today at a speech at northern virginia community college. the associated press says he will help congress to boost funding in transportation education, cut government spending and increase taxes on the wealthy while reducing the budget deficit by four trillion dollars over 10 years. we will have the president live at 11:00 eastern on c-span. on the heels of the budget released from a number of government agencies are holding meetings to discuss how the budget will affect their department. at 1:30 the state department briefing with the deputy secretary of state and the usaid administer. at 2:00 eastern, a number of defense department briefings with the head of the army, navy, and air force. also, we will have a congressional reaction to the budget throughout the day on the c-span networks. once again, president obama will

make remarks about his budget in about an hour here on c-span. until then, a conversation with douglas holz-aiken from today's "washington journal." >> we're back with the former budget director from 2004-2005. you are prominently displayed this morning. here is your quote. by expectations could not be lower. that is on the front page of " the washington times" this morning. what do you mean? guest: my concern is this, the first budget he put out show the you was going into the debt spiral. it was at the point where we were borrowing to pay interest on previous borrowing. it is the kind of thing where

world credit markets they just work it. that was in the midst of the crisis. we said it is a crisis, we have to do this. the next year put out a budget that did the exact same thing. and so he appointed a commission, his own fiscal reform commission, which came forward with a set of proposals that i thought made a lot of sense, the fundamental problem was spending. it is all spending. if you want to act on europe have tax reform. he put out a budget with the recommendation. here we are at budget member for, and we have yet to see serious reform on taxes come and get to see anyone preserve the safety net of social security and medicaid for the next generation of americans and seniors. those strikes me as the issues

of our time. we are in the midst of a great debate of fairness. the fundamental injustice is being perpetrated to the children who were going to inherit a load of debt that is unimaginable. if we're not careful, an economy that is not performing as well as it should be pure ye. host: is now the time really to do all of the things you're talking about? medicare and security? can we really afford to cut spending and raise taxes right now when you have a fragile economy? guest: think about social security. any restructuring would be an attempt to avoid the current plan. that is a terrible plan. what would you do? you would exempt people who were already retired.

we would typically exempt those near retirement. that means we will not change the current spending a bit. it will change the plant. and it will send a signal to people who were my age and younger that there will be is also security there for you when you retire and to lenders that the u.s. will be responsible for finances. >host: can we still look for the bush era tax cut? guest: we need a debate about tax reform so we can fix the loopholes people have identified in raise the revenue necessary to pay the bills. that is arithmetic. people have to perceive it as fair. the big problem is the business taxes, which are crippling the best corporations. >host: president obama's budget is expected to say let's raise taxes on those that make more than to under 50,000 per year in order to help raise -- help with

the deficit. guest: the average tax rate is 30%. it will not change the average amount of taxes from those people a bit. and some pay less than 30%. the tax percent is not there just for that. we of housing subsidies, higher education subsidies. it reflects the realities of's combined administration. if someone is legally lowering the tax liability, it is because they're contributing in some other way. rather than just add another broken piece on to a tax code, which will only raise $35 billion in a world where we of a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit, let's fix the tax code. stopped rolling extra about policy on it. -- stop rolling throwing extra n

it. the notion that there is no way politically is just wrong. the question is, it is just wrong. so we have seen the same thing year after year. it may be politically advantageous, and i get that, but it is not serving the nation well. host: the president's budget is expected to exhume an extension of apparel tax cut and assume the extension of unemployment benefits. alan blinder writes today the safety net needs to stay in place. two more percentage points translates to about $1,000 per

year. about 160 million americans will see taxes rise as the government collects another 10 billion a month in revenue. that is doing more than helping needy families. it is a source of badly needed purchasing power in an economy that is short on demand. guest: i, and i think everyone who was watching this expected that to happen as it is already. i am not inside the room on capitol hill. everything i hear says it should happen, and it is not appear again i would like to see that made more quickly. >> do you think republicans might use this perception, this battle perception-wise with american voters?

>> i think the democrats is an equal recipe. washington is very unpopular. that includes the white house, senate, of the house of representatives. in the senate the president's budget is dead on arrival. harry reid said we're not born to do a budget. it is not so much that republicans are at risk. the leader of this and as as we are not even born to look at it there is something seriously wrong. >host: + if you set modest reform. democrats went from 99 to 33 weeks. would you say that is modest? guest: that is modest. the appropriately the unemployment benefits is hard to figure out. we go to things are true. if you give someone an unemployment benefit, it enables them to maintain the standard of living and the world golf to search for a better job. the longer they do that, the more the skills tend to

deteriorate and the job may ultimately it will pay them less and does not serve them well. somewhere in there there is a balance. >host: is 57 weeks to strong? guest: it is well above what we typically done in a recession. we're so far out of the norm, it is almost indescribable what is the right number. and hosthost: let's get to the e calls talking about president obama's 2013 budget. caller: good morning, mr. director. i hope you're feeling well today. i would like you to confirm or correct numbers for me. as i understand it, with long- term interest rates at historic lows, the government is borrowing currently at roughly 2% as you combine the three

month and all of that. and with such borrowing, we're paying an interest of $286 billion a year on our debt as it currently stands. going forward, if we get into a normal interest rate environment, that would more typically be 4-6% for government borrowing, which would therefore mean that if we are projecting 10 years of deficit reduction, we almost have to include an extra 2.8 trillion dollars that we're going to go, because the interest rates are going to double. is that correct? >> your numbers are about right. the concern is we do have extraordinarily low interest rates at the moment. the truth is we should all hope for higher interest rates, because it would trigger a

return to normalcy. i am one of those that is very deeply worried about the that the u.s. has of the future. right now the u.s. debt of the united states is over 100% bigger than the size of the economy. the history of the research says if you're over 90%, to things happen. number one, you grow more slowly. -- two things happen. you have a much higher probability of getting into trouble. it is not predictable. you do not know when. getting a handle on that is important. the second thing is countries rely heavily on short-term debt. if interest rates to come up, your stock. when you look to the president's budget from last year, and you roll it for 10 years, we're still running a deficit of 1.2 trillion dollars a year.

950 billion of it was interest on previous borrowing. that is a recipe to be borrowing to pay off the previous credit card. when interest rates go up, but that is a disaster. if you are borrowing to pay interest, you were just giving one new credit card past the old one. we are the united states of america. we are the largest economy on the planet. we are not immune from the loss of arithmetic. host: why are corporations making record profits? guest: half of the big corporate profits were in europe. it is now already contributing to our trouble. that good news story has

diminished somewhat. the concern over the corporate tax is that it is largely paid for by u.s. workers. the evidence is increasingly growing that you tax and corporation a dollar, 70 cents gets paid for in the form of lower wages, reduce compensation or jobs lost. this is a tax that has perverse impacts. one of the reasons it does that is our tax is way higher than anywhere else in the world. we tax in a way that is correct for the beginning of the 20th century, but out of line with the 21st century. all of our competitors, those company paid taxes. we're always double taxing power companies. -- double taxing those companies. to ghost: responding to criticim

that president obama promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of its first term. here is what he had to say -- >> when the president took office we were losing jobs at a rate of 750,000 per month. lasthat means the economy was softer than anyone knew at the time and we have less revenue coming in. and there was a deeper hole to dig out of that anyone could have envisioned in june were 2009. >>guest: we have heard this before. each time the projected deficit comes up, they talk about what they inherited. you could put anything else on the president's budget. they make economic projections and budgetary proposal. those numbers do not reflect what they inherited.

they have complete ability to have those budgets at up. and that reflects the priorities bathey put on it. i used to think there was a secret memo in the west wing of somewhere. president obama comes in, there is a big recession and national crisis in the financial sector, in the promises to cut the manhattan of the end of the second term. i used to think it was a memo that went from president to president. host: does that make a cbo director cringed at promising to cut the budget in half? guest: yes. at some point you have to pay the bills, and we are not. but go to phone calls. rosemary in virginia. -- let's go to phone calls.

caller: it concerns me that senator reid can state he will not consider a budget and does not think we need a budget. is it not a constitutional issue? could you please answer. thank you. it is not a constitutional issue. one of the marvels of the constitutional system is we do not have the federal budget ever. the president makes proposals. the house and senate are expected to pass budget resolutions, and to agree on that plan for the congress, but the president never signs the budget resolution. we have always had a system where giving the white house, house come and senate have been difficult at best. host: and the role of the appropriators in all of this? guest: there the kings of the

annual spending cut discretionary spending. they have historically been an interested in having budgets placed on them. that has been a constant battle. host: new york. democratic calller. caller: thank you. i just wanted to know, why is it that everyone is putting pressure on obama, and no one will tell the real reason we are in the deficit? bush did nothing. why not blame it on him? i just want to say to you, and i am not trying to be crass or anything, but i want to know why is it that white people think nobody has [inaudible]

that is the only problem with the president. he is not white. that is the big problem. nothing wrong with obama. he is the best present we have had yet. host: let's take the point of bush not paying for things. democrats bring that up. the wars were not part of the budget. guest: it is something no one can defend. the practice of putting the afghanistan war as a supplemental appropriation. they gave us them the appearance of being temporary in some sense. clearly they are not. it in no way constitutes good budget practice. then a republican criticize the administration for this. i think that stands out. just because they did not put on the budget, does not mean they will not pay for it. we do.

the do medicaid prescription drug bill, $400 billion over 10 years. entirely debt as of finance. -- debt financed. of the increase in the deficit rss what bush inherited, up 50% is due to economic inheritance. about 50 percent of increase and that this is from that period of the rest, it is about 16% on the tax side and the rest on the spending side. to my eye, the biggest mistake of that era, roughly the first 10 years of this century, we did not fix social security come in medicare, and medicaid. right now, ted nelson seniors for day. -- 10,000 seniors per day retirement.

i am saying the same things now that i did in 2003. that is a big missed opportunity. and hosthost: want to get your n the short-term tape of the economy. host: in 2011 much of the nimeiry was people giving up for work. the more recent gains have been underpinned by actual hiring. consumers are less indebted than they were a year ago, and the housing market showing tentative signs in improvements. 49 economists surveyed put of the recession and the next year at 60% down from 33 percent signed. >guest: that strikes me about right. i have never been in the double dip camp. i've always seen as as recovering i think the economy

is growing at 2% per year. i expect by the end of the year it will be at 2.5%. that reflects the resilience of the economy. i think there are reasons to be more optimistic. the problem is it has taken too long. when you look at the policies you should worry about where you grow slowly, you should not be looking for jobs starts the and quick sugar burst of economic policy, which is the stimulus approach. you should look at a deep, structural things you can do to allow the economy to grow more rapidly. that was my deep discontent with this budget. no deep, structural changes. caller: good morning. i of a ph.d. in chemistry. i started my own business when i

put up my first production unit. when i turned over the business from day to day operations, we had 700 workers/employees. the first thing i want to do is to brought points. we're very concerned this president does not follow the constitution. look at what he did when he lied about the moratorium. there were four circuits up of what he was doing as unconstitutional. we cannot count on this president to be definite and what kind of decisions he makes. we do not know when he will come in and tell us how to do it and so forth. you are a number sky. right now we see the bush tax cuts are going to expire. that means the marginal tax rate will be 39.6. look at obama care. there is already a 3.8%

surcharge, and there is also for a self-employed, another 3.84 medicare taxes with no ceiling. it all adds up to a marginal tax rate of 47.2 percent signed. you that 8 percent signed-10% state and locals on businesses, and we're looking at and near 60% coming out of marginal tax rate bracket. host: what sort of right of steve howe? -- write-offs do you have? caller: that does not make a difference. we're talking about marginal tax rates. when one of my boilers' go down, i'd better have money to pay for it. what i have to send it to the federal government and the taxing entities, that is not fair. i do not go and shake down a company and say i need money, i

have to pay for it. to get the tax on marginal tax rates are exactly right. those are at the top of the the combination of the 2001-2003 loss of the affordable care act. and the reality in the united states is we tax many of the business entities through the individual income tax so it is impossible to disentangle tax policy toward the idle rich versus toward the altar rich. -- ultra rich. this is one of the reasons the commission the president appointed, all of the commissions that have looked at this have said we need a tax code so we can get a handle on a broader base that will allow us to get out of the marginal tax rate and raise revenue we need. host: another tax question. the effective rate in 2009, 10.8

percent said 2010. it is huge write-offs, subsidies, tax credits. >> there are many things that are write-offs and tax reform. the biggest thing that is misleading about that type of calculation is the first thing that all companies do is pay taxes in the home country abroad. add up the total in their tax more heavily than competitors. >caller: good morning, douglas. i appreciate your openness to describe some of the details of tax rates and tax codes. i think all too often on c-span and other channels that delivers some information, that people leave so much off the table and speak out of context. when i hear of warren buffett talking about his secretary making a certain amount of

dollars in making less than he does, it is ridiculous. he is a passive income man. his secretary goes to work. anybody in the united states is entitled to passive income. an immigrant coming it can buy a home and read the outer room, and that rent is passive income. people that have money in do not have money, they can take advantage of the tax code. sales tax. you can control all of this, but people who speak about tax, they want to look at little details taken out of context, and deliver the message is to the public that a completely untrue. guest: i concur with the sediment and that one of my frustration is washington wants to talk about taxes. there is a lot to the tax policy. how you raise the money matters.

those details are reported to me, but that is one of the reasons i am not would to be a media star. i like to go on c-span because you do get to say that. >host: as former cbo director, what goes into calculating that? guest: when i look at the president's budget, you have initiatives, but not a lot of details. the new additional alternative tax, it is part of a tax code, how are you going to do this? the president's budget should reveal exactly how he does it. there should be details there. he talks about alternative tax for corporations. what does that mean? he talks about tax breaks and double special tax breaks. you is the manufacturer? last time mcdonald's qualified.

-- who is a manufacturer? these things matter enormously. my concern with the budget, and i do not want to sound like a broken record, that is not tax reform. but a special stuff for chosen constituencies. we need tax reform that treats everyone fairly and raises the revenue. caller: what you're saying is fundamentally not true. the bush tax cuts, the war's, it was all put on the supplement budget. it will not add to the deficit. also, to solve social security, which is not adding to the debt, all you need to do is raise the cap. everyone who makes money should be paid on it. you did not give people a raise that were paying social

security. that were drawing social security. host: -- that are john social security. guest: the calller is wrong about whether the medicare part b is on the budget or not. it was on the budget. the wars were funded by supplementals, but the way the debt accumulates is spending comes in, spending goes out. it does not matter whether you put it on the budget in advance or not. if spending happens, you borrow to cover it. the numbers i gave on the contribution of the different pieces to the deficit are what the cbo has basically done again and again. that is the state of play. there's no question about it. >> this comment on twitter -- guest: it was a huge missed

opportunity in my view. this was a plan no one thought was perfect. i could find the warts in it from my perspective. it was a plan that did not get 100% of both sides of the ideal, but it had elected rev representatives from both parties. i am saddened it was left of the sideline. host: would it have passed through congress? guest: we do not know, but unless any president takes the leadership from you do not get big changes. only a president can say to the members of this party, i know you did not like this vote, i will raise the money and you will be fine. only the president to go to the other side and say i will help you. host: republican and pennsylvania. caller: i was listening to the

previous calller say something about how somebody does not lock -- does not like obama because of color. we have a presidential candidate. his name is dr. ron paul. he went back to stop the debt limit from being raised in the campaign in order to do what he has been doing for years. he has been going after every one of these spending increases better unconstitutional, including rick santorum who comes in income and i heard a calller from pennsylvania talking about him like he was a hero. i guess he did not look at his record. host: i want douglas to analyze for you and others ron paul's plan. guest: it is extremely

ambitious. i do not think there is anything close to the unanimity in congress to get it through. the international security aspects are on both sides of the ideal widely viewed as far too aggressive. while it is aggressive, i do not think it is politically realistic. things have to be done in a bipartisan fashion. if they are not some of the other party will start overturning of the first chance they get. i hope is we get something that looks closer to proposals that the white house can push in congress understands that. host: we will go to louisiana next. independent calller. caller: i am looking at the whole tax situation. i have quite a memory on me. i go back to the beginning of

the class warfare, which was instituted by ronald reagan, it was been enshrined because of it. what he did is shift the tax burden from the wealthy and corporations to the middle class. my taxes doubled during the reagan administration. along with that, at minimum minimal wage has been held down for three decades. considering this money would go into the treasury, if people made more there would be war going into the treasury. it is like they're having their cake and eating it, too. the class warfare, but the wealthier are getting will figure.

this is not unheard of behavior. and as far as the united states, corporations being taxed more than others, i think we lead the charge, and the rest of the world had to try to be competitive with us. that has the whole world in one hell of a mess. this insane experiments with the supply-side economics and go back to the keynesian model where we cannot share the wealth and have more taxes paid to the treasury. guest: first and foremost, i will repeat the point i made earlier which i think the fairness issue is not to the rich of the poor today, it is between us and the next generation. people are not going to do that. we have a fundamental choice to make. we cannot support the spending programs that are currently in golf by taxing the wealthy.

there is not enough money there. the tax policy center and non- partisan entity in washington did a calculation that the top marginal tax rates would have to be 90 percent signed to balance the budget over the next five years. that is not feasible. if we want to have an enormous government, much larger than today, the middle class will pay a lot more in taxes. i have done calculations that show if we're going to look like europe -- the middle-class in europe pays a lot of taxes. in europe they pay about 30. the middle class has to pick up the burden of an enormous state. i would argue this would impinge on growth and we would regret it. or we can get realistic about the spending side and raise the revenue to pay for it in a sensible fashion. >> here is a piece written recently of the cbo and how they have done estimates. it says the cbo studies i have

examined use keynesian models as the basis for the calculation. if their order to estimate the effect of gdp in jobs, they will apply them to different categories. the model they use guarantees growth. when they look ahead to 2012- 2013 and applies similar models to projected tax increases, they will automatically conclude that growth will be slow and of the glove at high. -- in the unemployment high. guest: that is correct. cbo has a requirement to do it in a consensus fashion. it has to do it based on what is out there and the literature and what is out there in the practice. the reality of most business cycles, most formal attempts to capture what is going on in the

economy have a keynesian foundation. you cannot get the stimulus package that sales in those models. i understand the criticism. i think any cbo director is very cautious. they said it could be from here to here. it is usually a big range involved. it reflects the fact there is not a lot of confidence in the capacity to forecast the economy come into model the impact of the policies. >host: is a bad thing that keynesian policy is used by all cbo directors? guest: i am not exactly fond of it, but the reality is there is not a lot of alternatives. we have keynesian models, and some alternate models. i liked about presentation better. caller: is it not true that

when push came into office he made a statement such as the government is receiving too much money from the surplus, and therefore he implemented the bush tax cut? they may be meant a few hundred to even $1,000 for individuals of the country, leading us into trillions of dollars of debt? i do not get the comparison between tax cuts with individuals of $100,000, and then the country goes into debt with trillions of dollars? is there a comparison between individual receipts of a few relatively -- fe- relatively few dollars. it makes no sense. grover norquist has government official signing a pledge saying no more taxes. unbelievable. where do you get this kind of reasoning? think you very much.

-- thank you very much. guest: at the moment president bush took office, the cbo had projected a very large surplus. taxes have reached 28%. typical number is 18%. the logic he talked about on the campaign trail was we have big surpluses, extraordinarily high taxes. the bush tax cuts were about the same percentage across the board. history is a cold master. we've seen surpluses were driven to lot like the bubble -- the dot com bubble that went away. we suffered a lot from 9/11 and the recession. there are bubbles followed by a not very rapid recovery.

we want to be about how we've think about policy in the world. host: if president obama will talk about the budget later on today, around 11:00 this morning traveling to a community college to talk about students about what is in the budget proposal. shortly after that the white house will be releasing the budget. if you're really want to, you four -- aldownload all volumes. guest: i encourage everyone to read that. [laughter] host: we are also covering other events. people respond to the president's budget, and all of the different agencies will be talking about their separate budget. there will be response from republicans as well, and the office of management and budget will talk it 12:30 today. that is live on c-span.

go to our website to look at all of the different things we're covering of the president's budget, and we will talk about it again tomorrow. we will dig a little bit deeper into the details once we know them. of the republican side of the idle, let me go to the tweet. i am wondering what you think of republican proposals out there to lower the deficit by freezing federal pay, salary. what kind of a dent does that really make? guest: that is reality. we know something from history. we're not the only country to get into a situation where we of bad debts and little growth. the poster child for getting it right is canada in the mid- 1990's. what you do? do tax reform. and you cut government spending,

but not all spending is created equal. you want to preserve core functions of government. basic research and education. cut government employment. we do not have a lot of government employees, and transfer programs, which means entitlements for the next generation. host: someone might look at canada and say they provide free health care. one of the biggest costs -- how does that equal out? guest: their budget adds up. they run a surplus. when they did this come it was a liberal government. it was the federal government taking national level expenditures and pushed out a lot of responsibility. the perception was they were politically more capable dealing with problems. i look at the u.s. and say maybe

the states are more capable of addressing that the federal government. host: the government was able to take on a huge expense like that and balance the budget? guest: budgeting is about having priorities and you pick something and give up others. we're good at picking and bad and giving up. the canadians make good choices. host: thank you very much for your time this morning. >> again, the president's budget proposal is being unwrapped this morning. president obama will talk about it from northern virginia community college. he will talk about 15 minutes from now. we are learning the last congress to increase spending cut overall government spending and increased taxes on the wealthy while reducing the budget deficit by four trillion dollars. the president will be live on c- span at 11:00 eastern. and as the budget is released

today, government agencies are holding briefings to talk about the impact of their departments. at 12:30 the acting director jeffrey sites. coming up at 1:30, a state department briefing on cspan3 at 1:30. at 3:00 -- at 2:00 eastern, defense permit briefings. we will bring you congressional reaction to the president's budget proposal throughout the day of the c-span networks. president obama of making were marks on his budget proposal in about 15 minutes here on c-span. until then, your phone calls from this morning's "washington journal." host: comments on our facebook page. let me read you one who said this --

above that, jose frayre the poor, unfortunately, their impact will be seen and felt in their non-votes. the "time" piece written by richard norton. it is about the history of presidential candidates and their path to the oval office. he says the trick is to convince voters that you could feel their pain.

we want to talk about this with all of you this morning. just to get an idea whether a president has been successful, will ealthy, poor. what does it make you think about them? richard, walk us through how it has played out in the past, and give us some examples of the candidates being will be indicated it being four -- being weathy and a candidate being poor. guest: there is a long tradition of try to thying to define a ca

ndidate by his economic status. sometimes this leads to very surprising results. abraham lincoln, who of course we all celebrate as the american success story, born in a log cabin who went on to become successful, it was in fact as a young man is accused of betraying his class, marrying into the will be taught family of kentucky. -- into the wealthy todd family of kentucky. this was actually used against

him. so in 1816, when lincoln was a candidate for the president, his supporters came up with a brilliant device to redefine him. as the state republican convention in illinois supporters came forward bearing a pair of whether grailed railst had been split by lincoln. he was present to say he may or may not have split those, but had split many of them. at that moment the image of ascoln the rail spilottor, opposed to the railroad lawyer took hold. i am not sure who was the poorest. i know for a fact that president ford who never expected to be

president spent 25 years on capitol hill, during his forcirt week on the job at someone when he could expect the first paycheck. he had a son that was about to go to college. there were like millions of americans, living paycheck to paycheck. he did not help him in 1976 in terms of getting reelected or establishing that sort of special bond between he and other people who were living paycheck to paycheck. there are those that do all sorts of studies of this. they say george washington in modern terms would be the wealthiest president. that may be, but in fact george washington had to borrow money to attend his first inauguration. that said, if you were doing

class-based politics, you could look at washington's economic program, which was all about centralizing power in this new government, creating a national bank, assisting industry through alexander hamilton's various schemes come in you could look at washington and say this is a man who was governing with his own interests in mind. host: below your piece there is a graphic that shows how much wealth presidents have through a time. when you get to jfk, he tops the chart at 1 billion. kennedy personally lived all but $10 million trust fund -- personally lived on at $10 million trust fund. very wealthy man. how was he able to relate -- guest: that is a great

illustration of my point. for example, john f. kennedy has the famous compound. he was a sailor. he was a very wealthy man, but he was also ironically perceived as anti-business. there was an attempt by u.s. steel and other steelmakers to increase prices, and the president referred to the steel executives o as sons of bitches. he earned a reputation as anti- business. the point being his wealth was trumped in the eyes of most voters by his economic policies, by his economic sympathies. by contrast, the first president bush had a compound in maine,

had a cigarette boats, but have the misfortune to be the president during the recession. he did pick fights with wall street executives, and so ironically he came to be seen by many people -- what to find him for some people was the famous rather over-typed in counter he had with the supermarket checkout scanner device. project early in this age, this visual age, the age of television, there is a kind of short-hand that develops. presidents can get to find very quickly -- can get defined very quickly and can find it very difficult to shake the image. host: how much of an impact in the past had it been -- let me

try this again. it americans are doing well, does the wealth of the candid it matter? guest: what is in the president's bank accounts matters less than what is an average voter's accoutn. nt. most of the time during economic stress this becomes an issue. what comes to mind is the famous campaign in 1840 when van buren was attacked for spending public money at the white house. they portrayed the own canada as as living in a log cabin.

but the fact is he was born in a mansion in came from a very aristocratic family. even then, almost 200 years ago, the image makers could take, particularly in times of economic distress because the country was going through a severe depression at the time, it and at the end. -- and van buren, if he had those around him, they might have said stay away from the favorabinger bowls. host: wealthy or poor, how does that impact your vote? caller: whether the president attended it is rich or poor, it makes no difference to me. my main concern is the senate and house, and their wealth.

they are the ones that make loaws and rules that dictates what happens to us. host: they control the purse strings. caller: exactly. that has more impact on what the president does. the president comes and goes every four years. congress is there forever. caller: i think mitt romney will have trouble relating to the 99 percent of us. he has made what, of millions of dollars? i do not think he has any notion of how the regular person lives, but on the other hand -- host: before you go to that point, i want to show you how the gop president oial

canddiatidates stack up. they all have millions. caller: i was going to say that newt has a similar problem. he has been busy making money and has been going to tiffany's buying expensive jewelry. i think both of them have about problem in that respect. let me say further, i think we are headed towards a plutocracy in this country. that you either have money or you are going to get money when you run for political office, and the people that do not vote, do not know what is going on politically, 50% of the people that do not vote, and that is

what the rich want. they want the poor people in active. the plutocrats controlling all levers of power. host: let me ask you this, president obama comes in at 5 million. most of that comes from books, popular books he wrote. do you think president obama represents the 99%? caller: i would say i am an obama supporter, and i worry as a democrat, and as an obama supporter, i worried the president may lose touch with the base democratic vote, the regular person. the person struggling or working for paycheck to paycheck. i worry that he is getting aloof somewhat.

that does bother me, but i think the republican party has a much bigger problem in that respect of being corrupted by wealth. host: here is a tweet -- florida. independent calller. what do you think? caller: ok, it does not matter whether they are rich or poor. it matters which party they belong to. guest: why is that? caller: their board to give as much as they can to the rich. the democrats will help the poor and middle-class. as the candidate said, i don't

worry about the poor. what concerns me more, and one of the biggest mysteries is how the biggest group that will flovote against obama, identifiable group, is people that live in the confederate states but have white males that have less than a high-school education. they're one of the strongest groups for the republican party. yet, by economics that is you would think they would vote democrat. in hollywood, the money people always go back to the democrats. by economic standards, you would think they would donate to the republicans. host: michael a republican in

baltimore. caller: your calller before had a really interesting point. i am part of the democratic base. i vote democratic. that really is not want to change. it does not matter how much caller: my problem is a divisiveness over rich or poor. we are all americans and the problem we have right now is that we are being divided. we're all americans. the 50% that i heard you speak of who don't vote and don't care, they should not be allowed to vote of the don't care. they should not be allowed to vote if they are getting grants from the government because they will vote whatever is given them. 40% or more of people are on

d dole from the government. host: what is the top priority for you right now going into the 2012 election? caller: that we get more informed people. i am scared to death that if we have obama for four more years, i don't know if i can survive it. host: that was a republican in augusta, georgia. the president will unveil his budget this morning. he will deliver remarks to students in virginia and what his agenda is. we will have live coverage of that on c-span this morning. c-span.org if you want to tune in for that and republicans will be responding to the president's budget.

senate republican mentored jeff sessions who is the ranking budget member in the senate and republican senators are holding a press conference today in response to the president's budget plans to look for our coverage on that as well. there is a lot happening today in washington in response to the president's 2013 budget report. go to c-span.org to find out all we are covering on that. we will continue with our question this morning, getting your take on this question of wealthy or poor, does it impact your about? we will talk about the budget request and other news in the papers this morning and we have an independent in arkansas, good morning. caller: the topic today i guess is important. it is not important to made. i have done a lot of reading on economics. this silly thing about the question is that here we are a nation with trillions of dollars of debt and these politicians

are making millions of dollars. if we are in that was dead, -- if we are in that much debt, what will happen if we keep spending and borrowing and conquering back? it is an irrelevant question. give me a politician that can describe the mechanics of why we are in this state we are in. we don't need a race car driver, we need a race car mechanic driving the show right now. host: who do think right now running would be the best person to steer this economy? caller: the doctor and you know i am talking about. the only doctor that is out there running for president. he can't fix this and you have to learn your economics. there are so many smart people, educated people, calling in that understand monetary policy and understand and have been reading

the books. it is already internet. host: we will delve more into the budget and how it works this morning at 7:45 a.m. eastern time. we will speak with douglas told reagan, former cbo director during the bush years -- douglas holtz eagan. president obama and most of his $5 million wealth from books. i want to show you how the gop candidates were able to me their money according to this "time" magazine piece. romney made a living turning around struggling economies at bain capital. newt gingrich made $7 million after 20 years in congress, turned into a consulting and the novel writing d public speaking.

we will get back to the question about whether wealth or property impacts your vote. we have a correspondenfor the wall street journal joining us. let's talk about the president's goal and what does it mean for his agenda for 2012 and is this also campaign tactic? >> this is mostly a political document. i think everybody would knowledge that the chans of any of this becoming law are very slim except for perhaps on the margins. he's doing a statement of values, what is going to run on for reelection and what he would do if he won a second term. host: laura, you said it's probably not going to pass.

why do you say that? republicans in the senate afr bin after democrats for not putting a budget on the floor. i mean, where does the request though it's not going to pass? guest: what you have on one hand its annual spending congress has to improve that call discretionary spending. every year the president makes proposals and congress then enacts goes into law or puts their own version of those in turlock. that is across the agencies, military spending and domestic spending, to figure out how much each program will get. the reason why this budget is a little less consequential than most is usually looking for what the total spending proposed is. but of total spending numbers were agreed to as part of the debt ceiling deal last summer. so we already know what t caps are going to be. president obama's budget adhere to those caps. of course congress is expected

to adhere to those apps as well. there are questions about underneath that, how do you divide it up it's a tight budget because the overall discretionary spending is not rising very much. just barely more than it was the previous year. they will have to decide within each program, does heating assistance get less or does the program that helps to bring get more? it's those kinds of decisions back to be made. the president's proposal was certainly got the process, but congress will make its own decisions. on the bigger budget questions, things like should taxes go up and should youhange the rules around medicare and medicaid and social security', the really big programs that are automatically funding each year? that's e kind of stuff that really is not expected to anywhere this year. host: on social security and medicare, you expect him to try to reform those? guest: he does not make any changes on social security. last year during the budget

talks that he had with speaker john boehner, he did make some concessions on social security spending, but ose were never -- never went for because there were not able to seal a deal. medicare and medicaid, he proposes a more modest reductions in the range of about $320 billion between those two programs. those are cuts to providers and other changes on some co- payments or participants, but they don't make the big structural changes in the program that would save a lot of money. for instance, raising the eligibility age for medicare. he does not propose that. taxes, he has a total of $1.50 trillion over 10 years and tax increases. comes from a variety of places, ending the bush-era tax cuts for those earning over 250 cows and dollars a year is a big chunk of the money. he also proposes increases on --

bigger increases on families earning over $1 million a year. in addition, there are some corporate loopholes, corporate tax and bandages that they would -- host: what about jobs? guest: he also has some spending proposals. you should spend more upfront in order to stimulate the economy and then deal with the deficit in long-term. he proposes infrastructure spding and proposes aid to states, opposes a variety of things, renewing the payroll tax, which will expire at the end of this month - >> are going to remarks from president obama will discuss his budget proposal that was released earlier today. >> my name is mike phillips and i am a student in informations systems technology at nova. after working in the real-estate industry, [inaudible]

i read about the demand for skilled personnel in cyber security and the news media. cyber security is a constantly changing field which includes many different disciplines area our data, devices, and finances are constantly under attack. as technology advances, so does the rest. there is practically zero unemployment in this field for a new jobs had been created such as security analysts, incident responders, and digital forensics and there will be others in the future i enrolled in may of 2009 and recently completed a career studies certificate in network security as well as a security + certification . my experience has been very enjoyable. one of the greatest assets here are the instructors. whether taking a course on line or in the classroom, the instructors are dedicated professionals, and nothing short connectionding.nova's

to cyber watch also provides competition, internships, and scholarships. i recommend to others and may be starting over to consider the opportunity at their community college. location no longer matters. we're pleased to welcome the president to our campus. he is committed to america's community colleges and recognizes the importance of the education available today for tomorrow's jobs. please welcome the president of united states, barack obama. [applause] ♪ ♪ [applause] >> thank you.

thank you, virginia. thank you nova. thank you so much. thank you, thank you very much. everybody who has a terribly sad a secret not everybody has a chair. i love you back. good to be back. thank you for the wonderful introduction and please give mike a round of applause. [applause] this is great to be back here at nova. i have been here so many times, i am three credits short of graduation [laughter] there are a couple of reasons that i keep on coming back. first of all, i think dr. templin and all administration

is doing a great job. i'd like you to give them a big round of applause. [applause] the other reason is because joe biden keeps top -- jill by and keep talking about how great you are. just as i do what michelle tells me to do, i also do what jill biden tells me to do. [laughter] i want to acknowledge that we have our secretary of labor here, hilda solis, who is doing an outstanding job. [applause] the main reason i keep on coming back is i think this institution is an example of what is best about america. some of you may have your eye on a four-year college and some of you may be trying to learn new skills that can lead to a new job like mike, or a job that

pays more and gives a more opportunity but all of you are here because you believe in ourselves, you believe in your ability, you believe in the future of this country. that is something that inspires me and you guys should take great pride in that. the truth is, the skills and training you get here will be the best tools you have to achieve the american promise. the promise that if you work hard, you can do well enough to raise a family, all may home, send your kids to college and put a little away for retirement. the defining issue of our time is how to keep this promise alive today. for everybody. grade we canhoice settle for a country where a few people do really, really well and everybody else struggles to

get by or we can restore an economy where everybody gets a fair shot and everybody does their fair share and everybody place by the same set of rules from washington to wall street's to main street. that is the america we believe ben-gurion [applause] -- that is the america we believe in. [applause] we are still recovering from one of the worst economic crises in three generations. we've got a long way to go before everybody who wants a good job and find one. before middle-class americans regain that sense of security that has been slipping away for too long, long before the recession hit. but, over the last 23 months, we have added 3.7 million new jobs. [applause]

american manufacturers are creating jobs for the first time since the 1990's. the economy is growing stronger. the recovery is speeding up. a last thing we can afford to do is go back to the very policies that got us into this mess and the first place. we cannot afford it. [applause] the last thing we need is for washington to stand in the way of america's comeback. [applause] what does that mean, really? for starters, congress means to stop taxes from going up on 160 million americans by the end of this month and if they don't act, that is exactly what will happen. [applause] congress needs to pass an extension of the payroll tax cut

and unemployment insurance without drama and without delay and without linking it to some other ideological side issues great we have been this -- we have been through this before, remember? we have seen this movie. we don't need to see it again very the time for a self- inflicted wounds to our economy has to be over. now's the time for action. now is the time per all of us to move forward. preventing a tax hike in the middle class is only the beginning. that is just for starters. in the state of the union, i outlined a blueprint for an economy that is built to last, an economy built on a new manufacturing and new sources of energy and new skills and education for the american people. today, we are releasing the details of that blueprint in the form of next year's budget. don't worry, i will not read to you. [laughter]

it is long and there is a lot of numbers. the main idea in the budget is this -- at time when our economy is growing and creating jobs and a faster clip, we have to do everything in our power to keep this recovery on track. part of our job is to bring down our deficit and of congress adopts this budget, along with the cuts we have already made, we will be able to reduce our deficit by $4 trillion by the year 2022. $4 trillion -- i am proposing some difficult cuts that frankly i would not normally make if they weren't absolutely necessary but they are. the truth is, we will have to make some tough choices in order to put this country back on a more sustainable fiscal path. by reducing our deficit in the long term, that allows us to invest in the things that will help grow our economy right now.

we cannot cut back on those things that are important for us to grow. we cannot just cut our way into growth. we can cut back on the things we don't need but we also have to make sure that everybody is paying their fair share for the same -- for the things we do need. we need to restore american manufacturing by ending tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas giving them thathe break to employ a right here in america. that is something everyone should agree on. [applause] when need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by ending the subsidies for oil companies and doubling down on clean energy that generates jobs and strengthen our security. [applause] and to make sure our businesses

don't have to move overseas to find skilled workers, we got to invest in places like nova and make sure higher education is affordable for every hardworking american. [applause] that is why i want to focus on this today, what we need to do in terms of higher education. community colleges in particular -- employers today are looking for the most skilled and educated workers. find themnt them to in india or china, i want businesses to find those workers right here in the united states. the skills and training that employers are looking for begins with the men and women who educate our children. all of us can point to a teacher who has made a difference in our lives and i know i can.

i want this congress to give our schools the resources to keep good teachers on the job and reward the best teachers and in return, they also need to give schools the flexibility to stop just teaching top the test and replace teachers who are not helping kids learn. [applause] making sure we got the most skilled workers starts early. it starts with k-12 and before and making sure every child is prepared when an american of any age wants to pursue any kind of higher education, whether it is the high school graduate or trying to get that first couple of years of college education, or someone like mike who is in

the process of re-training, whether it is two years or four years or more, we've got to make sure that education is affordable and available to everybody who wants to go. this congress needs to stop the interest rate on student loans from doubling this july -- [applause] that is pretty important. that is in our budget. we are saying to congress that now is not the time to make schools more expensive for young people. they can act right now to make that change. they also need to take the tuition tax credit that my administration put in the budget over these last few years, a tax credit that saves families thousands of dollars on tuition, and a need to make them permanent. [applause]

it cannot be temporary. it should be permanent. between the increases we have provided in pell grants, these tax credits, keeping interest rates low, all that will help. and millions of students across the country have benefited from that. but, students and taxpayers cannot just keep subsidizing skyrocketing tuition. we will run out of money. that is why i asked states and colleges to do their part to keep costs down. we're putting colleges and universities on notice that you can't just keep raising tuition and expect us to keep on coming up with more and more money. tuition inflation has gone up even faster than health care. that is hard to do. [laughter] what we are saying to the states, colleges, universities is that if you cannot stop

tuition from going up, funding will go down because higher education cannot be a luxury. it is an economic imperative that every family in america should be able to afford that is part of the american promise of the 21st century. [applause] that is what we need to do to get more americans ready for the jobs of the future but what about the jobs that are open today? i talked about this at the state of the union. there are millions of jobs open right now and there are millions of people unemployed. how'd we match up those workers to those jobs? what about the companies that are looking to hire right now? i hear from business leaders all the time the want to hire in the united states. at the moment, they cannot always find workers with the right skills.

growing industries in science and technology have twice as many openings as we have workers who can do those jobs. think about that. at a time when millions of americans are looking for work, we should not have any job openings out there. they should all be getting filled up. here in america, we've got the best workers and some of the fastest-growing companies in the world. there is no reason we cannot connect to the 12th and places like nova are proving that we know how to do it. [laughter] [applause] this institution proves we know how to do it. let's say you are a single parent or returning veteran or someone who wants a shot at a better paying job, you are a hard worker, a fast learner, motivated -- you know there are companies looking to hire. you just need to figure out how to acquire some of the specific

skills, the specialized skills, that companies need a need to figure that out as quickly as possible, hopefully without taking on tons of death. debt. everybody should be able to get those skills at a community college life nova and companies to be able to count on the schools to provide them with a steady stream of workers qualified to fill those specific jobs. that is what mike was sharing his story. as he mentioned, he worked in the mortgage and real estate industry for 10 years but when business declined, he decided to start over. he began selling building materials than the bottom fell out of the housing market so might have to start all over again. he has a knack for computers. he figured that he would try a career in cyber security where there is a lot of hiring. that will be a growth industry. luckily for mike, nova is home

to a program called cyber watch. he signed up and even though he is trying a limit -- driving a limousine on the side, he is working while going to school. in december, mike earned two certificates and finished 4.0 so we are proud of that. [applause] now he is working toward his associates degree at when he graduates, mike will have access to a network of over 40 companies and government agencies to help him find a job. we need more stories like mike's. that is why my administration is helping community colleges redesign training programs so students can learn the skills that are most in demand in industries like health care,

science, and advanced manufacturing. that is why we are making a national commitment to train 2 million americans with skills they need to get a job right now or start their own business right now. we have lined up more companies that want to help. [applause] we have already got partnerships between major businesses light collegesand community in places like charlotte and louisville and they are up and running and we know how they work. that is why i have as to dr. biden and secretary soleus to take a bus tour through several states. to highlight businesses and community colleges that are working together to train workers for careers that are in demand right now. we've got to make these examples a model for the entire nation.

and we need to give more community colleges the resources they need to become community career centers, places where folks can learn the skills of local businesses are looking for right now, from data management to a high-tech manufacturing. this should be an engine of job growth all across the country, these community colleges, and that's why we have to support the man that is why it is a big priority. [applause] so, an economy built to last, demands that we keep doing everything we can to help students learn the skills that businesses are looking for. it means we have to keep strength and american manufacturing and we have to keep on investing in american energy and we have to double down on the clean energy that is creating jobs but it also means

we have to read know the american values of fair play and shared responsibility. the budget that we are releasing today is a reflection of shared responsibility. it says that if we are serious about investing in our future and investing in communityllegew energy technology and investing in basic research, we have to pay for it. that means we have to make some choices. right now, we are scheduled to spend nearly $1 trillion more on what was intended to be a temporary tax cut for the wealthiest 2% of americans. it is very expensive. now we are scheduled to spend another $1 trillion. keep in mind, 1/4 of all

millionaires pay lower tax rates of the millions of middle-class households. you have heard me say it that warren buffett plays -- pays a lower rate than his secretary. that is not fair. it does not make sense at a time when we have to pull together to get the country moving. i don't need a tax breaks. . we don't need to be providing additional tax cuts for folks who are doing really, really well. do we want to keep these tax cuts for the wealthiest americans or do we want to keep investing in everything else? education, clean energy, a strong military, as care for veterans -- we cannot do both. we cannot afford it. some people go around and say that the president is engaging in class warfare. that is not class warfare. that is common sense. [applause]

coasking a billionaire to pay at least as much as a secretary when it comes to taxes is, started warren buffett is doing fine. i am doing fine grit we don't need a tax breaks. you need them. you are the ones -- [applause] you are the ones who bears the cost of everything from college to groceries and that has all gone up. you're the ones who deserve a break. we don't begrudge success and american. we aspire to a grid of what everybody here to go out there and do great. i want you to make loads of money if you can. that is wonderful. we expect people to earn it and study hard at work hard for it.

we don't envy the wealth. we do expect everybody to do their fair share. so that everybody has opportunity, not just some. given where our deficit is, it is just a matter arithmetic that folks like me will have to do a little bit more. americans understand that if i get a tax break that i don't need in the country can't afford, one of two things will happen -- either that means we will add to our deficit or it means you have to pay for it. it means the seniors have to pay for it. in terms of their medicare benefits costing more. it means students suddenly saw will see their interest rates go higher when they can afford it. a family that is struggling to get by is having to do more because i am doing less. that is not right. that is not who we are. each of us is here only because

somebody somewhere felt a responsibility to each other and to our country's future. that is why they made investments in place a nova. here in america, the story is not a been about what we can do by ourselves, is about what we can do together. starke living in our future and the future of our country. you believe in that future and that is why you are working hard and that is why you're putting in the long hours and that is what mike is doing what he is doing and some of you are balancing a job and school. you are scrimping and scratching to make sure that you can pay tuition here. you know that doing big things is not easy but you have not given up. that is the spirit we have to have right now. we don't give up in this country. we look out for each other. we pull together. we work hard. we reached for new opportunities up to other.

that is who we are and if we work together with a common purpose, we will build an economy that lasts and remind people around the world why america is the greatest country on earth. thank you very much, everybody. god bless. god bless america. [applause] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> president obama wrapping up his remarks on his 2013 budget request and you consider the proposal itself on our website, c-span.org/budget. we have a post along with another project with other budget resources plus the remarks in this morning and congressional reaction you could get that at c-span.org/budget.

a number of government agencies will hold hearings to talk about how the budget will affect their departments. the office of management budget briefing at 12:30 and it won a 30 zero at 1:30, we will bring a the state department on c-span 3 and coming up at 2:00 p.m., we will have the defense department briefings with the heads of the army, air force, and navy here on c-span. we also expect a reaction from members of congress on the budget. senate democrats coming up live at 2:30 will be followed by senate republicans and that is on cspan 3. the u.s. house gavels in today at 1:00 this afternoon for a brief pro forma session and will be back tomorrow for legislative business. the house and senate will spend a week working on highway and transportation programs for the next several years in the house bill includes changes to current federal programs and continues federal fuel taxes to pay for the highway programs and expand

offshore oil and gas drilling to contribute funding. members might also consider extensions to the payroll tax cut and long-term jobless benefits and medicare payment rates with doctors. house and senate negotiators are working on a compromise. the senate also debates transportation bills this week including a number of amendments because if republicans are planning an amendment to overturn the obama administration's ruling on health insurance coverage of contraceptives. you can see this and let live on c-span 2 and the house here on c-span. a discussion now on the president's contraceptive mandate from today's "washington journal." host: kathleen kennedy townsend serve as the lieutenant governor of maryland from 1995 to 2003 and is a board member with catholic democrats. welcome to the table. we appreciate your talking with our viewers. guest: could be with you. host: this ruling over the

contraception issue has not died down. we can see it here in the papers this morning from "the wall street journal." let me read this -- guest: my reaction is that it is not an immoral policy, it is part of a long tradition to care for the least among us. to care for the sick. to help those that need help. women, many women want, need, use contraception. as you know, you can use contraception for a number of issues. to prevent birth, on ovarian cysts, on terrible cramps. it helps to stop and reduce

ovarian cancer. there are many reasons that one may want contraceptive devices. the fact that the bishop does not understand that is really unfortunate. the good news, as you know, is that catholic health centers under carol keaton, who says that this is a good idea -- the jesuit colleges say that this is a good idea, and catholic charities have endorsed it. there is disagreement amongst catholics. it is a big church. we do not always agree on everything. host: were you surprised that the bishops did not like a compromise that was put out there? guest: remember, the bishops are largely going to become very conservative. you do not really hear them speaking about poverty the way that they did when i was young. you do not hear them speaking

out about war and peace issues, like you did 20 years ago. you would naturally think that they would be on the side of the republican party. host: this has been part of the debate amongst those running for president. rick santorum when don "meet the press," yesterday. i want to get your reaction. [video clip] >> the bottom line is that you have the federal government saying that we will give you the right, and then saying -- by the way, we will tell you how to exercise that right. we will tell you, a religious and church affiliated group, that what you provide your employees -- if you do not like it, tough. our right to tell you what to do trump's your deeply held convictions about what you're dollars should be spent for. the idea that you could have an

insurance company -- by the way, a large number catholic social service providers are self- insured. they will be forced to still provide. there is no compromise here. they're forcing religious organizations to pay for something that they find as deeply morally wrong. this is not what the government should be doing. guest: obviously, he has not listened to the national catholic -- catholic health association, just a colleges, and catholic charities, all of whom agree with the president. there is a disagreement amongst catholics. rick santorum himself said that states should outlaw contraception. so, he has a different view. 98% of catholic women that use contraceptive devices have different views from 60% of catholics that indorse the

proposals. so, that is a debate and a question. i think that he is really on me -- you know, he has firmly held views, but probably politically they are on the wrong side. republicans want to get it out there and the anti- contraceptive. i think that that is a political mistake of a large dimension on their part. host -- host: everyone knows your family, a prominent catholic family. let me ask you, are you a catholic first or a woman first? guest: i was born both and they are both very important to me. i am as catholic as the pope. it is a big church with many parts to it. catholics have different views from the pope on this matter. and the bishops.

the national catholic health association supports the president. so, that indicates that the bishops do not speak for all catholics. host: let's get to the phone call here. you are on the air with kathleen kennedy. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. my question is, why does it seem like so many men are against women being healthy. it seems like they want to take us back to a time when they had so much control over us, they could tell us what to do with our body. this is 2012. i think i know what is good for me. guest: that is an interesting question. as you know, it is men telling women what to do. women are saying that we can make decisions ourselves for

what is in the best interest of our health. it takes a while for things to change. you understood it very well. women do know what is in their best interest, what is in the best interest for their health. host: john, republican in sarasota, florida. we are talking about republican decision on friday to put out this compromise on the contraception ruled. we want to get your thoughts on all of that. john, go ahead. our guest is kathleen kennedy townsend. caller: now i know why i became a republican in 1980. as far as contraception and birth control pills, the the catholic church alone. send them to these clinics that give them away.

if you -- you come from a large family -- guest: i am the oldest of 11. caller: if the mother said that you did not -- that she did not want a child, she wanted an abortion, you would not be around. guest: we have 11 kids in our family. it is very interesting, you do not want me to be part of the catholic church, and yet the national -- as i have said before -- jesuits agree with it, catholic charities agree with it, and the catholic health association agrees with it. we believe that the catholic church is a large church, which is why it has been able to endure. it has different voices. i am as catholic as the pope. my cat phallicism is really important to me. deeply important to me. i have gotten enormous solace

from teaching at the catholic church. i have learned the importance of caring for the sick, the pork, and the helpless, from my catholic upbringing. i went to catholic school for 10 years. so, i do not want -- i really think it is sad that you want to kick me out. i want to embrace me. i want to have more catholics, as i think it is an important part of our church. host: are the bishops alienating catholics? caller: they speak for -- guest: they speak for one part of the church, but not all the church. my view about the bishops is that they are chosen by rome. they are not elected. although the first catholic bishop in the united states was elected. i think it is an interesting notion, if there are some reform

efforts, the bishops should better represent the people that they work with. that there should be better relationships between the bishops and not just the people up the chain, but what the people think. i think that would be really good. host: we have this twitter message -- guest: a very good point that i should have raised earlier. this has been the rule in 28 states, including our largest states, new york and california. some of our states had very small exceptions that we did not hear about. under the bush and administration, this contraception -- contraceptive was part of the requirements of health plans. none of the bishops complained at that point, which just leads me to wonder if this has more to do with politics than what is

best for women's health. that is what is added up at the end. host: going back to the phone calls, independent line, florida, go ahead. caller: the government being involved in it at all, that is the moral issue. i think it should be lived up -- left up to an independent woman to decide what is best for her, not the government. i do not think that the government would be willing to sacrifice their own people with abortion every day, and i do not think that they should be involved whatsoever. bringing people on this earth just to kill them for us. guest: i think that she may be complex -- completing a number of things. this is not abortion, it is

contraceptives. it prevents pregnancy and helps women with other issues. the idea is that women should make those decisions. this is a woman's decision. a woman should make the best interest -- the decision for what is in her best interest. host: do you see birth control as a moral issue? guest: i think that a woman can decide what she wants. i think that it is helpful to have that right. do i think that the [unintelligible] from the catholic church was right? i do not. i do not agree. as to many catholics. as you know, when it was passed, there was a study group as to whether the church should change their policies on contraceptions. the vast majority of the people in that study group said that the church should change the

policy. for one particular man, pope john paul ii, he said that if we change the policy it would show that the holy spirit was always on the side of the protestants. they did not change the policy because they were interested in their own power. as a result, 98% of american catholics do not pay attention to the bishops on this. and i think that that is harmful in the sense that it is very important for the church to have a moral voice when people do not pay attention to them. politically, i think if they should make sure that what they say has some credibility.

host: let's go to the democratic line, pennsylvania. caller: i am a quaker. i married a catholic in 1963. at the time my mother said that it is not so socially reprehensible any more because there is a catholic in the white house. that is my background. i think that the government and church thing is political. i think that rick santorum is being a demagogue about this. there is another issue that concerns me regarding reproduction. we just had the 7 billion human on earth born? we have too many people, all respect your big family, but your family could afford those children. a lot of people cannot. my daughter, who lives in south boston, i know this up there because they have health care paid for, all up and down the

streets there are all of these double and triple strollers. people are doing that because it is easier than having just one child the old-fashioned way. i do not think that we should be encouraging people to have big families anymore. i will listen to your comment. host: your reaction? guest: i am happy with my 11 brothers and sisters. the 11th of us is a fabulous film producer. she has been nominated for oscars. she just produced a film on my mother. i think that women can decide. i think that there are very many women that would prefer to limit the number of children and use birth control to do that. i think that could be very helpful to them. if you cannot afford to have 11 children, it is very difficult for you and the kids.

as she said, we were lucky. i feel blessed to of come from a large family. host: is there debate within your family? guest: even my mother is with president obama. she understands. she goes to mass every day and she very much appreciate so many priests and nuns the work with the poor, doing god's work. sometimes the bishops are not supportive of that. host: how has your mother's viewpoint evolved over the years? guest: i would have to talk to my mother about that. [laughter] but over the years, i think it is also her friendship with priests, really, a priest to have reworked in the poverty communities. she has understood how much support the church has given them.

guest: i think that was try to get her generation and how that view has changed. host: i think that -- host: i think that i was trying to get at her generation and how that you has changed. guest: well, when i went to school, i had a friend with 17 kids in their family. we were 7 in elementary school. obviously, we came from large catholic families. if i talk to my catholic friends today, they're having three kids, for kids, not 10 kids or 11 kids. host: independent line, austin, texas. guest: good morning -- caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i wanted to say that the churches' position on this, with lawsuits against this, is discrimiti