigrants. most of us in this room, including myself, are descendants of immigrants or immigrants ourselves. one of my ancestors came across from europe's, one of the original settlers of the county. we want always to be a nation of

immigrants. we want them to come to the front door, not the back door. we incentivize them to come to the back door when we make it difficult to come to the front door, and then we reward them for coming through the back door, which we do not want. we need to be vigilant about not giving entitlement benefits th are intended for american citizens to people who are not legally in this country. if you listed some of the reasons why that can be circumvented. it is also true that because we grant automatic birthright citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants who are going here in the united states, that is another way illegal immigrants can end up receiving a entitlement benefits intended for citizens. i cannot emphasize enough the need for us to close this loophole with automatic birthright citizenship. i am not aware of any other developed nation that has the

same picy we do. it is not a constitutional imperative. it can be fixed by statute. i failed to mention another issue we need to focus on, which is border enforcement. one of the reasons we have a border that is as porous as it is -- if you look at the southern border of the united states with mexico, and you look at where most of the illegal immigration crossings are taking place, people walking across the rder, most of them happen to coincide in those areas where most of the borderland is federally owned. within federally owned border areas, a majority of that land, or nearly a majority, is environmentally protected in one way or another, such that border patrol agents have restrictions on their abilityo enforce the

law there. they can do anything they want on private property. if you on land adjacent to the border, they can come onto your land, no matter how much you value your petunias and daisies you have carefully planted. they can stop all over them to enforce the border. but if it is federally owned and there is an endangered or threatened species, the cannot do anything. they are restricted to a tiny corridor where there is a little path. that is one of the main reasons our border is so porous. we have to fix the problem. i am working to try to close that loophole. [applause] >> nator, good to see you here. we have met. a couple of years ago. it is good to see you standing here as the first u.s. senator to ever visit fairview, i think.

i will just turn in on this. the border -- i doubt it could be enforced as long as there is a demand within the country. you would have to set up machine-gun nests and things like that to stop it. it cannot betopped. i notice you are" sponsoring one of the -- are co-s ponsoring one of the e-verifys. i hope you will explain that. are you proposing that legal immigration -- that we increase the numbers? what i am asking is would we be using legal and illegal immigration to continue to depress wages? that is what is being done. wages are depressed because of immigration.

what do you think is going to happen concerning the national e-verify? are you going to get that move along? >> first, is the idea to enhance legal and menace -- legal immigration to depress wages, to intentionally bring in more people. the objective is not to increase the total number of immigrants, as much as it is to identify those we are going to admit, to have a transparent policy that can be evenhandedly applied in a way that we are not making it so difficult and time-consuming and impossible for people to get a visa. when we do that, we incentivize illegal immigration. that does not necessarily mean we are bringing in more people. it has nothing to do with a desire to depress wages. it is a desire to enforce the rule of law and bring people in

through the front door. as to the part of your question that relates to e-verify, i am sponsoring legislation that would make compliance with that progm mandatory. what that means in essence is that most employers -- i think there probably should be, at the end of the day, a safe harbor for release small employers. employers, as they do now, continue to gaer information, and can find out whether the person they are hiring is entitled to work in the unid states. that would need to be cross- checked on this database. employers would be held harmless ones they had taken the step to do that. that is another step we need to take to make sure we are complying with the law, enforcing existing laws. i agree there is a lot we can do by enforcing the border. as long as there is tremendous demand for illegal paper, --

illegal liquor, and people feel it can be overlooked because it always has been in the past, in the case of some employers who have had that experience, we will continue to have this problem. yes, sir. >> i want to apologize. one of this up a minute ago, i did not commend you on the work you are doing. you're making us proud. >> thank you. [applause] >> i have two things that are related. the small arms trade treaty -- what is going on there? >> i am against it. >> good deal. and what can you do to get these people to confess about fast and furious and how high it went?

thank you. >> let us pretend that one of us does not know what fast and furious is. [laughter] would that be you? >> yes, sir. [laughter] >> vatfe was instrumental in allowing firearms dealers on the border states to sell guns, knowing that they were illegal, and these guns walked across the border a border patrol agent was killed with one of those guns. >> thank you for pointing th

out. i did not know it by that name. i know that set of circumstances. it is awful. it is being investigated. i fully believe those who violated the law will be brought to justice. it is inexcusable. >> he got transferred. >> he got reassigned. >> that was awful. it just goes to show that government, when it runs amok, can be the source of an untold amount of grief and pain. this is awful and inexcusable. i will do everything i can to follow up on that and bring those people to justice. i oppose and will vote against the small arms treaty. this young lady has been waiting patiently. i have to make sure i get to her. >> my name is suzanne bean. i own a small business, a newspaper.

>> i had better be nice to you, then. >> lots of people here have already vilified me. it's fine. would you absolutely foreclose the option of increasing revenue by making the tax system a little more progressive, more like he used to be 20, 30 years ago, and using that as part of the strategy to balance the budget? i have heard, and they do not have the verification of this, that if social security, the social security tax, was applied against all income, and not just the first $75,000, that the additional revenue would be enough to make the system solvent. i am 62.

i am planning to work another five to seven years. the time is going to come when i will need to collect that. i am worried about whether it is going to be there for me. if it is not, i do not know any more about how i and when to manage than the illegal immigrant who is here and cannot work and hasn't got the money to go back and has nowhere else to go. that is my first estion. my second is aut the american dream act. we have some extraordinarily talented young people in our country. some of them are at our local college. they did not come here of their own accord. many of them were brought here as children. they have gone through our school system. they have skills to contribute.

yet they cannot, even with a bachelor's, master's, ph.d. -- the cannot legalize. as a journalist, i am appalled of the situation of the pulitzer prize winner who did not know until he was an adult that he was an illegal immigrant. now he cannot really function legally in the united states. what is your response on that? >> you have three questions. no additional charge for efficiency. on the first point it the question is, i opposed to anything that would enhance revenue, the answer is i am not opposed to anything just because it would enhance revenue, in the sense that it would stabilize our revenue base and thereby bring in a more steady, consistent flow of revenue, bring in more than we have got

now. we are in a valley. our tax system has peaks and valleys. some years, we will bring in 14.5% of all the money that flows through the economy. the most we ever get is about 19.5% of gdp. it averages 18 to 18.5%. we tend to not be able to get any more than that. we could, if we flatten the rate, making it more stable. we could if we simplified it. if we kept marginal rates constant but close loopholes, we uld bring in more revenue without having to raise anyone's rate. that would make it more stable. it would make it so this 18.5% would be more reliable. it would not be so likely to fluctuate. if the question is what i make if the question is what i make it more