what i want to do is, and said a spending my time on leadership, want to focus on the issues i care most about. i would like to work with the democrats and find a place to put our nuclear wastes permanently. we are stuck on that. we are closed down yucca milton. we need a permanent repository. we need to work across party lines to do that. i believe we can do that. >> we've seen bipartisan efforts in the spring and summer, most notably the gang of six trying to get a big debt deal. they got a lot of attention. 36 are supportive. they never followed through. they do not have a legislative draft of their language. they're not close to putting

something on the floor for a vote. how do you go from the debate society view of what should happen to actually getting something accomplished? >> people who have not been a part of the senate do not understand it operates by unanimous consent. each senator has about the same amount of influence. what i can do is make it easier for them to succeed. when the gang of six announced its report, i endorsed it. it is a small thing, but it helped get credibility. i joined the 37 senators who urged them to go as big as they can. when you get 1/3 of senators from both parties agreeing on something important, that is a really big step. i will be focusing on a result. instead of just making speeches, i will do what i can to see if they can get to a

result. i will try to support it even if it is not perfect. >> what does the leadership focus on, if not results? >> the leadership has to take positions that reflect the caucus feelings at the moment. soon after i came to the senate, we were stuck with the nuclear option. republicans were going to hold up the senate because the democrats were filibustering president bush's judicial nominee. i made a couple of speeches that suggested if seven democrats and seven republicans would not filibuster any nominees, it would take it out of the hands of the leaders. that was the beginning of the gang of 14. that made it possible for most of the president's nominees to be confirmed. that is the kind of thing. >> some have said this is an about face for you to move up the leadership ranks. there have been stories that said if you had been assured of

the whip spot in the next race that you would have stayed in your current post after january. >> that is not true. i could stay in my current post for another two and a half years. i am eligible to do that. i am elected until next year. i think we're all political accidents in the senate. when i wake up in the morning, i think it is a great privilege. how can i make the best use of this time? i have enjoyed my leadership time. i think i can do more with my independence back. i will be a good republican. i always have been. if i can get a 100% republican solution, i would. >> are you buying -- eyeing a chairmanship? >> of course. you get those by seniority. if i am chairman of the couple of committees and have been here nine or 10 years, hopefully

i have enough respect in my own caucus and with the democrats so that when clean air, debt, or nuclear waste issues come up, i can get a coalition that will get us to 60 votes. that will help the leaders to succeed in the senate to function better. >> is part of the problem with the senate that there are not enough people trying to build bridges across the aisle? how much has that changed in the 8 1/2 years you have been here? >> we have gotten into a habit of making our speeches, of proving our credentials. after we do that, the people expect us to get results. it comes to what we need on roads, debt, taxes, or israel.

people expect us to perform better than the iraqi parliament in its first days. >> how do you measure up so far, the senate? >> the senate is not as productive as it could be, but it is more productive than it looks like. in the last few weeks, we have passed a patent bill. that helps with jobs. we passed extensions to highways and the airport bill. we would ratify the three trade agreements with panama, colombia, and south korea. >> the patent bill was last revised in the 1950's. it took 60 years. the faa bill has been on autopilot for eight years or 18, i do not quite remember. when you say these are examples of efficiency, i am wondering if that is really what you mean. >> i did not use the word

efficiency, i hope. there's nothing efficient about the senate, nor has there ever been. it was designed to slow things down. it does a good job of that. if the senate passed every crazy idea every offers, we would all be bound up. the senate is designed to slow things down and the break -- and liberate. what is wrong with the senate is that we are not voting. harry reid does not like the democrats to vote on anything controversial. that makes me wonder why they're here. when senator baker and senator byrd were in charge, almost any sinister to offer any amendment and they voted long into the night. now we barely vote. that is one thing that is wrong. second, we do not know each other across party lines well enough to find out where we have common interests. but partisanship is not a goal of mine, read by partisanship -- bipartisanship is not a gold mine, but it is essential.

harry reid is the majority leader. he can schedule a vote anytime he wants. this last week, he has manufactured a crisis on disaster aid. it is a cynical thing for him to do. he knows the house is going to send us all of the money we need to approve for the rest of this year. the senate appropriations committee has already approved all of the money the president's disaster declarations and fema have approved. we will approve more if needed. we could have been spending this week on the jobs bill if senator reid had brought it to the floor. >> you have said that congress does not do comprehensive well, the big things.

looking at the $15 trillion in debt, that is a comprehensive issue. how do you rewire congress to be able to do comprehensive well? >> we do not do comprehensible. we will have to reduce the debt step-by-step. step one was what nobody liked but what i think was a good step. the deal in august, the budget control act, took 39% of the budget, the discretionary funding, and over the next 10 years, it will grow a little less than the rate of inflation. you could argue is under control. 55% of the budget, mandatory spending, it is going up at three times spending.

we took a step to get 40% of the budget under control for the next 10 years. the super committee needs to take another step. i hope they work on entitlements. that is where the problem is. >> is there any way the republicans might agree to a deal that increases government revenues? >> we will have to see. a number of republicans are going to wait to see what the proposal is before making that decision. speaking for myself, i have said that something like the simpson-bowles plan or the early gang of six principles that used about 20% of the revenues created by lowering the rates in getting rid of loopholes, the idea was to use about 20% of that to reduce the debt. that makes common sense to me. i think i can walk up and down the streets of tennessee and sell that to 99 out of 100 people. it increased revenues.

>> is that the same thing as increased taxes? >> i am not going to try to write the bill before i see it. i am not on that committee. i will reserve the option -- i hope they consider everything. i will not try to say yes or no to the bill before i can read it. >> how much do you think the new freshmen in the house and senate have changed the overall atmosphere? it feels as if the house, as if it is going to be difficult to pass anything that is not staunchly conservative, especially on debt and taxes. how much of the newcomers in both places changed the makeup of the place? >> they have made a real difference. that shows our political system works well.

what we have had for many years is a system where most of the forces were contributing towards spending more and a larger government. there were very few countervailing forces. the tea party movement and many of the new republicans have provided a new force that has said we will go the other direction. instead of talking about how much we will add, we are talking about how much we will cut. it is like turning a big locomotive around. my grandfather used to be a railroad engineer in kansas. his job was to take the engine on a round table and turn it around. that is kind of what we're doing. >> do you feel frustration with that wing of the party in trying to get things done? >> anybody who gets easily frustrated should not be a united states senator. >> but do you feel any sort of

frustration? >> i served in the body that literally operates by unanimous consent. anyone, the tea party senator or a socialist from vermont can stop the train. that can be frustrating if you are used to getting things done. we have to try to develop coalitions and find some way to get a result. that is what i enjoy doing. that is the reason i made the decision i made this week. >> you put forth bipartisan legislation to reduce the number of presidential appointees that need to be confirmed by the senate. how hard was that to get them? >> it was hard. all the best people in the senate have tried to do that for 20 years. senators reid and mcconnell tried to do it as whips.

we got it done. we made a step forward in bringing some sense to the confirmation process and hopefully getting an agreement that we would bring more bills to the floor and offer senators to offer more amendments and get more votes. the last part has not worked as well. i do not want to sound too partisan, but he does not want them to vote on controversial issues. i cannot understand that. i do not understand why they would not want to vote. >> it is if the case that senator mcconnell does not want to let anything passed by majority vote? >> he wants 60 votes. senator mcconnell believes most things required 60 votes. we could still get 60 votes. senator mcconnell will say to senator reid that if you will not let us vote, we will not let

you bring a bill to the floor. we could be operating the way the american people want. >> would you agree that sometimes the reason he does not want to bring a bill to the floor is because he is bringing a bill to the floor about funding national parks and someone wants to offer an abortion amendment? it is so far out of line with what the basic bill is that reid does not want to have you guys offering amendments just for the sake of having a controversial vote. >> in the 1980's when senator byrd and senator baker ran the senate, you did not have to check with them to offer an amendment. they would just opened a bill to an amendment most of the time. they might get 150 amendments and say, let's start voting.

one of them said the the senate is a place where you are supposed to be offered almost any amendment and have an unlimited amount of debate unless 60 senators cut it off. if the senator from oklahoma wants to offer a gun and minute, why can he not offer it? we can vote on it and go on to the next amendment. we have plenty of time. >> on stepping down in general, you said it would be liberating. what about being in leadership is not a leader -- liberating? >> you have to reflect the majority of your caucus. sometimes even the minority of your caucus. you have to work around -- if you are in the huddle and the

quarterback calls a play and you all go to the line, you cannot have everyone running off on different place. you all run on the same play. if mcconnell says to go left, i do not come out and go right. now i am free to do what i want to do. >> you do not like the way the senate is operating now under reid. want to see some changes. if things do not change, what does that mean for you running again in 2014? >> i plan to run again in 2014. i understood the senate when i came. you have to work to get things done. i worked for two years to pass the act about our our country can be competitive in the world. in china, the premier did it in a different way.

he assembled everyone in the great hall and said this is the way we're going to do it. in the united states committed to two years. you can say it is frustrating, but that is the way democracy works. >> are there any other issues below the radar of what we cover that you really want to work on? >> i would like to fix no child left behind. i would like for us to have clean air laws instead of the regulations that come out. i want to be a voice that says not to allow mandatory spending to go up three times inflation and squeeze out the national laboratories, college scholarships, and roads and bridges. i do not hear enough voices saying that in our party. i would like to be one of those. >> you have said there are not

enough voices to make that part of the republican program. >> we like to talk about taxes and regulation. that is what you talked about at the big dinners. i found out when george w. bush talked about education when he passed no child left behind, suddenly the american people gave republicans credit for being more interested in education than democrats. we are missing the boat if we do not talk about education and realize the research universities are essential to our standard of living and our future. >> do you hear that in this presidential campaign from what you have seen so far? where do you think of the candidate? >> i like the three governors. i am biased towards the governors. i think they each have shown strong leadership qualities. president obama has a great many admirable characteristics,

but he has never been an executive. he does not lead as the president should. he does not set a long-term agenda and focus on it long enough to leave the fortune -- country -- does not focus on it long enough to leave the country forward. i think the governors could do better on that. >> do you agree with governor. perry on his views on social security that it is a ponzi scheme? he has said that in the past. he has set in the past it should be a state option but has not said that lately. do you agree with mitt romney that some people should invest retirement funds privately in the stock market?

>> i have run for president one- and-a-half times and i will not get into that race. i like all three of them. perry has made some statements that do not sound completely presidential. i saw him the other night defend his immigration views before a hostile audience. i thought that was a presidential action. people are looking for a president who has a view, will stick to it, and try to lead us in a particular direction. >> governor perry has also said that the governor has never created a job. do you believe government -- has said the government has never created a job. >> the government creates an environment in which we should be making it easier and cheaper for the private sector to create jobs. i understand exactly what governor perry is saying. >> the government decides it is

going to spend $3 million to build a road. it sends the money to the state. the state hires construction workers. that is not creating a job? >> it is creating jobs, but that is not the goal. the goal of creating highways is not to create construction jobs. the goal is so that tennessee can have a good highway system so that suppliers can get to the nissan and volkswagen plants. when i was governor, we created a highway system to attract the automobile industry. we did not just do it to create jobs building roads. >> you did not really give us your views on social security. what do you think of the social security program? >> i think the social security program is in trouble. this year, it has more money

going out then coming in. it is in a lot less trouble than medicare. this year, you pay in $110,000 and medicare pays you $340,000. we should be able to make it solvent over the long term. i agree with the idea of doing it separately so we do not scare people in the process. our focus needs to be on medicare, medicaid, and other medical -- mandatory spending. >> do you think you could adequately get that message out to the public? the last few times people have cut medicare, there has been a violent reaction from the public. >> senator mcconnell went to the national press club when president obama was elected and offered to work with him on social security.

he never heard from the president about it. he and the president did not even have a one-on-one meeting for 18 months. that is mindboggling to me. the way to fix social security is for the president and republicans to agree on a way to do it. the way to get the debt down is the same. if the president were creating an environment for that to happen instead of playing politics and suggesting class warfare solutions, we could do better. >> what are the prospects for the super committee at work trying to come up with a debt reduction plan? >> i am optimistic. we need for them to succeed. the consequences of them not succeeding are pretty severe because of the built-in penalties. 1/3 of the senate has said we will do our best to support them. it would help of the president would say here are some common forms i would support. that would help a lot. >> thank you for being with us on "newsmakers."

we are back with our team of reporters -- two reporters. lamar alexander is stepping down in january from his leadership post as conference chairman. he says he wants by partisanship -- bipartisanship. -- bipartisanship. >> has a strong record of trying to work across party lines within the leadership. he and senator schumer work on legislation to cut down on the time consuming confirmation of presidential appointees. that is a relatively minor issue in the broad scheme of things, but anytime there is a desire to work across party lines, it increases the prospects. increases the prospects. the senate could become less gridlocked.

>> the long-term question is what he seems to be saying in his feeling liberated from leadership is whether the leadership itself is so bound to the party line that makes the prospects for his own future more difficult. he is going to most likely be replaced by john thune. jon kyl is 69. he will be replaced by the number 2 -- in the number of two position most likely by john cornyn. it could set up a team that is gender and more conservative. does that set up well for bipartisan cooperation? that is something we will see in the months and years to come. >> he said you have to do with

the quarterback says. did you hear that he did not like the play is being called? >> i did not hear that. he said there were a few occasions when he does not. no one goes into the leadership without understanding that you are part of the team. you are a cocaptain. your responsibility and obligation is to satisfy your constituent senators and in his case tennesseeans. electionng to have an in a little over a year. without knowing who is going to win, the next republicans could be responding to the play is a republican president is calling. we do not have any idea what that might mean either. >> what does this mean for legislation? viewers know there is the deficit reduction committee working on the $1.2 trillion in

savings. what does this mean for legislation coming down the pike? pike? >> he wants to be old- fashioned bridge across the aisle that kennedy was before he passed away. trent lott tried to do it earlier this decade. earlier this decade. the problem is that he admits we do not do comprehensive very well. he wants to try to do these big debt issues little by little and bit by bit. i am not sure if you can get away with doing by playing small ball because the problem is so big. >> thank you both for being on "newsmakers." >> in my opinion, the bounds of academic freedom have been pushed too far. >> the author suggests that the

job for life mentality needs to go. >> there are basically professors of cooking, professors of nutritional studies to have tenure now. when pressed, a professor telling -- towing the party line will say we need someone to have tenure in security studies so they can talk about immigration even though it is controversial. someone in nutritional studies needs to say something controversial about obesity. >> it that and other reasons you won't get to college education you paid for. >> tomorrow on "washington journal, a discussion on the foreign-policy views of the gop presidential candidates. then the state of the entrepreneurial marketplace. that conversation about the federal government's 47 job

training programs. that's "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> president obama told about 400 campaign donors on tuesday night he intends to win next year's election, but says there is work that needs to be done before then. he also spoke about the end to the military's don't ask, don't tell policy. he made these remarks at a fund- raiser in gotham holland new york city. this is one of several fund- raising events the president attended this week in new york for the un general assembly meeting. this is about 45 minutes. this is about 45 minutes.