caller: i have a question and comment. as the united states consider wikileaks a terrorist organization? were they responsible for cutting off the funding? when grover norquist was on, i thought that you let him babble, and the one person that call i am with numbers to dispute him, you cut him off.

guest: wilkleaks is not considered a terrorist organization. they have been cut off in terms of funding by credit-card organizations that sponsored them. host: aerospace, what is interesting about it? guest: held little al qaeda had to do with it. the day advocate the violent overthrow of these regimes. if you look at what has happened, these have been largely peaceful and driven by social media. al qaeda did not have an impact in the beginning. several months into the effort, you already see disillusionment sinking in. al qaeda is trying to get back

into the game, trying to exploit the disaffection, turning people towards these new movements. host: elaborate, and speak on the death of osama bin laden. >> eric summarized it quickly. the gap between early euphoria and expectations in the spring, in that gap, terrorism can grow. although he has not been martyred the way that people thought, the brand is not done. as long as there are unemployed, disaffected men in this part of the world, the call of bin laden is very powerful. host: independent line, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my

call. are those authors aware of the man, [unintelligible] he eventually admitted to tending to the training camps for the osama bin laden. he was arrested and kept quiet, because a judge put a gag order on it. eventually he did 10 years. host: why do you bring it up? caller: i am curious, because i read a book called "the interrogators'," which describe the taliban playing themselves up as farmers. and it was discovered that they were to sit on it, someone would come for it.

host: are either of you familiar with that case? caller: not with the case, but in the book, as you look to the future, al qaeda sees pakistan as wounded. yemen has become a rising star of the terror network. but it is the home ground hihadi that goes on line and read the propaganda, becoming trained. the challenge of combat in the hottest is that he or she is almost impossible to find before they act. host: anything you would like to recommend? guest: much of what happened has come through the online videos. an american-born cleric that

preached in virginia and san diego was killed recently by a missile strike in yemen. an american citizen that moved to al qaeda, becoming not only their chief propagandist, but he was very much involved in helping to plan the underpants bomber. 10 months later, involved in the same to pack explosives, with cargo planes bound for the united states. this same individual, even though he is dead, his online videos are still very much here in the united states. a big concern for local law enforcement is how hard to detect it is, where you have

individuals that might make a mistake. guest: risin, al qaeda in yemen has been trying to bring together large amounts of castor beans. the administration is deeply worried that they're trying to mount a plot by and europe or the united states. host: where did they come from? guest: all over the world. they are an agricultural commodity that you can buy. guest: -- host: we have about 15 minutes left with our guests. how long did it take you to put the book together?

guest: we have been working on the book for about two years. we were working on it right until the end, when bin laden was killed. from the final stages of an editing the manuscript, writers get -- we were given by the editors 96 hours, going into the relevant chapters. we are right on the cusp. guest: one of our readers said that you guys need a better ending. [laughter] host: brad is on the line, independence. caller: we were talking about the border. i feel that one of the biggest reasons why, aside from the political football of the

integration issue, border security does not have enough money available for the big defense contractors to get behind the lobby for those types of things to go on. the fact that in the iraq war, halliburton was given a contract to fight oil fires that never occurred in iraq. in turn, they got to not lose that money, but do something else. other projects in iraq. you know, when those kinds of dollars are being thrown around , i think that oftentimes there is profiteering in other nefarious things going on.

our money being spent on wisely for the sake of the most connected to be able to do what they want to do, which is not always the best thing to do. you know, it is kind of scary, when we think about the amounts of money that have been spent since 9/11. guest: the caller has a good point. since 9/11, hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent warring against terrorism. everything from how to combat ied's to how you develop and train the afghan and iraqi national security forces. what is important to note is that in this current age of budget hiking, the whole federal government has gone through, and we talk about this in the book,

the entire government has to be much smarter by and how we fight terrorism. risk-management. how do you spend dollars wisely? combating what is overseas and here at home, particularly as the threat migrates from the core leadership in al qaeda and pakistan to this much more dispersed threat that we have been talking about. whether or not it is franchises like in yemen, or here in the united states. guest: the special inspector general has admitted to millions of dollars in waste. war is the greatest decision that any democracy can make. it is hard business. the fact that a company was given a contract to fight oil fires rather than start the war again, it was a lesson learned from the first gulf war.

the very first mission into iraq was not a bombing raid or a commando team, it was special operations forces seizing oil platforms in the persian gulf, to make sure that they could not be detonated. host: new hampshire, ronald, democratic line. caller: good morning. i have a comment and a couple of questions. i will try to get them in quick. my comment, where other facets of the government have failed us, troops and intelligence agencies stand out with an exemplary conduct and professionalism. i am in awe of our troops in the world. sharia law, u.s. mosques, what does -- what is the danger?

china, are they friend or foe? they are our trading partners right now, but in the end the technology that they have is what they have stolen from other countries. host: let's break this up. thom shanker, sharia law in the mosques, in the u.s.? guest: we need to address this point. islam is one of the world's great religions. violent religious extremism is a perversion of the proper teachings. islamic law, by itself, does not preach violence or extremism. we are blessed to live in a country where we tolerate the religions of all. guest: china, as a possible threat down the road, we talk about cyber-attacks.

it is always hard to tell, exactly, what part of a chinese government or backed company could be behind these types of attacks. clearly, the chinese military is on the rise in southeast asia. it is under close watch by the u.s. government. host: want you are on twitter asks about the mexican drug cartels -- one of the viewers on twitter asks about the mad -- mexican drug cartels. host: any thoughts? guest: clearly, an area that people are concerned about. there is an increase in concern that mexico may someday be a failed state. there is increasing concern that the u.s. military is supporting these domestic organizations along with mexican organizations, dealing with a potential terrorism issue?

road. not just drugs. terrorist organizations to use the same routes. these are concerns of u.s. counterterrorism officials. host: take it from president bush to president obama in terms of strategy. guest: from strikes, the bush administration started them. president obama wants more in his first year in office than bush did over the entirety. commando raids increase. but what did change was the dialogue. obama reached out to european allies that have been offended by our strategies. we tried to blow the fog from the distant mountain top on this in the book. bush had declared terrorists

with weapons of mass destruction and existential threat on par with the soviet union. this could have ended life as we know it. but we have to be mature enough to admit that terrorism, while tragic, it does not represent the same level of existential threat. therefore, the most up -- response needs to be mature and calibrated. that is what the obama administration has tried to do. we calibrate terrorism in the proper perspective. host: a few more calls. fort lauderdale, indiana. you are first. good morning. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i have not yet read the book, but certainly i will. what i feel is this. when one speaks about the holy

war, we need to get into the genesis of that. did the roman catholic church not, hundreds of years ago, launched its own holy war against islam and muslims? killing in the name of christ? that accomplished one thing. pardoning the degree of sensitivity -- pardoning the degree of sensitivity in fanaticism. the degree of sensitivity and fanaticism. two wrongs do not make it right. we need to understand the gestalt of all of this. what was done wrong, many years ago, that precipitated with this thing now. if you could share your thoughts in regards to that, i would

appreciate it. guest: all of the tenants of religions in the truth and to be positive. a perversion of what christianity teaches, including the actions of jewish terrorists in the middle east, it is just something wrong. i think that you can cast a judgment over an entire religion, but individuals professed to kill in the name of their faith. do not forget, one of the worst terrorist acts of recent months was the gunman in norway. he was in some kind of armed, right-wing christian cult from oklahoma city. timothy mcveigh block a federal building. he was not an islamic extremist, but he was one of these right wing, home grown radicals.

terrorism comes in all flavors. guest: the caller has pointed out that you can have an extreme version of a religion. islam is one of the world's greatest religions. on any one takes them to an extreme, that is when you wind up with terrorism and extremism. that is what we've talked about in the book. the u.s. government is focused on the extremism elements, on the right and left, looking at these individual organizations. guest: -- host: debbie, welcome. caller: i am concerned that my view is not as seriously taken by your speakers as it is by the grass roots.

i would like to comment on potential nuclear power in iran. guest: this is one of the main areas, nuclear weapons, where the united states is trying to apply the diplomacy we talked about earlier. trying to isolate iran to a nuclear weapon development programs. guest: one of the greatest challenges is how the united states maintains a political, diplomatic, and economic posture throughout the persian gulf. host: our guests have been thom shanker, of "the new york times," and eric schmitt.

the authors of this book, "counterstrike," we appreciate you sharing your views. >> herman cain is at the national press club this afternoon to discuss his candidacy. he is also expected to address the sexual harassment story broke last night, brought by two women, originating when he was at the national restaurant institute. >> and there is a big cloud right now affecting your ability to get this out, this story. can you clear this up for us, right now? >> the question is not cleared with ground rules.

he is going to be there at the podium. >> you can see that event in its entirety if you go to the c-span video library. since his appearance this morning, mr. kane told fox news that he does never sexually harassed anyone and that he was falsely accused and that investigations into complaints were baseless. he said that he had never sexually harassed anyone. we are expecting more about that this afternoon, 1:05 eastern, from the national press club. we plan to have that live for you, on c-span. until then, the political story was the topic of your phone calls this morning in "washington journal."

host:as is the story as it was first brought by politico. lots of other folks writing about this as a follow up this morning. jonathan martin joins us on the phone. he is with politico. one of the several reporters that have been working on this story. how exactly did this come about? tell us about your reporting. guest: thank you for having me. we have been reporting the story for the last three weeks or so. during that period of time we have talked to dozens of individuals. we have about half a dozen sources on these actual allegations themselves. current employees, former employees of the organization, current and past members of the board, as well as sources who are close to this washington trade group. two female employees in the late 1990's when mr. cain was the ceo, were uncomfortable and angry about a series of verbal

and physical gestures toward them that were of a suggested nature, so much so that they went to colleagues and senior officials at the organization to complain about the treatment. these women subsequently received five figure cash payouts to late -- leave the organization. as part of that, they signed non-disclosure agreements so they would not discuss what happened. we have seen documentation in one of these cases, that give the allegations and that the organization formally resolve the matter. hopefully that gives you a sense of a carefully reported piece that was done with extensive sourcing on obviously a sensitive topic. but that is this view. host: a lot of folks going -- doing a lot of the reporting of the push back. what are they saying question on

guest: we gave them 10 days to respond. initially the response was that these allegations were "resolve -- i am sorry, resolved by the parties years ago. i pressed to the campaign what exactly was resolved, but the spokesman says he, the spokesman, talk to mr. cain and mr. cain vaguely recalled, and suggested they talk to was then and now the general counsel of the restaurant association. that was for a few days the response. we went to him at the organization. he would not comment. finally, yesterday i went to the cbs washington bureau in

downtown d.c. and asked mr. cain directly about the allegations. he did not respond. he was asking for more information, and names. i gave him one of the names involved. he would not comment. then i asked very directly -- sir, have you ever been accused of sexual harassment? he did not answer the question. i asked him three more times. have you ever been accused of sexual harassment? he would not say, no. host: written up in politico, politico.com. we are speaking to jonathan martin, one of the reporting team. mr. cain had been planning lots of stops in washington today. we are going to be covering him at the american enterprise institute at 9:00 on c-span2 talking about his 999 tax plan. we will also cover him at the press club later ron at 1:00 here on c-span2. how do you expect the events to come out?

guest: even if it is not act the actual event, i am sure it is going to come up at some point. either on the way into the event or leaving. again, the campaign had 10 days to respond to some very straightforward questions about our reporting involving these two women. and they did not answer. and mr. cain himself did not answer a very basic question, have you ever been accused of sexual harassment or not. we could not get an answer. we published our story last night after having reported it over a period of weeks and talking extensively to dozens of individuals. host: what do you think this does to the campaign at this point? guest: obviously mr. cain has questions to insert. we try to get answers for a period of 10 days. perhaps now he will be more forthcoming. but certainly, there is going to be intense scrutiny on him going forward, like there is on all serious candidates for the white house.

the american people want to know who these candidates are, they want to know their backgrounds. host: jonathan martin of politico, thank you for sharing time with us. guest: thank you so much. host: a little bit of the follow-up reporting, this from "the washington post" today. cain camp denies harassment allegations. they say he is pushing back against these allegations that he engaged with -- in inappropriate behavior when he was the head of the national restaurant association. here are a couple of passages from the piece --

that is from the campaign. the first caller on all of this, maryland. bryce, independent caller. caller: i think regardless of whether or not it is true or substantiated, i think herman cain has to get scrutinized more, and as he has more questions asked about his plans and his agenda, i think he will gradually take himself down out of the race anyway. i don't see him carrying any

more than 10% in any state in the primaries. i just think as the nation sees him, asks questions, get to know him more, he is not to be president. and the machine going after -- unfortunately, that is part of the political landscape and part of what any candidate has to deal with. host: bob is a cain supporter in pittsburgh. what do you make of what you are reading and hearing? caller: this is nonsense. i was a superintendent of a shock. there was a black fellow, he could not learn anything and then i counseled him, he started coming in late. i called up human-resources and they said just write it up and don't do anything right now. finally it came out as a racial problem. they settled the case to say it go away. i quit over that because i was frustrated. i have gotten rid of that before for doing stuff like this. i wrote them up, but because he was glad they did not press the case with human-resources.

they gave him money to go away. that is what a lot of these people do when they work for somebody. they try to find something. they always find somebody to agree. host: are you a cain supporter? bring it back to the candidate. caller: i think he is an honorable man, i think he is smart. i think he is more intelligent than anybody running, including barack obama. he has been a success all his life. he went to college without affirmative action. everything that he earned he got. i trust him more than anybody i see on the scene right now. host: marietta, georgia. a bill is on the line for democrats. what do you make of this story? the low -- hello? you there? let's try akron, ohio. caller: yes.

this herman cain died, if you want to know who he is, you have to go back to ronald reagan -- this herman cain guy. what ronald reagan did was go in to mississippi to basically gain the black vote. that is what republicans do. he also granted amnesty for the mexican vote. he jumped in bed with the jerry falwell to get the lunatic fringe a vote. -- limits infringe -- loovis six friends rode. if you look at the republican party today, they create the job a plumber guy. so, they create all of these people through the media and they basically create these people out of nothing. if you look at herman cain, he worked for the koch brothers on their payroll. and if you look at the tea party, again, the republican party is based on racism.

it is the south. it is going back to the civil war. so, what they do is fox news -- general lack even helped promote -- general electric helped promote this guy. why would general of electric, so-called liberal democrats? so they could create the illusion that this guy is of legitimate. he has absolutely no legitimacy -- host: want to get some other voices. we are following up on this "politico" report. they call it an exclusive. thing two women accused herman cain of inappropriate behavior back in the 1990's. there is the story. we just spoke to one of the reporters, jonathan martin, to

explain how they came about. national, tennessee -- nashville, tennessee. caller: you have to look realistically. herman cain has been married to the same woman for 40 years, and the executive and i high position, they're always going to be parasites trying to get a free bubp. it is kind of becoming clear in the campaign that the worship -- warship of the politico is basically a mouthpiece of the democrats socialist party and this is really just a media- driven fight, high tech luncheon. reminiscent to what happened to clarence thomas who has been a great supreme court justice. the liberals in this country cannot stand a strong, self- made, conservative black man. it just absolutely infuriates them up to the point where you get articles like this and defaming a man who has really had an amazing life.

self-made millionaire. head of a pizza chain. chairman of the federal reserve, and very successful radio talk- show host. host: here is "the washington post," a printed version. campaign pushes back on account of alleged inappropriate behavior. this is in the first section of "the post" today. and "the washington times" also picking up in the story that broke into "politico" last night. they say the cain campaign promptly denied the charges late sunday night. good morning, it is john online for democrats.

caller: how are you today? it's good doing fine. caller: i am an all time common-sense democrat and i tell you the liberal wing of this party started dragging things down when mr. clinton got in there with the whole law wednesday -- lewinski, jennifer flowers. talking about allegations. what if you did allegations of steve jobs? until something is proven -- i actually like this fellow, even though i am a democrat. they are trying to pretty much gang up on him and taken out. host: we will be covering up herman cain evans. 9:00 a.m., on c-span2, he is at aei, 999 discussion about his tax plan. the press club, at 1:00 p.m. eastern time, we will have that on c-span. one event on c-span2 at 9:00 in the next one on c-span at 1:00.

he is touring washington today talking about policy and why he would make a good president of the united states. in the meantime, there is this "politico" story. 1 tweet asks simply -- centerfeld, florida. in march, independent. caller: it does not surprise me. number one, i do respect "politico" and their reporting and i do not believe they would put out anything without the early investigating it. a few weeks ago i met mr. cain at the "barnes and noble" -- barnes and noble book signing at the villages. as a woman -- i am 45 years old. and i do feel there is a -- women in government and corporate america.

just the feeling i got when i met mr. cain, i could tell there was something about it. and i got the impression that he was doing this book and threw his hat in the ring, and it is all for personal gain. i do think that the news reporting, the mainstream media, is a j.d. he is taking away from the tree candidates such as ron paul, gary johnson, and especially buddy roemer. i appreciate you letting me talk. host: let us move to barbara at southern pines, north carolina. republican. what do you make of this? caller: i am truly disappointed in c-span that i don't remember you going after john edwards when any of these stories came out about him. i don't think "politico" -- one

of the women that they got this information, wasn't it anita hill? host: anything else? in the good that is it. host: bonnie from michigan. the wellhead. caller: we had the same problem at ford motor co. in 15 years ago. if there are two women complaining, there are 20 who have not complained. i think what is most of the can is his campaign that the inability to address the issue effectively, which shows it is not a good campaign. this is a problem we have in the workplace that we have failed to resolve. i am hearing the same old canard that it is just women taking advantage of it. nonsense, it is a problem in the american workplace. host: lots of other political news. this from herman cain. back to "the washington times."

emphatically against abortion with no exception. the right here that -- they write here that -- the headline here says cain emphatically against abortion was no exception. east bridgewater, massachusetts. caller: i agree with the man from tennessee.

caller: i agree with that the man from tennessee. he hit the nail on the head. these liberal democrats, they are gimme people. they want to give everything away. they don't want to see anybody, white or black, work. they don't like the self-made millionaire that mr. cain is. it is aggravated -- keep sowing people. the woman in michigan about women being discriminated against. i was on the fire department, the first woman became on, the first thing she did was file a lawsuit against 11 of us. they go on theirth onere -- they go on there to get a lawsuit. the women -- their places in the home to take care of men. host: jerome, republican. caller: i think it is a bunch of

crap, first and foremost. those democrats, they are so worried about somebody else, what is going on in somebody else's past life? why are they getting the illegal votes from aliens? they never talk about that, right? they never talk about the $4.2 billion that these illegals get in tax loopholes. why don't they focus on that? they got a strong black man like myself that is going to speak their mind and they are terrorizing them. please. host: marietta out once again. bill on the line for democrats. caller: i got cut off earlier. i am sorry. i think it is a whole joke. i agree with only the first caller. i believe in the second

amendment, i am a liberal, i am a black guy. what i am really concerned about is the police departments coming out in full armor and automatic weapons and firing tear gas. i did not see anyone throwing tear gas back. new york is a city where you can't even own a gun and most of the cops are buying illegal guns and probably using them to shoot citizens. we should get back on track with getting people back to work and hoping that these kids don't start bringing weapons and stuff like some knucklehead did in atlanta at the occupy organization -- one guy. but i am for the president. i am looking forward to a second term with a bunch of democrats and house and senate. host: let's hear from barry on the republican line from north carolina. what is your reaction to the "politico" story? >> , my first thing about cain is i just -- caller: well, my first thing about cain -- this story is basically just to get the

american people to run around like a dog chasing its tail. they will never catch the story. it is just a way to run around and get confused. but what it all boils down to is what the politics the way it is -- now, it's his father is the way republicans are doing things now because they are -- it just bothers me the way republicans of doing this now because they are doing reverse psychology. democrats are on the black the with the >> so what we are doing is bring cain and use him to make use some reverse psychology so now of any democrat says anything now they are racist. anybody who is in politics anyway comes from a pool of people who have been loyal to corporations, and when their number comes up they have opportunities to get thrown that way like cain.

here is on the national scene and he gets to appear that he has power when really the power players are behind the scenes. nobody will ever see them. host: front page of "the dredge report -- "the drudge report." a picture from "face the nation." pointing out the weekend poll concerns of -- as concerns iowa. it says -- here is a rick perry story from "the new york times." he is retooling his campaign with a newly and phatic anti- washington message -- more on politics in the papers in a couple of minutes but a couple more callers first. kankakee, illinois. what do you make of the herman cain stored? caller: i am confused with all of the comments that have been said. a first of all, i really do believe that "politico" would

not report anything unless they know about their sources. why didn't mr. cain just answer the question? i was always taught if you did something, if you are trying to hide, ok, i am embarrassed, i shall not have done it, whatever. yes, i did it. it was a mistake. 4 give me. let's move on. if he did do it, if he did do

it, and he is evading the question, he is guilty. that is how i feel. host: iowa -- what is your name? hello, iowa. you are calling on the democratic line. go-ahead. caller: i just wanted to make a comment to a lady that called and said about john edwards -- they did, because i remember when the story broke in 2008,

accused him of having a child. but also, i visited your bus on cnn -- yes, the c-span bus. it was very interesting. host: go ahead and finish up. caller: anyway, i just wanted to say that i do think that he probably did do it. there is sexual harassment everywhere. there is sex anywhere. it does not make any difference what man there is. there is not going to be anybody for present. because everybody has done something. i think john edwards was framed. and to the lady that said it is close to the same thing. he did not do any sexual harassment. host: the front page of "upington post." raising cain, they write here. here is the front page.

"huffington post," "drudge," almost everybody following up on this initial "politico" story. a couple of e-mails on all of this. one other viewer writes -- let's hear from wendy in hollywood, florida. caller: i just turn the tv on. i use like to listen and use would not like to talk. but for somebody like me who is stupid about politics, it is obvious they are tried to take him down. i do not think he is qualified to be present. just like the present guy, not enough experience. thirdly, ron paul has never been accused of anything. he is pristine.

it is a tragedy we did not put someone in the white house who is an older man who as wrinkles. that is what it is about. he is an old man. women in a country -- it is sad, but i have come to the conclusion that men did not like women or do not respect women in america. if women search our hearts, we are wearing a parka -- burka. i have accepted it. it is true. host: let's move on to antonio. miami, florida. caller: good morning. what i think we need here in the states is -- are you there? host: we are listening. caller: obama -- all of these republicans who heard something out there in congress the other

day at a meeting, you do not even love your kids and grandkids. all across obama government. sir, i think we should have a better americans and the politics and politicians who know what they are doing and what they are saying. i respect the other's and everybody else. but we don't have the good politicians. and this one running for the black people, he is not going to run for nobody. he is going to run only for himself and his group. republicans. i don't like him but i will not vote for them. i will vote straight for obama. host: one of the tweet this morning. more about rick perry. he is committed to participating

in at least five debates -- sorry also points out he has things to say about going to -- toto with president obama in the debates. that is in "usa today" this morning. houston, texas. tiffany, a democrat. how are you? caller: i am fine. first-time caller. i am down here in houston, texas. you could not pay me to vote for herman cain as an african- american woman.

i think he is a joke. i think he is trying to sell books. it is crazy callers are trying to support him. it is like a black man saying i know how to stay in my place. i think he is a joke on a slip. host: moving on to roanoke, virginia. david, republican. caller: my problem with the sexual harassment is it seems like it happens all the time for nothing. for instance, my father went to the air force and went to london, england, for several years and while there he met a beautiful woman who happens to be my mother. after sitting there several years he picked up the lane go, thank you, love, when he spoke to women. while working at a major company, he said the thank you, love, to everybody all the time

for 30 years. after a long time, a secretary had retired and got him a new one and she came and brain injury problems something and said thank you, love. she went to his supervisor and threatens to a lawsuit. [unintelligible] host: you are breaking up. i think we get the point. we will move on to other calls. this is from "the washington post" which is fighting "politico." -- citing "politico." they also go on to point out over the past several weeks, since skyrocketing to the top of the field, cain has faced scrutiny over his stance on abortion, foreign-policy, his tax plan, and his management style. 9:00 a.m. he will be on c-span2 and at the press club to talk

to reporters at 1:00 eastern time for an hour here on c-span. we will do this for about 5 1/7 minutes until we bring up our first guest, grover norquist, americans for tax reform. john. independent. caller: good morning. this is the united states, and you are innocent until proven guilty. and i don't think there is any evidence to show that this gentleman did this inappropriate action.

if you want to talk about inappropriate action, when you see the president as all of these meetings that he has for the state of the union, he is always kissing and hugging the ladies. i think that is an inappropriate action. that is coming from the president of the united states. thank you very much. host: let's hear from houston, texas. caller: i believe the women are telling the truth. i have a comment about herman cain. he is like a lady called a while ago, he is only as a joke, a monkey. host: i will let you go, caller. let us move on to massachusetts. dana, republican. are you there? we will hear from dana in a moment. other news from the papers this morning. something we have been hearing about for several weeks and months. the world population has hit 7 billion people in record time.

this is a "usa today" right up -- write up. just a bit of the "usa today" piece this monday morning. "watts street journal -- "wall street journal" -- weymouth, are you there?

caller: the thing that bothers me the most about herman cain is the fact that he sat on the kansas board of the federal reserve. i don't know if we can trust anybody who sat on the federal reserve. >> you can tune in to washington journal every morning to see these segments in their entirety. coming up, remarks from herman cain. we are going live to the u.s. house, holding a brief pro-forma session this morning.

[captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of epresentatives.] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a complune occasion from the speaker. the clerk: speaker's rooms, washington, d.c.,, october 31, 2011, i hereby appoint the thomas j. rooney to act as speaker pro tempore on this day, signed john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray, almighty god of the universe we give you thanks for giving us another day.

on thisal hallows eastbound we pray in thanksgiving for all of our american ancestors who have forged futures fraught with risk and danger. their hope and their faith through many challenges and victories built this great nation. grant them, living and dead, the peace of your presence. we ask your blessing as well upon the men and women, this the peoples' house and strive with their energy and goodwill to strive our nation, to work on legislative solutions, to the challenges we face in this time, always mindful they are entrusted especially with the well-being of so many who are powerless. we know, o god, these little wubs are of special interest and concern for you. bless us this day and every day and all that is done within

these hallowed halls be done for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceeding and announced his approval delf, pursuant to clause 1, rule 1, the journal stands approved. the chair will lead the house in the the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. without objection, the house stands adjourned until noon tomorrow for morning hour debate. >> the house returns tomorrow at noon for mourning our speeches and will have live coverage here on c-span. if we are now at the national

press club in washington, d.c. herman cain is the speaker today. >> key to told me today he has been asked to autograph a cigarette. [laughter] even years after the fact, the 1991 parody of john lennon's " imagine" has become a viral video head. one thing is clear, he is connecting with the voters in this early electoral season who have indicated they are not wedded to the front runner so parker. they have turned the race on its head several times over. in the last electoral cycle, early on it seemed like the republican might be fred thompson or rudy giuliani and hillary clinton would be the democratic. who is herman cain? the son of a cleaning woman and a janitor who often worked three jobs, our guest speaker graduated from morehouse college

with a degree in math, earned a master's from perdue in computer science. he began his career as a computer analyst at coca-cola where his father worked as a chauffeur to the ceo. he moved to) where he rose for the right to manage 400 burger king stores. pillsbury made him ceo of its unit of godfather pizza. in 1996, he became ceo of the national restaurant association, a trade group that lobbies congress. he has worked for the koch family that seeks to reduce government regulation of industry. he also served on the federal reserve bank of kansas city. as a candidate for the republican nomination, his signature policy is999 which would replace the current tax code with a 9% tax on business income, personal income, and federal sales tax. we plan to let harman the hermon

before the q &a and find out how he plans to help america. give a warm national press club welcome to herman cain. [applause] >> thank you. good afternoon. [laughter] i normally speak to audiences that are live and nice to know that your responding back. i am delighted to be here. thank you for that introduction. before i begin, i want to take a few seconds to recognize the gentleman who has worked here at this club for 44 years and who has some special coincidences

with me and my campaign. his name is mr. mr. andrew price. [laughter] [applause] while chatting with him as he was serving at the head table, he was asked how many presidents have you serve? he said about eight. which means that i would be number 9. [laughter] [applause] some things you might call coincidental -- [laughter] i call it a good sign. about three weeks ago, we started hitting the top tier of those running for the republican nomination. for a couple of weeks now, i

have gotten used to what it feels like to be near the top. big newslt of today's story, i really know what it feels like to be number one. [laughter] renewing america -- wheat in deep need to renew america because america has become a nation of crises. we have an economic crisis. in national security crisis. we got an energy crisis, a spending crisis, a foreign faulty policy crisis, a moral crisis, and the biggest crisis we have is a severe deficiency of leadership in my opinion, in the white house. [applause] this is why i believe we need to

renew america, by fixing the stuff that is broken. there is a difference between a typical politician and businessman which means that there is a difference between herman cain and those vying for the republican nomination. as evidenced by senator santorum's comments at one of the recent debates. politicians are interested in proposing things that they believe can pass. businessman propose things that fix the problem. that is what i do. that is what i have done for over 40 years. i want to spend a few minutes addressing two of our most critical issues that we need to be bold about in order to begin the renewal process for this great nation.

let's start with national security. my national security philosophy is an extension of the reagan philosophy. his philosophy was peace through strength. the herman cain philosophy is peacekeepers strength and clarity. we need to clarify who our friends are, clarified who our enemies are, and i happen to believe we must stop giving money to our enemies. [applause] the reason we need to clarify who are friends are is such that we can tell the rest of the world who we will stand with such as in a herman cain presidency, there will be no doubt that the united states of

america will stand firmly with israel. [applause] mark, you have this audience pretty well trained to be objective. they are not applauding because they may be accused of lacking one candidate over the other such restraint on the part of the press, i applaud you. [laughter] we must let the world know who our friends are and who we will stand with. i don't believe you need to have extensive foreign-policy experience if you know how to make sure you were working on the right problems. establishing the right priorities, surrounding yourself with good people, which will allow you to put together the plan is necessary to solve the problem. when i went to godfather's pizza

in 1986, the company was supposed to go bankrupt. i had never made a pizza. [laughter] but i learned. the way we renewed got father speaks as a company is the same approach i will use to renew america. that is, if you want to sell the problem, go to the source closest to the problem and ask the right questions. i talked with customers. i talked with young people who worked in the restaurant. i talked with managers, assistant managers, the office suppliers,chisees', and i asked them why is godfather's failing?

after listening and distilling the feedback, it turned out the reason it had gone from the darling of the restaurant industry when it began in the 1970's, in the 1980's rather, until now, it was on a failing trajectory. they were trying to do too much with too little too fast, it had lost its focus. that is what i believe it is america's problem. we have lost our focus. in order to renew that focus, we must address its most pressing problem boldly. the second point about foreign policy is that i also have what i term and what we term foreign policy common sense. my humbleannounce, in

opinion, that you will pull the troops out of iraq, reduce the troops in afghanistan, and then sent an e-mail to the enemy and let them know what you're going to do. that is not how you fight wars. number three, relative to the conflicts we are engaged in, i would do something that apparently this president is not doing. i will listen to the commanders on the ground because they are closest to the problem. [applause] the second biggest crisis we face -- this economy. which is on life support. when you have an economy on life-support, you cannot tweak

around the edges. we got 14 million people out of work. , millions underemployed, college students asking me what they will do -- what i will do to help them and a graduate from college. i said to get this economy growing so you can find a job when you get out of college. right now, it will be difficult for them to find jobs. the latest projection is that this economy as opposed to grow this year at a board -- at about 1.6%. that is anemic. we can do better. when you consider the fact that we will grow at 1.6%, and we have been at this anemic rate for several years now, and china is growing at double digits plus change, even on that small base and our base being much bigger,

we run the risk of losing our economic superpower status. this is why we propose a bold solution to grow this economy. it starts with throwing out the current tax code. we have all complained about it for decades. politicians have complained about it for decades. we know it is unfair, it is unclear, and it costs us billions of dollars to try and complied and file according to the tax code -- billions of dollars to stay out of jail. we should not have to be on the defensive when it comes to paying our taxes. [applause] we throw out the current tax code. and then pass our 999 plant.

[applause] how sweet it is! as jackie gleason would said. [applause] let me give you some additional description about how and why we came up with that. we want it to be simple 9-9-9. we wanted to be transparent. there are no hidden9's. [laughter] we wanted it to be efficient so we have -- don't have to spend billions of dollars just to file and we wanted it to be fair, not fair according to washington's definition of fair but according to webster's definition of fair which means that everybody is treated the same, no loopholes,

no loopholes. secondly, we are often challenged on why you would introduce another component for government to tax us on. , the sales tax, by introducing a national sales tax. the trade-off is i am willing to fight and defend keeping the national sales tax rate at 9% in place of throwing out an 82,000- page tax code that allows the government to try and pick winners and losers, that allows the government through the irs to harass us and those of you who have ever been something -- through something like that know what i'm talking about. the idea is we want to broaden the base. if we did not end in the national tick -- sales tax fee, the only way we could generate

additional revenue is to raise taxes. what we have done is effectively lowered taxes to the lowest possible rate for everybody. two misperceptions about the 999 plant would like to clarify -- first, there is not a 909 plant. we have a poverty exemption built into the revenues that we would raise. such that people would be able to deduct the poverty level for their family size. if a family is at poverty level, their tax rate on that middle 9 will be zero. that is not a new plan. it has been in the analysis all along.

we did not call it 909 but we allowed for that deduction in generating the same amount of revenue. it is not a new plant. i have not tweaked it because of the criticism. as i mentioned in one of the debates when i was attacked by my opponents, they did not read the whole plan. we also have something called the opportunity zone. opportunity zones would be cities that would be able to qualify if they compete with other cities for even more generous deductions such that cities will have an opportunity to help get themselves back on their feet like detroit where we were a week or so ago. detroit need some help and so the opportunity zones are not

more entitlement programs. they are empowerment programs. which is how we will renew this nation. we also have the objective of replacing five taxes with these three. according to the analysis we did, we replaced corporate income tax, personal income tax, capital gains tax, the death text, and the biggest tax that people pay, the payroll tax. and replace it and collect the same amount of revenue with 999. yes, it is a bold idea and a bold plan. but america cannot wait. 14 million people who cannot find jobs cannot wait. people who are underemployed

cannot wait. some of the criticism has been that it is the vat. i don't care what you call it. if you want to call it a vat, it is one rate, one point. we are simply taking invisible taxes and replacing it with one visible attacks. when you buy a loaf of bread, it is estimated that that loaf of bread contains at least 30%-40% more cost because of the taxes that have to be paid along the way. you just don't see them. the farmer pays taxes on his profit if he makes a profit. the flour miller pays a tax.

the baker visit tax. the truck driver that delivers the bread to the store pays a tax. and the grocery store, if it makes a profit, pays a tax. who do think pays those taxes? we do, the consumer. we are simply taking out the embedded taxes which are invisible and replacing it with a 9% retail sales tax. the other question that often get is how we came up with 999? why not 10-10-10 or 888? being a mathematics major, real simple -- 888 not enough revenue. [laughter] 10-10-10, too much revenue. for the mathematicians in the audience --

[applause] it is called a simple regression analysis. i am thrilled that it came out a 999 because of 10% is good enough for god, nine should be enough for the federal government. [applause] and so, i am a firm believer that we can renew america but we've got to get this economy growing. we also have got to get our spending down, not just the rate, but how they define spending cuts in washington, d.c. we have to get the absolute amount down and i happen to believe that the american people are ready for this renewal which

is why i am running for president of united states of america. mark? [applause] >> thank you. we really appreciate your willingness to be here today. we have had a number of other presidential candidates join us at the podium. we have that presidents -- we have had presidents and we appreciate your willingness to take part in a civil discussion of the cheap issues of the day. it might be said that one reason we have more cameras here the might otherwise be the case is because of a story in politico today that talks about some accusations of inappropriate behavior when you're at the national restaurant association. i understand you addressed to these allegations and this may be the time. can you now confirm that these

allegations were made and that there was, in fact, a settlement of any kind? >> i would be delighted to clear the air. [laughter] [applause] #1 -- in all of my over 40 years of business experience, running businesses and corporations, i have never sexually harassed anyone. number two -- while at the restaurant association, i was accused of sexual harassment, falsely accused, i might add. i was falsely accused of sexual harassment and when the charges were brought, as leader of the organization, i recused myself and allowed by general counsel and might human resources officer to deal with the situation.

it was concluded after a thorough investigation that it had no basis. as far as a settlement, i am aware of any sort of settlement. i hope it was not for much because i did not do anything. the fact of the matter is, i am not aware of a settlement that came out of that accusation. per the article, two anonymous sources claiming sexual harassment -- we will not chase anonymous sources. when there is no basis for the accusation. i would draw your attention to the three people mentioned in the article that were at the restaurant association as past chairman, chairman, and incoming chairman of the board who would have known about this if it had turned out to be a charge with validity. it was not. as a result, i have never

sexually harassed anyone and those accusations are totally false. [applause] >> would it be fair to say you are asking the restaurant association to help you further shoot this down to the extent they might have for their records if indeed there -- they could look at their records and that might have affected their insurance or they might have had to pay -- to make that payment? will you get back to us and verify or should it down? >> no, there's nothing to shoot down. the policy of the restaurant association is not to -- that information. unless they have changed the policies, i was chairman of the board, as far as we are concerned, enough said about the issue. there is nothing else there to dig up. >> do you think that one from

rivals might have helped put that out there? [laughter] >> i told you this bull's-eye on my back has gotten bigger. i have no idea. we have no idea the source of this witch hunt which is really what it is. we have no idea. we have been busy trying to get my message out. >> perhaps if you work aggressively to affirm or deny in the coming days, we have had to deal with this issue today and we appreciate your willingness to answer the question of the podium. another issue that is out there that people have been asking about in recent days is the abortion issue. you clarified that to a degree yesterday abob schieffer. in an earlier interview, you indicated there may be exceptions where abortion should be allowed. you have seemed to have vacillated on this a little bit in the last few weeks. under what circumstances would an exception be allowed to an

outright ban and have you only come to this conclusion in recent weeks which has led to this apparent change in direction? >> let me state what i stated because part of an interview that i did was taken out of context. i am pro-life from conception period. i have been that way for many, many years. i have not changed. i don't plan to change. i have been consistent. in that one interview, the reporter tried to pigeonhole me on a specific case involving a hypothetical situation. what if it were my granddaughter? they took that piece out of context as i was trying to explain it to come to the erroneous conclusion that i am something other than pro-life from conception, and the story.

>> how far are you willing to stand behind that feeling that you have that abortion should not be allowed? would you back legislation to outlaw it? >> yes, i would. >> and there would be no exceptions allowed? would that be at the federal and state level? >> i cannot determine the state level but i would support that at the federal level if that legislation were to come to my desk. >> what about in choosing pretty important nominees. would you allow that to be in an issue that would allow you to vet a? a? nominee? >> there will be no litmus test.

we need people that will enforce the constitution and those of the kind of people i would point. >> and of course, that would not be a key issue to determine whether you select a certain nominee. >> correct. >> in terms of where the place is for government in our society, you just talked about you having a certain feeling, a certain stance on abortion -- how do you determine where government should intervene on a given issue such as abortion and where it should stand back? we had ron paul here a while ago and he is at one extreme of that equation, a so-called libertarian. where you put yourself? >> i go back to the founding fathers. in the declaration of independence, they said that endowed by their creator, you and die, with certain

unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. the interpretation is that you can pursue happiness in this country as long as you don't infringe on somebody else's liberty. you have the liberty to do what ever you want to do in this country as long as you don't infringe on somebody else's life and that includes the life of the unborn. [applause] >> we have a number of questions about your 999 plan. one person asked how this differs from a vat. you indicated that maybe it doesn't. they said your answer at aei did not address that. >> with the example of a loaf of bread, you've got five taxes embedded.

the current code is a vat because you have five. we do it one tax so we don't care what you call it. there is one tax rate imposed at the end at the retail register. that is how it is different from many vat. >> the economists are predicting dire consequences for economic recovery if we can address the housing crisis. how would you address that specifically? >> one of the first things that i would do to address the housing crisis is to get this economy growing. it all gets back to economic growth. this is why we're so confident that our economic growth and jobs plan is going to boost the economy. we have also done a dynamic analysis to show that the

unemployment rate will be reduced. if you've got people going back to work, they've got money, they might go out and buy a distressed home. if you have a growing economy, people who are underemployed would have a better opportunity and one of the biggest things that will help the housing market is an economy where businesses are excited about growth. when i served on the board of directors of several corporations leading up to running for president, part last three years, the conversations in the board rooms or how to grow the company. we did not have conversations about how do we stay the same or get smaller. you don't talk about that. that is not what boards are supposed to do. we have a $14 trillion economy because we have run this economy because businesses have ground. they are talking today in this

environment, board members are talking about how we survive. survival is not what will grow this economy. the certainty of a new tax plan called 999 will cause businesses to get excited and b n/a mode to grow again and that is the best thing we can do to help the housing slump. [applause] >> mitt romney has said to let the foreclosure crisis play itself out. aside from your plan, would you allow that to happen? >> i would do one other thing prior to that. ever since we have been in this economic decline, this administration, through ther fdic, has meddled in the business of smaller banks and

community banks. i would like to eliminate the new requirements they have imposed under the guise of it protecting banks from failing. it has had unintended consequences. it has caused more banks to fail when they ratcheted up the capital coverage requirement for banks, i know of community and smaller banks who got rid of some business transactions simply because they were trying to meet an artificially to buy requirement with the federal government. -- too high requirement with the federal government very we need to allow the community banks and medium-sized banks and small banks to do what they do. one of my guiding principles is if you want to solve the problem, go to the source close to the problem. it is not washington, d.c. and the big banks. we need to get government out of

the way of small and medium banks. [applause] >> to go back in history, there are those that might have said government was out of the way while the housing crisis was created. was there a proper role that government should have been involved with that of all that? how did they miss the boat when you're talking about keeping the government out in the first place? >> government did not miss the boat. government created the boats. [laughter] [applause] government put the holes in the boat. if you go back to the financial meltdown of 2008, it all precipitated because of the practices of fannie mae and freddie mac. [applause] fannie mae and freddie mac is the roots of why we had holes in the boat because of the practice

of bundling mortgages, the practice of fannie mae and freddie mac making it too easy for banks to sell them bad mortgages that were bundled. fannie mae and freddie mac have not received the oversight they should have received for at least a decade because chris dodd, head of the oversight committee in the senate, barney frank, head of the oversight committee in the house of representatives, yes i am naming names -- [applause] because they did not do their jobs. there is evidence that the book said fannie mae and freddie mac have been cooked but they did nothing about it. i'm not mad at you will, i just get passionate about it, you understand. [laughter] if the government has not made it too easy for banks and mortgage companies to bundle up

those mortgages, we would not have had that part of the problem. yes, wall street has some blame and this but not total blame. the derivatives market was not properly defined in terms of what businesses can do. to give you an example -- everybody in here is familiar with enron. that was probably the early precursor to someone who pushed derivatives too far to the edge and it caused the company to decline. i believe that needs -- their knees to be some responsible regulation relative to the derivatives market. at this point, i support totally rebuilding the dodd- frank legislation and let's do it right the next time. [applause] >> you are targeting the two congressional leaders that had

oversight roles. was the bush administration not to blame? >> the bush administration tried to get legislation passed but because he did not have a republican majority or a super majority, the legislation was blocked several times. i think the legislation, if i recall correctly, was introduced by senator john sununu and that can be looked up. did they have a role? yes, but they made an effort to do something about it but because they did not have the votes, they were not able to do anything about it which should have started with providing the necessary oversight. forlet's go back to they 999 a moment -- >> good [laughter] >> it was said that none of the gop tax plans would do anything

but leave a $9 billion tax deficit. >> this is richard lowry, co- architect of the 999 plan, senior economic adviser to the herman cain plan and i will allow rich to answer that question for may. [applause] >> thank you. the plan as it is designed to bring in the same revenue as the current code will. the issues regarding the deficit are a function of spending and spending restraint will be handled separately. what we are trying to do with state 999 plant is figure out how to generate the requisite amount of revenue and do the least amount of damage to the the meantime.the >in >> with a bold plan like 999,

the projected growth in gdp is going to be much higher than we are experiencing today. to get our hands around spending, my current plan is to do an across-the-board cut in all federal agencies day one. secondly, do a deep dive into all the agencies and find at least another 10%. i know the government accounting office documents of waste and duplication all over the place. when you have 535 members of congress looking out for either their pet projects or somebody else's, it will not happen. , or looking out for their friends. i am told i don't have any friends in washington, d.c. [laughter] i believe we will be able to cut a lot of spending going on in washington, d.c.. [applause] >> those members of congress

will not leave upon your election. it has been demonstrated with the effort to cut the budget now that it is hard to hide -- find agreement between the two parties and the white house. how do you draw the same 535 together when you just said that is what they fight for? >> great, great, great, question. it is called the power of the people. by keeping solutions understandable, that the public can understand, they will put pressure on their members of congress to support that legislation. i respect the united states congress and i will work with them, no question about it, but

there have been times when compromise has just about killed this country. my campaign itself is evidence that the voice of the people has awakened and it is the voice of the people that will put the necessary pressure on congress to pass legislation that they understand and that will be the kind of legislation that i will propose. former senator dirksen who popularized the statement "when they feel the heat, they will see the light." the american people will be the heat. [applause] >> student loan debt exceeds credit card debt and graduates

are having trouble and how might you address the problem of the expense of getting higher education? >> the issue of addressing the expense of higher education, i happen to believe letting the free market sort it out. you have more expensive colleges and universities. you have less expensive colleges and universities and people have a choice. colleges and universities are competing for students. >> the free market is starting out now and students are paying the price. is the system find? >> i don't believe we should artificially tamper with the free-market system. that is one of the problems that i see with the government in general, tampering with the free market situation. relative to the student debt, i don't have a position as to what we should do about the student dead.

debt. it is unfortunate but is something we will have to deal with. >> some of the biggest budget challenges ahead involve long term entitlements. how would you work with both members -- members of both parties about the huge differences decades out with massive deficits. >> i believe these programs which we call entitlement programs must be restructured. we can no longer say we will raise the retirement age and reduced benefits and think that will solve the problem. it will not. we have to restructure the programs. for example, i am a believer model how they got off this broken security system. even though we will collect the same amount of revenue will 999

and it will go to the social security account, i happen to believe that we need an optional personal retirement accounts system so we canwean this nation of a broken system. they did a inchile and 30 other countries around the world when they recognized we have a problem. we have long recognized we have a problem but we simply have not done anything about it. that will change. relative to medicare and medicaid -- remember one of my guiding principles that if you want to solve the problem, go to the source close to the problem. i plan to go to the states and get the states to help us restructure medicare and how it is administered rather than try to come up with a one size fits all set of rules out of washington, d.c. we have to restructure programs, not reshuffle them. >> you will have 50 different solutions? >> you will have 50 different

groups working on a solution but not 50 different solutions. states learn from one another. >> how much of the current president's political problem is caused by people not being comfortable with the nation accepting the first black president. where we stand with race in our country today? >> i don't think people being uncomfortable with this president has anything whatsoever to do with his race. it is bad policy that people have problems with this president. [applause] here is where we stand on race in america, in my opinion -- instead of us coming closer together, we have become more divided because of part of this administration playing the race card, the class warfare card,

the economic and equity card in order to turn people against one another, the millionaires' tax -- all that is part of the class warfare card. as a result, there is more racial tension than there had been. the fact that the tea party is not just one group of people. every organization that has members have mobilized their members to get involved and be a part of this voice of the sleeping giant i talk about because they do not like these policies. the tea party has been painted as a racist organization. i started speaking at tea party is in 2009 before it was cool. [laughter] april 15, 2009, and the people who attended these rallies have

only gotten bigger. subject, if you don't mind, some people have even made the assertion that the only reason i am doing so well trying to get the republican nomination is because white americans, the republican party conservatives, are trying to send a message that we are not racist. come to some of our rallies. join us on our bus tour. you have to follow along because there is no room on the bus. you will come to the conclusion that i have come to and that we have come to. this man eight white people can't pretend they like me. -- this many white people can't pretend like me. [laughter] [applause]

sure you get an answer. [laughter] about where we are with the status of race relations in our country today. your parents worked very hard and you have had tremendous achievements. have we made much progress? is there a possibility that two men of color could face off in the election? >> i will elaborate a little more -- i grew up in the 1950's and 1960's in atlanta, georgia. i was in high school at the height of the civil rights movement. then i went to morehouse college. the civil rights act of 1964 was passed in the voting rights act of 1965 was passed and that opened the doors. we had to make some political changes to open up more door. dr. king touched the hearts of

america and the world and helped to bring that about. he was one of our greatest leaders. i am a beneficiary of those two changes in our loss, no question about it. la --ws. i happen to know other black americans, brown americans who are beneficiaries because institutions have opened up. corporations have opened up. corporat corporate america has opened up. is there presence of our institutions? yes. it will probably always be there but for people who are interested in pursuing their american dream, don't put race in your formula. it is not there more than a mile. be there -- it is not there more than it

might be there. that is how i address it. we have come a long way but yes, we also need to do more work to make sure that we put the word united back in united states of america [applause] >> as we move into the softball question >> -- you mean there are softball questions? >> when did it first occurred to you that you should run for president of united states? >> the day barack obama signed obama care. is what really occurred to me. [applause] many of you may know that i was a radio talk show host and for five years leading up to president obama getting elected -- leading up to running for

president, rather -- when president obama took office, i, like many americans, i did not vote for him by the way to don't get carried away -- i, like many americans were hopeful that he would at least be a good president. i never wished him to fail. that is not good for this country. when i saw his policies and his lack of leadership exhibited, i became deeply concerned. obama care is not something the american people wanted. they did not want that solution. we have the best health care in america and i am an example of that because of having survived the stage for cancer. we have a health-care cost problem and i believe in order to address the health-care cost problem not more government but less government and allow the free market to deal with it.

we are weaker economically in america. we are weaker in terms of our dependence on foreign. oil we are weaker militarily. my priority will not be how, when, where we cut on defense. there are areas we need to invest in defense in order to rebuild our military might. because i have been blessed to have achieved my american dream, by and notcajillionaire but i climb the corporate ladder couple of times per my wife and i moved back to atlanta and i was on my way to cruise control. and then the country got off track. i felt i needed to look at using my skills, talents, and abilities possibly to help get this nation back on track.

it did not start as a consideration until after president obama took office. -- a're almost out of time couple of housekeeping matters to take care of. we have upcoming luncheon speakers like tom brokaw on november 3, the u.s. postmaster general will be here and on december 4 jim in, cantore from the weather channel will join us for his view in journalism. as we always do, i'd like to present our guest with the traditional npc m freeug. [applause] -- coffee mug. my final question, if you can join me for that -- you chose to sink at the home of pressure club [laughter] i thought i would -- of the omaha press club

[laughter] would you like to give it another shot? >> would you like the same song? 9 >> whatever you like. >> let me first said that it is demanding enough to speak a dozen times a day, let alone to them also have to sing. however, [laughter] i will take advantage of this opportunity but if i come to your event, don't ask and don't expect it. here is why -- my faith is a big part of her who herman cain is. it is a big part of how i made this decision. it is a big part of this journey that we are on and this is a

journey, not just my campaign, but this nation. senses it and -- since it is an opportunity for me to share a little bit of myspace, i will. graceing will always be my form of praise for it was grace that brought me liberty i will never know why jesus came to love me so he looked beyond

all my faults and saw my needs ♪ thank you. >> how about a warm round of applause for herman cain? [applause] ou.thank yea >> i like to thank our national press club staff for organizing today's event. thank you, and we are adjourned.

>> republican presidential candidate herman cain, the second of two of his appearances in washington that we have covered. earlier he talked about his 9-9- 9 plan at the american enterprise institute. if you like to see either of these events again, go to the c- span video library at c-span.org gueit is part of our "road to the winehouse" coverage. tonight, live coverage of the debate for kentucky's governor. it begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern and you can see that on c-span3. what more video of the candidates, see what political reporters are saying, and track the latest campaign contributions with c-span's web site for campaign in 2012. it helps you to navigate the

political landscape with twitter feeds, candidate bios, the latest polling data, links to c-span media partners, all at c-span.org/campaign2012. >> i think the odds are that the super committee, if it comes up with the recommendations, which i think it well, that it will include a proposal relating to auctions of the spectrum. >> key telecommunications issues, including spectrum sales, net neutrality, and the decision to redirect the universal service fund to provide the internet to unserver areas of the u.s. >> you are watching c-span2, with live coverage of politics and public affairs, and every

weekend, nonfiction authors and books on "booktv." you can join in the conversation on the social media sites. >> up next , the congressional republican health care caucus hosted everything looking at two programs aimed at covering manager americans. the speakers are a health care consultant involved in a discount program in nevada and a consultant whose organization has set up a website people can use to determine whether or not they can qualify for insurance. congressman michael burgess of texas is the chairman. this is about an hour. >> ok, welcome to everyone watching on the internet, and

those who are watching the live stream, your questions can be tweeted to @healthcaucus. we have two informed and informative panelists. as always, there will be an opportunity for questions. i would ask, as we always do, to identify yourself, and if you are with a news organization, tell us which organization you are with, or if you are from members of this, let us know that as well. we will be happy to take your questions. the issue of what will happen at the state level as we watch the affordable care act growth for its implementation and also some of the challenges coming to the affordable care act in the courts, leads the states in a tough position.

we heard in this very room from the governor of utah in february and march of this year when he talked about how she was building his own state exchange in utah, and that the affordable care act came along and he literally did not know what to do. he felt like he was walking on shifting stands. -- shifting sands. perhaps today with the storm we can provide a little stability and give people an idea of what they might expect regardless of implementation of the affordable care act. today we will specifically talk about state efforts for helping the uninsured. we are all aware of the costs. we are pretty conversant with the numbers that have been talked about. both sides of the presidential election in 2008 talked about those numbers. the number of people have increased in the last 10 years,

going from 19% -- now at 19% of the population, from 16% in 2007. it seems most people who are uninsured understand they need health insurance, but most are concerned about costs. some, quite frankly, find barriers they cannot access or do not know how to access health insurance if it is not provided by employer. the main reason people are on injured and remain so is because of the cost, rather than the lack of desire to have the coverage. under the affordable care act, individuals will be required to have health insurance, with the exception of if no affordable premium is available. however, this, in combination with those who opt out of the individual mandate, means we will still have an insured population in this country. the uninsured pay for about 1/3

of their care out of pocket unfortunately, the remaining costs of the care, un compensated, amount to about $50 billion. hospitals incur a 60% of the cost of un, stated -- uncompensated care. in addition, being an injured leaves individuals with an increased risk of actually amassing an affordable medical bills, uninsured adults are three times as likely as the injured to be unable to pay for basic necessities, such as food and housing, due to medical bills. we want to encourage the uninsured population to find affordable coverage, and here is the good news -- it is there, it

is available. is a question of accessing it and knowing where to go and who to ask. joining us by two experts on this issue who are looking at in a bit of ways the state for helping their uninsured population find coverage but .irst, mr. phil lebherz in 2004, he founded the foundation for health coverage education, a nonprofit organization with a mission to simplify public and private health insurance ability -- eligibility in order to have more people gain access to coverage. his input on the health-care debate is featured regularly in numerous publications, including "the wall street journal," abc news, "the washington post" and cnn. peggy tighe has significant

expertise working with physicians, hospitals, patients groups, and also, i might add, working with members of congress gr. liability reform, patient safety, genetic not discrimination. we are fortunate to have both of these panelists here today. i look forward to what they have to share. for those of you who are watching, if you know of someone who would have benefited from watching this exchange today, but unfortunately missed it, it will be archived in perpetuity at healthcaucus.org. >> i would like to do two things today -- mike problem. >> pull it close to you guest: . >> thank you. i would like to give you an

overview of the uninsured and tell you about an innovative program in nevada. flash -- ifews/- it just tells us that the uninsured cannot pay hospital bills. is this news to anybody? and those bills are passed on to all of us. again, news flash. not news. this is just a couple of months ago. who are the uninsured? the kaiser urban institute has told us that there are 50 million uninsured as of 2009. just over half of those are under 130% of the federal poverty level. if you look at my slides, you will see that in the orange section, that is about half. the other half are between 139% and 400% of federal poverty level. where are the uninsured?

unfortunately, the southern part of our country. they are also scattered throughout. how much does it cost? if you are paying for your own alpa insurance, not getting it through your employer, how much is it? according again to our friends at kaiser, just over 10 years ago it was about $2,000 per individual, $6,000 for families. now it is more than doubled for a single and triple for families. that means over $5,000 for single coverage, $59,000 for a family. think about paying that bill a year. -- $15,000 for a family. think about paying that bill for a year. people are less likely to receive preventive care, more likely to be sicker and at much higher mortality. and, harkening back to hhs,

hospital problems cost all of us more. i don't know if you can see this on your slide deck, but it is a giant billboard at a hospital paid for. "e.r. wait times you can trust." are you kidding? this is what hospitals are advertising now. emergency room wait times. you can see better when you are driving in a car -- "you can text us to find out what that wait time is." i think that is pretty sad wait a minute, here comes to health care reform. isn't this going to solve all our problems? let's say we start with 50 million people, and for argument's sake, say that they are right when they say half of those people are now going to be covered under health-care reform. of those roughly 23 million, according to the urban institute, those 23 million, 40%

of them are eligible for coverage. and not accessing coverage. i remember during health-care reform, i went into a meeting with high-level officials at hhs and told you what i'm going to tell you about an imminent, this access to health care program in nevada. they said to us, "what if we put you out of business?" the answer was "that would be wonderful." health care reform is not capable of doing that. it took about two or three years for people to admit that. we get it wrestling with this solution for decades, especially the last two. i posit that there are solutions. look?] \ to the states -- to the states. think of state solutions as

pieces of a puzzle. finally, let's talk about access. access is the only not-for- profit medical discount plan in the united states. it is not health insurance, it is not an entitlement program. it is a public-private partnership. in nevada, three short years, access has helped 11,000 people get comprehensive health care. access sign up 1800 providers to do that. it gets better. the model is still at sustaining. i -- self-sustaining. it pays for itself in just three years. they are expanding it to las vegas. also important about access -- a big "also" -- only 1.5% of access members go through the emergency room unnecessarily.

1.5%. i will tell you how they did that. the way they did this, in a nutshell, is a shared responsibility model -- sheri is going to kill me for putting her picture up. who makes it work? again, i told you, it is a public and private partnership. lots of people make it work. members make it work, because they pay a monthly membership fee. they take responsibility. if there is a no-call or no-show to your doctor when you have an appointment set up, you are kicked out of the program. that is made very clear when you meet with your case worker when you come in as a member. that is part of the deal. if you don't show up to your doctor's appointment, you are out. providers -- how they have skin

in the game is they have enormous discounts. the community has been given a tremendous amount of money to a patient care fund and dollars they can contribute. it takes less money to cover more people -- your donation it's going to go a whole lot further. you'll be able to care for a lot more people. the government programs also put funding into access, because there are some things government cannot govern. by the rules, by their nature, access will cover the things they can't cover. employers, banking, and insurance industries are heavily involved in access. it is everybody in the picture of health care. employers sync with employees on access, an hsa so people can

save money, and insurers have a referral. they have a separate thing to give to people coming in and saying, "i cannot afford your insurance." code to -- go to access. in your packet is the shared responsibility detection. how'd you get to be a member of access? you must be current and insure, able to show proof of all income, such as they paced up on that income tax form, that child support, money received from any other source. you have to live in nevada and show proof of residency. that can come in the form of utility bill or rental agreement. you must show photo id. also important, there is eligibility income guidelines in this form. how does it work? members pay their membership fee and a they show up.

access gives low rates, the members pay in cash -- that's they payaid eighit -- in cash at the time of service. they have a 1-800 line, it they take all these people together, and phil will tell you how his group does this as well. they are so good at it that they are from everybody to where they need to go -- they are referring everybody to where they need to go. this cartoon caught my eye. the patient says, "i cannot afford the diagnosis. can you provide a cheaper one?" this is funny for us. in nevada, that is exactly what is happening, that is what access does. nine-access members would pay about $50,000.

out of your pocket, right? $50,000 for a 10-day hospital stay. but access member state f -- access members pay $3,000. that is a big discount. $25,000 to $35,000 for a broken ankle in nevada. a lot of money when you are uninsured. access -- $1,500 to $2,000. what dr. in his right mind would offer these discounts. -- what doctor in his right mind would offer these discounts? hospitals would rather have somebody paying part of the bill that none of the bill. -- than none of the bill.

i think this is pretty cool. i happen to be fortunate enough to represent access to health care networks. if you don't believe what i am saying, you can take a look at the recognition, awards, and distinction, and their testimonials. if it is ok with you, i would like to read a couple of those. "i have been most impressed by how access health people return to a normal life. many of my patients are basically non-functional because of the problem they cannot afford to have fixed. they can get the problem solved through access and go on to live a full life. this is an owner of a 15 mcdonald's stores -- "it is a simple and easy to administer, and with a diverse work force, that is saying a lot." from a member -- "the whole package has given my wife and

meet new hope. everyone at access treats us with respect and care. this has been a truly positive experience." to summarize, why does access work? everyone in the game has skin in the game. hospitals and doctors took an absolutely of faith that has paid off in the end. members are held was possible to the access rules and fees and retained -- held responsible to the access rules and fees and retain their dignity. you get people who have much more knowledge about with a cancer doctors are or whenever 80's you need. -- whatever it is unique trade with the involvement process, and ask to be face-to-face. this is a committee member who is meeting you. meeting you face-to-face to

enroll you in the program. they also got technology - savvy and are doing skype enrollment. when we saw a need, we did one more thing, then we saw another need, we did another thing. that is how you solve the problem of the uninsured. at least that is how would is working and in nevada. thank you. >> go along with your presentation, then you open it up for questions. >> i am here representing a nonprofit put together and it silicon valley. our advisory board includes carly fiorina, and the ceo of

wellpoint, and an esteemed professor of economics -- rico. i did not have it on. starting over. i am here representing the foundation for health coverage education. we are in silicon valley in california. we put together a very high- tech, low-cost solution to the uninsured problems in the united states. our board of directors includes carly fiorina, who was the ceo hewlett-packard, leonard schaeffer, who was part of the carter administration, but also started well one from scratch and became the 32nd largest company in the united states, and amnesty a health-care economist at stanford. -- and an esteemed health-care economist at stanford who was also under secretary of defense.

what we did was we put the entire united states healthcare system on line. over 3 million americans have used it. it has been around for a long time. through the power of technology, fhce enables people who need health care to obtain a. 1 9 million americans eligible for publicly funded programs have not signed up. they are using the emergency room as their primary care. they go into the emergency room and get taken care of and then they leave. the emergency room cannot collect because they are not there and they don't have the money to pay any way. with a mission to provide some of my public and private health insurance eligibility information, fhce enables us as a nation to know and control our costs, prevent waste, fraud and abuse, allocated to all cost of health care properly and accurately. we do eligibility at point of care.

when someone comes into the hospital, it takes two minutes -- the whole united states is on line, all 50 states, the district of columbia. the administrator asks the questions, sees what they are eligible for, we can be confirmed on line, and the hospital or doctor gets reimbursed immediately. in california, we have 27,400 employees whose job is to sign people up for medicaid -- medical in california -- welfare, food stamps, and all the eligibility is the same period a is based on what county you are in, how much money you make or don't make. about $110,000 each per year. $3 billion being spent on administrator, not one nickel of which goes to health care. with point of care reimbursement and one after eligibility, -- and poitn of

care eligibility, we and our the individual to understand if they are eligible. all they need to do is show up at a doctor's office or clinic. it takes two minutes to figure out. we know what is going on trade but to collect all the data at, for the very first time in -- once we collect all that data, for the very first time in american history, we will bucket our costs. we will know if the procedures being done are worth it, and we will work immediately be -- we will lower immediately the uninsured. the exchange is already done. we have had it on there for seven years. it works. people loved it. hospitals, doctors -- in fact,

some of our partners are the most the american cancer society works with us. 1.2 million calls a year from people who found out they have cancer. one of the questions they ask is, "to you have health insurance? before they started working with us, they had no answer. "oh, that is too bad." now the american cancer society there refers them to our help line, where we answer the phone for people who don't have access to the internet. they our free anybody who has cancer who is uninsured to us, and we find coverage right away. the american diabetes association, lung, blood -- all of them refer to us. what is it a thing is that hospitals started using it. the hospitals are doing the

two-minute grace and i seeing for the first time that it is not the person who came into the rear emergency room and injured, but who should have been liable? who did not die when they were supposed to die? -- who did not pay when they were supposed to pay? 80.2% were eligible for public programs and. 80.2%. amazingly, 99.7% were eligible for something. this is before health care reform. people don't know what they are eligible for. not all the other people could afford it. we do need policy, we need to confront these issues. but 80.2%? we called the medicaid office in san diego 50 times during working hours. we're spending $3 billion a year

in california. they answered the phone 15 at times during working hours. 35 times you cannot leave a message. the 15 times they did answer, you had an average time on all of 22 minutes, with the longest time 48 minutes. $3 billion a year, 80.2% of the people coming in the emergency room, costing five times what it costs to a doctor or clinic, are eligible for these programs and have not signed up. a is wrong. with our technology, we can do eligibility at point of service, at one of care. you carry that one step further and we do reimbursement point of care. all the 17 million people across the united states will have health care access. this is 100% already set up. as working. thank you. -- it is working.

thank you. >> wanted to be sure i wrote it down. i will exercise chairman's profit of and ask a question of both of you, and then we will open it up to general questions from the audience. both of these sound like very, very solid, good ideas. i had forgotten my copy of the patient protection affordable care act that i like to wait around end up like this. imagine i have a big, thick, yellow book in my hand. why these programs not included in that law? was there no room for ideas like this? were there better ideas that were incorporated? are there things that have yet to happen that we will see would be so great that it would negate the purpose of having either of these programs included? what are your thoughts on that? >> interestingly enough, there is a provision in health care

reform for programs that look a lot like access. they never got funded. a in -- it is incomprehensible to me -- >> wait, i've got to interrupt you. it didn't get funded? everything in the affordable care act was prefunded by preordained our preparations for five years street and the one that might help someone did not get funded? >> you got that right. it is not going anywhere, despite bipartisan support. >> this is an important point, because a lot of people say he did not get funded and clearly that is a problem that congress is being too parsimonious with money. the affordable care act, where we lavished money on all kinds of programs, some of the sum worth, some of dubious words, and yours was not included? >> that is correct.

>> i'm sorry. go on. >> leonard schaeffer was part of the hhs system during the carter administration. when health care reform passed, he referred me to the person who communicated directly with the president in charge of health care reform. he referred me to the person in charge of technology for all of this. we showed him what we had online already. they cannot believe it, that no idea existed. i had already communicated as much as i could, but it is hard to break through. for real reasons it is hard to break through. but this time we were right there. they were very surprised to see that the u.s. health-care system was already on line, and that millions of americans were already using 8. i offered to share it with them, share my technology and everything, but they did not

really want to do that. they wanted to copy it for their own. what are you going to do? we are doing this not for one side or the other. we are doing this to help america. americans at know it. they are using it. that is how eight days. we think we could save the united states somewhere -- once it got implemented -- $20 billion a year in administration. >> will they be -- i have a number of things i could ask, but i don't want to monopolize the time. we will open it up to questions. rebecca, anything you get off the twitterverse, hand to me. if you are going to ask a question, i guess we need to use the microphone. while people are collecting

their bearings, let me follow up on my initial question. i guess i don't understand what -- even without funding, what would be the barrier to setting up something like this in other states? are there other states that expressed an interest in this? . >> yes, we abide talking to several different states saying, "here is a model, take it." how they got started is there was an initial grant to pull this all together. that is the government funding to start. about $2 million to be done for about $1 million. it is not a lot of money. at the end of the day, when you are self-sustaining, that is the kind of investment that the government should be making in its priorities. i am fearful that this is not considered a priority. >> this comes up all the time,

from employers' questions to our office -- say you are a big national retailer and have the largest and you are criticized for not providing employees with entry-level insurance. you do that, you start providing insurance. it has some limits. these are no longer allowed under the affordable care act --like time limits c-span.or lifetime limits and out of pocket limits will negate a law that these policies, so people have saw waivers to continue arguing that some insurance is better than no insurance. the changes themselves don't start until 2014. the center for consumer

information an assurance oversight has provided over the past year -- i don't know what the number is now, 15, 16, 1700 individual laborers. would your -- individual waivers. would your access and called a waiver to continue? >> it would not, because it is not insurance. it is in medical discount plan for the state of nevada. that was part of the earlier conversation -- are you going to put us out of business? as the leaders of hhs said to us, what if we put you out of business? they win, because there is still because they wouldn't, there is still this uninsured population to take care of. >> in theory, it could continue after the supreme court says all clear bias and the affordable

care act -- says all cleared by a task and the affordable care act is the law of the land? the argument would be that it would be unnecessary, but some would prefer that if they have had exposure to it before. >> exactly. >> please go ahead. if not, i will continue edging to witnesses. -- continue badgering witnesses. you mentioned administrative costs. we are constantly told that private insurance companies in this country take too much of a premium dollar for other things, presumably other things are profits. the administrative costs in private insurance is inordinately high, and there is

in the affordable care at a limit to and on how much can be spent on a non-clinical issues. you are talking about not the private insurance realm, but you are talking about the public insurance realm, where you maintain that administrative dollars -- i hate to use the term "wasted," but it sums up what i heard you saying. how do you keep a administrative costs low in your world? >> one of the things they did when they tried to figure out the administrative costs of, let's say, group insurance. -- of, let's say, group insurance with bigger out the marketing costs. in reality, the insurance company never received the money.

they received it, but it went right out. really, it is the person buying the insurance, the group, that is paying that commission to the broker. the broker does all kinds of services and advocates for all of the people that are under that group. it could be the dependents are the spouse, the employee, the employer. there's a whole lot of laws, accounting, everything brokers do. when they included that in the minimum loss ratio, it for everything off. insurance companies generally work only on 3% to 5% of total profit health insurance companies. it let people think that they must be making 25% or something, but they are not. they could cut profits in half and still within three or four months after it. -- still in three or four months catch it. the whole concept of minimum

loss ratio should it scare anybody in america. the health insurance industry is in industry like any industry. as competition, it is tough, it is a complicated business. if the banks are telling them how much money, it will be long before they start telling everybody else. -- it won't be long before they start telling everybody else. >> we are already told the medicare is, as far as the administrative fees, are only like 3% -- i would dispute that figure, but let's stipulate that that is the case. how is the foundation going to save additional money there? >> i am using california as an example. if we did point of care eligibility and point of care reimbursement, the patient is out of the picture for having to sign up for all of this. if you think about it, and one of the biggest problems with, as

i see it, health care reform, is that they have confused health insurance with health care. all of the programs that are public programs are prepaid health care. it is not insurance. you would not evaluating risk. you are giving access to health care for the safety net. which we need, we all believe in that. it has created this huge barrier of entry for, let's say, a single woman with two children at all back -- at home. she has to go back, but she is working and is a huge problem. >> how does the foundation cut through some of that? >> we have the united states healthcare system on line -- >> wait a minute, the whole system on line? >> sure.

take the eligibility quist. it takes two minutes. you see what you are eligible for. it will give you a copy of the application you need to take with you, right up. -- a copy of the application you need to take with you, a copy of what you need with you to sign up. in california, i heard that they are only allowed to sign up two people per day per person. in california -- >> person in the medicaid office? >> it is because california is in financial trouble. you cannot just not sign them up. all that does this transfer the costs to the private sector, because the hospital has to charge somebody did that is why the premiums go up. that creates a cycle and in the insurance companies look like they are the bad guys react they are only working on 3% or 4%

profit margin. there is a whole lot of waste in the system. the whole concept of the exchanges is like 1990's technology. that would be like investing in xerox desktops with eight-inch floppy disk drives. we have the whole country investing billions of dollars, each state doing it separately, in these exchanges. yet you could set up the exchange -- our system is available on your iphone. it is all done anonymously. there is no selling of anything. all we want to do is make sure people understand what they are eligible for. or your ipad. that is all on there. it takes two minutes, it shows you what you are eligible for. it is so simple it is scary proje. >> let's take a question. >> he said in nev -- you said in

nevada it is not considered health insurance. does that mean that those people who signed up for that would still pay a penalty for not having insurance? >> the question was, if it is not insurance, what access is offering, and it is not, under the new regime of health care reform, if you don't have insurance you have to pay a penalty. when we had a conversation about that, because we are not insurance, the answer we got with hhs was you would not be affected. how double play out in a regulatory sense is anybody's guess. >> with a minute w -- wait a minute -- how can someone use you as insurance? >> i am not making this up.

i don't have assurances to know how that is going to work. i am hopeful that we can talk to the administration and, frankly, plead and beg that people who are getting it done in a smart way that works for them will not be financially penalized for how the system is quite a workout. >> it will be judged as credible coverage? >> it is not credible coverage because it is not coverage. i don't know if one of those 17,000 waivers they are not going to -- but i hope they are not going to hurt us. >> other question from the audience, or from twitter? if not, i have got to ask you this gue. you are frie -- you referenced california was having some trouble. the medicaid population is going to increase by probably around

15 million as a safe guess, with the coverage of more and more adults under what should have been a safety net program for medicaid, which now will become a primary insurance for anybody who earns under 138% of the federal poverty level. the states are obviously going to be concerned about groups such as yours finding more and more people that should be covered under medicaid. is this a problem for the states for the future? i understand that it is going to be a problem because we had so many newly eligible people on the medicaid rolls. but he said they are already not taking care of what they should be taking care of. your point of service engine will then drive people to the coverage that they actually should have, and we are adding 15 million more people on the medicaid rolls. it looks like a tremendous burden for the state's.

>> that is one way of looking at it, but if you think about it, it is a zero sum game. 15 million people are already using the emergency room as their primary care. it is not going to be all of a sudden more money. each should be less money, because the 15 million people eligible who are not signed up understand that they should go to the doctor or clinic without having to worry about paying for it, or at least being covered through a government program. perhaps that person that is, let's say, having symptoms of diabetes is going to go early and get it under control rather than filling up -- rather than showing up at the emergency room. it is fully and a standing exactly where we are, the very beginning of getting it under control. you cannot go somewhere unless

you know where you are. if we get everybody signed up, we will collect the data, we will have all the data, and he will know what we're spending our money on. for the first time in american history, we can budget health care in the united states. if the states paid more for all the people that were eligible at they oppressiveness of the tanker, theoretically, the costs of insurance -- that they are supposed to be paying for, theoretically, the cost of insurance should go down. we want all americans to have healthcare access. if we had a program that is passed by law and the person is eligible, they should be able to use it. it shouldn't be-seat. -- it should hide a -- it shouldn't be hide and seek. we want to know exactly what it really is, make it accountable, do cost containment, we should to waste, fraud, and abuse

control and provide access to all americans. >> let me ask if -- let's go way back there first. >> hello? >> i will repeat it to you. >> i have a question about the coverage rule. you mentioned that it is similar to what the hell exchanges are going to do, but better. i was wondering how the health exchanges are going to affect your program in california. >> our program is actually -- >> repeat the questionz. >> she was asking about how to help the exchanges are going to affect our program. i am like the person who runs yours -- if we got put out of business, that would be great, if it made sense. what we do is it that our mission is to lower the ranks of the uninsured throughout the whole united states. that is why we put the holding together. by bringing it all together for

the first time, people did not have to know the program existed. that is the key actually. the question is an algorithm that once you enter the five questions, it pulls all the program you are eligible for. you don't have a look for 5000 programs, right? that is the beauty of it. that is the simple thing. california already used it in the deployment development department of california. we get referred by the department of insurance. they refer to us, as well as ohio, louisiana, and other states. in our annual report, we have 8 final -- a funnel. the people who need health care are either sick or injured.

the rest of the people don't think about it. that is why people don't sign up. what we have done through this funnel is with the hard and long and hospitals, implement development department, all these people refer to us, and all the people with pre-existing conditions are able to go and use it right now. it is a beautiful thing. this happened all on its own. we set it up. we had no idea it was going to have this kind of demand. it just keeps driving and driving us. this is so important to the country and there is so much consumer demand and we have some money wonderful letters and phone calls and everything from people who say, "you saved my life. i had no idea we could do this." we see it as a gift, something

we can do. private sector, nonprofit, anonymous program. it helps millions of americans. if you go to coverage.org, you can see it there. that is what drives us, really. we want to help. >> if we can do so under the limits of house ethics rules -- put a link to the access and coverage for all on the health caucus website, people might find that interesting. people might want another five questions you ask when you go into the images room, and they can find it on the web site. >> if you know somebody who does not have helped insurance, send them there and they will find it -- >> just in california? >> oh, no, all 50 states.

coverageforall.org. 1-800-234-1317. operators all train, 24 hours a day, they speak 198 languages. we can answer the phone in 198 languages. >> access is only in nevada? >> at this time only in nevada. the beauty of phil's program and our program is that there are a number of ways to do this. there are models that work, and why are we work -- but why aren't we looking at the models that work and doing them all over? >> i wonder if the emergency room is not considered a point of care? >> it is a point of care. the answer is that yes, they are

all points of care. the images the room is a very expensive point of care -- the emergency room is a very expensive point of care. it is online. when a hospital decides to use our system, we integrate it into the system and it becomes theirs. we stay on top of all the programs throughout the whole united states. if they change medicaid or the schip plan, we change it and it gets done. we centralize all the information is so they don't have to. the hospital can use our system. the beauty of this -- >> the beauty of this is what access does is keep people out of the emergency room. it sounds like what phil's group does is that is where they kept them -- catch them. >> until we know who is in the

program, we cannot control costs. they are not there. >> oh, yes, we can. we will only answer your medicaid questions -- >> or we can transfer the costs somewhere else. don't you think as a country we should know exactly where we are and be honest with ourselves and not fight over this and that? as we fight, people are not having access to care? we want to give everyone access. we want our programs to work, right? this is a great country we are in, and people need to know that. they e to know that we can figure this out and we will. it is working and we're getting there. >> i am so impressed listening to both of you. i can think of times with in my practice lifetime, peggy, where i would have someone come in, and even if i would say, "you

need this done, i won't charge you," you are always up against hospital and up against the anaesthesiologist, the pathologist, and a way to access that with one phone call as opposed to -- i got punished twice -- i wasn't going to get paid for the procedure, and i had to go in and organize and orchestrate all these ancillary activities that would surround the%'s hospitalization. i never once was at -- it was a private hospital and not primarily by its initials, and they would never give anyone a break. this is an exciting transformation, and exciting difference. certainly for the person who comes in and recognizes they have a problem -- i want to take care of it in the right way. this is an opportunity for them to do that if they live in the state of nevada. i hope it is replicated in other

areas. i cannot tell you the number of times i did a delivery at 2:00 in the morning on a saturday morning. the patient would be long gone from the hospital by the time the social worker arrived at 9:00 on monday. even if it was emergency medicate, for what they might be eligible, the person who could assign them -- who could sign them up was long gone by the time they arrived at hospital. your actual point of contact, and your system works 24 hours a day, seven days a week, correct? >> correct. >> that in itself would be a game changer. i practice in texas. i was not close to the southern border, but nonetheless, we had people every weekend at came in and saw services who did not have a social security number. but they might be eligible for

emergency medicaid under a federal program, but they were lost to the four wins because the access they gave voice -- they gave was frequently interact -- incorrect. it is such a tremendous step forward, and is utilizing things that are already there. you have not add to build any new infrastructure. i was struck by your comments -- if we are going to restructure health care in this country, soup to nuts, top to bottom, why did we go back and recreate 1950's, 1960's programs? surely we can be smarter than that. that is what i like some much about what you articulated. there is no way to be smarter than that. regardless of what happens with the affordable care act for the future, regardless of the state in the court, these types of content, which both of you have

brought to us today, are worthy of study and recognition. implementation at some place, either in the affordable care act or the brave new world that follows its demise in the courts. thank you both for being with us. as always, health caucus will keep this webcast up in perpetuity on the website. if you know someone who would have benefited, someone you know who would benefit from one of these programs, the contact information, if it comports with the rules of house ethics, will be available on the health caucus website. thank you all for your attendance today. >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> figures a quick look at our prime-time schedule on c-span. beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span, republican presidential candidate home and came on what his plans are for america. and on c-span2, key issues with spectrum sales, net neutrality, and high-speed internet. and on c-span3 live coverage of the kentucky governor's debate. all of these programs night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on the c-span networks. >> this was the first time i've

seen in politics where there was a heat, irreal he. >> on tuesday, the deficit -- that is a reduction committee will hear from senator davinci -- the manatee -- domenici. you can see all of this on line and c-span archive online. >> now from this morning's "washington journal" a discussion on tax policies espoused by the republican presidential candidates.

host: who you like so far on the gop side? guest: all of them have said that they would vote against any effort to raise taxes, veto any effort to raise taxes, with the exception of huntsman, the former governor of utah. he has not taken the pledge, but the plan that he has put forward is revenue neutral. his plan is not to raise taxes. he just will not put it in writing. they are all leading toward taxing income one time and at one rate. this is what herman cain wants to do. he has this complicated 9-9-9 transition. but he is also talking about taxing income. that is also what governor perry has put forward.

they're all moving in that direction, taxing income one time and at one rate. there is consensus among republicans that tax rates are too high. we're talking about something like 20% to 25% as the lower rate. it is good to have that kind of general consensus. >> at the same time, the "new york times" lead editorial says this.

guest: the "new york times" is choosing the polls it wants to listen to. there are also poles lead know -- but are also polls that show that nobody wants to pay more than 20%, nobody. what governor perry has put forward is an alternative sense -- if an alternative system that you do not have to go into. i think that makes sense. but the political issue is, if you are happy with the present system, you might well not wish to move to that cleaner, more rate. someone who is retired might not wish to move. someone who organize their life of around the tax code, knowing what is deductible and what is not, might say, no, i don't want to change anything. we will put up an alternative system.

corporate great depths down lower, few were deductions, but -- fewer deductions, but more rights. i think is wise to have this as an alternative. i think that idea of. isis -- of rick perry's extremely credible. host: and 9:00 a.m., he c-span2 hermine kaine and others will be talking about that nine-nine- nine plan. -- 9-9-9 plan. mr. norquist, let's take a listen and a look at mr. kaine talking about his plan.

>> here are two of those features that my competitors did not get to. number one, how we deal with the port? if you are at or below the poverty level, your plan, your9- 9-9. it is 9-0-9. in other words, if you are at or below the poverty level, then you do not pay that middle 9 tax on your income. this is how we help the poor. >> what do you think? guest: here is the challenge. i applaud his sense that the present system is broken and needs to be changed, absolutely. he wants to go to a sales tax, which is an income tax on consumed income. everybody pay the same rates. but the transition that he set

up, 9-9-9 got him attention, which i guess is helpful, but here's the challenge. 3 taxes. a 9% value-added tax, it is a tax on all wages paid by a company. a 9% sales tax, like those you pay in most states. and a 9% income tax. to have three taxes is like swallowing 3 tapeworms. assuming that two of them will go away and one of them will be well behaved. i worry when you create new taxes there is a temptation for them to grow. you can look at europe when they added a value-added tax in, not only did it increased dramatically from where it started, but all other taxation increased more rapidly than

before that. it was not "instead of," but "in addition to." in germany in the 1970's, their high property-tax is. we must fix this. but we do not have an income tax. now what do we have a new jersey? the highest income tax and property tax around. and they just did this in a pick -- in connecticut. creating new taxes to fix old taxes, it does not end well. >> we will hear from the rick perry and others as we move along. let's take our first call for grover norquist. it is from ottawa, canada. caller: thank you for taking my call. mr. norquist, i'm very offended you have the republican party signed your petition to not ever raise taxes.

you do not live in my district. you had my representative sign that. he is supposed to have an open mind when you go to congress. how can you have an open mind when they sign your petition come hell or high water you are never going to raise taxes? we have to raise revenue in this country. how do you have so much power to do this to have everybody sign? guest: actually, you have power. i think you misunderstand what the pledge is. it is not a petition. it is a one sentence commitment that the congressman takes to you. if you read the pledge -- go to our website hea.org. 41 senators have signed a pledge. is that i will not raise net taxes. tax reform, cutting some taxes

and raising others, fine. as long as it is revenue neutral and does not increase taxes. we can press the politician who wants to have tax reform if they have taken the pledge and made it clear that tax reform will not turn into a tax increase. and that pledge, when you have a chance to read it, is to you. it is to your congressman or congresswoman constituents. it is not to me personally. the power is in your hands. the majority of this district voted for a congressman who committed that he would not raise your taxes. if you are for tax increases, then vote for a candidate to that is for them. i do not be unhappy -- but do not be unhappy when a politician gives you the respect of telling you what he is going to do.

the other politicians that got there and say if i want to raise taxes i will raise taxes and i'm not going to listen to you and we just do everything we have been doing and we need to do more, raise taxes. there are two kinds of politicians. vote for the ones who want to raise taxes and not reform government if that is where you want. but do not be angry with the other citizens in your district. he promised all of you here would not raise taxes. that is a good thing. host: the next caller is from a shell. caller: i liked your debate with ed rendell. but he proved that many of your statements were false. guest: actually, he did not, but we can go through that if you would like. caller: ok, but i have read in the media that you are now

threatening republicans that do not agree with you. they will punish them in the elections. is that true? guest: it is true that you may have run that in the newspapers. i have read that in the newspapers. what the pledge says it is is a commitment that he or she will not raise taxes. they may do other interesting things, but they will not raise taxes. and i commend this to you at other people in your town or your congressional district or that stake if it is a senator. -- or that state if it is a senator. you are calling from illinois. in illinois, your governor has not taken the pledge, nor your state legislators. they have raised taxes. they have done more in illinois in terms of tax increases and other states and as a result, people are leaving your state.

people are moving to states with lower taxes. the damage being done to annoyed by tax increasing politicians is very unfortunate for illinois, and you did not do anything to deserve it, other than electing individuals who will raise taxes rather than reform government. who will enforce the pledge? the american people will enforce the pledge. when george herbert walker bush was elected, he did so well -- and promise not to raise taxes. he ended the cold war without a lot of blood on the floor. he got iraq out of kuwait. he governed very well with one big exception. he raised taxes, and he lost the next objection.

i did not do that. the american people did that. some more fromr texas gov. repairing about his flat tax plan. >> central to my plan is giving every american the option of storing out the 3 million words -- throwing out of the 3 million words of the current tax code, and i might add, the cost of complying with all of that code, in order to pay 20% flat tax on their income. the best representation of my plan is this postcard. this is the size of what we are talking about right here. taxpayers will be able to fill this out and file their taxes on that. host: simplicity, he points out there, but that is specifically on the flat tax. guest: i think it is a very good idea. the whole plan that he has put

forward. 20% is the important part, 20% at the corporate and the individual level. even obama has talked about wanting to cut the corporate rate because ours is 35% in europthe united states. the average in europe is 25%. that makes us less competitive than companies owned by german or french people or irish people. it is a terrible disadvantage for americans and very bad for job creation here. we need to take that rate down to -- at least, people say, 25%. but europeans did not have a state income taxes. we do. even taken down to 20%, we are still above the average -- even taken down to 25%, we are still above the average in europe. he takes it down to 20%.

what obama wants to do is take the corporate rate down so that general motors and ge pay 25%, 30% when you add the state's, so still more than our competitors. but then it was to take the individual rate of to 35% and then to 40% and then at 2% if your a small business -- 50% if you are a small business. if you are a major corporation, 25%. we need to keep both of those at the same rate, but so individuals pay less, but also so the small businesses do not get whacked. that is what perry does. host: here is another call on the line. good morning. caller: i do believe that rick perry is the strongest of all of the republican candidates running for president.

i am an african-american. and all the -- although i do admirer mr. herman cain, i believe that rick perry's plan is stronger. in illinois, ever was property taxes were raised 66%. it is atrocious. see absolutely no change in the state. it is time for the two-party and the republican party to shift years because i do believe that herman cain, as well as mitt romney, fits in with the perfect narrative of the occupied wall street forum. mitt romney is receiving most of his millionaire and billionaire investors in his campaign. host: you vote therefore rick

perry. i can rick perry win? guest: he has enough money to compete with mitt romney in the primary. i think either would defeat i obama and the general election. rick perry has a 10-year history as governor of texas. it's a tremendous track record of success. there were some things i thought were some -- most impressive that were perry did. transparency and the state level. all the other states are following the texas model. i had a guy called in the 1990's and said, what did you do that was interesting? i saw what repair it was doing. now kansas and a, followed.

all of the state websites that exist. and that transparency is in extremely good idea. host: i was wanting to drop the mitt romney story from the -- "washington times" article. speak about what you see as mitt romney is a tax proposal. guest: it is not as dramatic as 9-9-9 or repairs plan. he might want to come out and do something more specific on taxes. all of his ideas aren't moving in the right direction, though.

-- all of his ideas are moving in the right direction, though. the houseicans' own of representatives right now. they should capture the senate in 2012 because they only need to win four and there are 23 democrats up for reelection, only 10 republicans. half of the democrats are contested races. we will have a republican house and republican senate. what about the presidency? if there is a republican president, what is the bill he will sign? he will sign the tax reform bill that congress endorses. it will be something between ryan and perry, or between reihan and herman cain, or between ryan and mitt romney is planned.

host: here is a democrat, tony, from colorado. -- california. ,aller: i'm in the oakland california. my comment is, on the plans the republicans have, they can say what they want to say, but when it comes down to it, they were all raise your taxes -- will always your taxes. people should educate themselves, and not just as far back as the reagan administration. ronald reagan, he raised taxes . they lost a lot of money then and no one said anything. when george bush sr. came into

office, he also had a deficit. he also raised taxes. no one said anything. when clinton came in, he had a surplus, but he was still working with a torch for senior to make sure that they all got paid -- with george bush senior to make sure they all got paid. the american people are not looking at the facts and seeing that every president has ever been in office has raised taxes. there is something that has to be done. from the stateg and local levels, the federal level. people have to be able to live. guest: a couple of very good points. reagan did raise taxes in 1982. the democrats went to him and said, here's what we are going to do.

we will cut $3 in spending, because there was a deficit. we will raise taxes $1 for every $3 in spending cuts and will be this big reduction in the deficit. reagan agreed with it. the republican senate was in league with the democrats and house and they said $3 spending cuts for every dollar of tax increase. the taxes were real. we are still paying the tax that were increased in 1982. and spending, instead of coming down by $3 for every dollar of tax increase, it increased more rapidly after the 1982 deal. it did not go down by $3 or even $2 or $1 or zero. it increased more than before. in 1990 bush sr., they said you

will get $2 for every $1 and he said, that is a good idea. he should have learned from megyn. -- reagan. they raise taxes and spending did not go down. now what is happening? you think republicans will raise taxes. the good news is, that is wrong. people remember 1982. they remember 1990. and they know when you walk into the room with democrats and they say, we will raise taxes and decrease spending. two things happen, taxes go up and spending goes up. speaker boehner in the house and image mcconnell in the senate have made it very clear -- mitch mcconnell in the senate have made it very clear that there will bring it down. the on the way to cut spending is to cut spending.

raising taxes is no part of cutting spending. raising taxes unable spending too much money. if obama is trying to quit smoking, you do not give him more cigarettes. it does not help. there is no part of getting obama to quit smoking that includes giving him cigarettes. it does not tell. -- help. that is why republicans have learned, as you say, through painful examples in 1982 and in 1990. very embarrassing, very bad for the economy. that is why we will hold the line. host: buffalo, new york, patrick, an independent. caller: i want to know where you get the funding for your organization. do you release the names of these individuals or corporations that fund you? i think this is important for the american people to know this. guest: we get direct support

from mail. we do some fund-raising on e- mail as well. and we get support from foundations. we have a c-3 foundation. we get general support from across the board. but your question is, are the public? the answer is, we are americans for tax reform. the aclu takes on a lot of powers in washington d.c. americans for tax reform takes on some very powerful tax interest that want to trillion dollars in tax increases and we work to say no. we work in issues of privacy where people could be threatened. we have very powerful, rich spending interests that are very unhappy that we are part of the american effort to stop them from raising taxes.

that is why the law very correctly protects privacy. host: 1 your rights -- one viewer writes this. guest: i think we are cannot -- he is confusing government with america. government is not the country. that is a mistake that germany may. government, when property -- properly limited, is a very important piece of society. you want to work to keep the canadians on their side of the border and you want to have police to keep people from stealing your stuff. but when the -- government becomes too large, it becomes abuse of liberty rather than protection of it. one thing that my organization has worked for is limiting government of the state level as well as the federal level.

his dream is to get his hands on their bodies money, yes. that is not the american dream. that is the east german dream. host: we have a short piece from alan simonsen -- alan simpson. the former governor talked about the tax plan. >> let me get back to grow norquist because he is a good guy with a bad idea. anyone who goes and picks up a pledge that you are going to never raise taxes under any situation, even if your country is in extremity is just -- he came and testified before us and he said, my hero is ronald reagan. i said, he is mine too. i said, ronald reagan raised

taxes nine times. he said, i know. i did not like that at all. and i said, why did he do that? he did that to make the country run. 9% of the republicans that are serving have signed the pledge. how can you sign the pledge before pledge, know that -- without knowing the position of your country? i think that that is a remarkable absurdity. i spend a lot of time talking about them, and i mean it, he is the most powerful man in the united states right now. host: used the phrase remarkable absurdity. what do you think? guest: several things. he is quite correct, the tax issue is a very powerful issue. the american people are very committed to not raising taxes. people campaigned on that pledge. it is an open pledge. unlike democrats, who make

private pledges to trial lawyers and labor unions that are never written down. this is a public pledge. when people run for office and proudly say that they bought raise taxes, that they will reform government -- if you are not willing to say that taxes are off the table, you'll never reform the government. it is a very interesting one. alan simpson mrs. -- he has an argument, but not with me. he has an argument with the american people. with 98% of the congress. only six people in the house have not taken the pledge. seven republicans. "the hill," they did an

interview with those 13, they do not sign pledges, but they said they would never raise taxes. 99.9%, committed to not raising taxes. host: dave, for grover norquist. caller: good morning. you walk on the right track with the limiting of raising the taxes. i love that. i love what you have done. here's why. i went through this stuff and looked at some figures. 14,000 companies have left for china because taxes have hovered around the four -- a 40% corporate tax rate. they just flat out told us, we are leaving the united states and going to china and holland, where they are much lower.

whenever taxes come back down, they might hire the 25 or 35. 14,000 companies have left, in addition to these large, international companies. those 14,000 companies averaged 1000 people per company. a fact check with the number of unemployed. about 15 million. it is because their corporate tax rate is hovering around 14%. the rest of the world is not. this is why companies leave the united states and will not come back and tell that this change. that is my comment. guest: is not that some companies leave the united states only, although some do for the reasons you are saying. people move between states. people have been leaving michigan. detroit used to be much bigger than it is today.

people have been leaving illinois, wisconsin, other states, moving to lower tax states. 1 million people have left california over the last 10 years. over 1 million people have moved into texas and florida. no state income tax in florida. high income taxes in other states. it is easier to move from one state to another in the united states, as opposed to france. but people will move between states. and we see that. they are telling politicians that taxes matter. when you hear from academics that taxes do not matter, when jobs leave the united states, they are sending a strong signal to the politicians to listen to us, to keep tax rates low.

host: democratic line, new york. guest: hello, michael. caller: thank you very much. i find your comments incredibly slanted. they need to be responded to. first of all, the question becomes -- is the tax rate right now about the lowest that it has been for quite a long time? lower than that has been in 28 years? guest: no, it was 28% when reagan left office. caller: i am talking about income tax. guest: i am talking about the tax rates that people pay. you are talking about the percentage of gdp. that is down because obama is driving the economy into the dirt. caller: the percentage of gdp, if the economy goes down, the gdp goes down, so your logic is

wrong. what about the tax rates for the rich? not everyone. when he talked about raising tax rates, he was talking about raising them for the rich. guest: obama promised that he would never attacked anyone less than $250,000 per hour. -- per year. caller: i am talking about over $1 million. guest: i would oppose raising taxes on any one in this country. caller: what would you do about the $3 trillion " deficit -- $3 trillion dollars -- $3 trillion deficit in this country? host: let's get a response. guest: some politicians say that they will tax the rich and not everyone else.

that is what clinton did. remember, he tried to raise taxes on energy and gasoline. everyone uses that. obama said that he would never raise any kind of taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 per year. 16 days into his presidency, not three weeks into his presidency, he raised taxes on corporate jets? billionaires'? no, no. smokers. only one person smokes cigarettes and makes more than $250,000, and his name is barack obama. his first tax was on low-income people. he has come out with a series of other taxes on low-income people. the reason that politicians say that they will raise taxes on rich people -- remember the alternative minimum tax?

tens of millions are threatened with it now. it is a tax on rich people. congratulations. how did we pay for the spanish- american war, 100 years ago? a tax on rich people. 100 years later, it is a tax on everyone with telephones, 98% of the country. at some point, it comes down to lucy in the football. host: one final thought? caller: strictly political, i was asking about policy. if they do something other than what we ask them to do, you are right, that is wrong. we do not want them taxing the middle class. we want them taxing the rich. i am asking you, should they be tasking -- taxing the rich more?

guest: if you reduce marginal tax rates, you actually get more revenue out of a growing economy. it is bigger and you have lower taxes on a bigger economy. the government gets more revenue. at the end of eight years of the reagan presidency, tax rates to 28% and the government was getting twice as much revenue. a dramatic increase in revenue with lower rates. this is what but perry is talking about doing, as well as the other republican candidates. host: there is a huge headline in congress that is coming. 24 days. guest: here is what they are being asked to pursue. $1.20 trillion in spending cuts or tax revenues. host: if there is no agreement, as we know, $1.20 trillion will be split between defense and

domestic spending. what do you want to see happen? guest: first of all, republican leadership said that tax increases are off the table. the six republicans and six democrats on this supersecret committee, i believe it should all be on c-span. i have made that case repeatedly. nothing good happens if c-span is not watching. whatever deals they are cutting without cameras are bad for the american people, or they would be done in public. democrats do not want to talk about tax increases in public, i think they should have to. the question is, the democrats want to help republicans cut $1.20 trillion in spending in a reasonable way ? or do they just avoid cuts? the democrats have always attempted to come up with a plan that is an essay or an outline.

then we will go to the automatic sequestering. acting as if they had an alternative. host: the committee is meeting again tomorrow. that is coming up in just a few weeks. guest: keep an eye on them. host: we will be watching. what about the congressman from virginia? here is the congressman from before the house. >> we have reached the point where one person's demand for ideological purity is paralyzing congress to the point where even mates -- a discussion of tax reform is leading to no tax breaks? i wrote -- i understand that some may not understand what i said. many are not aware of mr. norquist. my conscience compels me to

speak out today. guest: frank wolf is the only republican that is for tax increases. he endorsed the $2 trillion in tax increases in the simpson bowls proposal. no other republican in the house of representatives has endorsed that kind of tax increase, except specifically that one. he came to me in a lobby with a bill that he had a number of years ago. at the time i remember -- reminded him of what happened in 1982 and 1990. i thought that a commission for just spending restraint would be a good idea. he wanted one and his commission passed this bipartisan commission that would have recommended, tilted towards democrats in terms of who was on the commission -- he was

guaranteeing tax increases. massive tax increases with little or no spending cuts. so, he is an appropriate. he has a very different idea of the way to go. it is wrong of him to miss characterize the pledge. he did the same thing that one of your callers did. that i am stopping a tax increase. he has not let -- he has not read the pledge. he thinks that it gets in a way of tax reform. the pledge is written down. it is on the website. there is no net tax increase. i created it. it was endorsed by president reagan in 1986 to help to pass tax reform. only if people felt there was -- only if people felt comfortable that there would be no tax increase hidden inside -- you cannot get there unless the

american people know there will love be a tax increase. not only is the pledge consist -- which he got wrong, unfortunately, first on the floor of the house and now, but he misunderstands completely what it does. you do not get tax reform without the protection of the pledge. the pledge is enforced by the people of the district and your state. not by me. frank wolf has been very frustrated with the republican leadership. to pretend to be mad at me is silly. host: calvin, independent line. caller: good morning. this is an honor and pleasure to be talking to you. i will never forget this. today's my birthday. october 31, halloween. guest: happy birthday. caller: thank you very much. [laughter]

that pledge, anyone that signs that pledge, they signed it. no jobs, right? they signed the pledge that because all republicans, except that man that you just said, he voted against it, but now, because the economy is the way that it is, everyone is 99% in the streets, and you keep going back to ronald reagan, he signed, making it ok for your thing, but now that everyone is in the street, do you not think that all of this -- actually, when ronald reagan came into office, do you not think that because of the 99% with everyone losing that 1% you are trying to protect, you are all trying to

blame president obama, do you not think that president obama has done everything possible that the republicans have tried? everything that they wanted? i am very disappointed with the president, but now that he did everything that he can, all the republicans that could make the country go, you made him sign a pledge? guest: i did not make anyone sign a pledge. un frank seem to understand -- misunderstand this. people live in districts that do not want their taxes raised, they seem to want economic growth. the call was to take the pledge and keep the pledge. those times in america when we do not cut taxes, we have better economic growth and more job creation. for two years, president obama

and harry reid had complete control of the american government. they had a majority in the house and the senate. they did exactly what they wanted to do. things got worse. the idea that the government can create jobs, the $800 billion that obama, harry reid, and that he pelosi put together to borrow, the theory runs that if the government takes a dollar from someone who earns it and gives it to someone who is politically connected, that you have somehow created more dollars in the economy. harry reid, nancy pelosi, president obama, standing on one side of the lake, lifting a bucket of water up, pouring it into another like, announcing that they are stimulating. if you laugh at that, because

the lake is not deeper, they do respond that they will do this 800 billion times and it will work, for sure. but it did not. more joblessness. more people lot of work. it worse economy now than when people did that. we know that it does not work. government taking money and spending it does not work. from history, we know what has worked between countries and states. lower taxes, less regulation, less spending, few were abusive trial lawyers. that is what we need to move towards. government takes a dollar out of the economy and moves it. that does not create jobs. it just moves it. host: atr.org is the website. thank you for coming out this morning and sharing your insights. guest: absolutely.

good to be here. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> political and coverage continues tonight at the kentucky governor's debate, live coverage on c-span 3 tonight at 8:00 eastern. watch more video of the candidates. seek what political reporters are saying. track the latest contributions on the c-span website. easy to use, it helps you to navigate the landscape with candidate bios and the latest polling data, plus links primary and caucus states. all at c-span.org/2012. -- /campaign2012. >> the odds are that the super

committee, if they come up with recommendations, it would include a proposal relating to option spectrums. >> net neutrality and the fcc decision to be director universal service fund to provide high-speed internet to underserved areas of the u.s., tonight on "the communicator's." >> the white house council on environmental quality -- environmental quality kicked off today, featuring officials discussing ways that the government can lead in sustainability. the 2011 greengov symposium represents the second time that leaders from the government, nonprofit, and academic communities have been brought together to identify sustainability in the federal government. this is about 90 minutes.

>> all right, that was quiet fast. happy halloween. we are thrilled to have you here today. we are so grateful for your commitment to the federal government, following up on the challenge of the president's executive order. we are grateful for the team in the room today, working so hard and diligently over the past few years to meet all of our milestones. we are equally grateful for the symposium this year.

[applause] all right, we are jumping into the program here. i am very proud to introduce nancy, the chair of the white house council on environmental quality. she has been an extraordinary champion of this since day one. she has advanced an extraordinary set of initiatives on environment and clean energy in the economy. getting that effort stood up, also munching america's great outdoors, just to name a few. i would like to welcome nancy to the stage. [applause] >> thank you all.

welcome to the greengov symposium. we are very happy to see you all here. it has been just a bit more than two years since president obama signed the executive order of leadership, energy, and performance. this important executive order, the reason we are all here today, is to be smart and responsible in how we operate the federal government's debt not get complacent. the point is to make informed decisions on these operations to leverage purchasing power for innovation and job growth. we aim to be good stewards of the government and an asset to the community that helps us. i am glad to say that we are making excellent progress. the federal community has made

great strides towards meeting these goals, by working together across agencies and regions by rep -- replicating what is working and focusing on the results that demonstrate how environmental and economic health go hand in hand. let me recap the achievements we have reached together. january of 2010, we set a greenhouse gas reduction goal of 28% reduction by 2020 for direct reduction emissions. more -- more than one year later, we completed our federal gas inventory, showing agencies making progress toward our commitment to measure, report, and reduce pollution. next week doubles the federal hybrid week with the department of energy leading the way. a few months later, we published the first-ever comprehensive set of strategic sustainability

performance plans, which is sustainability added to each agency's mission. we know that you cannot manage which cannot measure. earlier this year, we released the energy and sustainability report cards, benchmarking each agency's performance towards these goals. earlier in the year, the president signed a memo requiring that new cars and trucks purchased by federal agencies must be alternative fueled by 2015. we are proud to announce the purchase of the federal government's first 100 electric vehicles. the point where every agency can be by example, reducing the amount of fuel that we use and practicing what we preach, it is how we can support the historic advances that the administration is making in building the next generation of advanced vehicles

in the united states. we charted a course to look at the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks, saving consumers thousands of dollars, stopping the consumption of billions of barrels of oil. we have made historic strides in an electric vehicles and the batteries that power them to make sure that these vehicles of the future are built right here in united states. the sustainability of work agencies support these efforts and more. great accomplishments that are just the tip of the iceberg. federal green teams are making sustainability part of how we work every day. teams like last year's presidential all board winners are cutting costs and fuel usage by inventing solar powered cars to get around campus.

general service administration management teams have connected their 400 biggest energy consuming buildings in a way that allows them to monitor and manage how much energy they are using in real time. you will hear more about progress today. not just in the great session agenda. today we are excited to work with more than 45 agencies to release this year strategic sustainability performance plans, of which will be available online at performance.gov. these plans demonstrate what leading companies across the american economy are showing also. that's marc operations makes sense for the environment, health, and the bottom line. in this effort, along with all of you, cq has had a great partner every step of the way,

the office of management and budget. i am very happy today to welcome the director to the stage. jack had an incredible history of distinguished public service, including leading omb during the clinton administration, along with experience in the private sector. i am very pleased to introduce jack, and i thank him for joining us here at greengov today. thank you very much. [applause] you do not need this, right? >> thank you. thank you for that kind introduction and for bringing together this impressive group. indeed, it is a very strong partnership with all of you on these issues. i think that it is fair to say that greengov an i see things in

july. there is no question that the consumer of real estate and motor vehicles have great deals that we can do together to save energy and money at the same time. it is a case where there is no conflict. quite the opposite. it is one and the same. the numbers are very big in terms of what we and the federal government occupied as space and consume in fuel. as all of you know, from the pieces in your agencies, we have 500,000 buildings and 600,000 vehicles in the federal government. with numbers this big, everything we do has an enormous impact on the federal government and the environment. i was going to take a minute before going into the more

suspicious -- specific issues today and why this is part of the overall administration agenda. , recently the president ask the vice president to head up a campaign. he started a few weeks ago by calling the cabinet meeting quarterly on that. saving money and energy, saving money on efficiency and through reducing how much we print and how much waste we create is all a part of it. but it has many elements. for example, in medicaid we have announced emissions a savings of $2 billion.

what the vice president is doing, as directed by the president, who also directed me, to make sure that the work we are talking about on the back burner is always on the front burner. wasting energy, everything that we do to consume energy is something that we do not need to do, limiting pollution that we don't need to be a part of. it really is one, large challenge. i think that if you look at the efforts we have made in the federal government, there is quite a lot we have to show. as nancy said in her opening remarks, if you do not measure, it is hard to say that you know

what you are doing. i think that it has been important that omb led in creating a scorecard to identify goal leaders. evaluations through the scorecard on available energy, this means that we have a tool that enables us to improve federal practices, strategies, and goals. today, we are taking an important step by posting, online, the strategic sustainability of the performance plan so that everyone can see them. it will give the american people the opportunity to hold all of us accountable, making sure that we do not just announced that we are doing these things, but that we actually get them accomplished. when people begin to read about the plan that all of you have put together, i think that they will be proud of the work you

have done. agency after agency, security, non-security, biggie and small agencies, we have innovative and common sense solutions that are helping to make the government more sustainable and, at the same time, save the taxpayers' money. in the department of energy, nearly a half-million square feet of roofs were installed that will result in an annual savings in heating and cooling costs. saving energy, also. the maine national institute of health campus is planning a water conservation projects to save 105 million gallons at the central plant by 2012. project implementation is $27 million and it will have $712,000 in annual savings. that is a hell of a payoff.

that u.s. aid, they have set up high-quality video teleconferencing systems in washington and overseas, setting up a high-powered software across the network. they project that this will save $1.5 million. in terms of share point software, they anticipate a 20% reduction in the paper filing systems of the next few years, estimated to avoid $2.4 million across. last year, the first wind turbine on an active army installation came on line in utah. 262 feet tall, it has the capacity to generate 1.5 megawatts of that -- of electricity, saving the base energy. has an initial value of $200,000 per year, quickly paying back

the initial investment. i can go on and on, because almost everyone from this room, from an agency, has some example of something like this they have accomplished. one of the values of a meeting like this is that it is best for us to learn from each other. helping government to work better, protect the environment , and not on importantly, saving money at the same time. as we strive to make the government cleaner and more efficient, i know one thing, it will must simply be accomplished in cabinet meetings. it will be done by all of you on the front line, coming up with ideas, day after day, implementing them in the field. as you do your work, let me leave you with so advice.

first, prioritize your investments. but your time and energy into things with the highest return. second, fund capital improvements that a lot of that savings in the short run, but will continue to produce the savings and sustainability of our performance. 3, leverage dollars with private agency investments that have an effective and responsible abuses of authority to work with public-private partnerships. if you do that and continue the work you have done, i am confident that together we will manage the resources that the american people give me the trust to manage. at the same time, introducing long-term savings to show the american taxpayers that the taxpayer -- tax dollars are being well spent i hope you find these three days of workshops and forums, opportunities to

exchange ideas, educational and maybe even a bit inspirational, so that as you go back to your agencies, your work, you do it with the confidence that we are making a difference in terms of how well government performs and how much we, as public's the words, can do to protect our environment. thank you all very much. i wish you well in the days ahead. [applause] >> thank you so much, director. i have the pleasure of introducing our next couple of speakers, who will be focusing on the future of sustainability in government. the first is martha johnson, who heads up the general services administration. she is not only the leader there, a woman with an extraordinary professional background " in public-sector

service as well, but she is also an expert in organizational transformation in change management, which has been critical to the approach that has been -- gsa has taken to their efforts and commitments to having no environmental footprint. without that leadership, it would be extraordinarily challenging for these agencies to reach those goals. please, administrator johnson, join us on stage. thank you. [applause] >> happy halloween. thank you for that kind introduction. terrific, as always, to hear the director speak. i want to thank you for your remarks as well. i wanted to be here for this

tremendously important event. the conference will shed some very valuable lessons. how we conduct the business of government, we manage acquisitions for the federal government, which touches $95 billion in this vast river of consumption that happens every year across the government. we helped to purchase and maintain some 400,000 vehicles, rebuilding 2% of all commercial real estate. we are positioned as a membrane between government and industry. it is a place in which we can interact and share, back and forth, being a part of the

discussion and creativity for our nation. same sweet's that spot. bringing businesses, government, and agencies together, solving the problems of collaborating and sharing across that line. let me just explain that we play a number of roles. at any time, we are trying to figure out the best role that we can play in terms of supporting the agenda going forward. we are pretty substantial. so, we can they can move markets. the important thing is to do it intentionally, not with serendipity. if we are very operational. we do things directly, meaning that we can get in more quickly and directly. where some parts of the federal government regulate and others legislate, gsa, holding and went

over the government purse, is in a position to incentivize. a huge role that we can play. we need to play it intentionally, but it can be substantial. we are in the position to model and try new behavior's in technology and new ways of thinking for the rest of the federal family. i seriously believe that gsa goes first. we can get things they try and the whole government does not put itself out there. we are proud of that role, innovative, we try to show it off. you heard it from jack. you certainly heard it in the press. these are certainly tough economic times. many of us have worked in and around government for many years. we have seen austerity

situations come and go. we can point to many times where we have been told as agencies to go on a budget diet. cut back on the cards, ditching the rich and creamy ice-cream. today is different. today the government is having at stomach stapled. at gsa, dour new construction and renovation budget was 90% last year. no new buildings in the future, if you look hard at the number. there are two ways to respond, in my thinking. the first is to find deep operational efficiencies. we can learn from each other and from the private sector. there are a lot of ways of doing this. gsa could be a good way to do

that. savings that we get, we need to plow into the reforms that we need. i think of that as judo. we need to transform. we need to figure out entirely different ways of being effective in delivering work to the nation. this is where we need creativity and collaboration, so that we can reach those new solutions. you might say that it is ironic, but i would call that theory that we are at a time right now when budgets and resources in the economy, are being squeezed, where on the other we are on the edge of an extraordinary revolution. we are in a sort of tsunami, if you will.

organizational and cultural norms are changing just as rapidly. with the commitment shown by this administration, they have promised high skilled, a green collar jobs for a high-tech, efficient economy. by have been on the road and a lot recently. i have been visiting companies investing in new end cool technologies. i have gone through some major production facilities that are operating sustainably and producing more fuel-efficient products. what you do and how you do it are beginning to blend in the minds of these companies. in one case, it was to sort out

the recycled parts of car batteries, breaking not just into the process, but all of the new equipment that we needed to get this to work. i have meant recruiters from companies in chicago, milwaukee, and cleveland. they need workers. they have hundreds of jobs. they are talking about that. veterans now installing solar panels. tooling up to be part of this new economy. it has tremendous possibilities and possibilities for them. across the board, smart techniques and technologies are on parity, practical and save, as well as a scalable.

here we are standing in the vise grip of budgets in the economy, holding us a tight while, at the same time, we have technologies and knowledge that can propel us into the future. the question is, within this frame, how can we thrive? we must lean towards a sustainable future. we must not hold to the habits of the techniques of the past. leadership, curiosity, risk. the entire surround sound that comes when a nation turns the corner. let me talk about our gsa terms. we have embraced sustainability in the extreme, if you will.

we agreed to said zero, our organizations aspirational goal. to start off, it gets everyone's attention. it is out there and as exciting for the next generation. we are giving phenomenal talent. it is a big magnet, so that all of the filings can head in the right direction. like many others, i am personally and deeply sympathetic to this. it resonates with my environmental side. i confess, putting on a sweater, save the solstice. [applause] thank you. truth be told, that is not why i

support and encourage the environmental footprint goals. i want to be clear about that. it might be a hard piece, but i supported for two big reasons. it is about no waste with time and effort in processes. think about this. it is wanting to cut the process, another to say that they are on the best medium. instead of talking about how tight it is, it is a tremendous way to transform an organization. it is also about good government getting ever better, the vision of gsa.

we do it by work -- waking up the workspace of the future. the bill but have an innovative government if we cannot work in innovative ways. we do that by supporting business partners. we do that by thinking in new ways. for example, cradle to cradle design. we need to think about 10 behavior. there are many new levers that we can pull. we are trying to find them and put them to use. we also have to think about how

that product is used and we of the nation's shoppers. we cannot just think about the design of a building, we have to think about whether or not it was built for its first day, lest they, or everything in between we also have to think about the ups william well, we cannot just think about the president. we have purchased over 100 electric vehicles. to support them, you need the

whole system -- the whole system to work. we are looking for a federal system across the country in which we link we are investigating creative ways to determine this by chance at the same ability. we need some of the good ideas. this is very hard. especially when you are only in one point of the supply chain and the product goes through you. then it moves further down the chain. how do we know the impact? we are developing tools by which we can assess base of organizational footprints. in terms of how much square

footage you have, i want to give them one energy measure. we are reducing our environmental footprint by dramatically reducing our actual footprints here in washington, d.c. metropolitan area. we have so much to share and much to learn. we all know and learn, offering as expertise and service to the rest of the government, if the gsa does not move forward, how can the government make progress? we know that the effectiveness of government and vibrancy are one and it -- one and the same. this is about the nation's future. we must hold together on this.

we must be rolling in the same boat. this conference brings us together. committing boomers like me and the brilliant millennial in the next panel. this is a great opportunity, thank you. i begin to bridge a guy looking forward to your comments and questions in the next panel -- i am looking forward to your comments and questions in the next panel. [applause] >> i would like to share just what housekeeping announcement those of you who are looking at your watch, you know that we started just a bit late. we had planned out, to our next panel, to work into the break

that we had scheduled. the next great will begin immediately. as we begin going, and i know that a lot of your standing in the back of the room, there is ceding out front. anyone that wants to pace of trauma, that is ok as well. in the next conversation, we will hear conversations on sustainability and green government from emerging, existing young leaders. green government, business, also in social equity and enterprises. an award winning journalist at

the associate prof. campus, she is named as a top-10 eco hero, a contributor to multiple newscasts, and the founding host and writer of "teh green, " creator of "the good fight." she is dedicated to bringing greater diversity in to the movement. louise cimmaron, please join us on the stage. [applause] >> good morning. it is such an honor to be here with all of you. i think i am seated down here at the end, actually. i think that what you will learn as well, this opening exemplifies what we hope to achieve in sustainability

efforts, deeper understanding, broader commitment, and the engagement from everyone. it is not an issue for a single government or economic class. it is an issue and concern for all of us. one that requires not one silver bullet, but what was called silver buckshot by bill mccann in. today we will be joined by some of the brightest young people leading this charge, creating innovative, participatory solutions to our most pressing problems. together, we will discuss the evolution of sustainability and the role of government in sustaining a more sustainable future for every american in the global community. i will start off with a brief introduction, then questions and answers. i would like to start by

introducing to you, ciara complimenski. [applause] i will introduce each panel member, then i will have them sit down for opening comments. we're being joined by phillipe crusoed [applause] and ashuk camalle. [applause] will burn. [applause] and sarex shah.

briefly tell us about the work you are doing. explain how your organization defined and advances sustainability. >> just about one year ago we released place-based mutual social participatory governance advances and promotes sustainability, without just being linked to that. part of that is a concept of cultural sustainability, culture and creativity in advancing solutions for sustainable change. >> thank you. >> my work is focused on sustainability and innovation.

we think about the different projects and initiatives involved, finding different solutions, thinking outside of box. the various different ways that might be relevant to them in their daily lives. speaking of, at the international nonprofit that we run, it is not that you can make a difference, it is that everything you do makes a difference. we are focused on how to think differently about the best ideas, which rainout be different from the green, sustainability space. everything from how we travel to the food that we eat. it is about thinking outside the

box in educational markets, innovating and thinking differently. i am very delighted to be here to share this with you all. >> economic ec the manifestations of what this looks like. -- you can already see the manifestations. >> i and the executive director of an organization called the dc project based here in the district and we will soon be taking on the name at groundswell. the focus of our worked is really zeroing in on the problems of the energy economy and focusing on those projects that can achieve of significant environmental outcomes on a community level while also yielding deep economic activity

and community benefits that everyday people care about. in terms of our perch to sustainability, we're really looking at it through the lens of the community and local level. more holistic leave than just thinking about environmental balance or ecological balance, but to have a sustainable community, you really need to have your people community engaged. it is available to economic activity, etc.. we're focused with those clean energy products that not only yield future ecological balances in neighborhoods, but also actual significant new economic activity and we think that

enhancing the broader challenging of environmental imbalance and ecological protection is a big part of that strategy in and it needs to be making a clear economic impact for everyday people. >> i would just say thank you for being our moderator this morning. it is an honor to address all of you this morning. thank you for allowing me to speak to you. i work at the defense department. i work in a new office called the office of operational energy plans and programs. it is a mouthful. when we say "green"most of the time we are referring to the army. when we are talking about "sustainability" most people here sustainment which is about logistics' keeping our troops' movement which is all in support

of our mission. the good news is that energy is really a part of that sustainment. as general petraeus said in his last months in afghanistan, he said energy is the lifeblood of our war-fighting force. we use a lot of that life's blood. we spend $15 billion on direct energy purchases in 2010, most about petroleum. that is the equivalent of 5 billion gallons of oil, so within the federal government, we use 80% at the defense department which makes up the nation's largest user of energy. after 10 years, we have maybe learned a difficult lesson, that our energy needs are a risk multiplier, at the tactical, operational, strategic, and fiscal levels. in 2009, congress created the

new office that i work in in the president nominated my boss for the job. as i alluded to, the impetus came from our troops, our experiences in iraq and afghanistan where they face problems on the battlefield. some of these paid the largest price when they are killed or injured muting this fuel. -- moving the fuel. he said, "on a leash just from the tender of fuel." less of it needed to move around in these convoys. the 75% of the energy that we use in operations and training, flying planes, appealing ships

and combat vehicles, all of this in the theater, in the other 25% are used at fixed installations and bases. they tackled by a challenge for us. to get to the question of what sustainability means for the department, at home it means recognizing where we work as a part of the communities, so protecting the land, air, and water is a part of the mission. on the battlefield that means making sure the troops have the energy to get the job done, to be able to fulfil the seven missions that we proceed in the 21st century and we realize now, as a department, that it means making sure we are using energy better. i look forward to the conversation. >> thank you. would you tell us a little bit

more about how this defines sustainability? >> it is an honor to be here. i came by way of new york city in a blizzard which is symbolic to have on halloween where many of these issues we are discussing. my name is ashok kamal. someone mentioned the group is under 30, but i am slightly north of that. i work running a huge development organization in the green ring keys for "newsweek." most recently, after going to business school, i started a company called bennu which is social marketing based on energy initiatives. we do creative messaging, tactical execution, and the return on investment analysis.

we have a unique marketing methodology combining greening and a believer in with social media, communication platforms of choice and the gamification, the drivers that make us all human, are need to be social, our need to be recognized, achieve,, and a little bit of friendly competition. the way i define sustainability is really learning how to create maximum shared value for all stakeholders which includes the planet, communities, businesses, while still living within the means that we have been granted by are in natural ecosystems. those two agendas do not need to be mutually exclusive, and i

will be talking about some of the successful example law have been involved with. >> that is such a great expansive definition i recall one of my students who worked in the military who said they would rather redefine the question by asking what sustains us, which i think opens up the conversation in in a different way. that is what you will hear today. everyone is trying to engage in innovative and new ways. i thought a little bit more about what the dod is doing about risk-management. as you said in your opening statement, the department of defense is the single largest consumer of energy. as is detailed in the global sustainability report, the pentagon and its branches, if there were to form a country, they would rank among the top 60 energy consuming in the world and top 50 greenhouse gas in

matters. although climate change has become politicized and the dod is committed to reducing emissions in domestic and tactical operations. the military has really led the way which is expiring -- inspiring to me. can you talk to me more about the innovative ways that you are mitigating carbon emissions and why the dod is committed to renewable energy and has managed to avoid polarization we have seen in other areas? >> the first part of the question is why does the department care about these challenges, climate change, energy. on climate change, it is about the new and dangerous missions we see coming from a climate change. q. can look at the arctic and think about what happened as the climate opens up there.

you can think about the effects of climate change as an accelerant of instability, which is how we've defined in the quadrennial defense review in 2010, these weather events driving increased demand on the military, whether that is supporting civil authorities at home, humanitarian assistance, disaster relief. it is a set of missions climate change may lead to that really gets the department interested in looking at this issue. on energy, we recognize that energy efficiency can serve as a force multiplier. you can see an increased range in endurance, to speak to the technologies we are looking at, we have one ship that we have installed a harvard elective drive on. two more engines operate the ship at low speeds. in its maiden voyage from its

yard to san diego, it saved over 1 million gallons of fuel. over its lifetime, it will save it $250 million worth of fuel. that is just pure long, not talking about the benefits from the range and endurance of that ship being able to loiter launder. that is the key point. better energy use about better capability. anything that provides a more capability is not necessary interest to our military leaders. briefly, energy security, as they define it, is important to our national security. in the big about the cost of our energy addiction, it is too high about the geostrategic consequences. as we tackle that by ourselves, we have an opportunity to really improve this picture also

leading the way in the nation on energy technology. >> let's talk a bit more about you said on this dependence from fossil fuels coming at a cost. we were talking about a true cost accounting and what really comes down to a gallon of petroleum. the cost ranges from $7-$40 per gallon and the dod spent billions of dollars to purchase energy. talk a lot more about what that embedded quality means and why there is a price volatility and how it impacts you on the ground.

>> they trained with a suite of technologies and they had in the lights for their tents, solar panels that a day used for solar generation, pulled up solar panels to recharge their batteries. they deployed in october last year in some of the most difficult fighting, and i will not go into too many details, but they were in a tough fight and lost a lot of guys. they were able to increase the capability and ran two basis without any need and were able to take it 90% off of the fuel supply line. on a 10-bit foot patrol, they took 700-pound out of the system, and you can see what that means.

would have been able to do that without that year, absolutely. it is a matter of looking at this in opportunity cost. what does this mean having men and women guarding and moving fuel, but what does this mean in terms of dollars and lives? can we do this better? the department has now come to the realization that we can. there are fiscal benefits, like you said, so we have been concept of the fully burdened cost of energy which is the cost in terms of moving out of fuel, the assets required, the personnel costs. it is high. the fiscal cost is there as a driver, but we can do this better and protect the nation better and be more capable if we look at energy differently. >> and that is the return on investment.

to me, this is one of the most heartening examples i have heard of within the government, but i am so expired about what we see at a lucia, the doj, the dod, and i'm so painful and for your willingness to join us here today. i want to move into what is going on outside of your world a bit and find out what is happening on the ground in our communities and find out how we can make that connection or forge a more dynamic relationship with our community members. well coming renovations around energy are just a little different. -- will, your reservations are different. can you tell us what is different right here in our backyard and across the country? >> fascinating to learn about the sophistication from the department of defense on this issue.

essentially, one of the major issues in achieving place-based sustainability, as we see it, and is actually really opening up a consumer driven clean energy marketplace. one in which every day people are creating a self-sustaining economy around issues of efficiency, global energy, etc., on the community level. a major barrier and a challenge that we have identified, and many have across the field is demand and consumer behavior, everyday people understanding that sustainability investments are not just for the tree huggers any more, right? they can really be transformative for families that are suffering from an energy burden, energy cost burden, need jobs, want to see local

business development. we have a model that allows for community organizations and faith based institutions to be able to shift consumer behavior at scale across communities by identifying those services and projects, that when they come together and pool their purchasing power can yield significant cost savings, significant jobs, and the economic development cannot stay local. to a quickly break down how that model works, essentially, we have an approach which faith- based institutions, community- based organizations, and these are natural human resources gun are everywhere. every city, every town has these

resources. these institutions, because of the trust and social networks that they have a, a have a really transformative effect in accelerating markets and tipping the scales around consumer behavior where conventional messengers that are trying to move everyday people to invest in these types of services may not have that same trust. we are really sort of a bogus bomb that barrier which is coming out of a lot of new studies about behavioral economics, behavioral psychology that really shows there are a number of lovers you can pull for incentives for everyday people, like financing, etc., but it is really pure pressure from here of alligators and people who focus trust who can really tipped the scale. focusing on that, we have worked in wholesale clean energy, and

also single-family residential efficiency, to give the example of the clean energy electricity. we worked with just under 40 faith-based and community institutions that, were they not to invest in switching over to an alternative electricity provider that would source more from nobles, they could not have afforded it because the economics did not work out, but by pooling 40 institutions across the sea and their purchasing power together, we were able to switch about $1.60 million purchase and we saved about over $300,000 across these institutions that are community-love all that desperately needed this help. -- that are from the community level that really need this help. there were switching from a dirty energy provider to shipped

that demand over to renewals. -- to shift the that demand, so this community-scale aggregation and also focusing on making communities and the messenger in shifting behavior has been really a key piece of our success. after success in d.c., we are taking on a project in baltimore and are in the process of scaling this around the united states >> i have another question before you that i want to ask. and when of the things that we do know is that faith matters. i am curious, and i may screw this up a bit now, but a pew research poll indicated that 90% of americans have some connection to faith and it is critically important to understand this relationship. her you can choose who to pair with, but you chose faith, can

you talk about that relationship of trust, what it means, and what benefits that had it? they, i mean us, i mean we. how did you recognize that and decide to move from there? >> i think there are two reasons that working with state-based communities, with a national infrastructure among institutions of faith will be a big part of our strategy. there are two reasons we felt that has been very successful. one is that, as you mentioned, faith-based institutions really have a social-action how in most communities and have a deep history through the civil rights movement particularly in the low-income communities and our places for civic action.

from that perspective, and the fact that there is a huge number of members, conjugation, synagogue, whenever, that can be influenced by their institution of the faith if they make their own investment, but the second answer to that is from a values standpoint. we have found that institutions of faith, their significant doctors -- acors -- actors in the economy. they have their own and focus on preservation, sustainability in the community and for taking care of people in the community. it was definitely a natural fit, but one quick anecdotes in terms of why it has been so new it,

transformative, and exciting to work with faith-based leaders is a we had one leader here in d.c., and we worked on the community energy a purchase, and his church was one that switched over to clean energy and he shared with us that the savings than they were able to achieve by making bats which along with other faith-based leaders allowed them to actually continue running. because of budget tightness, they were going to need to cut social service programs around transitional housing, so there is a social role that churches, synagogues, mosques all play which is to help us have more social impact through these energy issues. now he has gone on to not just preach around his face, but also around some of the economic

benefits that his congregants have made in their own home to achieve. there is that multiplier effect as well. >> one of the ways we define sustainability is around the notion of a triple bottom line. economic, environmental, and social returns. you can see how radically different the definition is, but the boats come back to the same thing, return on investment. the enabling city's approach to sustainability promotes interconnections similar to what will was talking about. it is fostered in part by participatory governance. can you explain how citizens can be directly involved in shaping the way policies are created and delivered and what role can and should governments play in those remarks for sustainability? >> the foundation of my argument is that if we look at

the everyday level and the lives of people and we see it as a potential, that can be deeply transformative. it can open up avenues of participation that enhances the very basic understanding and expands the understanding of governance and citizenship. it understands that citizens have more than just needs, they can provide solutions based on their own experience and knowledge and knowledge of the community and their needs to really sort of diffuse the idea of with creativity and problem- solving to non-experts. it really opens up avenues of participation that create a shared language and a common understanding around values and the very notion of sustainability and what can empower local residents to become decision makers over

their own environment while also and expanding the idea, the very notion of an environment. in a sense, i think when governments and institutions in a vast in sharing the very source of capital and complement that with the other forms of capital and competencies' that community groups bring to the table, that is when we moved from thinking about government to governance, a shift from control to enabling there really has the potential for cities, communities, and institutions as a platform for community empowerment. in particular, one thing that has proven successful is echoed design, where citizens, residents, and governments come together to articulate visions for policies, services, and projects that are determined in concert with the difference stakeholders.

it is a prolonged process of consultation and that really goes from the beginning to the hand and gives a greater sense of ownership involved in the process. just to give you a few examples on the government's side, there are over 40 examples from categories that range from growing and eating food to financing, more specifically in relation to the governments of cities. there are a few examples that i like to cite from scandinavia. there's a greater vision for the city organized a few years ago and it had 14 towns and municipalities come together to involve the public in articulating a vision for a sustainable future, particularly with climate change, overpopulation, so they wanted

and put on and then to transportation, land use, and energy provision policies that would really help to make the city more resilient and more inclusive. what this generated was a wealth of submissions that were incredibly insightful. my favorite example is a report called city 2.0 it together by a collective called social silicon valley, which is an interesting name and concept, but they combine the idea of whether to put zero and open governance and apply this on a very hyper-local level to incrementally form greater changes in cities. they have the idea of a common space production and exponential knowledge tied into the very process of policy-making, and decision making, and cities. it shows that the residency end users, not just as consumers of

these services but participants in them. these hyper-local tools like funding mechanisms, co working spaces, incubators, and how is really have the effect of stimulating an ongoing political conversation with city leaders, but also we created a figure of asocial innovative mayor which they would collaborate this into the larger fabric of this city and country. it is really working across levels of scale and issues and areas of expertise in a more holistic way with the potential to produce really incredible results. there is another example i like to cite in denmark. there are three ministries, the ministry of business affairs, taxation, and employment, that come to the other to create a managerial home to tackle these managerial home to tackle these interconnected issues