president says a mile away from here, we are sitting here, people are wondering, why can they work this out? as exactly what we are a sking to do. the differences are not very great. we can do we want the president to ask majority leader's so we can work out these different. we can give taxpayers the relief they deserve. and take care of our physicians who are going to receive a cut. we do not need to kick this down and then come back to the same place and have the arguments. we would like to get together and work these things out

between the house and senate. lasting certainty -- and for the country. >> what they do is get back to basics. nothing could be more basic in washington. we call on senator reid to a point so we can get together and sort out these differences. i can tell you that no hospital works in two months blocks. unless we get along your time extended for the payroll, tax temporary holidays and unemployment benefits, patients will not be able to see their doctors. we have to get back to work. >> there is enough time to get this thing done.

that is for sure. coming from a state that set -- had double-digit unemployment, it is about jobs. the keystone provision, 20,000 jobs -- more than 100,000 indirect jobs. take a look at spectrum. it could have hundreds of thousands of jobs created. this is bipartisan on both sides. the last thing that is important is we look at making sure that physicians are compensated for creating a medical eligible individuals. it is a good package. there is enough time to get it done. >> thank you. i am honored to have been asked on this conference. as a nurse i am concerned as well. i know how important it is.

also our seniors will continue. we have got to -- as a mom, i care about the single mothers who are dependent on this tax extension. we cannot take out money out of their pockets right now especially in a holiday. but give them certainty as well. >> [inaudible] the idea of a conference committee is a jeffersonian principle. i would ask senator reid to appoint conferees. we do not need people who are am -- depending on these important programs. >> i am a doctor and the

daughter of elderly parents to depend on their medicare benefits. i have been a small employer. i was on radio with folks in the hudson valley. one of them was -- point out that in fact it would be difficult to manage payroll. he said keep fighting. this is why you're there. this is why we're here. we're determined to do the right thing. this is not partisan. this is about common sense and doing what is right. nobody thinks that two months is better than one year and we are determined to make that happen. >> i think the american public is tired as -- of business as usual. it passed a two months' extension and raced home for their vacations. republicans are committed to a full year tax cut and we're willing to work through the holidays to make sure that

happens. mr. president and senate democrats, do your job first. vacation is second. what possibly are you doing that is more important than insuring the payroll tax cut is in place? >> i have an 11-year-old and a 13-year-old and i would love to be with them and my wife. the american people deserve that we do our work. this bill is bad, reckless policy. we need the senate to come back in a session and sit down with us. come back year and the american people deserve us to be at the table getting our work done. that is why my colleagues are here and i am privileged to stand with them. we will take a couple of questions. >> you were talking about the importance [unintelligible] the jeffersonian idea.

i have heard that you start to talk about process. have you lost the argument when you start to talk about process? >> we are here and ready to work. so we can do what the president in the house and senate want. that is extending the payroll tax cuts. >> scott brown his says you are playing politics and you should approve. >> we have the house and the senate. exactly what the president ask for. we're here ready to work. >> [inaudible] been your helping to reelect the

president. [inaudible] >> we have fought for lower taxes and we will continue to be the border -- party of lower taxes. we can resolve these differences between the parties. and give the american people a real christmas present. if members of the senate vote, both parties were here. >> are you open to the idea of giving a two-year extension if you had a guaranteed vote? >> we are here ready to work. and we have a conversation. >> when you intend to be home for christmas? >> we are here and ready.

i do not think that is in the country's best interest. time is running short. we have ample time to get this done. thank you. >> thank you. >> without an agreement between the house and senate, payroll taxes will go up 2% in january. 160 million americans would see their taxes increase. two other art -- items are included. an extension of unemployment benefits and a delay of the scheduled pay cut who treat medicare beneficiaries. president obama has planned to be in his home state this week but with the payroll tax issue unresolved he is in washington. the first lady and his daughters flew to oahu on

saturday. erick kanter spoke to c-span this morning about what was next. the senate has no plans to me with the house about the legislation. -- meet with the house about the legislation. >> thanks for being with us. one of the options? what is going to happen over the next week or 10 days? >> we're in washington today. we're asking the president and harry reid joined us and resolve the remaining differences over the issue of how to extend the payroll tax holiday. the house republican position is clear. we want to make sure the working people have a year. that is the position taken in this town which land some question of why is it what they said and has produced is something that is acceptable.

it is not acceptable to expect families to operate that way. >> you know the country process. is it feasible to reach an agreement in this limited time with the holidays in the middle? >> the only thing that is keeping the deal from being struck is harry reid's insistence he wants to keep his members on vacation. that is all. we're here to go to work. we're here in washington. what we're talking about is one issue. there is nothing else other than this payroll tax extension. the difference lies in how to resolve the budgetary impact. what we're saying is we're willing to sit down and compromise. we have always been willing to do so but somehow it seems acceptable to the president and harry reid to allow fox to be on vacation while we should be doing our work. my sense is this spirit we owe it to the american people at the

end of what has been a tough year to show that washington can do something and can produce a result. not this kick the can down the road for 60 days. we will be back in this fight again and we will not leave it. that is what we're trying to say. we can do things together and we can find common ground so we can see a better day in this country. >> you have seen the descriptions and the stalemate standoff. >> with a look at is they hear everyone sang we should have payroll tax holiday, a tax holiday extension for year. even the president said it is inexcusable for congress not to extend the tax holiday. now people are saying now. the only thing that can happen is 60 days. we're saying it is not true. we have plenty of time here. it would not take long. a couple of hours at that to resolve the differences over

the pay fors and let the american people get about their lives. otherwise there will be left in the lurch if 60 days is the answer or of taxes or the tax holiday is not extended. the differences are not great. we can do this. >> have you and others been in touch with the white house? >> absolutely. the speaker as well as my office and myself, i have been in discussions with the white house. i think we can get this done. it is not that difficult.

if everyone would come off an insistence that somehow a 60 day kicking the can is a good thing and realize what's is good for the american people to guarantee them a year's worth of tax relief, that is what we should do. we have plenty of time to do it. >> we're talking with house republican leader harry kantor -- eric cantor. >> the speaker and i believe a year long tax relief is where we need to be. i think that is where all leaders are in this town and all members. they say that is what we ought to do. somehow harry reid feels the only thing we can do even though everyone wants to do a year, the only thing we can do is 60 days. that is not acceptable.

we're here trying to do our work and ask them to join us. >> just walk through the process what we can expect. the house remains in pro forma session. what has to happen? >> the house on tuesday when a head and rejected the senate position to put the bill back into the body of the senate. what has to happen in order for tax relief to be afforded to the working people of any sort, that senate has to act. and if taxes go up, it will be because the senate did not come back to town and do their work. what we're asking is that harry reid would appoint conferees to join us in resolving the remaining differences. knowing where the negotiations were when they broke off, we're not far apart at all. and is inexcusable for us to allow for any kind of politics

to get in the way. what we're talking about is people's hard-earned money and we're talking about people of this country have been through a rough year. we care about this people and let's do the right thing by them. >> what are the odds of an agreement? >> i am hoping something will dawn upon the president who is here in town with us to get engaged in this and say let's resolve the differences together. we could get it done today. that is how easy this is. we could get this done today. that is what we're saying and set a new tone for this town and the beginning of the next year that the people can count on their government working for them and not the other way around. >> thanks for being with us. >> thank you. >> president obama spoke to house speaker john boehner today and urged him and the gop to vote on and approve the bipartisan senate bill that would extend the payroll tax cut an additional two months. j kearney detail the

conversation that lasted 10 minutes during the daily white house briefing. this is over one hour. >> welcome to the white house. let's get started. i would like to read to you -- or we go. readout of the call to the speaker of the house john boehner and majority leader harry reid. the president made separate phone calls to speaker banner and leader harry reid. in his call he reiterated the need and commitment to work with congress to extend the payroll tax cut for the entire year. and the fact that the short-term bipartisan compromise passed by almost the entire set is the only option to insure that middle-class families are not hit with a tax hike in 10 days and gives both sides the time needed to work out a full year's solution. the president urged the speaker to take up the bipartisan compromise passed in the senate with overwhelming republican and

democratic report -- supports that would prevent working americans from being hit with a tax cut on january 1. that tax cut also spoke with harry reid and applauded him for the work he did too rich -- success to -- to achieve this compromise. senator reid reaffirmed his commitment to secure a year-long tax cut after the house passes the two month extension. the president urged the speaker to allow a vote on the one compromise that democrats answer -- republicans passed together. to allow a vote on the one compromise that democrats and republicans passed together to give the american people the assurance they need during this holiday season that will not see a significant tax hike in 10 days. this call took place in last half-hour. >> did he get an answer for either one?

>> is the white house more confident this morning that some sort of compromise could get through? >> a compromise exists. it is embodied in the senate bill that was supported by 90% of the senate. republicans and democrats. it is available even now for the house to vote on. the house leadership has refused to allow the house of representatives to vote on the measure which has overwhelming bipartisan support. we urge the house leadership john better to allow that senate bill to come up, to allow the house to vote on it because we are confident it would pass with

both democratic and republican support. i know you are aware because many of you have been reporting on it. on the growing chorus of republicans who are calling back speaker john boehner and the house leadership to do the right thing and pass this americans do not have their taxes go up in 10 days and 11 hours. that is the resolve -- result a feeling that act. the bipartisan compromise exists. it was worked out by the senate leader. in the process that was agreed upon with the speaker of the house. it produced a house -- results and he recommended they support. they should just get it done. and we can all work on extending

the payroll tax cut for the entire year. a commitment this president has made from the beginning. when he was the first to put on the table to the american jobs that a payroll tax extension for 2012. but we have to get this two month extension done or less taxes will go up on the american people. it really is not that difficult. the house has the ability to call the senate legislation, pass it, and move on. taxes will not go up. the average american family will not have to worry about how to make ends meet with $1,000 less next week. we urge them to do that. just moments ago. >> what the white house and

democrats be willing to give some sort of ironclad commitment to pass the full year's tax extension by a certain date in 2012 in exchange for passing this extension? >> the president is committed to a one-year tax cut. that is what he has been pushing here in washington and around the country since of timber. as part of the american jobs act. when it was separated out from the american jobs act. summit -- house democrats are committed to doing that. republican leaders say they are committed to doing that. it can be done. it would require finishing the work that senators mcconnell and raid -- harry reid started as they tried to reach an agreement. were committed to be done which is why they move to the two month extension to ensure americans did not have their taxes go up.

that is the sensible thing to do. pass a two month extension and return to work on a yearlong extension orel's explain to the american people why congress would not listen to them, would not listen to their senate colleagues and listen to elder statesmen and states woman telling them to do the right thing. it is bad for the country and it is bad for the economy not to pass this bill. we feel strongly about it. >> does the president expect back to hear -- to hear back from john boehner? >> it is not clear just because -- the ball was in the house's corp. there is a compromise available. an avenue out of this blind

alley if you will. they have driven themselves into. it is the senate bill. vote and pass it and we can move on to discussing and figuring out a solution for the extension. i know what is going to happen and i agree with the editorial. probably the best thing to do is get this behind us and move on. urging the republican leadership to change course and indorse a compromise reached in the senate. it is harming the republican party. so do the right thing. pass the payroll tax cut. make sure americans do not have their taxes go up on general one.

>> what is the president offering the speaker in return for reversing himself? >> vehrs -- this is not a game of poker. we're talking about 160 million americans and their paychecks. there is no political quid pro quo. there is a bipartisan compromise reached. that garnered the support of the republican leader in the house. let's review some history. the president and democrats supported put for the american jobs act which was paid for.

this was the way it should be done. when republicans walked back and that democrats crafted a separate payroll tax extension and tried to move it and have it paid for by asking millionaires and billionaires to pay extra, republicans block that. the president and senate compromise. the deal that was passed, the compromise that was passed by a vote of 89-10 did not have the pay for the democrats wanted. they had a compromise to pay for it. that when the agreement of 89

senators. that is the essence of compromise. the bill even included an extraneous political victory that republicans insisted on. >> when will the president signed the bill? >> when he gets here. when it arrives there is a process in that institution that takes time in terms of producing the bill for him to sign but he will sign it when he gets here. >> what are additional steps to pressure the assaad regime? >> we have throughout this process were to unilaterally and

collectively to increase pressure and isolation on the assaad regime. we have seen is a continuation of fredrik rack -- acts of violence. needless violence against the syrian people. every metric shows the situation is moving against assaad. diplomats have begun leaving their posts and supported the opposition. the opposition is more unified and inclusive. the regime has been cut off by the arab league by its traditional allies and neighbors like turkey. it is a matter of time before this regime comes to an end. only fear is holding it together. and governing that is based on fear is always doomed to fail. >> [inaudible] i do not have details but we

will continue to pressure working with our international partners, the assaad regime and the writing is on the wall. the isolation increases. more members of the international community, the nation's are joining the call for syria to stop this atrocious behavior. >> the president will stay in town to sign the omnibus but he said it is up to the speaker to make the next move. what is the president's next move? will he join his family in a y.a.? >> i do not have any scheduling updates. we are in a fluid situation. the president made clear in his call earlier today as i made clear in the readout. the action that must be taken,

the house needs to take up the senate bill. it was supported by an overwhelming percentage of republicans and democrats. >> he has no intention of negotiating? >> the negotiation has happened already. it is not as i just explained. it is not at all the case that this is the president saying here is what what what and do it. this was a compromise worked out by the republican leader in the senate with the democratic leader, with the approval, even the instigation of the speaker of the house. quex the president has won this battle politically, " the the washington post said. the economy -- most economists are saying will suffer if the payroll tax cut is not extended. how concerned is the white house

that if it does not extend it and the nation's economy will take a big hit? >> puerto rican izard of two things. the micro and macro, if you will. the macro economic effect on growth that not extending this tax cut, not extending unemployment insurance would have. outside independent economists, not the ones to seem to disagree with basic economic facts say that it could have a negative impact about 2.5% of gdp. we believe in the end because there is such now overwhelming support for the payroll tax cuts and extending it for your that this will get done. we believe evangeline the house leadership will understand this is not about giving president obama a victory. this is exercising their

authority on behalf and that the demand of the american people. a bipartisan consensus of the american people as represented by the enormous bipartisan vote in the senate. it is the right thing to do. we're worried about individual families who need that extra money. an average of $40 a paycheck. as you know the white house called on americans to add their voice to the conversation about why we need to extend the payroll tax cuts. if congress fails, the house fails, the typical family making 50,000 year will have $40 less to spend or save with each paycheck. that adds up to about $1,000 for the year. the response has been extraordinary. over 17,000 submissions is the last information i got.

someone contacting us from connecticut said i can buy lunch from the cafeteria for a month or can save for my daughters prescriptions. prescription deductibles. $40 is big money for us. in west virginia someone wrote in sang after everything that comes out my take-home pay is $150 every two weeks. subtracting 40 would be 110. i can barely get by now. taking 40 away from my pay would just about put me under. this matters, this is real stuff. this is about one under 60 americans and their families. and the impact failure to act would have on them.

the voices are growing louder. even in the house now from respected commentators within the conservative our arena. the house needs to act. they're not behaving in the interest of the country. we want to do this together. we want to work with the congress. that is how we achieve a compromise that was co-authored by senator mcconnell. it is time to get this done for the american people. nice to have you in the front row. >> is the white house at odds when heaker betteboehner

said there is time to work out a yearlong extension of the tax- cut bill? >> we disagree with that proposition because we need the insurance. we need to make sure that taxes do not go up on generate one. that insurance is the compromise extension that was voted on by a 89-10 by republicans and democrats alike in the senate. we are committed to working with congress for a yearlong extension. certainly without any public can support in the beginning pushing this. republicans have gone from opposing it to a tepid support to now insisting it would cause -- would rather have taxes go up on the american people that create the uncertainty of a two- month extension. fors take you back to that some of us distant time in the

summer when republicans were insisting as part of the deficit or the debt ceiling negotiations that we return to raising the debt ceiling every few months. we would return to it by the end of the year. you want to talk about uncertainty, the threat of default. they are concerned about the uncertainty of this two month extension. it seems hollow. >> is there comment about soldiers killed in afghanistan. >> i have not got anything for you but i can take the question and get back to you. >> there were reports that there were five iranian engineers that

were captured in syria. with this statement issued, you're condemning the syrian regime and calling for action. are you calling for action? have you been speaking to your allies? because things are -- i mean, especially with the iranians now in the country, i mean, it seems that things are ramping up there. >> well, i would simply say that, from the start of this process, with regards to syria, we have ratcheted up pressure on syria. you have seen the united states working with our partners, working with our allies, participate in an effort that has increased international isolation of syria. and so the steps we have taken have been all in one direction,

if you will, which is to put pressure on syria to make clear that assad has lost his legitimacy to rule and to further isolate his regime as we call on him to cease the violence and to begin a democratic transition in that country. we will continue to take those steps to pressure the regime to stop its crackdown. i think as we've seen in terms of the -- by the reporting and by the international condemnation of what's happening in that country, the world is watching. and increasingly, assad's legitimacy is -- has been lost around the world. and that process will continue. >> are you aware of these reports of the iranian engineers? >> i do, but i don't have

anything -- i mean, i've seen the reports, but i don't have anything specific for you on that. >> and there have not been discussions with people in the region for increased action? >> again, i don't know -- i don't have any response on that. let's go ed and then -- >> thanks, jay. yesterday you were graciously answering my question about the president on 60 minutes saying that maybe -- >> you want to know if the invitation for christmas still stands? >> well, i was going to let that pass. but have you had a chance to talk to the president? >> no updates on scheduling. >> ok. in all seriousness, i did ask you yesterday -- i didn't want to belabor it after the president came out. he came out while you were talking about -- there's been a lot talked about this week, with the president telling cbs that if you stack up his accomplishments in the first couple of years it's the fourth best in history. he said only lincoln and a couple others were ahead of it. so can you talk a little bit about how he compares to -- >> sure, i mean, this has obviously been of great interest in the conservative blogosphere, but the fact of the

matter is, he has -- he was making a point about the volume and substance of the legislative accomplishments, and the foreign policy accomplishments, in his nearly three years in power. he was not making an assertion of -- that only historians will make about the success or -- this was not a comparison of success to other presidencies except in the significance and substance and size of the legislative accomplishments, whether it's health care reform, which was an effort that took 100 years to accomplish; or the recovery act, which was an enormous response to an historic economic crisis; the bailout of the automobile industry, the saving of the american automobile industry against great political opposition; and on the foreign policy front, continuing to take the fight successfully to al qaeda, embodied most notably in the successful mission to remove osama bin laden from the battlefield; the successful

efforts that we led to bring the international community behind the effort of the libyan opposition to remove moammar qaddafi from power. i could go on, and believe me, i will, as time permits. but it was within the context of the substance and volume of what has happened in the face of enormous challenges in these past nearly three years. >> can i just follow up on another subject, which is there had been commentary a couple weeks ago but now it's sort of died down because of the payroll tax cut fight -- but that the president might make some recess appointments. and there are a lot of people

in both parties wondering, does he reserve that right? i mean, we don't know when they're going to actually recess, i suppose, as we continue -- this drags out. but is there a possibility that richard cordray could be named by recess appointment? are there people in the nlrb? what's your sense about that possibility? >> well, i don't have any announcements to make or speculation to engage in on that front. i mean, we're not relinquishing any rights here. that's certainly the case. i would note that it is unfortunate that although we had some significant nominations succeed, many, many others unnecessarily have been blocked. the effect of that, whether it's on ambassadorial nominations or judicial nominations, is very damaging, and it is a constant problem and a growing problem where random senators put holds on nominations that are absolutely uncontroversial. and that practice should stop. and i think this president will continue to nominate highly qualified people for important positions around our government and our foreign service and onto the bench.

you mentioned richard cordray, and this is a perfect example of an abomination in terms of senate behavior. he is widely respected, has broad bipartisan support across the country. he is exactly the right person for the job to be the consumer watchdog, the overseer of this agency that is in place to ensure that average americans don't get taken advantage of by financial institutions, that they have an advocate for them here in washington. republicans blocked that because they want to water down wall street reforms, reforms that were put in place to help prevent the kind of financial crisis that almost tipped the global economy into a depression. seems like a bad idea. yes. i'm sorry, i did say -- david,

go ahead. yes, sir. >> yesterday, the president said he needed the speaker to do something. the speaker said, "i need the president to do something." my assumption would be the speaker expected something more than a phone call. he was looking for something from the president as far as negotiations; you say there's nothing to negotiate. the speaker is in a corner, he's boxed in a corner. is the president going to do nothing to help the speaker get out of that corner? >> the president is doing everything he can to help the american people. the speaker is very capable of helping himself by calling a vote on the senate compromise, a compromise that received the support of 80 percent of the republican senators and even a greater percentage of democratic senators. there is a bipartisan compromise available to him as a lifesaver, if you will. >> but politically he's in a box. is there anything the president can do? >> well, i mean, honestly, the important thing here is not who's up and who's down politically because, as i talked about yesterday, we are beginning to see some positive

signs in the economy. we are a long way from full economic recovery, but the last thing we need to do is fail to pass a payroll tax cut extension which would have a negative impact on the kind of economic growth that we have been seeing and need to continue to see. it's just wrong at every level to prevent this from passing. >> on north korea, there were some indications coming out of china that maybe there's some power-sharing agreement. can you update us on the situation in north korea? have you had any kind of communications through intermediaries or the north korean government itself? >> all i can say is that we're monitoring the situation closely. kim jong-il had designated kim jong-un as his official successor, and at this time we have no indication that that has changed. we hope that the new north korean leadership will take the steps necessary to support

peace, prosperity and a better future for the north korean people, including through acting on its commitments to denuclearization. as i stressed i think the day before last, we are in a period of transition. north korea is in a period of national mourning. we're monitoring events closely. we hope that the new leadership will support peace and prosperity and a better future for its people, and that it will abide by its commitments on denuclearization. >> and no communication from the north korean government or intermediaries? >> no, not that i'm aware of. kristen. >> thanks, jay. on tuesday, the administration called on the american people to weigh in, to lend their voices to this. realistically speaking, do you think that that's going to help break this impasse? and if so, why? i know you just read some testimonials. >> well, i do think it will because as i've said now for a while, even prior to this current situation, we are optimistic or at least hopeful

that congress will act on some of these common-sense, mainstream measures to help grow the economy, help the american people and improve our employment situation, not because we're for them -- that's probably a negative in the eyes of the highly politicized and partisan house of representatives republican party, but because their constituents are demanding it. and i, of course, don't have a ton of data here, but i suspect that the voices that we're hearing from -- by people who are responding to the #40dollars that we started yesterday, that they are representative of folks around the country in the districts of house republicans, as well as

democrats in the states all over the country for whom $40 a paycheck is a big deal, that it means the difference -- for someone from north carolina, it's the -- "that $40 buys my gas for a week to drive to work, or it buys my groceries for a week. it's hard enough making ends meet and $40 is a lot of money to me." in texas: "that is almost one week of groceries for me or how much it costs to fill my gas tank for one and a half weeks or medical co-pays at the specialist office. which one am i to go without? this is going to hurt. please don't let this happen." look, i think that the thousands of responses we've had so far are representative of the hundreds of thousands and millions of responses you would get if you were -- and if the members of the house of representatives were to survey their own constituents. for most people, $1,000 out of

their paycheck next year is an enormous hit, and in this economy, we cannot let that happen. yes. >> and on afghanistan quickly -- >> sorry. >> -- a senior military commander suggested that troops might need to, in fact, stay -- american forces might need to, in fact, stay beyond 2014. can you respond to that? and is that a possibility -- >> well, i appreciate the question. thank you, kristen. as established in lisbon at nato and as made clear through the president's afghanistan policy, one, we are in the process of drawing down the surge. and by the end of 2014, we will have turned over full security lead to afghan forces. we have made clear all along that much as in iraq when we turned over full security lead

to the iraqi forces that would be part of a process that may include troops in support. and make no mistake -- and i have an announcement to make, which is that we have met the commitment to reduce by the end of this year our forces by 10,000 in afghanistan, as we begin to reduce the surge forces, as the president committed to do. and we will continue that process, and when the surge forces are out between that end date, which i guess is september of next year, through the end of 2014, there will be a continued reduction in u.s. forces as we turn over more and more of the country to afghan security lead. that has been clearly spelled

out from lisbon on so that -- and is entirely consistent with what general allen said. >> and so just to put a point on it, the commander was wrong -- was not -- >> no, i said it's entirely consistent with what general allen said, that the process of turning over entirely the security lead to the afghans is the result of a gradual reduction of forces and a building up of afghan security forces. we have said from the beginning that there could be u.s. forces in afghanistan beyond the end of 2014 in a support role just as they were after august 2010 in a support role in iraq. from that point forward in iraq, we have drawn down now to zero in accordance with our agreement with the iraqi government. so that is entirely consistent. yes.

>> back on the payroll tax cut for a second, a follow-up to david's question. put yourself in the speaker's shoes -- are you suggesting that he cobble together maybe a house majority of willing democrats and whatever republicans he might be able to get to go along, even if it goes against the majority of his own caucus in the house? >> am i suggesting that for the sake of 160 million people he should allow this vote to happen and allow his house republicans to vote their conscience, which would result, because of overwhelming democrat support, in the passage of the senate bill? yes. >> that's one way he could do it. >> absolutely. that's the reason why they didn't vote on it the other day, because it would have passed. and that's the shame of all this. there are, i'm confident, more than enough house republicans who want to bring this to an end, who want to ensure that americans don't have their taxes go up on january 1st and certainly don't want to explain to their constituents why they took a vote so that their taxes would go up.

and if it came to the floor of the house, it would pass. it would have near unanimous support from democratic members, and i am confident that the 30- odd republicans it would require to pass this measure would vote yes, at least. and then we can move on to the next thing that we all agree on, which is that we have to get this payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance extended for the full year. yes. >> might that not spark a revolt within his own caucus? >> the president has an enormous amount of responsibilities. every president does. he cannot be responsible for the internal politics of the other party in one house of congress. he is simply focused on doing what is best for the american people, and working with republicans, as well as democrats, to achieve what's best for the american people. and that's what the bipartisan compromise reached in the senate represents. ninety percent of the united

states senate on a substantive issue, an important issue like this, is quite an accomplishment. senators mcconnell and reid deserve a lot of credit for the work they did on achieving the two-month extension and on the progress they made towards a full-year extension. and so the house should act on that. it doesn't happen that often when we have this kind of bipartisan consensus on an important issue. we should act on it. yes, sir. >> i'm just trying to get a little bit better sense of what happens next. as you said, the ball is in the house's court. did the president set any time -- did he and boehner set any time to talk again? or is this the time, the time that's behind here on this clock? >> there is nothing more i can read out to you from the conversation with the speaker of the house. the president was very clear, and i provided you the essence of what he said to the speaker. there is an available solution: the house should pass the two-

month extension to ensure that americans' taxes don't go up. the president, as he has repeatedly, affirmed his commitment to a one-year extension. he, after all, started this conversation and has been pushing for a full-year extension since september -- and there is a way to get there. and this president and democrats have been clearly willing to compromise, to accept that they could not get republican support for what we believe and they believe was the right thing to do, which was ask the 300,000 wealthiest americans, millionaires and billionaires all, to pay a little bit more so that 160 million americans got a tax cut. but since the republicans oppose that almost unanimously, senate democrats, with this president's full support, were able to work out a compromise with senate republicans, that included pay-fors that we found acceptable and that made sense as a policy matter, that did not violate the president's

principles in terms of doing damage to the economy or harming the very people you're trying to help with the payroll tax cut extension or with unemployment insurance. >> so why did he decide to call boehner? when you were asked yesterday if he was going to be calling boehner you laughed it off. >> no, i didn't laugh it off. i simply said that there was an available action here that the house should pass the senate bill. the president speaks with speaker boehner periodically. he called him to urge him to do the right thing here, which is bring up the senate bill in the house, which is something he can still do, contrary to some tweets i've seen out there. they absolutely can take up the senate bill and pass it. it will be signed by this president, gladly. margaret, and then -- i'm sorry, then i -- margaret, then in the back, and then i'll jump around -- laura. settle in, folks. >> i'm going to, like, take a stab at this, but i feel like it may not work.

(laughter.) so i feel like we're all caught in the middle of basically a game where i'm wondering -- are you guys just sort of making the house republicans twist in the wind a little bit more, and then this is going to get worked out? it just seems, if the president was really done with it wouldn't he just be on a plane to hawaii right now? >> i don't have any scheduling updates to give you. the president just got off the phone within the last hour now with the speaker of the house, urging him to do the right thing, to take up the senate bill. this is not about, like -- look, there's a clear avenue here. we're shining a light on the path out of this cul-de-sac that they've driven themselves into, and it is to vote on a bill that -- we're not asking them to vote on a bill that only democrats supported, we're asking them to vote "yes" on a bill that 82 percent or something, or 80 percent of senate republicans supported. >> doesn't the house -- >> it seems not that much of an ask.

>> doesn't the house's way out of it now effectively do that with just sort of a little bit more so that their members can vote for it? and i mean, in the end, if what you really want is just a resolution, doesn't that resolve that without really undercutting the places where you guys want to -- >> closing what resolve? >> a two-month extension with some language that requires a year-long deal. i mean, isn't that -- it doesn't seem that out of reach. >> well, i don't know what that means. requires a year-long deal on whose terms? i mean, you saw what the house republicans put out yesterday, and clearly demonstrating that this is not a payroll tax cut for them, it's about trying to get some political victories on ideological issues. so they took the willingness that senate democrats demonstrated and this president demonstrated to accept their totally extraneous provision on keystone, and decided that that wasn't enough, they wanted a little more, and they wanted a

bunch of other things that simply moved them away from bipartisanship and moved them away from compromise. so the president is committed to a full-year extension. he has demonstrated his willingness to agree to pay- fors that are different from the ones he put forward and from the ones that senate democrats put forward. but they have to make sense. they have to make economic sense, and they have to make sense in terms of the impact on average americans out there. so they should pass the two- month, and then we can get to negotiating the year-long. >> on iraq, the vice president made a couple of phone calls yesterday, and i guess i'm just wondering, is the president -- has the president or has vice president biden spoken with the vice president of iraq? what is -- what was the point of those calls? how does president obama feel about the arrest and the charges against this vice president? and what, if anything, at this point can the u.s.

do about it? are you considering pulling aid? if you're not -- if we're not -- >> well, margaret, let me stop you there. first of all, i think we read out some of the calls that the vice president made. separately, this kind of political turmoil has been occurring in iraq periodically, as they have taken steps forward and, occasionally, steps backward, but generally made progress towards political reconciliation, towards democracy, and away from the use of violence in pursuit of political ends. that has been progress, but it has often been hard won. that will continue. we certainly expect that there will be difficult days ahead in iraq. but the progress has been substantial. what is utterly nonsensical is the suggestion that somehow we should have left troops in

there, and that would have had any impact on the political disputes. because maybe folks weren't paying attention, but political disputes have been happening while there were 40,000 troops, 80,000 troops, 150,000 troops. the key metric here is that those political disputes have increasingly been resolved through negotiation, not through violence, and elections were held, a government was established -- these are all signs of important progress -- all while violence declined significantly. we will continue to have are robust relationship in iraq, and we will continue to encourage iraqi leaders to make smart decisions as they continue to move forward with the development of their democracies.

question that khristine had about afghanistan. in 2014, the president will make its decisions on the size and shape of our 2012 presence after the reduction of the surjit forces at the appropriate time with our afghan and nato partners. any 2014 president will be at the imitation of the afghan government -- any 2014 presence will be at the invitation of the afghan government. the framework that i discussed at the top was laid out in lisbon. >> do you have any reaction to the prime minister's suggestion today that he wants to shed members of the coalition that he might not get it along with it? >> we did a read of the vice president calls to that

statement. we have worked with a number of the members on the president's team in iraq. it will continue to be that iraqi leaders pursue a representative government so that everyone's interests are properly represented. beyond that, i would refer to the statement that we put out. >> [unintelligible] but the guard that he had jailed? >> i do not have anything more on that for you today. yes, alexis. and then john. >> you were reading the comments of people talking about what they can do for $40. the president talking marketing

a year extension, i want to be clear. he is talking about an extension where people would get $60. >> i'm glad you mentioned that. that was part of our argument. >> if he gets the two-month insurance, he will not then say, ok, let's talk about extending this. >> i will not predict. he may say that is a good thing to do, but he is absolutely willing to sign an appropriately paid for one-year extension of the payroll tax cuts at the current levels. you are right, he initially supported an expansion of that. and as another data point in my presentation, the ways in which

the republicans and democrats have compromised in this negotiation, under way that compromise has led -- and the way that compromise has led to a vote of 80% republican in the senate, understand that in a divided government you do not get everything you want. he is very willing to sign into law this two-month extension that was passed by the senate with overwhelming bipartisan support. and he is very eager to work with congress to continue the progress senators. and mcconnell made for a full year -- senator mcconnell and reid made for a full year. what he does not want is that nothing is passed by the house and taxes go up. >> i have a question about the present sense of history and his plays into it. it is my and steny that somebody

does an analysis for them. and is -- is that somebody -- my understanding is that somebody does an analysis for them. can you tell me where that came from? >> the president is a well-read individual, and was prior to coming to office and reads voraciously in office. i think that is an assessment that others may have made on the outside through the sheer volume of what has been accomplished by this president and by congress in the last three years. and part of the size of the record. and again, voters will judge it, and historians will judge it in terms of where it fits in american history, its relative success or greatness.

that is not what he was talking about. he was talking about coming into office, working with congress, facing enormous challenges for this country. an economy in free fall, the real threat of a global depression, and two wars, and enormous challenges elsewhere in foreign affairs. andy, with congress, took action to deal with -- and he, with congress, took action to deal with these things. they did big things -- wall street reform, successfully saving the american automobile industry, the recovery act, health care reform. and as i mentioned, a number of foreign policy successes. successfully and responsibly and in the war in iraq, beginning the drawdown in afghanistan, taking the fight aggressively to al qaeda kamari positioning ourselves, rearranging ourselves to reassert ourselves as a

player in power. because of the neglect prior that the united states has had in asia. these are all big things. successors and historians will judge the success of things he has done. and voters will obviously have an opportunity to do that in less than a year. but there is no arguing about the volume and a substantial nature of what has been done. >> you just said that the speaker's office has put out a read of the call and they are saying that speaker boehner appears to be dug in, just as the president was on the two- month period -- the two months. where are we today? >> today, congressman ben hollon and congressman -- van hollen and congressman hoyer

attempted to bring it up and they were gaveled down. that is what they understand. he knows, and the president made very clear to him that the avenue available to him as speaker of the house to avoid raising taxes on 160 million americans is to pass the measure that won overwhelming bipartisan support in the senate. this sudden insistence on the uncertainty created by a two- month extension -- you guys know. you have been covering this. it just does not ring true.

it is the same leadership that thought it would be a good idea for the global and the american economy to have periodic fight and stalemates over defaulting on on the credit of the united states government. talk about uncertainty. the uncertainty that we have to eliminate is the uncertainty that americans have right now on whether taxes will go up. there is a bipartisan measure to make sure that does not happen. just take it. follow the advice of numerous republican senators. follow the advice of the " wall street editorial page, words i never thought i would speak. [laughter]

follow the advice of senators mccain and grassley and corcoran and others. >> the speaker has said he has followed europe buys and has urged the leader of the senate ought to appoint conferees. isn't this a stalemate? >> there was a bipartisan measure out of the senate. it was a product of negotiation that the speaker of the house helped to initiate and urged to happen. it was a product that the speaker of the house endorsed to his own colleagues on a conference call, as has been widely reported. it should just get done. what is absolutely the wrong way to look at this and would be a disservice to readers and viewers would be to say, neither side will won't

compromise. democrats will move and republicans will not move. that is not what happened here in the senate. democratic leaders, republican leaders got together and work out a compromise that won the support of republicans and democrats. that is the kind of stuff that people are dying to see in washington. it worked. the president supports it. for while, or 424 hours there, it seemed like -- or for 24 hours there, it seemed like republicans in the house supported it until they were told not to. thethey're not speaking for overwhelming majority of the

american people, republicans in the country, or certainly for their colleagues in the senate, all of whom want them to pass this bipartisan compromise to ensure that americans do not have their taxes go up. and to refocus our efforts on getting a full-year extension. that is the way out here. there is a bipartisan compromise available. the negotiation has happened. he sat down with senator mcconnell and with senator reid and urged that process to begin. they worked hard on a year-long, and when they felt like they could not do it by the end of the year, they recommended a two-month compromise. republicans and democrats overwhelmingly agreed they should take it up and pass it. >> can you tell us how long the conversation lasted with the speaker? >> i do not have an exact time for you, but it seemed about 10 minutes.

>> obviously, more was said and what you said if it was an minutes long. >> i am not going to give you a transcript, if that is what you mean. the president was very clear in stating what i told you he said. i do not think he can be any clearer. >> those guys out potentially reiterated their public positions. my question is whether there's any hope for advancing this beyond the public statements of each side. >> again, i have given you the readout. it is an absolutely fair representation of what the president said. i leave it to the speaker to characterize what he said what i describe to you is exactly

what the president said. it is exactly his position, publicly and privately. the house should take up the senate compromise. >> you talk about how they committed to -- the president is committed to a year-long deal. what makes it seem so easy to get a year-long deal when both parties have failed to do so until now? >> senators. and mcconnell made process. -- made progress. that process -- senator reid and senator mcconnell made progress. that process needs to continue. there are ways to pay for this that the president can accept, democrats can accept, and we see no reason why republicans would not accept. the issues that they put forward in whatever that thing is that

they voted on yesterday so they could avoid actually voting on the bill were things that had nothing to do with the payroll tax cuts. nothing at all. >> if you think you're going to be able to get past all those things when -- that have nothing to do with the payroll tax cuts in january? >> i think the voices of people across the country will be heard. but let's be clear, great progress was made in the senate. there are ways to do this for a year that everybody can agree on. certainly, at least the senate republicans and senate democrats, as well as house democrats. speaking of isolation, there is one isolated group here that does not want to join the overwhelming majority of democrats and republicans in support of doing one thing on behalf of the american people.

increasingly, i think that isolation is becoming clear. and i expect that house republicans will be hearing from their constituents and maybe from other folks whose opinion they respect. and that will have an affect. the politics of this are really so far less important than the substance here. jessica pointed out early on in the briefing that there is an absolute economic impact to fail to act here. there's a macro amped -- macro economic impact from a reduction of growth by 0.5%. that would have an effect on employment.

it would have a terrible effect on those who would no longer receive unemployment insurance as they're trying to make payments on their houses and look for a job. and the withdrawal of all of those resources from the economy would be negative. the effect on individuals losing $40 per paycheck is real. and harmful at this time when we are still at a fragile stage of our economic recovery, where things are getting better, but are far from good enough. the last thing congress should do is in an act of total disregard of bipartisan consensus, a total disregard for the effect it would have on 160 million people, refused to vote on this compromise. >> it seems that the payroll tax cut is going to expire, weather 10 days from now, or two months, or a year from now. you just talked about the impact it would have if not extended for middle-class families.

how's the president or his economic team given any thought to making this payroll tax cut permanent? >> no. >> why not? >> because it was specifically designed a year ago working with republican leaders, designed to give the economy at that moment the goose that it needed. and again, notwithstanding those that choose to ignore basic economic facts and call themselves economists nonetheless, it has had a very positive impact this year on the economy, both on growth and job creation. and it would continue to have that. at some point, you hope that the recovery is at a stage where you would no longer need that added help. that is why it is a one-your manager. -- one-year measure.

the state of uncertainty is suspicious, to say the least, but republicans also overwhelmingly supported the temporary bush tax cuts. this is a real-world impact. this is not an esoteric exercise. this is not a political exercise. this is a bill that would either provide americans with an extra $4 per paycheck, or take it away. -- $40 per paycheck, or take it away. and americans who live paycheck per paycheck and americans who may be doing a little bit better than that and are able to save a little bit, they would have to change their budgeting next year if the house walks away from this bipartisan compromise. a% of senate republican support. -- 80% of senate republican support. but for some reason, the house republicans do not. >> a year from now, you think the taxpayers will be able to

handle about $40 missing per paycheck. >> there are a lot of things under the bridge economically between now and the year from now. as you know from reporting on these issues, a lot of other things will have to be decided next year economically that will have an effect on tax rates and a number of issues economically. we're also hoping -- i will not make any prediction about economic growth or anything, except to say that we need to take the measures we can to help the recovery along, to give the kind of momentum that will help with the unemployment rate and get people back to work. where yes, we would not need that kind of measure that we need now, and that americans need now.

>> [inaudible] what is the symbolism, if any, should read into the message that the dog is the president's best friend? [laughter] is there no message, and this is just the first time he has had a chance to go shopping? he cannot go -- get anything done until congress acts, so he might as well go shopping? [laughter] >> and an expensive trip to it. >> i think scott did my work for me. i was here as this otr, as we call it, was happening. the president was very busy

before this excursion. he was on the phone with senator reid and speaker boehner. you know, sometimes it is nice to get out of the house. thanks very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] by thursday, a discussion of the states that will be impacted by the pipeline. then the executive director of americans united for separation of church and state on what he considers to be an encroachment of religion in 2012.

and robert kaplan talks about his book on leadership and the economy. live every morning starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> hear what the candidates are saying at the newly designed web site. >> there are 72 entitlement programs. the vast majority of those are operated by the state government. good why? because they are state functions. backstays those out to treat everyone the same -- >> phase those out to treat everyone the same. the federal government does not bneed to be in the industry of picking winners and losers.

>> he is sort of an explainer in chief or a campaigner in sheaves. >> and richard donohue heiden -- campaigner in chief. >> the contenders looks out 14 men who ran for president and lost behind a long-lasting impact on politics. tonight, eugene dara of superior -- eugene debs. every night at 10:00 eastern on c-span. this weekend, three days of

american history tv. visit the congressional cemetery. and the university of boulder colorado professor. monday at 8:00 a.m. and at 4:00 p.m., highlights of coverage of the 70th anniversary of the japanese attack on pearl harbor, and the history of native american military service. all weekend, every weekend on sees signs -- on c-span 3. >> the last and briefing of the year was held up the pentagon during your -- the pentagon. the main focus will be to maintain a strong presence in the middle east. this is 35 minutes. >> this is likely to be my last

briefing in 2011, so we extend our best wishes to you in the holiday season, and have the new year. -- happy new year. this has been remarkable. if you look back, you see libya, iraq, afghanistan, the arab spring, and many other national security of events. to the military men and women, we say thank you. this year has also seen the death of osama bin laden. the secretary has recently said

we are now at a turning point. 2012 is likely to bring opportunities to the united states military and for all americans. we are seeing successful transition efforts in afghanistan. we are building a new relationship with iraq, and 2012 is likely to see increased focus on the asia pacific region. our men and women have performed in an outstanding manner. i would like to say to my colleagues and -- i am wearing a tie with anchors on it, so happy holidays. anything else? >> i do not know how i can top that. i think we should go right to questions. >> you know if all of 10,000

u.s. troops have come out of afghanistan this year? second, yes or no. >> i cannot tell you the official number, but i can tell you he will be able to meet the drawdown number by the end of the year. know the specific number, but i will try to get out. >> is there anything you can say about this case, about whether or not there may be some concerns about whether some of the hazing may have been known about or whether commanders did or did not take appropriate actions when this was going on? >> i think you can understand why we would not be commenting on a case that is ongoing. the charges were announced

today. we need to let the military justice system work. >> just to answer that question, coming after the marine who was taser earlier this year, -- who was hazed earlier this year, there have been a lot to say the military needs to do more to screen out racists before they get too remote bases overseas. you think the military needs to do a better john -- to do a better job? >> it was inappropriate and unacceptable. we treat each other with dignity and respect. cut is what the uniform requires, and when we do not, there is a justice department to

deal with it. i would not want to get into any specifics, but hazing is not tolerated in the military. if it is found and proven, it is dealt with. >> how will you prevent incidents like this one? >> this is something inculcated in our culture from the moment you raise your right hand through all your basic training and your first tours of duty. these notions are bred into you. we treat each other with respect and dignity, or we go home. the tolerance is zero, and the system itself, because it works

and works well is a deterrent to future behavior. it does not mean there will not still be those who want to test its and try it. when it is proven, it is dealt with. >> it is dealt with, of but after suicides, so the question and now would be should something be done before it gets to that level? >> our thoughts and prayers go out to the family. this is a tragic incidents, and there are training mechanisms in place throughout the military and all the services. this is read into year when you come into the service. i have been doing this for 25

years, and i cannot tell you the number of times i have had to undergo that kind of training and awareness programs. it is not like we do not pay attention. it is not like we are just waking up to it, but unfortunately, you are never going to be 100% perfect, and there are going to be those few who want to flaunt what the uniform sense for and what the regulations require and net, and what the region when that happens, it will be dealt with. >> you guys went to the pentagon last week. was out because of the pressure? >> i do not know what prompted them. i do not have that kind of detail.

>> happy new year and happy holidays to you, and thank you for everything. and wenter the new year commo are out of iraq, how are they taking this that the u.s. is out of iraq, and can you comment on u.s.-pakistan relations, because pakistan is really critical because nobody knows what is going on and what is the future. parks when it comes to iraq, we are committed to developing a long-term relationship with the iraqis, and we continue to build about. this was the most successful

logistical drawdown in u.s. history, and the men and women in uniform who carry that out deserves tremendous praise. when it comes to afghanistan, and we are looking at fighting the insurgency and what our long-term relationship and will look like, and we are looking at the enduring relationship. we have close dialogue all levels. general allan is doing tremendous work, and our men and women in, we saw the they are incredibly dedicated to their mission, and they are working very hard, and we think they are having very good success. we are looking at half of the afghan population now living

under afghan security, and that is an important development. 2011 saw a much different system. the taliban and other insurgents have been brought under increased pressure, and we think that is an important trajectory to note. finally, with respect to pakistan, we know this year has brought challenges to our pakistani counterparts triggered -- now pakistani counterparts. the goal is to work through these issues with the pakistanis. this was a complicated but

essential relationship, and we are committed to a long-term relationship with the pakistanis. we face a lot of the same threats, to americans and threats to pakistanis, and we are confident we can get to a baseline that allows us to move forward. it is not going to be easy, but with a little hard work, we think we can do it. >> on the pakistan issue, the report is due out thursday or friday. do you know if it has already been completed? >> the due date was the 23rd to be completed. our understanding is that it is

on track. >> we will share our findings. in the relatively near future we expect that to happen during your -- that to happen. >> on the supplier, but has been going on for some time. would you give us an explanation as to what has been the practical of fact and how long you can go to take certain steps to mitigate it. if you could discuss 0 little bit more, could you also offer any indication, or is this something you view as indefinite. arts i think we are hopeful --

>> i think we are hopeful and the secretary and expressed confidence about would have been triggered -- thought would happen. it would be helpful to have supply routes and reopen, but general allen and his team have done incredible work to insure we have what we need to carry out our mission in afghanistan. that could be a specific time frame, we have what we need for the near-term. good part of the only thing i would iron and -- are would add but general allan make sure he

has stockpiles on hand, and he had been prepared with stockpiles on hand. there has been no appreciable impact to operations throughout afghanistan as a result, and there are other avenues for support. you mentioned northern distribution. you can shift to other arteries if you need to, but i think for the most part, general allan has been able to sustain the war effort based on stockpiles he had. >> how does this affect the cost of the operations hamas --'s of operations? >> if you have to go through northern distribution, it is going to be more costly, but i

did is going to take a little longer, but he has been able to subsist on what he has on hand. there has been a truth that the pakistani government cannot close manila lines 4 to the -- cannot close the lines for too long. good have you noticed any building pressure from the business community on the pakistani government to open those ground lines? >> i do not believe we have. there is tragic moving through those gates, civilian traffic, not designed for nato. >> egypt, what is the secretary's reaction to seeing the violence perpetrated on the streets of cairo?

has he spoken to the chairman? is it permissible in his mind for this to continue, and what can you tell us beaumont -- what can you tell us? >> there have been further development in egypt. when he sees violence break out, that is a concern. at the same time, he believes the egyptian military is committed to the process of transition whereby the wishes of the egyptian people for a full system are realized.

that includes the election, constitutional reforms common \ and the election of a new president. he has confidence egypt is working towards that, and when we see violence, raises concerns zero years -- that raises concerns. >> the question remains has either one spoken to their counterparts? are you doing anything -- doing anything to cut supplies to u.s.

equipment? are you concerned about the violence of the egyptian military against civilians? >> i would have to check on general dempsey. i do not know. as george said, he is deeply concerned are violence and -- by violence, no matter who is perpetrated by. it is unacceptable. you have seen the egyptian military apologize for it. that is encouraging, and we certainly hope we will investigate and deal with it appropriately. as george said, the military is working very hard towards a transition of a civilian government.

they areme toime, trying to secure their country. i am not making excuses. >> can you tell us what the secretary meant when he said iran could have a nuclear weapon within a year? what is he talking about? >> the secretary was very clear in his comments. he said iran with a nuclear weapon is unacceptable, and he was out about specific timeline, and he said if the iranians made a decision to move toward the development of a nuclear weapon, they could have won in the near future -- have one in the near future, but it would require

several steps. it would require them to move forward with the development of a nuclear weapon. and they would have to not only enrich uranium so you get highly enriched uranium, and then you would have to go through of mechanization process, so he was not saying definitively the iranians would have a nuclear weapon fire 2012. if they did move on the timeline, it is possible. >> you were saying within the next year. he is saying it could be within the next year if these conditions are met. >> if they made a decision to move forward with enrichment and ionization, that is possible. he was very clear though that the region we do not know if that decision has been made. -- he was very clear what we do

not know if the decision has been made. the best information is we do not know whether or not the iranians have made the decision to move ahead. >> we also think that if they make the decisions george talked about that we would be able to detect and we would have time to deal with it. >> the secretary articulated about as well. we would in all likelihood have some signals we are moving ahead. >> what signals would you have democrats they would probably move to keep the inspectors out we did what signals would you have? >> it would probably move to keep the inspectors out. we think we would know should they crossed that threshold, and we would of time to deal with it -- we would have time to deal

with it. the president has said the red line is a nuclear arms enron -- iran. >> when you say the red line is a nuclear arms iran, does that mean they would be committed to getting the nuclear arms? not stopping it before? >> and nuclear arms to iran. the president has made that clear. it is also important to understand we are on a dual track here. diplomatic pressure from the international community and economic pressure with sanctions. use of discussions admitting the sanctions have had an effect on

oil revenues. the secretary has been clear over and over again that he fully supports that approach and the military options, while they have to be prepared and ready, that should be the last option and deaths of president fully supports actions being taken. >> has the united states improve its capability to attack iran? >> i am not going to speak about operational capabilities in that regard. the strategic review you will see in early january. tracks we do expect to articulate more about the budget strategy early next year in january. not have the exact contours lined up yet, but we do

expect to go public with defense strategy in january. >> we have heard nothing but success. the elephant in the room is whether it was justified or not. secretary bennett is kidding slam for his, -- secretary panetta is getting criticized for saying it was worth it. there are lots of military people saying, thank god we are out of there because this was a fiasco and not in our interest. >> i think the secretary has been clear. he has said the start of the war was controversial inside the united states. he understands that. he understands the debates that went on.

roll the tape forward. we are nearly nine years after that. nine years of blood spilled, sacrifice, and hard work, and the secretary believes the men and women of the u.s. military have done an outstanding job and have made sacrifices in nearly 4500 cases, the ultimate sacrifice, and they have given iraq the opportunity for a better future to define for themselves with the way i head is and to define what a sovereign, free, and democratic iraq. that was a very historic occasion, and that is where he this region where he is right now. he believes of the end of the

day the opportunity is there for the people of iraq. >> he was opposed with going in, as i recall. >> many americans questions the rationale for going into the iraq war. he believes the 4500 service members who died, their sacrifices were not in vain. >> here is the thing about wars, and you do not have to be much of a historian to figure this out, but they changed over time , the character, the missions, the goals, the strategies. it is not a typical for them to change in their nature, and the iraq war did change over time.

it was a large-scale invasion and became fallout counter insurgency. you know it better than i do, and they to change over time, and overtime this war did c become about giving iraq an opportunity they did not have before. but your question for been -- back to your question for me. i will not pretend to speak for the hundreds of thousands of men and women whose families have been affected by that war. what i will tell you is when you stop on this uniform, you do what you are told. you do your duty, and regardless of how any of our troops -- i will not speak to the outcome of but i can tell you each and every one of your can and should be proud of the

fact that they did their duty, and they can move forward knowing they did their duties very well. >> the point tony is making is an interesting one. the sacrifice of the men and women who have served have served magnificently. there is a sense that to criticize the war is to undermine their sacrifice. the nation owes them our respect. but the chairman often said we are not saved if we are broke. we can all agree the sacrifice of the service member's we should respect, but should our financial security put on the scale of what we did to liberate iraqi people? >> our financial situation has

certainly been affected by 10 years of war. that is not the reason the economy is struggling. it is a fair point you may. speaking for those of us in uniform, i am not a vet of the war, but as someone in uniform, the decision to go to war and all that entails, the risks, the costs, the dangers, the sacrifices, those decisions are made by the civilian leadership. we execute those decisions, and it would be wrong for us to be over concern with the financial costs or the impact on the economy. we do not determine when and where we fight, but we do get to determine how we fight.

>> japan is scheduled to have a deployment on 2016, but that is two years ahead of schedule. what kind of message does this send to people inside the u.s. but japantown is going to have this before they did -- that japan is going to have this before the u.s. if they are on schedule? >> i do not have the schedule, but we welcome the decision by the government of japan to enter the joint fighter program. japan is an unwavering ally, and we have an unwavering commitment to japan, and this latest announcement by the japanese government is a further indication of the strength of our relationship with japanese self-defense forces and expresses confidence, so we

welcome the decision wholeheartedly. >> has anyone from dod been involved with their chinese counterparts regarding north korea, and have you seen any new activity by the north korean military? >> the answer to your second question is no, we have not seen any unusual movements by north korean military. this appears to be a relatively smooth transition on the peninsula, and we hope it stays that way. there has been no increase in levels of sources for north korea, and general thurman and other officials in north korea are in constant counterpart with their south korean counterparts, and they are doing an amazing job. the secretary has full confidence in what they are doing.

>> i am not aware of any discussions with our contacts in china so far are to they have contacts regarding the military? parts we would like to have content with the chinese over a range of issues, and this is a country we want a much stronger relationship with from a military perspective. i am not sure there is a need. things are calm right now, and that is the way we would like to see it, so i am not sure if there is an imperative to reach out to the chinese with regards to north korea. >> you said the transition is relatively smooth.

does that mean you do believe kim jong un is in power now, or do you lend any credence to the reports that other members are also taking power of eminent -- taking power? >> we do not have any evidence to the contrary. we have not seen any unusual troop members since the death of kim jong il. i am talking now about the security situation. in terms of succession, i am not going to get into the particulars. kim jong un has been identified as someone who would take over. north korea has suggested he would take over. is to who else might be in power, i am not going to

speculate. >> there is an opportunity for the north korean regime to join in and stop the isolation they have suffered their people through, and we hope they will take that. >> i have a couple of questions about the u.s. presence in kuwait. have they maintain additional combat brigade as have been reported earlier this year? they have mentioned there are 3000 to 4000 troops who will evacuate in the next couple months. how long will they be there for? if there is an agreement for a permanent presence, and third part of the question, secretary panetta spoke about the 40,000 troops in the gulf region that are going to be maintained. i believe it was mentioned the

u.s. was going back to a pre gulf war presents, which was significantly lower than detailed, so which of those? >> i can we are still working through what they are going to be. what they are going to look like. what it is going to be. what they're going to be doing. there have been no final decisions about where any residuals may stay or how long. we are grateful for the support that we have received from kuwait for a long time, not just even in the last 10-years. kuwait has been a steadfast partner. we appreciate that. i would not get into any pre decision discussions with any of our partners. >> the secretary has been clear

that we are going to maintain a presence. the numbers in terms of deployment fluctuate depending on requirements. i am not sure i am in a position to parse 40,000 vs a different number. to the secretary is insistent that we have a presence that will protect our interests. >> is there a way could result in a lowering of that number? >> we have not had any particular discussions on troop levels in middle east. the key point is that we are going to maintain a strong presence noncommittal east. i did not have a particular figure to get to you today. it will remain a focus of the united states military. >> we have to go. happy new year's. >> happy holidays.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] matt cook will be our guest. then berry, executive director of the american united separation of church and state on what he considers an encroachment of religion in campaign 2012. later former goldman sachs vice chairman robert kaplan talks about leadership in economy. we take your calls in e-mails every morning starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> with the iowa caucuses and

new hampshire primary, and the c-span series looks back at 14 men who ran for president and lost but have a long-lasting impact on american politics. here is our lineup. thursday, eugene debbs. on saturday, a three-time governor of new york, al smith. >> this weekend, three days of american history television on c-span3. this is the congressional cemetery on american artifacts. at a, a lecture on history. sunday evening, me the white house chefs dating back to the carter administration. monday, highlights of the coverage of the said the -- of

the 70th anniversary. experience american history television all week and every weekend. high school students, we want you to tell us what part of the constitution has meaning to you and why. let us know in a documentary. it is less than a month away for your chance to win the grand prize of $5,000. there's $50,000 in of total prices. this is open to students grade 6-12. for complete details, go to studentcam.org. >> the white house budget director take place in activities at the national menorah lighting ceremony outside the white house. this feature the u.s. marine band. it will be featured each night

of hanukkah. this is about one hour. >> i want to welcome me all here washington, d.c. on the front rows of the white house. we appreciate the lighting of the national product a menorah. i am the executive vice president of this evening's event and of the national menorah itself. we would like to introduce some special guests this evening. first among them, the united states marine band, the president, led by the major. we are delighted to have with

this three of the world's most for most cancers. he has served as our musical director for nearly 20 years now. a new rising star on the jewish music scane. ene. they will welcome us with a song of peace. we welcome the united states marine band, the president on. ♪ ♪

♪

[applause] >> thank you very much. the president's ellen and the three cantors. we heard them in rehearsal today. they were fantastic. let's give them a round of applause.

why are we here? what are we celebrating? what was that? water is celebrating? celebrating?e we tell us really loudly what we are celebrating. chanukah"]ng "ko for us to have so many children here in knowing what they're celebrating on the lawn of the ellipse, this is one nation under god individual, nations that we should be considering ourselves fortunate.

let's hear it for the united states of america. it was not too long ago that the menorah had to be lit in secret. if you were to be out celebrating the festival, you'd be imprisoned or worse. today we are able to come here and full sight of the public. we can come celebrate our date. what is it? many years ago, their lead to a people under hellenic influence. they wanted to destroy the faith of the jewish people. they wanted to be sure there's not anything in the lives.

use it however you want. they went and defied the temple. a small army defeated this great army. they went back to the temple. they were looking for oil so they could rekindle the menorah. they cannot find any oil that was still here. they found one little vessel. they use of that vessel. they were at the menorah. even though it should have taken them a week to get more oil, it burned for eight. what is the story? even today we market the victory of life over darkness. justice over serenade. decency over all people.

it is that even matter if we are jewish. we have a message for you. we are here and delighted to have this opportunity to celebrate this great transition in such a prominent fashion. i would like to recognize some officials of the administration who are here with us. we will be having a special guest who is presently on his way from the west wing. he is the highest ranking official of the jewish faith in this administration. he will be arriving in a few moments. i would also like to note the presence of a good friend and the chairman of the federal

communications division who is with us. hanukkah is all about communicating a message. we're glad you're here. maybe we will have a word with the director. the liaison at the white house to the jewish community is here with us this evening. we want to welcome you. we want to welcome danielle he was the jewish liaison. -- daniel who was the jewish liaison and assistant to the vice president. i also would like to note the presence of one who lit the menorah during a previous administration under the secretary of defense.

we have a few special people this morning that they have prepared for us. we are going to ask for them to return to the podium. did you might be able to join in the first song. the free to participate. i would like to give them a warrant welcome. -- a warm welcome. you were just saying that while we were up lighting the menorah,

he should remind me to have a word with the about some hanukkah guilt. i will make sure he understands it later. join in the medley if you can. the united states marine band. ♪ ♪

♪

[applause] >> now before we start our next song, we have someone everybody is waiting to hear from. he want to know that he is welcome.

if you say his name we might get his attention. 1, 2, 3. starts with a "d" the next letter is an "r."? his hearing must be hard. i don't see him coming out. i think he wants us to say it louder. 1, 2, 3. he's getting the message. i think he wants to hear a say happy hanukkah. here he comes. ♪ ♪

drill dreidel a drill, i made it out of clay. dreidel, l, ♪all dreidel, dreidel ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

>> thank you. me wehe president will metold

will have them back for the t hree blessings. we would like to call to the podium one very special individual. this little individual, a young individual, flew in across the country to share a few words with us. we sponsor the national menorah essay contest in memory of a rabbi who used to work what us on programs such as this. children express their thoughts about monica. thousands of children have expressed themselves about what hanukkah means to them. one of our winners is a fifth grader at the hebrew a

academy in san diego and is here at his parents to read his winning entry. >are you nervous? >> what hanukkah means to me. it is the right to be free. from the battle of light versus dark to light to oil with only a spark. he is a master to all including me.

umass had joined in your heart. one day you shall never part. if you feel like you are drifting away, throw a shell and pray. that is what's hanukkah means to me, the right to be free. [applause] >> he will be receiving a little gift certificate so he can buy and sell some judaica study materials. mazel tov. your parents are very proud. the menorah behind me was first

led in 1979. jimmy carter personally attended the lighting ceremony. two years later, it was called the national menorah by president reagan. one individual who is very instrumental was ambassador stewart's eisenhower who served as the domestic policy adviser to the president and insured that permission was granted to place the menorah at in space. he did that in the partnership with the rabbi of our national director, my father who spearheaded the effort of a

public menorah lighting. starting in 1974 in philadelphia. in front of the liberty bell. and then with the large menorah and independent ball. followed by this. i am proud to say that my 4000 thstatess in 40,000 for are sponsoring 13,000 celebrations of hanukkah for the public all over the globe. it all started with a menorah about this high. now the message those much only in to synagogues and community centers, not only at the jewish

schools, but we celebrated in the pentagon and the capital. it has been celebrated in very remote army bases. i would like to take a moment for us to celebrate its in show our respect to those men and women of the united states armed forces not only who are playing the music here this evening but to have stayed ties you want to welcome all those who have returned. we want to pray for the safety and well-being of all those sorts still deploy it. a like to hear the loudest round of applause for the men and women of our autumn tarmed serv. [applause] it is through the sacrifices that they and their families

make that we are able to celebrate our freedom here this evening. ibid like to call upon the second winner -- i would like to call upon the second winner in essay contest to actually hails from philadelphia were this began. we are very excited about what she has to say. >> what hanukkah means to me. >> wait for the plane.

>> when something in your life goes wrong, how do you feel about it? some people feel frightened been discouraged as if their life is ruined and will stay that way. the hanukkah dreidel teachers as otherwise. on the first side is a hebrew letter. if they land on that letter, they win the whole pile of coins. if one land on the other, he or she does not get any of the coins. if you land on the letter hay, [inaudible] the dreidel game represents the ups and downs of our lives. day goes justry goe had you want it.

other days are when things are going fairly well and we are getting half a pile. then we have days when things are not going our way. we might even be losing our coins. what we must remember is that it keeps spinning. of the other side of the shin is always a gambimble. a great miracle happened there. this refers to the miracle of hanukkah, the battle of the greek empire seemed impossible to win. they did not give up. they thought about the other side. they cleared a path for god. this shows us that wherever we are in life, merkel happen every day around does. there is one other idea.

if the ad of the numerical value of the four letters, you get 358. -- if you add up the numerical value of the four letters coming you get 358. the value of the messiah also = 358. it will teach us how to see this divine providence in everyone's life with the shin will be e.rned into a gimbl the dreidel is not a toy, it is a way of looking at life. >> rennae needs -- her name mean

"speak" in hebrew. she will also be receiving the same gifts from us for her essay. i am sure her parents are proud. i can see how proud they are. our next speaker is a very special individual not only to me because he is my father, but to this project because he conceived of the idea. he also established the sponsors thiseswhich event. he is the chairman of the executive committee of the umbrella organization of the world wide lubavitch

movement. >> all of you have gathered here to celebrate this great moments. the idea is conceived by rabbi.

he raised us. many ideas have been introduced and developed. rabbi shemtov has mentioned the backgrounds of hanukkah. as much as the world changes, it stays in one place. the first time we put out the first menorah in the park, the then president of the united states, president carter, was closed inside when hundred days

due to the hostages in iraq situation which he saw as a dark moment. here was his chance to express himself to break this darkness by participating in a celebration of life. we help a full celebration will come in our time so we do not have this. we're continuing the bright life of redemption. i would like to call attention. i have in mind thousands of colleagues such as myself who have gone into the mission. when we buy the first candle tonight, the first candle was not a miracle. it was there. it was found.

to the merkel was that this -- be miracle was this oil that was found was enough to last one night and turned into a medium to provide light for a full seven days, at the time in which they had the opportunity to prepare new oil. the message entrusted that. the first candle contains a power and a quality that was supposed to last for eight days. this was discovered. the message is that each of us

has the enormous potential of bringing light into the world. you do not dismiss darkness with a broom. you light with a candle. that is the way you deal with darkness. the world has a ruler. that is all of us here. we are in the position of bringing the message to the rest of the world. it'll take advantage of that. the challenge of this was met by delight and they're all of us

here. we are carrying the irresponsibility of taking sparks that are ignited and caring in all around you. >> thank you very much. i would like to introduce our necks speaker. i will be brief in introducing him. he is in a hurry to meet his

boss. with everyone who compromise that, ladies and gentlemen, may i introduce to you one of the humblest great public servants in administration and in the united states. he has done a great deal for our country and a great deal of pride for the jewish people here and around the world. please put your hands together and welcome the director of management and budget at the white house, the honorable jacob j. lew. >> is a pleasure to be with you here again. it is a nicer to be here when it is not cold and windy. it is amazing we're here the men or after what the weather last year. they have been great leaders in this community and their friends

of mine. they have done so much to build this community. i want to think the president's director of jewish outreach for all he is doing. hanukkah is a special day for all of us. we remember that merkel happen. merkel happen only when people put their minds to it -- miracles happen. miracles happen only when people put their mind to it. it is a partnership that we have to do our part for miracles do happen. so many have come to where we are because our parents or great grandparents came to this country and started a life where they had no previous life before. we celebrate our freedom. we live with the opportunity for our generation to come after us.

today it is moving. the president went out and greeted the returning colors. it is a day when we welcome back the people who are represented to fight for our freedom. we're thankful to them every day. one of the things about hanukkah that is so moving is that it is the holiday of light. when it is getting dark and we see it, we light the light and it gives us reason to remember the great things that can happen. all of us are thinking about what we can do to make our country and our community a better place. if we do our part, the mayor calls will happen to us. happy hanukkah. >> thank you very much. now we proceed with the lighting of the menorah. i asked everyone to please remain in places after the

lighting of a menorah. please remain in in places after the lighting of the menorah. thank you.

♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪

♪

[applause] >> thank you very much. just before we conclude, a nice round of applause would not hurt. now just before we conclude our program, there are some people we would like to thank. first, we would like to thank the almighty god for this weather.

and for protecting the united states and allowing us to live religious freedom. as we celebrate hanukkah, we remember alan gross who is still an american jew we hope to see the light of hanukkah. i would like to think some of those who have honored to this event to make it possible. we want to thank our national chairman. we would like to hold the applause until we are done. we would like to thank the neighbor family to has done their best to support events like this. we would like to thank their sponsorship. we would like to thank mr.

joseph davidson for his sponsorship and all the companies that have helped by donating time, who extend themselves way and beyond the call of duty to ensure that these events can happen in expanded manner. they increased more and more. a round of applause, sure. we would like to thank the national park service, the united states police for their involvement and interaction. it is not easy to permit an event like this. we would like to thank the military for sending their support in the form of the president's home. we also like to thank our staff that each work to the tasks of three and four people each to make sure all those people were able to be part of this.

at the crowde look here tonight. we would like to thank all of you for coming out here in showing support for this most important events. after we conclude with the songs of peace, we will invite everyone to get a little menorah to take some. they will help you get one. if not, you can go to nationalmenorah. org. if you'll please rise in your places. we can all sing these important things together. >> please come and join me in thanking them.

they put this magnificent celebration together. we could never be here. thank you rabbi shentow. >> thank you for helping but this music together. all the military librarieperson. thank you. ♪ ♪ [singing "song of peace"]

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ god bless america land that i love stand beside her and guide her through the night with a light from above rom the moountains to the prairie to the ocean white with foam god bless america my home sweet home god bless america my home sweet home ♪

god bless america land that i love stand beside her and guide her from the night with a light from above from the mountains to the prairies' to the oceans white with snow god bless america my home sweet home god bless america my home sweet home ♪ ♪

>> thank you, thank you. we have one more thank you to mention. that is for the community's security service would also serve as security for the jewish communities in here to help protect this of inspirit a very happy hanukkah. have a safe trip home. we have done that to my right. good night. thank you very much one and all for coming. for coming.