couldn't fix anything. i said it up front. i mean, if i were in boehner's shoes, i don't know if i would do any better than boehner because the difference is obama. bill clinton was from arkansas, tried to build a moderate wiping in the democratic party and leadership counsel, spent 12 years negotiating with the conservative legislature, and we could talk, a we understood you got to get something done meaning i got to schedule it, and he's got to sign it. if i won't scheduling it, he's not signing it, and if he's not signing, we're not getting it. there's not a lot done in the three year period. i don't see any of that happening here. part of it is frankly, being clever. tried for two or three months now to convince the house republicans to pass the web warner bill to allow for development of oil and gas off

virginia. these are two democratic senators, it fits the bill that republicans say they believe in. it provides for 50% of the feds, 37% to the common wealth of virginia, 12.5% to land conservation infrastructure. if they passed with no amendment, send it to the senate, and reid has to decide whether to bottle up two former democrats, and one running for the senate is for the bill. or do we pass it? if they pass it, goes to the white house,nd in this economy, does the president veto a bill that creates american jobs and american energy and revenue for the federal government? that would be an act of suicide. he might, but it would be pretty amazing. >> what's wrong with the sequester that now looms as a result of the super committee? >> well, the idea of cutting $500 billion out of defense is a political exercise.

strikes me as crazy. i mean, you ought to design the national security policy around simple things -- what threatens you, what arehe goals, and what do you do to achieve the goals, okay? i'm for reforming the pentagon. i mean, i'd apply that, find the military caucus in 1981. i think there is waste in the pentagon, but you don't start with a politically defined, this is what the british did in the 1920s, and it came back to haunt them because, you know, you start politically definingt, and you say to the military, well, tough break, you know, start taking risks. fine, what risks do the president and the congress want us to take? >> phil gramm wrote last week aboutsequestering, that most of this from the domestic side, all of it is just cutting back on the increases that we've had in the past few years, and that before 2013 rolls around, a republican congress would repeal

the defense cutting, is that not something to campaign on? >> well, i would campaign on the approval of the defense cutting, but i also say what strikes me is there's three paths. there is the fantasy path that obama's on that leads to greece, and he's been wandering around the country like a 16-year-old with his first credit card. i'm sure he'll bring money in some form, okay. he says to students, you don't have to pay back the loans, here's an extra billion, and it's all fantasy. the second pats that washington -- path that washington loaves is painting prosperity. i think there's the third path which is innovation and growth. it's the path that reagan was on, the path we did in the 1990s. stng america now believes if you apply modern management to the federal government, you'd save $500 billion a year.

.. between 70 to $120 billion a year and the americans master cards ibm all of whom believe they would save 95% of >> that's designed to change trillions of dollars of

spending and martin feldstein has arguedhat, you know, if you had a capital base galt custom system growth is very substantially increased growth. >> what our global what points reviewed today? >> anybody who wants to could choose a personal system in the savings account. you would build it up over your working lifetime for 14 or 16 and basically the easiest model is you are allowed to put your half of the social security tax and to your own savings account the over half goes to sustain the current system. you look at that and it turns out half the amount of the

social security built up over your lifetime comes to to three times. the record of broken galveston and chile. there's no question historic we that over time you do that. we would also keep the guarantee because we would never fall below the social security minimum level. so if you had terrible investment you would still get the tax paid karent. in 40 years they never paid a penny. >> the part time hours would start with cleaning the schools. >> explain this. >> i actually do believe those

places we are endowed by our creator in the pursuit of happiness in the generation bringing it to the very poor so you are in a very poor neighborhood and you have no money and no work habit. so, you're trapped. the first simple thing you can do is redesign the school system so kids can in fact take care of the school. part of the place the got this from as college of the ozarks which is a terrific work study program and college of the ozarks ays you cannot apply unless you need financial aid. they are the fiftmost selected right after colombia. the total number they get the account for a very small number. they have no student aid. you work 15 hours a wek to

40-hour weeks during the school year and that pays tuition and books. 40 hours a week in the summer but that pays room and board. 92% of the courage of its own. there's an alternative. on average $05,000 because they bought a car the same year and i went around the campus in the brand new library they have a general contractor. all of his workers were students everywhere you went in the scol you had people working most of the clerical work was the students. you now public universities which cost more than private universities and you wonderwhy the price goes up. what if 80% more students per student loans and student work? my life as a part of her financial package n college

topped out she had 20 students a week she taught and went to part of her tuition. we have to rethink the roundup. the poorest neighborhoods in america and that means the most important because we think the work ethic. when i talk to the first generation successful people all of them started working they got to have their work, have their money come have savings. a much longer time horizon to be successful because they started much earlier. we see people in poor neighborods don't work, drop out of school, have no habit of showing up or staying all day. it's not really your money. it's tragic what we've done to the poorest people.

>> you mentioned the center on health studies there was a report out on a lot of money that the senator has made over the years or a lot of it dealing with is not the government then big business and pharmaceutils which are dealing with the government and last week i think on one of the six brazillian the dates you were asked about your fee for helping if kody and your initial response was i may historian and it was 300,000 cks and then eight got up to one point -- >> how much was it in total? >> i think it was 1.6 million. it wasn't pai to me personally the adoptions in three cities and did a lot of different things. i think we had over the course of the years involved to think they had 300 pounds of the

various places. >> what i am getting it isn't going to be viewed especially if he were to get the noination as same old same old washington insider gets the money based on his name. you went before the house republican group to argue in favor of, which amazed me, the medicare part b which was the death knell for a lot of republicans winning again. and you said that was because you wanted to bring them up into the modern age, but there were no cutbacks with that bill, right? there was more spending. >> created medicare advantage. >> get paid for rich people to have their drugs paid for. >> at a time when didn't have the money. >> first of all i think to have a medicare program that says we

will give you open heart surgery but not lipitor is very destructive. >> understood. i think you have to modernize the system. i offered you but not paying the crux, okay? i'm a cheerful of the dating and the only one has done that for four straight years so i would be happy to walk you through how to balance the budget, but in the case of health care to take the example, i've been a very clear in my positions. i wrote a book called saving lives an saving money as a moral issue. first yosave the life than you save the money. if you can take 40% of the cost of health care. we did a study with the gallup poll and jackson health two years ago and they went out and asked doctors if we came back with this $8 billion a year defensive medicine seeou want

to talk about saving money in the health care you talk about payment reforms you talk about tom pryce bill to successful people to contract out i would take part of paul ryan's bill and i would doit next year. i would say we are going to have a premium support model has an option you want it you can take it and if you combine that with tom pryce, some people can come along with really good insurance packages and they are going to opt ot so you can create a medicare plan that has a variety of traces which begins to be i think expensive. >> when you get to the site of paul rollin and's plan that it was too radical. >> i was asked should we impose on the country something the country thinks this deeply unpopular. and didn't reference ryan. >> we are talking about the rye in lan?

>> the question i asked i said there's a lot of pieces i don't like. the fundamental principle which is when you do something which large, what we are doomed to do th social security, you have to have a conversation with the country where the country decides that i fact they will accept the change. i am again imposing radical change in the country and i think they've fired you when you do that and they should. europeans don't want to have any popular vote on any of these reforms because the eletes in node they will be repudiated. paul, i like going into a country can be repeated so when we did welfare reform, 92% of the country favored it and we carried have the democrats. one of the reasons obamacare is repealed laws because they get no republican support that matter, they were not capable of getting get back to the senate

and they ran it through any way. >> does it make any difference whether the supreme court opposed or rejects obamacare? >> my contract for repealing obamacare line for repealing obamacare no matter what the supreme court does. >> pretty analytical prolifically does it help or hurt the republican nominee, say you -- >> helps repealed, repudiated. it's one more blow at how unconstitutional obama is. >> on the obamacare mandate, the heritage foundation he said responsibility as mitt romney and you reform that. you see sine then you come to different conclusions. i'm curious between then and now at what point do you realize an individual mandate at that level wasn't constitutional? >> i never focused on the

federal level. i talked about it at the center of the state level and whate are trying to solve, and i finally come would you couldn't do it, it is too hard because what it does is it politicizes what do you mean by health care. once you run into mandates you start getting is this an or is that in and what is required you rapidly politicize the system from being the doctor patient relationship. what we are trying to get there is the challenge of the fact that in the very sgnificant number of people who are over $75,000 a year in coming and they are basically taking the position that they are prepared to be a free rider on their neighbors if something happens to them and we have had a psychology of health care frequeny people won't pay their hospital bills. so, as we work with hospitals and the challenge of collecting, people who show up through any

other business because they bought a car or bought a house they went on vacation they would just expect to pay it and if for some reon you create this mind set in health care it's a very real problem for hospitals and that is what we are trying to get at is how do you encourage responsibility for people who otherwise -- john goodman has had a model of that under the inpatient power you geta tax credit if you don't want to take it you don't have to buy insurance you share the tax credit then sent to the high-risk pool. and if somethg does happen you are taking care of by the high-risk pool and that means you have to have a double room you don't get a single room and it means a variety of steps. it's a half step towards saying if you don't take care of yourself we will get you basic services but you don't have the right to demand what everybody

else has erred because they have been responsible and they have done the right thing. >> a mandate that the federal level in your view is unconstituonal. why? >> this is something again where the heritage found themselves as you work thrugh it at the time it was designed the more you thought about it the more you realized the congress which can compel you to do something like that can compel you to do anytng. what is the limit to the congress power to dictate your life and there will be a hard argument about the supreme court. >> the known mandate [inaudible] the problem you were raising before is the social security also the program and health care, obamacare and medicare and

medicaid [inaudible] >> there are two pieces. part of - education as we went through this. in 85 e federal means tested programs the amount spent on them is enough if we spent directly on the poor there would be no poor left. what he's calling them now the empire in the welfare state which is all the bureaucrats are living, managing all the regulations and all the structures for 185 federal programs. so when you start block granting that the savings are extraordinary. second, there is no evidence washington knows how to solve any of these problems. when we do health care reform we are driving and the only speaker who's actually brought in state

governors and state technical people and put them in the draft room so the federal drafters actually involves the people who actually implement the bill. the whole federal attitude of why are these guys here. >> you mentioned before clinton dealt with the legislature. you were also a historian whether you liket or not and history tells me the people wh get to be president are destined for most governors senator very rarely if ever a member of the house of representatives, so what is it in your background that is going to convince the american people that on like all these governors who got

caught there with real experience dealing with these problems that you can do it? >> you can probably argue james capel is the only speaker of the house to get there. and he had actually been the governor of tennessee. i think if you look at the scale of what we did in the 90's, you look at the size of the contract with america campaign in the 360 districts you look at actually getting the balanced budgets and will form enacted. i have a fair amount of management experience when i step down i had to enforce my companies and some business experience much smaller nonetheless the business experience and frankly people who felt i was did in june and july would have to confess we are voting in the preious campaign and we now have the five offices in new hampshire and five to seven in south carolina and so in tems of

management skills i have a reasonable track record of having done that. i also think that if you wantto change washington what you need is a leader who an attract managers. it's difrent from being a manager. the job of a president is to the head of the american government in that order. and the biggest job actually is to communicate with and educate and set standards for the american people. >> whether that means herman can deal with the complexity of congress and federal budget i was very fotunate to step down first because clinton appointed me to the commission she and i had created gether so i spent three years of the national security act of 2005 and then when bush became a in with friends like tomy thompson and

human services, rumsfeld, georgia the cia got me deeply involved in the executive branch so i actually spent six years on a pro bono basis inside the executive branch and the strategy and rethinking the system so i have had more insight experience trying to understand how problems are solved and what works and what doesn't work and any one of the legislative branch of the same time 20 years in the legislative branch saw a pretty good understanding of that branch and the question we have to ask is look at theavailable candidates. who has anything like this in the national experience and second, e background of the national security to work with 79 and work for the defense department in general since the early 80's and the foreign policies. >> when the third countries

looking you mentioned insider, the inside experience the involvement of these government agencies and people are fed up with anything from washington and looking for something else. >> the reason is they are mature enough to say okay i want somebody whose values are a outside washingn who actually knows about washington to be effective and the just tried three years of amateurs and i think you can make a pretty good case that hiring somebody that doesn't know what he's doing this hasn't been a big win. >> the editorial for welcoming the president. >> so to make a good case on the one hand i had the experience, on the other hand quickly my values, my positions, if you look at the contract with

america.org it is clearly an outsider document it is an outsider attitude >> it's rather unusual it seems and that you have become your own worst critic on your web site by bringing out charges of both personal and professional attempting to answer them. were they going to come out anyways? >> we are having a national conversation which i think is the biggest waste since 1860. i think this is an extraordinary moment in american history. and you either believe in the american people which i did, or you don't. you believe in the american people then you have toay anybody can ask anything they want because i am asking them to lend me the power to be president of the united states

and therefore they have every right to say tell me about this, tell me about th. rather than half msnbc distort something with no answer i would say if you have any questions, right here on moe toward and here are the answers and make of lowercase this, you know because you guys reported a job in number of them are just plain false. here are the facts. i have tremendous faith from the american people sorting through this coming up with a reasonable conclusion. >> the facts are too short changed positions. drew mentioned the health care option making people buy the insurance even though we was at the state level and you were famously on the couch with somebody talking about climate

change and there have been others over a long career. the big charge against mitt romney is he is a flip-flopper. if he is, isn't new gingrich a flip-flopper? >> i don't think so. my career rating is 90%. >> i think that is relatively high. my recrd of balancing the budget is the only person to have done it in your lifetime, my position on the national securi back in 1979 my record of wanting to cut taxes and working goes back to the mid 70's. now i would say two things. one is sometimes things change. i voted for the department of education in 1979. i wouldn't vote for it today. gist i've looked at how it's evolved. life looked at the national education establishment, and my

conclusion is you need a very, very dramatic changes. plus the 32 years ago. other things i've been relatively stable and a couple things i just made a mistake. it is truly the dumbest thing i've done in the four or five years because she is so radioactive just literally you can't explain that. second, i'm probably not going to meet your standards but i don't know about the climate change. there are a lot of grito double standards, there are a number of standards to say that it's not real speech tuesday night to the truth is the climate change the fact is 1978 indicating become an ice age i

s recently at the field museum in chicago looking at dinosaurs in the antarctic. if there are dinosaurs in the antarctic there is no -- >> they wouldn't call you a dinosaur though. >> the campaign of newt and proud to be here. >> [inaudible] >> how was your help? >> i work seven days a week working for president i probably put in 100 hours -- >> how was your blood pressure, how is everything? okay this is the strangest thing you not only decided to be a catholic but a golfer, but are

you, nuts? >> i've tertian to catholicism with my golfing. no, my wife's golf since she was lying and the only person i gulf with and if there was a way to go out and be away from telephones it is a nice walk in the woods and i may truly bad golfer. i have no investment in my golf psychologically committed >> good otherwise it will eat you up. who is the president who golfed the most? >> by reputation, eisenhower. >> willson. he did the game and his dr. mix prescribed it after his first initial mild stroke and he played every morning, naim holes, he did it. >> eisenhower was one of the better ones but thbest one was kennedy.

i never thought of kennedy as a golfer. >> nobody confused my game for serious golf. >> the mengin yournswers on the website one of the points you bring out in the ethanol mandate it's for all of the above energy policy that's part of it and you would rather have energy from on the above than from the persian gulf, but then why does it follow that the federal government has to subsidize it? can the government just get out of the way -- >> the government retains saying most people in he business now don't think the tax subsidy is going to survive. there are wo questions.

everybody get a big oil will give you this. if obama comes and says let's get rid of the ten to 14 billion in the oil exemptions would you let anybody jump up in the business? annuity that has tried to kill ethanol on behalf of the world probably jumped up and said -- and half right by the way and i am against in fact apply overwhelmingly to the small independents who knew all the exploration in the field. on the one hand they understand exactly why they want the subsidy for oil so this isn't a purity this is a practicaty. you have two sources of energy fighting each other to keep the small independents to find oil

and gas in fact i want to open federal land to be able to find oil and gas. north dakota all of the development on private land and the reason north dakota has 92 per cent unemployment is the bolten field formation has tried 25 times bigger, 2500 per cent figure in the u.s. geological survey thought it was. >> [inaudible] >> i voted for ethanol and gas in 1984 when ronald reagan signed it and in 86 when he signedt and in 1998 and helped it survive. my record on this the position let me be very clear about this i had a very successful speech business. i had a very successful general

business. there isn't a single position taken that involves bnp i'm happy if people who like my positions and no cases on know of where i say please, don't pay me, but in fact these are all positions i have had over a long public career. so in that sense they said we are concerned would you give us advice and i said sure. >> what exactly where yr company speed fr to do by freddie mac? >> largely strategic advice and i think in one article 1 of them says that. the lobby for the strategic advice. i read a book called the art of transformation which i a pretty good intrduction to how you get very large scale change, and our specialty was talking to people,

listening to people tell what their problems were and then trying to help them think through how they could solve what they e up against. in the case of hosing tenth and starting in the mid 80's on how do you help your people get into housing and there is a conservative way to do with which is to teach them budgeting and how to take ca of their house, there is a kind which allows relatively poor people to own homes and be successful at it. you don't just hand them money to buy a house that they don't understand, etc. triet support if it is how would you think seriously about meeting these goals, how would you try to do it? >> one of the directors quote to the story recently saying we were hoping he would write something in support of the model and get conservatives and republicans on board but i don't think that ever happened.

was that communicated to you? >> again, the government sponsored enterprise goes all the way back to the founding of america. they have not necessarily -- they can be useful. noeth rational person is going to advocate creating a bubble. that is to teach economic history i know the book miniet crashes pretty well and the fact something is good if you do that after this point but in sing and if you commit to this point doesn't mean suggesting you do that to this point puts you over here. dividing we ought to try to find ways to halt the relatively poor people in the united states? of course. does that mean we ought to create a bubble and have people trapped poverty? no. so i think that there is a big difference. >> were you in a position to see the bubble coming? did you write about it? >> i think if you go back and

look at my speeches it wasn't obvious at the starting and initially it wasn't fannie mae and freddie mac. it was things like countrywide but the minute he started getting people with no credit, no money down, these things are in same. i would say that consistently because again, people would come to say -- first of all i had no access to the internal information. i wasn't on the board of directors, i wasn't brought in with the general votes. anybody who had said to me do you think we should be giving the following five things i would say no. these are all the things in fact dodd and frank wanted de and the other difference which doesn't seem as i wasn't n congress. i was a private citizen. private citizens are allowed to

be in business, a totally different operation. i checked with for a sample rosio and the reform bill passed against the opposition levels and said they always supported these reform efforts and never mentioned fanny or freddie to him and so in my public role i think i was very clear about where i was going and what i was doing and it's very important to understand that. as a private adviser, had they come to me and, again, every time somebody says to me here's what's happening which will be occurring pretty late i would have said this is unsustainable because if you state economic history is just clearly not possible to do this. so,to examples a good friend of

mine who's a very successful investor in the early 1989 we worked on al and the ground of the japanese had approximately the same value as the state of florida and said in a passing that is a bubble. he sold everything that he had in japan just before the u.k. crash and its a random conversation. it doesn't take much to figure t they are not going to be sustainable. >> they are going to be getting out of whack on the education part which you mentioned. you have sort of a long list of education ideas, reform ideas, one of the pell grants for the k-12 and the charter ideas and then on your web site at the end you say that you are going to shrink the education department to as small as you can get to

read the pell grant for k-12 doesn't that further the federal government? all of those are -- >> i want to draw a distinction on the president's role as the leader of the american peop and say here are 12 things i hope the state government does and the leader of the president's manager of the federal government and different rules ronald reagan understood this thorghly as the leader of the country i can advocate a series of things for it satellite think every state should adopt a law that says states will encounter the declaration of independence every year that they are in school. i don't think the federal government should but i would actively advocate that in every single state because the declaration of independence is central to who we are as a people. speaking would be data collecting analysis and -- spec

all of the federal dollars, you've got lunch programs and subsidies. school luhes and used part but if agriculture. you would have to make a separate distinction about whether in fact -- remember we nt t school with a world war ii because of the malnutrition. originally sponsored by richard russell who was pretty conservative because so many young men were incapable of serving in world war ii because of basic heath problems and the was the original theory behind date and i haven't taken the position on school lunch and something i don't think about but i think you'd be cautious before you automatically mp off the cliff and sage we are going to disband its. is that a problem do we need to take a look at? >> a small percentage is growing but i would argue that if you're to go to the average school if

you would take from new hampshire how much the federal regulation costs you how much time do you spend filling out forms it's like when you talk to doctors about the number they now hire tfill out the forms federal aid also meant federal regulations you might find it was more of a break even than you think. >> in manchester we can't -- some 70 languages almost a spoken in the school system that want to take the sate's and not test them for federal testing for a year or two but we can't. >> that is inaccessible something that is just crazy. if you have someone that shows up from ethiopia or somalia or cambodia and say i'm glad you've been here six months let's test you and they get average into

the schools -- the second part of that is i'm adamantly in favor english being t official language of the government and in favor of all people 60 or 70 languages. i think in nursing in english is the first step towards prosperity. >> in the gingrich administration we have now currently every now and then they will pop up because there's some government documents in miami and some printed in spanish or california and texas. >> you have the department to print the voting documents in every language in the country. theoretically in california i forget the total number of languages to print the voting ballot in but it is an absurd. >> what we have the evan patrician -- >> english. >> mr. speaker, in that cabinet of yours you've been talking about good when and the rivals

so where would you put their rival mitt romney in the team? >> governor mitt romney is an extraordinarily competent manager with an immense amount about business and finance and has a wide range of possibilities. >> when i suggested that to him -- the part about him rving in the team of rifles. >> that might have just about the serving his team of rifles. none of us want to. we got into this because somebody said the other day what do unequivocally say no to the vice president and following ronald reagan in 1976 he said he was really glad that ford didn't offer it because he wasn't sure how youwould turn on the president. i said to clarify gingrich must

think that -- this is back when i was like eight per cent h must think he's not going to get the nomination. so, he is the front runner or should we think anything less than winning the nomination. >> i guess no good reason have you got a campaign now you said you have eight staffers here and eight in iowa. he's got a great future in this buness. he's very good natural political leader. >> so you don't have to pay him. to complement him nicely. do you have a campaign to sustain yourself with? that historians have to fini in new hampshire to go on with any hope of winning the

nomination. >> we got to be the top three in iowa and new hampshire. i would like to be first in online and in new hampshire a we will see, but i think if we go south and i'm a viable candidate i would win the south carolina, and i think that changes for florida. so, to me these are important building blocks. what we don't know yet is whether one of us can run the table, you know, in which case it gets over early or better because of proportional representation of what happened to hillary and obama and still struggling with that in may and june and i think you have to prepare for both u.s. to say it's true i like to be the best i can in all the early primaries but i have to have the ability to assist in the campaign all

the way. >> when you say top three in this team states and my lai and new hampshire ron paul seems like of a wild card in this film. is wrong paul -- should he be viewed as one of the regular republicans? i mean he has his followings in his positions. >> he may do surprisingly well. >> certainly as we learn more about how bad the federal reserve is and how much money if it is thrown around the plan that he has a better case in the foreign policy it's a little bit harder for people to acceptut i think that ron paul is going to depending on the turnout and i applaud it could be significant the bigger he primary. i think that he will be reported as a factor. >> he's also said he won't rule

out the third party. >> i saw him on tvd of the morning he said flat he would not run he said he wouldn't automatically guarantee the republans so he might be passing that he said what he wouldn't run asa candidate. >> you caught up with this on the internet where the former bush campaign official claims to have $24 mlionto get on the ballot in 50 states and the you're going to have the process of the six most likely candidates with internet voting and then put one on the? >> if we nominate someby that is reasonably articulate and clearly conservative no third-party ticket will because people will walk in ad say let me get this straight i can beat obama or vote to re-elect obama and if i don't vote for the only major candidate against obama i

just voted to re-elect him and will be the tendency this year in a modern times because the desperate desire to beat obama is great. that is the biggest at i have because if you say to people who would you like to see beat obama overwhelmingly they would say the. i was leaving des moines in the other day and of a woman that was checking said we are so excited about your idea. my husband and i are already planning the debate parties. i thought that was an encouraging sign. >> do you have any follow-up or are we all set? then it is who had the best third party and it didn't do the republicans any good. >> he was a unique figure.

>> woodrow wilson to the system again this year give us obama. >> i found out with a son-in-law was. i didn't know that. the provision series which was great. thank you for coming. we will no doubt be covered in your social scurity. come back when you get a chance. >> thank you. will that make c-span happy. one of my major goals in life [inaudible] in alba conversations inaudible conversations]

>> see more editorial of the candidates from campaign 2012. >> now remarks from president obama on the failure of the debt committee to reach an agreement before this week's deadline. the president spoke from the white house briefing room. >> as you all know, last summer, i find a law that will cut nearly $1 trillion of spending

over the next 10 years. part of that law also requires congress to reduce the deficit by an additional $1.2 trillion by the end of this year. in september, i sent them a detailed plan that would have gone above and i don't understand that goal. the plan that would reduce the deficit by an additional $3 trillion by cutting spending, slowing the growth of medicaid and med -- medicare and asking wealthy americans to pay their fair share. this kind of balanced approach to reducing our deficit, an approach where everybody gets a little bit and everyone does their fair share is supported by an overwhelming majority of americans. democrats, independence, and republicans. it's supported by experts, and economists from all across the political spectrum and to their

credit, many democrats in congress were willing to put politics aside and commit to reasonable adjustments that would have reduced the cost of medicare as long as they were part of a balanced approach. but despite the broad agreement that exists for such an approach, there's still too many republicans in congress who have refuse to listen to the voices of reason and compromise that are coming outside of washington. they continue to insist on protecting $100 billion worth of tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of americans. even if it means reducing the deficits to things like education and medical research. even if it means deep cuts in medicare. so at this point at least, they simply will not bulge from that -- budge from that negotiating and that refusal remains somewhat blocked to prevent congress from reaching our reduced deficit. now, we are not in the same

situation that we were -- that we were in in august. there's no imeminent threat to us defaulting on the debt that we owe and part of the law that i signed this summer state that if congress could not reach an agreement on the deficit, there would be another $1.2 trillion of automatic cuts in 2013, divided equally between domestic spending and defense spending. one way or another, we will be trimming the deficit by a total of at least $2.2 trillion over the next 10 years. that's going to happen one way or another. we've got $1 trillion locked in and either congress comes in with $1.2 trillion which so far they failed to do or the sequester kicks in and the spending cuts will occur that will bring in in deficit reduction. the question is whether we can

reduce the deficit in a way that helps the economy grow, that operates with a scalpel, not a hatchet, and if not, whether congress is willing to stick to the painful deal that we made in august for the automatic cuts. already some in congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cutting. my message to themtis simple. no. i will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to -- domestic and defense spending. there will be no easy off ramps on this one. we need to keep the pressure up to compromise, not turn off the pressure. the only way these spending cuts will not take place is if congress gets back to work and agrees on a balanced plan to reduce the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion. that's exactly what they need to do. that's the job they promised to do. and they still got a year to

figure it out. although congress has not come to an agreement yet, nothing prevents them from coming up with an agreement in the days ahead. they can still come together around a balanced plan. i believe democrats are prepared to do so. my expectation is that there will be some republicans who are still interested in preventing the automatic cuts from taking place and as i have from the beginning, i stand ready and willing to work with anybody that's ready to engage in that effort to create a balanced plan for deficit reduction. now in the meantime, we've got a lot of work left to do this year. before congress leaves next month, we have to work together to cut taxes for workers and small business owners all across america. if we don't act, taxes will go up for every single american starting next year. and i'm not about to let that happen. middle class americans can't afford to lose $1,000 next year

because congress won't act and can only hope that members of congress who have been fighting so hard to protect tax breaks for the wealthy will fight just as hard to protect middle class families. we still need to put construction workers back on the job rebuilding our roads and our bridges. we still need to put our teachers back in the classroom educating our kids. when everybody gets back from thanksgiving, it's time to get some work done for the american people. all around the country, americans are working hard to live within their means and meet the -- their responsibilities and i know they expect washington to do the same. thanks.

[captioning made possible by universal television] >> exactly of state clinton and treasury exactly geithner announced new sanctions against iran yesterday. we'll get a closer look at iran's nuclear program. the forum includes remarks from national security advisor. that's live at 9:00 eastern on c-span2. >> in the name of the greatest people that have ever walked in this earth, i draw the line in the dust and i say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever. [cheers and applause] >> for most of his life, george wallace was an ardent supporter of segregation, outspoken against the civil rights movement. the four-term governor of alabama ran for president four times and lost. one of efforts cut short by an assassination attempt.

this week on "the contenders" george wallace, live friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on witherspoon. -- c-span. >> in a moment, your phone calls, e-mails and today's news live on washington redskins. a number of -- "washington journal." a number of conservatives voicing their support for not raising taxes as part of a deficit reduction package. we'll hear from americans for prosperity, the tea party patriot, the family research council and citizens united. live coverage at 10:00 eastern. and president obama travels to new hampshire today to talk about his jobs bill. the president will visit central high school in manchester and we'll have live coverage of his remarks at 12:15 eastern. and coming up this hour, we'll get an update on what's ahead now that the joint deficit reduction committee has failed to reach a deal. failed to reach a deal. to reach a deal.