better services to our citizens. our citizens expect us to find common sense solutions to their everyday challenges. inaction is unacceptable. we still have our challenges, our differences, do not get me wrong, but our citizens expect us to work together to resolve our differences in a manner that keeps our states going forward. the overall fiscal condition of states has improved, but governors are concerned about the growth of medicaid as it consumes an increasing share of state budgets. medicaid's rapid growth could result in less funding for education, transportation, where public safety. the governors have made significant progress on several fronts. to the council of governors, the nga, and the department of defense, we were able to resolve

long-standing concerns regarding the coordination of state and federal military forces during disaster response. the passage of legislation codifying the dual status commander makes it possible for states to effectively coordinate with federal troops operating within their borders when responding to a natural disaster. we have also worked with the public safety committee to advance an issue that was first raised by the 9/11 commission -- the creation of a nationwide communications network for first responders and public safety. currently, first responders must rely on commercial networks for mobile services, dedicating a portion of the spectrum, providing our first responders with a single communications network and a device that works seamlessly anywhere in the

country. governors and first responders are pleased congress has passed legislation and the president has signed into law. the most important issues for us as governors are economic growth and job creation. it is fundamental to our future. my initiative as chair of the nga is growing state economies. our goal is to provide governors and policymakers with better policy options to assess the economic environment in their state, and create strategies that foster business growth. hi-growth businesses are a driving force -- force of the economy, and a primary source of job creation, prosperity, and economic competitiveness. as governors, we're looking for the best strategy is to strengthen economic performance. we want to help the private

sector growth and create new opportunities for our citizens. we have held three regional economic development summits on this initiative in hartford, connecticut, national, tenn., and seattle, washington. i will host the final summit in april. they have provided the opportunity to learn from experts and business owners about the best strategy is to create an environment focused on the importance of high-growth businesses of all forms, scale- up enterprises, and corporations. it is my pleasure to ask governor jack markell, vice- chair of the association, to say a few words. >> thank you, and i want to say thank you to governor heineman. we have been friends for 14 years now. he has done great work. we expect to have really

productive conversations. for most governors, you do not care where policy comes from, as opposed to where it can take you. we all need bhajans balance. people are looking for work, and they're looking to us as governors for answers. kids in public schools are asking what we will do to give them a better opportunity to have a great future. they could care less which party we come from. they do not care what part of the country we come from. all they care about is that we get the job done. thankfully, a lot of really good answers start with the work governors do with each other, conversations we have with each other, and the work of the national governors' association center for best practices, and i have the opportunity to serve as chair the ideas -- chair.

the ideas drive a lot of the discussion we will have this weekend, and from a lot of work the governors across the country have been doing. the work of the center is funded through federal grants and contracts, as well as private and corporate foundation contributions and the nga's corporate fellowship program. the reason we come to these conferences is because we want to get things done. we want to figure out what might be working in other parts of the country that could work in our states. i will give you a couple of examples. the governor of west virginia helped the state tackle a dropout prevention and recovery legislation. we supported efforts for governor bob mcdonnell in virginia to help dislocated

adults remain competitive. in delaware, we have the opportunity to participate in a three-branch initiative focused on adolescence in foster care, including people from our executive, legislative, and judicial branches, learning models to connect people in foster care with relatives, be adopted, and the like. this is the work government is supposed to do. when we can come together, we can make a real difference. while this particular meeting in washington, and the annual meeting we have every summer in july are the ones that are best- attended, there are more than 70 formal summits and meetings across the year. there are countless opportunities for cooperation and collaboration. if u.s. than any governor what three issues drive them the

most, you would probably get the same answers -- building stronger economies, as governor heineman is working on, improving our schools, and been good stewards of our taxpayers' money there are probably one dozen ways to do that -- money. there are probably one dozen ways to do that, or probably 50 or more of thinking about that. what is so great about this weekend and the opportunities we have with each other is to share those ideas. that is why we are here. i look forward to a productive set of conversations with governors from both parties because we do not care of the good idea comes from the democrat or the republican so long as it put people to work, increase education, or helps be good stewards of taxpayers' money.

>> thank you. we will try to answer your questions. if they're really tough, we will give them to jack. >> does a block grant that grows slower at the rate of inflation help you with medicare problems? >> from my perspective, the answer would be yes. i would prefer more flexibility on a variety of programs in general. other governors may have a differing opinion, but i just would like to have the congress that, as we do in our states, get budgets passed on time, so we know what we are dealing with. >> one of the great things about the weekend when we are great -- together, is we have an opportunity to meet with the president, and last year, the issue of medicaid flexibility came up because the president brought it up. he said high hear a lot about wanting additional -- he said i

hear a lot about wanting additional flexibility. he said all we have to do is say what kind of flexibility we are looking for. we have to understand that not all of the answers are at the federal level. governor patrick of massachusetts, a leader on this, has legislation focusing on getting away from the fee-for- service model. it is something the number of us are following closely. it is about finding the right partnership and recognizing that we have irresponsibility in our own states -- a responsibility in our own states. in my state of the state speech, i spent time talking not just about medicaid, but about the fact that if you think about the number of people in delaware covered with health insurance, taxpayers pick up 40% of them. we have to do a better job in our state leveraging our roles

as been the major procurer of health services. >> yes, sir. >> thank you, governor heineman. just as a follow-up question to that, under the welfare reform legislation pioneered by the governor, and later president reagan, and signed into office by president clinton, welfare was treated as something there was to be a cap put on, and states would have to work within a certain framework on funding it. has anyone discussed, when the president asks what your flexibility is, why not use the very model for welfare and medicaid? >> i think you will see a variety -- welfare on medicaid? >> i think you will see a variety of discussions on that. who knows for sure.

from the governor's perspective, we want more flexibility. local governments do not want one-size-fits-all within the state. we are only asking the federal government to do what most governors tried to do in their state. what you might need to do in a state like nebraska or delaware is different than massachusetts, texas, or california. they have different needs, different demographics. we need the flexibility and we believe in states' rights. >> the issue of flexibility is an interesting one that comes up all of the time. as i said a moment ago, the president said to the governor's directly tell us what kind of flexibility you are looking for i have also heard him talk about it in the -- and i have also heard him talk about it in the case of education.

10 states have flexibility in the note child left behind waiver. he has said you can get that flexibility, but that should not be understood to be relaxing expectations in terms of what we expect in student achievement. so long as we continue to make progress in doing things the actually lead to student achievement, we will find the flexibility that we seek. [unintelligible] >> the same with medicaid. >> the schools that have been most under-performing, it will not be good enough if we let them continue to under- performance in generations not live up to their potential. >> let me address education for a moment. it is primarily a state and

local responsibility, and in my state, i chair our p-16 effort, preschool through 16 years of schooling, and one of the goals is to eliminate the african- american achievement gap, or the hispanic achievement gap, wherever that might be. more rigorous expectations are critical. parental involvement is important. those are the things we can best do with the state and local level. >> california, the governor is smarting a little bit because the obama administration rejected their waiver request. did that come up at the meeting, or can you characterize how the president is looking at that? >> i did not think it came up in the meeting yesterday. i think the president and

secretary sibelius for that matter, have been very forthcoming in meeting with governors in what they are looking for -- what kind of flexibility we need, and how we are going to make sure we continue to take care of people? if we're just going to drop people off and they're no where to go, that would be a problem. they've been very open and continue to look to governors for our best ideas, republican and democrat alike. >> was there a discussion yesterday about changing the way the nga works with the agenda throughout the year [unintelligible] >> yes. >> can you tell us more about it? >> one of the things jack and

i are trying to do is getting governors to decide policies, not the staff. we want governors to make recommendations. we began the process yesterday. it really started last fall when we had our first executive committee meeting, and we asked the various committees, what your priorities are, and we decided these would be the priorities for the nga, based on what we heard for the governor's -- from the governors, and i think you will see the results of that monday when we vote. >> the people in our states are not all that interested in the policies, committees, and the internal work of the national governors' association, but here's what they care about, and governor heineman mentioned it a few moments ago.

one of the best examples of how we can come together across party lines is what happened with the d-block spectrum. it has to do with the airwaves spectrum. there was uncertainty with what would happen with this block of airwaves. it could have been used for other things, but democratic and republican governors came together with a talented staff and public safety teams and we recognize that if these airwaves could be allocated to public safety, it could mean profound things for the people of our states. for example, imagine if a loved one is injured, in an ambulance, and a medic in an ambulance can have a video camera and can be showing the wound directly to the doctor at the emergency room who was waiting for the ambulance to get to the hospital? that could save somebody's life. they could be that ready.

these are the things that our folks care about. the change in the process that governor heinemann talked about is not a change for the sake of change, but it is to make sure that we are focusing on the things that will make a positive difference in the lives of the people that we serve. [unintelligible] >> say that again. >> will this new approach allow using the directors to lobby? >> first and foremost, we would use our own staff at the nga, but this will give and the staff a clear direction of where the governors are at -- what are the general principles we stand for? secondly, almost every state is going to employ their own people to effectively persuade congress, relative to a particular issue and how it

affects their individual state. to the extent that we can coordinate state and nga staff, i think we can be more effective. it is a little hard for us to see. i'm sorry -- the lights. [unintelligible] >> job creation could be a top policy, and a concern for chinese prudential -- provincial leaders, so you think there are opportunities at the state and provincial levels? thank you. >> i believe the answer is yes. in nebraska while i have been governor we have had a focus on education and jobs. i've been to china, about a

different trade missions and i'm probably going back to asia this fall. we try to work with a variety of countries relative to the opportunities to export more of our goods and services out of nebraska and other states, and have had significant investment for chinese companies into nebraska. i've learned this from another governor. governor markell was talking about how we learn from each other. early on, when i was governor, i learned from another governor, a reverse the trade mission. i've done two of them where we have invited the world to visit nebraska. they have been successful. we have had over 125 business and foreign officials come to nebraska to learn firsthand what we have to offer, and as a result of those visits, many companies decided to invest in the state of nebraska, and we were very pleased about that.

>> absolutely right -- huge opportunities for us to work together, and when we last met as a group in july, there were a number of governors or party secretaries from china that were part of that meeting. we think about that as an opportunity to promote exports, and to attract for investment, like the governor mentioned. i had a chance yesterday to talk with secretary of commerce john bryson, so the u.s. commerce department has recently kicked off a new mission called select usa, and if you think about what the president has talked about with the idea of in-sourcing, and more companies coming back to invest here, select usa is an opportunity for companies around the world were thinking about

expanding outside of their home market to make sure the u.s. is on their radar screen, and we as governors want to make sure our states are on the radar screen. >> governor heineman, there have been some governors, especially republicans, that have voiced concerns that federal government is getting too involved in education through the race to the top program, stimulus funding, and even no child left behind. what is your view on federal and state roles? >> state and local governments have the primary role for education in our country, ok? it goes down to local school boards. the federal government has a limited role. i want to be careful here.

most school districts welcome their funding. they would like a little flexibility in how we use that. i would argue that what massachusetts wants to do with that money is different than what nebraska would do. i think we can all work together when it comes to academic achievement. that should be the focus. more rigor, higher expectations, increased parental involvement -- that is what i have fought for in nebraska. i want the very best teachers i can heavy and the classroom. my wife has been a former elementary school principal and teacher, so this is one i understand well. i lived for over 30 years since we have been married. the commitment we need from teachers, administrators, and parents is critical. i have always said the formula works best, good teachers, plus good parental involvement, = good learning.

we appreciate the funding with as few strings attached as possible. >> to his credit, secretary duncan has been clear about that line, and one of the area's most dates have been involved in is the common core standards. there are some people that say this was a federal initiative. it was absolutely not a federal initiative. secretary duncan could not have been more clear that these were not national standards. this was an effort by states superintendents of education, by governors to work together across state lines to make sure the kids in our state have higher standards for them to meet that are also clear. i think secretary duncan gets a lot of credit for putting forth

policies. in delaware, for example, the state government funded about 70% of education. we have 19 separate school districts, and each of them has an independently-elected school board. it is our view that the people that are closest to the kids generally have a good sense of what is in the best interest of those kids. >> one more question. >> go ahead, sir. you were pointing to someone that i did not see. ok. go ahead. >> one year ago, governors were dealing with severe budget challenges that were controversial. do you feel you have stepped back from the cliff in terms of some of the budget pictures? >> i think jack and i can

remember that when your a new governor, you are trying to learn the process, and all of a sudden you are presented with a significant budget issue. by and large those are addressed by governors across the country, differently, increasing taxes, controlling spending, but at the end of the day i get the sense that governors are feeling a little better that their budget pictures have been proved. i will say this, i've gone through it for seven years, controlling spending is critical, but invest in priorities. education and jobs allow your state to move forward. i think most governors are feeling a little bit better. for the new governor's it is probably just the fact you have a year under your belt and that does help. governor markell? >> of the last 23 months in this country, 3.7 million new jobs have been created, so when

governor heineman says the governors are feeling a little bit better, the way we feel generally has a lot to do with the way our people are working or not working. that is what is driving all of us today. that is why governor heineman's initiative was about growing state economies. i have now finished three years. the first year, i came in 2009, and you talk about looking at an abyss, things were in absolute free fall. i think we have stepped back from that. i would not say any of us are feeling great, but things are feeling better. we are moving in the right direction, and we also recognize that we cannot afford to just wait for things to get better. everyone of us is interested in doing what we can to put more people back to work in our states. >> thank you very much for being here this morning.

[applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> we will have more live coverage of the national governors' association annual meeting in about a half-hour with the discussion on growing state economies, and later this afternoon, a look at economic growth at 3:00 p.m. eastern. while we wait for nga to continue, we will show you virginia governor bob mcdonnell and maryland's governor martin o'malley discussing a wide range of topics including the controversial abortion legislation in virginia, and maryland's passage of the same- sex marriage bill from the political state solution conference. we will show you as much of this as we can before returning to live nga coverage.

>> we are close. on a lot of things, we get along and we have very different views of it comes to was going on at the federal level but that is the beauty of american democracy and the 10th amendment and their founders owritten by virginia. >> financed by marilyn. >> they always have higher taxes so they can afford them a higher standard of living. >> is it my turn? >> is governor mallee when he runs for president still going to be blaming everything on

president bush? we believe it is time to get serious about rekindling the american dream. we don't believe it comes to more taxes and more spending and more regular is it -- and more regulation and more unionization. we believe that you have to spend within your means, balance the budget without tax increases on time, you've got to encourage the private sector. this president has pledged the wall street, tea party republicans, house republicans, he blamed the founders' last week for not giving enough power. this is a blatant game. we believe in taking accountability. you have to be responsible for things in your state and getting things done. encouraging and strengthening the private sector is the way to go. i know we will compare a couple

of statistics, virginia has been ranked for a couple of years in a row as most business-friendly stake in the country. -- state in the country. we have invested the largest amount of money in transportation last year, $4 billion at my request and this year we will invest $230 million of new money and higher education. -- in higher education. we're making strategic investments for the short-term and long-term grid we are doing by re-prioritizing spending. our unemployment is down to 6.2%. our formula is working. republican governors using similar philosophies, 11 out of the 15 states that have the business-friendly rankings are republican governors. seven out of 10 with the lowest among moderates are republican governors. that approach that republicans are using is working.

i would compare that with what democratic governors are doing. >> i think what we are trying to do is figure out how to build a new economy that lasts. that is not going to happen by itself. yes, there are republican governors in mineral-rich state to have been largely immune to the national recession. let's look at some other states. in ohio, john kasich is one of the new superstar republican tea party governors of the rga, 30 of last year in new job creation. rick scott, a super star tea party republican governor, 45 the new job creation. scott walker, you remember him -- lets them the unions and that creates jobs -- 49. in new job creation. >> all the jobs are leaving

illinois for wisconsin. >> actually, wisconsin turned back some of the high-speed rail dollars. the democratic governor picked them up and picked up companies to build the parts and the trains to come to illinois. our state of maryland was ranked fifth by one of the top five states for new growth by the chamber of commerce. our state was ranked number 3 in the new economic index for its potential for job growth this is about building a new economy with new opportunities. the choices the democratic governors are making and the choice is the president is urging us to make as a country are the choices that create a better future with more jobs and more opportunity. if you look at the republican debate the other night, how many times rick santorum said the were jobs? not once. what does alloying unions, omen's rights, outlawing

cultural rights, what does that have to do with creating jobs? >> i'm sure we will get back to those. you mentioned cultural issues which have been divisive and a national debate in annapolis enrichment in the legislative sessions. cultural issues have been very prominent. governor mcdonald, let's start with you -- virginia international -- governor mcdonnell, virginia drew national attention working its way through the general assembly requiring ultrasound for women before they procured abortions. you seem to initially be prepared to sign the bill and then you did a turn the other day. you said you wanted modifications and you're not prepared to sign it. give us the trail of your thinking on that issue and why

you apparently changed your view. >> you cannot believe everything you hear in the national press. this was from "saturday night live." or jon stewart. if you believe everything the northern virginia said about maryland, you would believe that governor o'malley is interested in raising taxes and same-sex marriage but he it believes in more than that. you have to be careful what you read in the papers. having said that, the focus for governor o'malley and i is about getting our budget under control and about jobs. i proposed about 153 bills this year in the general assembly and nine are being voted on credit i'm a pro-live governor. i believe the sanctity of life is critically important kore.

go back and read the founding documents. we had a bill that came for that mandated ultrasounds would be for the purpose of allowing a woman to have fully informed consent legally, medically prior to making a life changing decision. everybody on both sides of the debate believes this is a critically important things of this was about information. we realized -- i said i supported the bill. we realized there was different kinds of ultrasound's. i recommended in the general assembly is let's make the requirement for the abdominal ultrasound and we found out through the medical community that the of donnell ultrasound is not sufficient and on their own, they do other kinds of ultrasound's. i did not think it was proper to mandate in days to prop -- ultrasounds.

i got legal advice that these kind of mandatory invasive requirements might run afoul of all the fourth amendment law. those were the reasons. >> and did you originally not realize it might mandate -- >> this was not my >> i understand. you learned that this might mandate an invasive procedure. >> during the course of the discussion after talking to lawyers and doctors on my own after we started to hear concerns raised in the legislature, i personally looked at it. normally a governor would review these hundreds of bills when they get to your desk. you don't read every legislator bill but i was supportive of that concept once we realized exactly the medical and legal issues involved, i thought it was permitted to recommend to

the general assembly that they make a change and they did and the senate as of yesterday has adopted that change and i believe it will pass and virginia will have a strong women's rights in those bills to provide the information to make fully informed decisions. this is what is exasperating and coven are -- and governor o'malley would probably agree -- you would think maryland all is only concerned about same-sex marriage and raising taxes. in virginia, 97% of the bills that have gone through so far are on things i have advocated, job creation, economic development, transportation, higher education, k-12 education, our men and women returning from iraq and that is what i am focused on very we cannot sell what the media is focused on. it is sometimes a very sad --

different set of issues after the session, the start of this session will be a balanced budget. i'm concerned that the senate democrats are concerned about their senate assignments so they will kill this bill. they are putting their committee ahead of their communities so we now have a budget in virginia at risk because we have senate democrats that are concerned about committee assignments. i have never seen that in 21 years in office. my focus is our budget. >> i thought the democrats were concerned about your cuts to education. >> that's not what they said. i ask them publicly. i was told they were mad about committee assignments. think it is smart to cut education either. [laughter] >> we raised education in my budget $500 million. it might not be as much as somewhat but only in washington

with an increase of that much be a cut. we increased education spending. >> governor o'malley, sometimes these social issues get a disproportionate attention in the media but for many people, they are the reason they go into politics because they care very much about these issues. one issue that people care about is marriage and the bill you are prepared to sign in maryland allowing same-sex marriage is an historic bill in maryland. you are prepared to sign it, why? >> i believe the way for among the people of many different faces always in the direction of greater respect for the equal rights of all. this has been a difficult issue for it was debated over the course of the last year in our state but it passed the house and passed the senate last night and i look for to signing it.

i look forward to signing it next week. this bill protect religious liberty and the rights of individuals equally in the context of civil marriage. some of the other bills that would part of our legislative agenda were tarnishing -- harnessing offshore wind. there is damage done by the mass of septic housing development to our chesapeake bay watershed and this bill supports 52,000 jobs with the second highest amount invested in new school construction. maryland is one of a handful of states that invests in school construction from the state standpoint. all this requires a lot of hard work. all this requires an prioritizing our budget and those things that make our economy go. >> can you briefly describe how your own views of gay marriage have changed over time? do you foresee a day when this debate is considered no big

deal? >> i do believe that there is an unmistakable movement and you see it generational leap. ly. in speaking with younger legislators, we found a greater openness to the discussion, a greater ability to examine the issue from all sides. amongst our more senior legislators, there is not that open mass, not a willingness to look at this my standpoint of rights. in my own in the evolution, could leaders who are progressive leaders always triy to be a force for building consensus that moves us forward in the direction of greater respect for the equal rights of all. for a long time, i thought that

consensus pointed to progress in our state and that was around civil unions. i was mistaken. i misjudged. the public mood forward more quickly -- moved forward more quickly on this issue than i thought we would as a people. i look forward to signing this bill. at the heart of religious freedom is the freedom of the individual conscience. that requires respect for the equal rights of all. >> have your own views on this question evolves? d? do you see a time in the state of virginia when same-sex marriage might become legal? >> the beauty of our farmers under the 10th amendment -- our framers under the 10th amendment is that states of the laboratories of democracy and

innovation and they have the freedom to make different choices and i respect to that. martin and i have different views on this issue and others but that was great about having 50 states. we are free to try different things and see what works. on this issue, the people of virginia have already spoken. there was an amendment that passed that said we think marriages between one man and one woman. our citizens have already decided. i would say this is a matter of deeply held religious beliefs. there are dairy bit of difference is in the governor's state. there will probably be a referendum. there will be a discussion over the next few months with a potential november referendum in maryland on the subject. our voters have decided in virginia and we think that it's

the right policy and is in line with several hundred years of the typical position of churches and reflects the collective conscience of virginia. other states may have a different view about one of the perspectives that helped us through this was looking at this issue from the perspective of the children of gay parents. in our evolution, in my evolution and the evolution of a number of legislators, we concluded it was not right and not just for children of gay parents to not have homes that are protected in a lesser way under the law. >> a lot of people's views have changed over time. it is a social question that is in flux. have your own views changed at all? >> no, because from all the data

i read and like many, i am driven by one's religious beliefs, everybody has to make up their mind on that. i would say that most of the data i have read that the best environment for a child to grow up to be fully capable of achieving the american dream and having the best start in life is in in tact two-parent family made up of a man and woman. i think that is what the data would suggest. because of divorce and any number of things, that is no longer the family that every young person grows up in. that is why the governor and i spend a lot of time on social services to help people to create a good safety net and take care of people and families are not intact. that has been undeniable for

centuries. what has held society together and is the best environment for children but also for society generally and i think all the data i read from sociologists and others that write is the best for our country. it should be the model but when it does not work, we have safety nets. >> let's go to the audience and some questions. raise your hands if you'd like to be recognized. yes, sir? >> thank you very much. thank you to politico for the good program this morning. you touch -- you both touched on national politics. you are both from pivotal states. governor o'malley, do you expect the state of maryland to follow

its modern historical trend and go in for the democrats again in the presidential race and, governor mcdonald, your steak when democrat in the 2008 election and do you think they will revert to their historical trade. you could be a vice presidential candidate with any of the major republican candidates except record santorum would have to change his registration from the old dominion to pennsylvania. would you accept the vice presidential nomination? >> i believe that marylanders will reelect president obama. the president inherited one of the worst economies and recessions since the great depression. we have not recovered all we have lost the we have now gone 23 months in a row with private sector positive job growth every month for 23 months and that has not happened since 2005-2006 and

the people of maryland i believe will vote to reelect president obama for that reason. >> president obama said during the campaign that if we don't turn this around in three years, this will be a one-term proposition. virginia is ready to collect on that promise because it has not turned around. we have the worst debt in american history, $4.70 trillion under this president, the greatest growth in the national debt in any term of any president in american history. that will grow another $1 trillion and with his budget, it is a political document because harry reid will not take it up. his budget calls for about $25 trillion in debt by the end of his term if he was reelected. he said if we had bailouts and stimulus a massive government spending, we would have

unemployment below 8% we have not had unemployment under 8% since the first month of his presidency. his entire presidency has been above that. i am glad there has been progress last few months. i think that is a very positive sign. >> i want to thank you for admitting that. they used to say he always makes it worse. >> i did not say he was responsible i'm just saying it is good news. your question is, will he get reelected in virginia? >> and the vice-presidential question. >> i was going to skip that. >> size of virginia as somebody who knows the state. size it up politically. >> we have seen the president

and his wife and virginia recently and we are always glad to have the president here. >> we send them your way. >> that's true. he won by seven points in a state that has gone 44 years for a republican. he had a phenomenal campaign. i think he is a bad president but he is a good great campaigner. i won by 18 points and we pretend three congressional seats and a couple of months ago, we picked up the largest number of the house of delegates. this trend is very bad for the president and on everything he said he would do on debt and deficit and jobs, he has not delivered for there's no coherent strategy in this administration on energy. he continues to support major industries like coal and gas -- thwart major industries like

coal and gas. he has been trouble in virginia and on the vice-president, it is not my call. >> the usual stance among people is i'm not interested or it is so far-fetched. you have been pretty direct on other occasions saying that you are working hard for governor romney in ways that looks like you are saying to look at me. >> you must be reading the national media. what i said was, a bad governor o'malley will say the same thing, if the leader of your party says you can help the country and help our party, of course you think about it. i would say that for any governor any member of the legislature. >> among friends and among officer -- [laughter] let's be clear, you eight for this job. >> no, i am chairman of the

republican governors association and my mission is to become governors like martin o'malley and get more republican governors. i believe this president has taken this country on such a radical left stands that i will do everything i can to elect a new president of united states and i decided about a month ago that mitt romney is the best guide. i believe that a governor with the skills we have to hone to focus on job creation and getting budgets on time without excuses and getting things done, getting results, that is what we need instead of what we have now. that's why i'm supporting mitt romney and i think he is the right guy. >> you are not exactly "about someone raising their hand in the national debate and dampening speculation as recently as this morning that you might be a candidate in

2015. what about your own national ambition? >> i accepted government all possible nomination and i appreciate the hopes and dreams he sees in may. me. [laughter] i am head of the democratic governors' association this year and governor mcdonald is head of the republican governors association and i'm proud of the difficult things our president has done and not shy about wanting to be a supporter of his especially in this national debate with some white democrats losing their tongues and they feel they can't speak up. everybody second-guess to the president when he did the recovery and reinvestment act and virginia did not turn those dollars down. one of the reasons that virginia has been able to maintain a lower unemployment rate than most as has maryland is because we applied those dollars and used those dollars. on the auto industry --

everybody second-guess the president. they second-guess him on the turnaround of the auto industry. that would not have happened by itself. we have a lot of jobs in maryland that depend on the auto industry. last i checked, i think virginia has thousands of jobs that depend on the auto industry i don't believe -- i know governor mcdonald is supporting governor romney but i don't know if he subscribes to the position that the turnaround of the auto industry was something that president obama should not have done. you could have philosophical debates about it but you cannot say that he was not successful in doing that. you cannot say that we have not had 23 months in a row positive job growth. last year, government dollar, more jobs were created in the private sector in america while

president obama was president than during all eight years of george w. bush. president obama is not running against all my. the almighty. he is running against the people who are against the policies right now. according to an independent group, a commission on responsible federal budget, the budget put forward by the current crop of republican presidential nominees including governor romney who you have endorsed, would all exacerbate and create a greater amount of debt than what the president has put forward. we can go forward or we can go back. when the people are given a choice of more jobs and more opportunities or back to the

failed policies, the trickle- down policies of george w. bush and the mountain of debt, i think they will choose to move forward. i would dare to predict that in virginia where they have seen what happens when you put republicans totally in charge, they have seen their legislature take a hard right turn and that is exactly the sort of overreach they sought in wisconsin which has the 49th worst job creation rate and the over reach they saw in ohio that has the 30 of worst job creation rate and also what they have seen in florida which has the 45th worst job creation rates. they say things will get better and then you vote for the republicans and they take a hard right turn, outlining their relationships, women's rights, unions, outlawing social wedge issues when people only care about jobs and the economy. >> i had a hunch we would mix it

up eventually. i'd better let you respond to that. >> all i can say is governor o'malley is the only one who's got social issues at the top of his agenda. i don't so i am not sure what he is talking about. >> you know he is accurate in describing the social issues that were important among the republican caucus in the general assembly. >> you are flat wrong. you are both wrong. 97% of the bills we have advocated in virginia are bills that i suggested. these other ones i put forward as my agenda at the beginning of the session on job creation, economic development, veterans, transportation, higher education and i can go down the list. this will continue to make virginia based leading states in job creation.

it was outlined about a week ago that maryland has done better in job creation than virginia is false. >> that is not true. 2.35% * job creation. i should not said 2.5 times, it was only 2.3 times. i apologized p toolitifax. >> but not to me. competition is good between states. i like it. it makes us both stronger and because we are fierce competitors, our state's do well in job creation and have lower unemployment. i am sure in his list of credits would not talk to you about the governors in california and illinois and new york and connecticut that have horrible ratings when it comes to their climate for business on taxes

and everything else. democratic governors believe that increasing taxes and increasing regulation and protecting unions is the way to create jobs. republican governors don't agree we have more faith in individual liberties and the beauty and incredible power of the entrepreneur and a free enterprise system. we believe the more you don't shackled them, the better they do. time will tell if this aca obamare individual mandate which is an intrusion in the federal government, i believe, if it is up held, it will show to be an absolute budget buster, $2.2 billion in virginia alone and unfunded mandates over the next decade. republican governors have 11 out of the 15 best states for

business and seven out of the 10 lowest unemployment rates. you can have all the other statistics you want. even though states have taken stimulus money, you are right, and have taken money from the federal government, it is our money that we send it to them. i would like to have a morede- evolution of this. i would much rather have medicaid be block granted and not have this federal government cannot with rules and mandates where we have to ask for waivers and exemptions. let us run our own program. it is a different philosophy of government and this is why we are grump -- going broke at the federal level. >> it is for the oscars, the music would be playing. >> we will leave the last few minutes of this event and you could see the whole thing in its entirety on c-span.org. we are going back to live coverage of the national

governors' association winter conference. this panel coming up will be looking and growing state, ms. with the gallup chairman jim clifton. this is live coverage here on c- span. [room noise] converstaions] [inaudible conversations]

[general chatter] [room noise] >> can everybody find a seat? we will be starting. can everybody please take your seat, we will be starting in one minute, thank you.

[no audio] [no audio] >> ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats. if i could have audience members please take your seats and

governors please take your seat. i have a delegation of your lead numbers coming in. they came in. ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats. i call this meeting to order as the nga chair. i would like to take this opportunity to welcome into the 2012 winter meeting. may i have a motion to adopt the rules of procedure for the meeting? is there a second? thank you, let me explain one thing first before we vote. part of the rules require that any governor who wants to submit a new policy or resolution for adoption will need 3/4 votes to do so. please submit any proposal in

writing by 5:00 p.m. tomorrow, february 25. all in favor of the motion please say aye. all opposed? the motion is adopted. governors, our monday's session is dedicated to reviewing and adopting new policy statements. we have streamlined our policies and process to more closely align our policy statement with governor priorities. i want to say i appreciate the hard work of everyone involved, the governors, your staff, the nga staff, as we change the direction of how we established our policies. i would like to acknowledge some distinguished guests who are with us today. i want to first recognized our guest from the white house office of intergovernmental affairs. thank you very much for being here. we're also joined today by

delegations from canada and the head of the mexican nga. if both of these delegations would stand so we could recognize you, please? [applause] thank you very much for being here. pour all the tough issues states and territories face today, economic growth is what the most important issues for us to address. economic growth is key to our success as governors. that is why i chose growing state economies as my initiative. it is designed to provide governors and other state policy makers with better policies to improve the economic environment in their states and more strategies designed to foster business growth. we put an emphasis on understanding how small business becomes a fast-growing firm and

what policies support the transformation. high-growth businesses are one of the driving forces of the modern global economy. they are the primary source of job creation, prosperity, and economic competitiveness. new fast-growing firms often evolves to become large employers. as governors, we want to help the private sector grow creating new job opportunities for our citizens. nationwide, firms and their first year of existence at an average of 3 million new jobs per year according to the kaufman foundation. nearly 40% of these firms don't survive the first three years. those that survive, however, prosper and usually create more net jobs and all small start-ups do. the most important firms that survived are called gazelles, high-growth firms that expand employment by 15% or more

annually for five consecutive years. such firms make up about 5-6% of all businesses but virtually all new net job creation. for any successful firm, the challenge is to stay ahead, go from good to great, and do it again and again and again by creating new products or by entering new markets. firms that remain entrepreneurial do exactly that. these firms derive growth and prosperity and global competitiveness that is why we are opening the 2012 winter meeting with a discussion about economic growth and job creation. my goal for growing state economies is to provide each and every governor with a state profile on their small business and economic environment and to produce action-oriented reports on policy choices that have been shown to generate job growth, of

dr. lenoreial activity antics activitieseneur ilial and more exports. this should provide an opportunity to learn from local entrepreneurs, small business owners, researchers and other experts on what works to create high growth and innovative firms. in october, governor malloy hosted a summit in hartford, connecticut and governor markell joined us. in november, governor haslam posted a summit in nashville, tennessee. last month, governor gregoire posted one in seattle. in april, will host a meeting and omaha and i encourage as many of you who can to attend. i want to take a moment to thank several organizations that have made important contributions to this initiative.

bank of the west, general motors, intel, the national venture-capital coalition, and santa fe of venice. this cross section of private sector support illustrates just how important our work in growing state economies is. we have support from companies engaged in advanced manufacturing to cutting edge information technology to those who can finance of entrepreneurs. i also want to thank the kaufmann foundation for their financial and intellectual support. we're pleased to have as broad support because it is indicative of our work that we need a partnership with the business community and others who are committed to job creation, prosperity, and economic competitiveness. to kick this off, it is my pleasure to introduce a good friend, gallegly chairman and ceo jim clifton who says what

everyone in the world wants is a good job. in his latest book, he describes how this undeniable fact will affect all leadership decisions as country's wage war to produce the best jobs. since 1988. jim has served as ceo of gallup in research. his most recent innovation is the gallup world poll which is designed to give the world 6 billion citizens a voice in virtually all key global issues. under his leadership, gallup has expanded from a predominantly u.s.-based company to a worldwide organization with 40 offices in 30 countries and regions. jim is also the creator of p the creatorath, in metric-based model that establishes human

nature in the workplace, customer engagement and business outcomes. this model is used in performance management systems in more than 500 companies worldwide. please welcome gallup chairman and ceo. jinm cli jim clifton. [applause] >> thank you and it is a big highlight for me to be here and thank you for your partnership. i don't know if you know this but i was born and raised in nebraska and now live in washington, d.c. and i have an office in new york and i go back and forth but there is a story. it is not a joke. it is a story. nebraska was playing oklahoma years ago and used to have these big gains in the game was

in the lincoln. the abc announcer interview one of our running backs. he had his football helmet, and nebraska football, which is white. she said to him -- if the n on your helmet did not stand for nebraska, what would stand for? he said i would have to say knowledge. [laughter] that one follows you everywhere you go. i just changed some things too perfectly fit what i saw in the program. i don't know if this page will work perfectly and i wish i had not changed and but i did. let me hang some thoughts on you

that we have found from our polling and maybe there will give you ideas for important discussions you will have. i have had the same job my whole lifedr. gallup started our company and he was from iowa. he was more of an academic then he was a businessman. he was interested in democracy and he had a line where he said if democracy is about the will of the people, somebody should find out what their will is. he did not say two votes that will. he said you should know what that will is because of you don't know what that is when you're making strategies for your states and the united states of america, if you have the wrong premise is, the worse you make the place. his point was left or right bed will down. -- his point was to write that

will down. looking over the last 75 years, what is the single most profound poll you have ever seen? i will tell you. dr., gallup called that the great american dream. what it has been for decades has been peace. maybe that comes out of the civil war and world war one and world war ii and it became to have a family, prayed to god you want, freedom and a bunch of stuff like that. that has been the will of america. this is what you need to know. almost nobody knows this and it will sound subtle. it has just changed. the new will of america is to have a good job. that is a huge sociological shifts and changes everything. it changes when you get married.

you wait longer or you don't get married at all. it changes how many kids you have or maybe you don't have any at all. here is a big one -- it changes migration patterns. we have been walking for 200,000 years. now we walk because there is a place we can get a good job. it also changes who we vote for. more than ever. it also changes, for all the people here in corporations, it changes how you manage your workplace. a job is now a personal and it defines your relationship with your country, with your state, which are neighborhood, with your family and also with the big u. that is all new. when you see a yankees baseball

game and babe ruth hit to me as that funny run, look at that crowd. those are salaried men. they have black suits and white shirts and they look exactly the same. it looks to me like they are all smoking pall mall cigarettes but they all look the same but that is when a job was not personal. those were salary people. need to know.u right now, gallup nightly tracks unemployment. lawn, iand mow dave's am not unemployed. i might be announced there so i worked one hour a week but i am not unemployed.

if gallup asks if i am unemployed i say yes. the real unemployment number is about 20% which is deadly. when we ask the 20% -- do you have hope to get a job? 60% of the say they have no hope. it would not have mattered to salary man. now it wipes you out and you experience something that i will call hopelessness. it is a brand new state of mind in the united states. tickets to 18 million people. -- that gets you 18 million people which means every single one of us is one degree away from someone who is hopelessly out of work. if you ask yourself why is america in the current state of mind, it could be the relationship we have with those

18 million and that is what this is important. the reason there is a book called "the coming jobs war," there are 5 billion adults on the face of the earth. we have this world where we sample across 60 countries. i will speed this up pretty great american dream is now the will of the whole world. the whole world wants a good job. a good job we defined as 30 + hours per week and a paycheck and consistent work so that is just a good job. when we asked the world how many adults wished they had that, 3 billion of them say that is the most important thing of the world to me is to have a good job. the problem is there is only 1.2

billion good jobs available right now we have a global shortfall of somewhere between 1 billion and 1.8 billion jobs. the problem with jobs going to china or wherever, all of that will grow multiple times bigger. when we think about our future and where the jobs will be, it is not just china. the whole world will be crushing. we have been watching this in the middle east. it looks like the arabs sprang, maybe it is islamic winter -- that might just be a jobs war. in egypt, they voted for the brotherhood so they came and made a big movement to leadership. why did they vote for the brotherhood? because they wanted sharia law? that's not what they told us.

they think the brotherhood is more likely to get economics going better so they can get jobs. if you don't understand what the will is, you may call the wrong decisions and assumptions and you make the middle east worst because that is not what they are going for. it is everywhere. i was watching -- you know these numbers now -- this country's gdp is about $15 trillion. the chinese gdp is about $5 trillion we have about three times the gdp that china does. when you ask on the gallup poll to the country who has a bigger economy, they say china's. i don't know why. if china had a bigger gdp than we do right now, this would be a colossal bust. this would be a huge mass. it is kind of a mess right now.

i went through and took a bunch of economists and said where will the u.s. economy be in 30 years? they said it will go from 15-30. we will have $30 trillion of new incoming stuff. where will china be? between 60-$80 trillion. the white bus out. we are on track where they will be the leader of the free world and economics are more important than military. they will have plenty of money for military. the problem is the economic might the u.s. has had over the years has been incredible. another good question is what will the gdp of the whole world be? we will go from a current $60

trillion where we are now -- the united states as 25% of all whole world's gdp which is colossal. there is only 300 million of us. it will go from 60 to 200. it means $140 trip -- it means 140 trillion new stuff will be coming in. be $140 trillion of sales, stocks, money, customers, and jobs in the next 30 years. we've got to get a disproportionate share of it or our relationship with the rest of the world changes more than you can ever imagine. the way it looks now is the chinese, whether you do 8.5% or 10%, that's what comes out to.

unless something big happens that is coming to a theater near us and that was one of the reasons why the gallup poll put this stuff together. you are quiet and depressed. that is why we did that research. i will try to say something hopeful here. i was watching tv a little over 30 years ago and there was a panel of economists, i just turned 60, i lived through this. the panel of economists, i will never forget watching this, shocked me. they all sat there left and right leaning, good americans, and they said that japan and germany were going to overtake our economy in the next 30 years. that is right now. they say because of superior manufacturing, japan would go

to first and germany would go to second and the united states would go to third. they said japan would be at about five and germany would be about 4 and the united states now, would be 3.5 or 3.8. can you imagine? it as deja vu all over again. remember what happened -- nobody saw it coming. the people of low america, our own economists said it was over. we went clear up to $15 trillion. i don't know why. why did anybody not write about this? what ever happened there is what we need back here again. somebody needs to write that down and say how can we do that. what happened was, we just had

an unbelievable run of innovation and an entrepreneurship. if he won a big number, add the stubs over 20 years over the projection, you see what i mean, over the regression line, that equals $100 trillion. now you finally have a big number. that is how much money we had over those 30 years by outperforming where we were supposed to beat. . that is also how we had 25% of the total gdp of the whole world. i want to hit on a couple of these points. i don't mean to make them sound reckless but i think it is important for the good of the order here. i think we're making a very big mistake getting all of our money on innovation.

consider that. we have pushed all the big multi-colored chips on to that one phenomenon of innovation. what if you are wrong? what if we are wrong? i notice the president just packed $150 billion into innovation. i did not say a line for entrepreneurship. what if we got it exactly backwards? i worked on this research with no special interest groups. innovation has no value whatsoever until there is a customer standing next to it. there is not a person in this town that knows that. when we are trying to create jobs and we keep piling more and more on innovation, look what they saudis are doing. they are building cities of

innovation. the most valuable part of it is the business model and the doctor per nor that can't fire it. this is such an unbelievable story -- the internet probably saved this country in that great big run. there are some other things but that is a huge part of it. there is an inventor in washington right now walking around, he built to that. he is a friend of mine and he told me this story. he had done. a guy came walking over and he had heard about it any asked to see it. vin got back is to fly across fiber optics. he has -- he has his own internet and a guy came from the u.s. senate and looked at and he

said that could be a helluva thing, let's throw it out into commerce. vin cerf said to that u.s. senator, fine with me but i don't see what value businesses will have with this. it was a conversation about the internet. by the way, the u.s. senator was al gore. i don't even know him. he should have gotten a nobel prize for that one. that internet just sat there until it went out into commerce and ought to ignore is got ahold of it and probably most of the $100 trillion came out of just that moment. otherwise, all that in obeisance it's there. maybe we would still be spending more money on innovation. a woman invited me to give a

talk at the cabinet of sciences. she >> i said to somebody canceled checks what you want me for? she said it was the people that had our best laboratories. she wanted me to tell them that an invasion was overrated. these of the people that run the best laboratories in the world. i said to them how many of you have inventions that are ready to go and just need to be commercialized? every hand went up. >> one guy said i have an invention better than the internet. it needs entrepreneur were shipped. we must -- an entrepreneurship. we might have an oversupply of innovation -- of invention, but we of not put the same science

to the entrepreneur that we have to innovation. i'm watching my clock here, governor. i just want to make one more point for you to consider. what the united states is the best in the world that is intellectual development. you hear about bad schools. the top schools are incredible. the top 30 schools, 20 are in the united states. we are masters of intellectual development. if you put 1000 kids in front of educational psychologists they can rank them 1 through 1000 with their iq, sat score, and everyone would agree, we really know iq.

that is how we will find someone. they cast out. you give them a scholarship. it is so intentional but once they graduate they go on. see how we do that? no one has mastered intellectual development like the united states of america i do not know what -- america. i do not know what the example is. the hammer and nail? if you are a hammer, you think everything is the mail? if you said there are these 1000 kids, let's line them up by their ability to enterprise. the united states of america fails. we have no idea. it is even an argument. we do not even know who the buses carry if we could do that,

you might rise up and -- do -- who the best is. if we could do that, you might rise up and change everything. here are two ideas, and he will have some questions. this morning, 6 million ceo's got up. 6 million between one employee and 100, between 100 and 500 there is only 80,000, and 1000, then a -nd there are only 100,000. we really are a nation of small

businesses. when the small businesses get up, not one of them is thinking about how they can hire an employee. you are seeing the president. make sure you tell him that. no one is trying to hire an employee. they are trying to cut them. if you hire one person, it is like a merger. you have to talk to your bank, your spouse, and everything else, but what everyone is talking about is how they can create customer. this is really important. of the 6 million, 75% are not even trying to grow. you just have to know that or you will make mistakes in your engineering. what they doing in that business? if they do it only for the reason of freedom. they are like coyotes. they can not be domesticated.

they never will be. that is the way they are. they are not trying to grow. if you put engineering systems in, policies in, all the ways they can grow, 75% into not know what you're talking about. they are doing it because nobody can tell them what to do. if you get into what they are thinking about, they are like from outer space. only 25% of them are trying to become facebook and groupon. that is 1.5 million small businesses, but those are the ones we have to put engineering in place and support because they could burst. there is about $3 trillion of gdp in there. they could burst up to three times, five times.

that is the sweet spot in all of this. the last one is we did a survey of fifth through 12th graders. it is hard to get a national random. we asked if they would invent something that changes the world, so 45% of them said they would do that. the other one about starting their own business is about 45%, to. there is plenty of hope. that is where you will get start-ups. the second place we have to be is right there. here is the negative, when we ask them if they are in an internship, only 5% of them said they are. if we not done up to 20%, 25%, or even 50%, i think we would take over the world. i'm quick to stop right now. thank you very much for having me. [applause]

>> jim clifton has given us plenty to think about, and he has also agreed to take questions. so, go right ahead. >> first of all, let me say the newest governor has arrived. the governor of mississippi. welcome. you get the first question appeared >> i enjoyed that. -- question. >> i enjoyed that. tell me what the biggest impediment is to these lone wolves, these entrepreneur orders, because i love these guys. -- and entrepreneur -- these , and what slows them down? i love these guys. what what get them to take off? >> that is a deadly question. that is a debate. i called some of them myself. you sound like you know a lot of

them. there in a completely different space and the rest of the country. -- they are in a completely different space-bar than the rest of the country. -- space than the rest of the country. when you ask them what the biggest burden is, the state regulations. it is not banks. if anybody tells you, because there are surveys around, and they tend to be listed samples -- just trust me. when we say what regulations, the two drove down our environment and health care. -- drill downs our environment and health care. it is the image that crushes them. i looked at them as turtles. they have their heads in their

shells. what will get them out? i mean that positively. turtles can move freely fast. >> in mississippi, they will bite you, too. [laughter] >> you and i have always had trouble getting loans. 20% is the right number. it should not be 0. you should be arguing with these guys anyway. regulations, but also the image. i will not say the name, but a group of guys said we're going to give a rebate of $4,000 if they will hire somebody, then they start thinking is that more rules for me? it makes a turtle draw their head back. then we say why don't we have every company hire one employee? 6 million people are not going to hire one employee.

so little guy in jackson, mississippi, is going to hire one, and ge is going to hire one and lay off 33,000 people? >> thank you. >> along the same line of what has been mentioned with regulations, when you talk about 6 million ceo's were not trying to expand their businesses, i expected there out there trying to be profitable. that is the motivation. that this house a free market system works. as you are profitable, you have the opportunity to expand your business and hire more people. profitability happens in many different ways. to me, it is not only the regulation, but the uncertainty of the marketplace. estimates are that we have a couple trillion dollars of capital on the sidelines. that is because of uncertainty,

regulations, we do not know what the future is going to bring. for the entrepreneur who has a great idea, they need capital. when you commercialize, how do you you have capital to flow towards helping them to commercialize a great idea, whatever that might be in a free market system? my question would be how do we get capital flow into the marketplace to energize the entrepreneur and help them to expand existing businesses with new ideas? >> remember, of the 6 million, only 25% of them really want to grow. when we asked them if they have the capital necessary to grow, they say they do. you have another group, in that 75%, they are having trouble, would like to have money, and banks are not lending to them. they go broke. it is important that you segment

those populations. one of the most amazing experience i've done in my career we are doing in nebraska, and we found 500 small businesses and we put a guide to 10 of them, and we have about five things we do to them. you also have a relationship outside of those tools. you talk about their strategies. they are always do it a lot of things wrong. they spend too much time with their worst customers, rather than their best. we put our best tools in. it is mentoring, advising, that is really what they want. what they wish they could have consultants like a big companies have, kind of like bain capital or somebody.

we have tried to create that. by the way, to do it well, you need to have the university of nebraska help. you cannot have some lowly state department do it. it is kind of like magic pulling it off. dave told me he was a very popular governor. that is what he told me. [laughter] >> people in that 25%, there are some real hot shots, and they want to be part of something exciting. dade shows up, i show up, did ceo shows up, the president of the university -- dave shows up, i shall walk, the ceo shows up, the president of the university shows up budget i show up, the ceo shows up, -- i'm sure, the

ceo shows up, the president of the university shows up. that is what they want. >> i was looking at looking -- your survey about the ceo's wanting to expand. i recently did a survey in oklahoma, and we are relatively small, 3.8 million people, and we surveyed our businesses, asking about tax structure, workforce, education, are you planning to add more jobs, and we found that over 60% of businesses that responded said they were going to add jobs, which was interesting according to your statistic. the other thing bettas a little different is that we actually have -- that is a little different in my state is we have employers that can not find

the workers in oklahoma, so we started a program called ok jobsmatch.com. it goes back to the last question of creating the certainty in the marketplace as opposed to the uncertainty we see nationally. as governors, would you recommend we can do to further create certainty in our state and what we need to do nationally with the uncertainty in the marketplace? >> by the way, if you want to do 9% unemployment, or 20% unemployment, you are right -- the variations in this country of performance are unbelievable. omaha, neb., has unemployment of around 4.9%. gdp is growing.

if you look at austin, texas, and albany, new york, i'd like comparing those two -- both big states, capital cities, and no ports, and know nothing, but for some reason austin, texas, has created unbelievable energy. albany can not. the only thing you can point to his local leadership teams where they get together and make some kind of strategy. i was looking in national. i do not know if they have that much gdp or not. they may get into a healthcare center. there are enormous differences. the best thing we can do is the 1.5 small businesses, by the way, the same number of soldiers we have, if we work as hard to develop them as we did our

military, and i love the military, by the way, but if we got as good as dead science, i think that is our best chance to -- at that science, i think that is our best chance to come up. i am a capitalist. the kids coming out of high school may to be in a state of mind of free enterprise or we will not have the focus that we need. we can encourage them. dave and i can tell you about our experiment. get a metric. gallup gave it as a gift to the country. if you go on a gallup.com, your schools can plug in how much entrepreneur energy and how much -- how many students are in your internships.

it is too low. >> let's say we solve the issue on been teaching folks how to be an entrepreneur, -- that we solve the issue on teaching folks out to be an entrepreneur, and then on regulation, so we have governments that and found ways to make it easier to do business -- have found ways to make it easier to do business. in small communities, unemployment is that 13%, and in some areas it is like 9%. you need a customer. it ultimately comes to meeting a customer. -- meeting a customer. -- needing a customer.

let's say they figured it out. do you then take from the other county, or the other state and prosper and blossom? you alluded to the issue of globalization, where america is at 25% now, but if you look at all of the experts, intent, 20, 30 years, -- in 10, 20, 30 years, we are a small piece of the pie. if we are driven by small business, how you get more customers, and it is not just the customer from albany or oklahoma. how do you get that small business entrepreneur who does not have much regulation to other customers in this global economy? >> i understand your question. one reason we have to slow down is we are not selling fast

enough to each other. we need more competition, but you are right, that will not take us up to the gdp numbers we need to continue the relationship we have with the rest of the world. we do need competition. we could get another 7% out of that. the big answer is export. you see the future through apple, groupon, cars, and other things, but if we do not export, none of this works. those little guys are doing a pretty good job. within that 25% group, those numbers add up pretty fast. you are spot on. we cannot sell enough stock to each other to get the numbers we need. -- stuff to each other to get the numbers we need. >> any final questions? the governor of hawaii. >> yes.

you indicated that among the responses that you got, the world used to cover a multitude of sins, and when you said you'd drilled down a little, one of the elements that came forward was health care. the provision of health care, financing health care, i presume, is what you mean by that, the costs. that has very little to do, or nothing to do with regulation s such. it has everything to do with how we provide health care. what is the assumption about healthcare? you mentioned the united states military. if we had training, investment, as someone who was involved for two decades of the armed services committee before i took this job, i will tell you i have some experience and how you

provide health care. it is national, international, that is to say universal health care. what is happening at least where my collective bargaining is concerned in the state of hawaii is that the provision of health care and its cost is the single most difficult challenge to me. it is not state spending. it is the cost running away. it is the spending chasing the cost. until we come to grips with the question of health care and get rid of the political rhetoric, we are not going to be able to deal with whether it's called regulation or anything else. we have to come with grips with the question of the provision of health care and the exploding costs are rounded before it will have some of the flexibility with -- around it before it will have some of the flexibility

with regard to education are -- and some of the things around it. >> by the way, when respondents say health care, something to keep in mind is also the image of regulations might be more than the actual regulations. it could be the 6 million turtles saying more regulations, but they cannot really pin them down. you are right. everything i am talking about this morning addresses -- i will call of the offense. we cannot cut our way out of the. if falling gdp does not bounce back up, -- if our gdp does not bounce back up, the defense is health care. it is growing. if you add that it is $10

trillion, three times bigger than the sub-prime dell compared the tsunami from health care is just unbelievable. -- sub-prime. the tsunami from health care is just unbelievable. the target is way out ahead of a lot of people. -- target is getting way out ahead of a lot of people. it is about the same as their profit. so, health care has gotten to the same place. remember the joke warren buffett made about how general motors was really a healthcare company that happens to sell cars? what he meant was the only survive to provide health care. that is pretty much the way of our businesses are right now. i had better end. thank you very much. [applause]

>> jim clifton, thank you very much. we appreciate your insights. you have given us a lot to think about. i would like to take a few moments to recognize the winners of the nga private/public cooperation award. each year, all governors are invited to nominate a company for work in his or her state that demonstrates is significant investment to perform a public good in areas such as education, health, public safety, economic development, and the environment. i want to thank all of the governors that submitted nominees. they were outstanding, and the volunteer selection committee evaluated the nominees on

criteria such as improved service delivery. i want to thank them for their investment of time and energy. i know the decision was not easy. this year, two companies will be recognized. i would like to invite the governor of pennsylvania to the podium to present the public /private partnership award. >> thank you, governor i think we have another minute to the morning which governor. i think we have another minute to the morning. -- governor. i think we have another minute to the morning. this is a great award allows to recognize the private sector people that we work with on a regular basis, and by who with their innovation make our job, hopefully, a little bit easier,

but also a little less expensive for the people of our state, the taxpayers of our state. right now, pennsylvania is in the midst of reforming our welfare system, and that reform could take many different shapes. when i stayed reform, is not an excuse to do less -- say reform, it is not an excuse to do less. we have to stretch the dollar, but it is a call to do better. the system hewlett packard help us put into place is about saving revenue and work hours in our work force, and there, by having more to help the clients of our department of welfare, the citizens of our state. this system has kept our employees from drowning in a pool of data. you talked about better before, mr. jim clifton. we know the internet provide more data than we thought we would ever see, and that has, in

some places, frozen agencies in time. some agencies have a difficult time assembling that data, and that is one of the things we found when we came into office 13 months ago. i am grateful for the opportunity to use the real- world solutions the private sector companies have come up with, hewlett packard in particular, to make state government more responsive, and a better service to the people of pennsylvania. the last time we spend crunching the numbers, the more time we have to help the people of pennsylvania. i am pleased to see that hp is recognized today. david, thank you very much. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> they did not tell me where the award was. >> thank you. >> congratulations. thank you. [applause] >> i would now like to invite governor martin o'malley to the podium to present maryland's winning nomination for the 2012 private, public partnership award. >> it is right here. governor, thank you. it is an honor to present this award expand the achievement when it comes to science, technology, education and math.

education is an issue that each of you spend a tremendous amount of energy on. in particular, the stem discipline, so we set the goal to increase the number of stem college graduates by 40% by 2015. so far, it is 23%. we are not done yet. we want to increase information sharing to promote achievement and sponsor that interest him stem disciplines. we wanted to bring together experts from our business community and our nonprofit world to share knowledge within the fields. we envision what one might call the harmony of stem. thanks to ibm, we were able to

make this business a reality. together with the maryland business council, ibm led a process to help us create a system to promote the most meaningful sharing of resources, information, collaboration, expertise, and time. they brought in developers to build a platform that is in use across our state in high schools, and were right by our side through every phase of the process including building and implementation, with the shared goal of bringing the expertise of working stem professionals directly into the classroom, so kids could see that this was real, and have a profession. one of my favorite parts of this is our ability to bring in representatives from business, government, and higher education to talk directly to kids. hundreds are learning directly from stem specialists and we are

looking to provide access for thousands more. we could not have done this without the expertise of governor heineman, and the guidance that ibm provided. i would like to bring them forward from the ibm corporation. here to accept the award is jim sallinger, vice president of technical support, ibm, north america. jim, come on down. [applause] >> thank you. >> jim, thank you. >> governor, thank you. thank you. >> we have one final thing we want to do before we adjourn to governor's only. we would like to ask governor

bob mcdonnell to come forward and say a few words about the upcoming annual meeting in his great state of virginia. bob? [laughter] >> good afternoon. thank you, dave, for giving me a few minutes to plug the great commonwealth of virginia, the cradle of democracy. i want to extend on behalf of the 8 million people of virginia and invitation to come this summer in july, bring your family, to williamsburg, virginia. it is been 57 years since the nga has come to virginia, and i am delighted that you saw fit to return this summer. we're thrilled to have you. over the last year, dave, his staff, my wife and his wife had been planning for what i hope

will be for you who love america, history, and the foundation of this great country, a memory that will be unforgettable i was chatting to a good friend and reminded him that plymouth rock was actually 1620. jamestown was 16 07 so, they were actually looking for jamestown and got a little lost. both commonwealth's have a great story about the foundations of our country. we have a lot of great events planned. you have on your desk an indication that says it is from the right, honorable, robert mcdonald, as opposed to the left, auto, robert mcdonald. you will have -- right, hon., bob mcdonnell, as opposed to the left, honorable, bob mcdonnell.

you will have a chance to be in the same place where my predecessors patrick henry and thomas jefferson were actually sworn in in the late 1770 and where they resided before the capital moved to richmond some years later. -- late-1770's where they resided before the capital moved to richmond years later. it is the site where they landed in jamestown, virginia, and gave birth to the greatest country the world's ever known, and i am excited to tell the story for all of you some-405 years after that. you will also be able to see and have a private meeting at the jamestown settlement, the place where did in 1619, the oldest continuously legislative body in

the free world, the virginia state assembly, held its first meeting. the remnants of where that meeting took place are still there. interestingly, after all of this passage of time, it was just about 15 years ago, where the original footings of the jamestown four were actually discovered, and they're still going live exhibitions today. they are still finding the artifacts. just a few years ago they found what they believed to be the buried body of one of the eight captains along with john smith and the others that are well- known. there is a marvelous museum set up with some of the artifacts, and you will actually still see a large -- live archaeological dig. we also have a private night at busch gardens, when of the premier entertainment parks on the thursday that you get there.

my wife and sally have put together a cruise on the river that i think all of you will enjoy, and also a private tour of one of virginia put the great winery's. we are the fifth-largest wine- producing states in the country. virginia is of great wine country. it is an opportunity to have a private meeting and lunch at the governor's mansion in richmond. outside, you will see a lot of things. the wine country guide. some of the world famous virginia for lovers dark chocolate.

and some other things for which you can remember and prepare for your visit to williamsburg. we are incredibly honored to be able to host this december. i think it will be a memorable experience as you -- this summer. i think it will be a memorable experience as you trace the roots. you will really get a sense of what life was like 400 years ago as we gave birth to this nation. we welcome you in a typical virginia hospitality, and please bring your family, your wallets, because we need a little more revenue, and again, it is an honor to house do in virginia. thank you. -- host you in virginia. thank you. [applause] >> bob, i want you to know that jack and i made a decision that

you were aware that have in virginia. we really appreciate that. he is already completed. this concludes our opening session, and we will now adjourn to a governor's only session which begins at 12:45 p.m.. this session is adjourned. >> i know.

[inaudible] >> governor bob mcdonnell of virginia will be on c-span's "washington journal" tomorrow morning. we'll be back live betti nga -- at the nga meeting later this

afternoon with the discussion of economic growth with the vice president of procter and gamble and a senior fellow from the harvard school of business. our coverage continues tomorrow live, beginning at 9:30 a.m. eastern with a discussion on education and eliminating child hunger. as to o'clock 30 p.m. eastern, homeland security and the national guard. live coverage of the national governors' association meeting of this weekend here on c-span. also tomorrow, road to the white house with former house speaker newt gingrich campaigning in georgia, speaking at a baptist church located in the congressional district he served well in congress live tomorrow at 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c- span. >> one of the trickiest things about writing this book for me was thinking through the way

rights were kind of straddled between an aspirational ideal and a more practical and formal mandate. >> from distributing food to the poor from sex trafficking, defining human rights and how western reforms could lead to increased -- decreased. > a look at african- americans serving in congress. and, the life of senator al simpson. booktv, every weekend, on c- span2. >> we got started because there are a lot of conservative think

tanks that work across issues. there had been no single progressive organization that worked on economic policy and national security. >> neera tanden, ceo of the center of american progress. >> we think there is an ideology behind arguments made in washington with very little facts behind them, and part of our job is to make the argument, the factual argument, and the evidence-based are given behind our own views, and sometimes when the facts do not argue for our position, we reexamine those positions, because the most important thing is to be right about what your views are. >> a look at the center for american progress, sunday night on c-span compel "q&a -- c-

span's "q&a." >> republican presidential candidate rick santorum discussed proposals in michigan last night, and outlined proposals he says he will implement in his first 100 days in office, including reducing gas and oil prices and easing federal regulations on businesses. this is about one hour. >> thank you so much. i appreciate it as a fellow knight, although i always hesitate to say that because i am only first degree. i certainly appreciate all of the wonderful service work to the knights of columbus does at the parish, and in the committee. congratulations to all of you for this wonderful facility. i do not think i have ever seen one this big. this is pretty impressive.

i have to tell you. congratulations. thank you for coming out here on a friday night, a beautiful, winter friday night in southeast michigan. it really is a pleasure for me to be here, and to be in a place that is very similar to where i grew up. i grew up in western pennsylvania, in a manufacturing town, which is obviously very much like batons in southeast michigan, where we had the kind of neighborhood values and opportunities for everyone in our community to be able to go off and go to work, and work hard, and have an incentive to go out and work hard because there was great jobs, opportunities, and strong families and neighborhoods. we had the opportunity to build a great and strong country.

that is how america is unique in the world. america is a great company from the bottom up. we were not designed and put into place with all the different economic areas and community organizations. they sprung up because we believed in the idea of free people and the ability to be able to provide for ourselves and our families. that is the secret, that is the difference of america when it comes to what makes a successful. it is the secret sauce, if you will. it is not harder sauce. it is the secret sauce. it is the secret sauce of what makes america a unique country and is so hard to replicate. america was built that way. it was a discovered country. people forget how young we are. this young country was born in a different fashion than of the

other countries that go back into antiquity. when i go around and talk to people around the country, i talk about how important it is that we remember who we are. what makes us great, what makes this different, and our differences what makes us exceptional in the world. when i try to do in this campaign, in spite of what always happens in a campaign, people get worried about whether they will win or lose, and they decided we decide to pull out everything, and throw mud and dirt, and run a negative campaign, but we have been going around this country from the days of the town hall meetings in the early primaries, to hear, in michigan, and we are talking about ideas that could reinvigorate and create that spark again. the greatness of american people

is still here, still alive, and still well. [applause] >> alternately, we have a government and a president who just -- ultimately, we have a government and its president who does not believe in the things that made this country great. he is a very different model for how we will build the great society going forward. i wanted to share some ideas of what i would do. this campaign, as we have seen is that it can get off of the mission of what the people will have to vote about in michigan. i've done a few television shows. the last one i did was marc levin, an amateur to listen to him or not. -- i am not sure if you listen to him or not. [applause]

>> he said we're going to talk about issues that people care about in this country. what are you going to do as the next leader of this country and this government, i should say, and what sort of things will make a difference in our lives? i thought i would share with you the time things -- whoa, , i guess i'm talking into it. the 10 things that i would focus on. if we elect rick santorum, these other things he wanted to get the country strengthened and turned around here at home. that is really the focus. that is what people are concerned about. we have not just 8.3% unemployment, and i suspect we're not looking at lower rates in the future, and we also know we have a record number of people not booking for work, and

the people not participating in the market is at an all-time high for the last 30 or 40 years, and that the people that are in the marketplace are there not the kind of jobs that allow for the advancement and allow people to have the wages and benefits that could support a family and create that sense of optimism and hope. those are the things that people are really concerned about. those are the things that are eating away at our optimism here in america. i want to talk about what we can do together to make things happen. obviously, the first and foremost thing is we have to do something to get this economy going, and i would say the first order of business as we look at what is happening before us is we have to do something about energy prices. the price of gasoline in this country is going up, and it is not going to be going down anytime soon. [applause]

>> this is not just an economic issue. it is a national security issue. the to our involvement in the middle east right now -- look at our involvement in the middle east right now. one of the principal reasons gas prices are going up is because of the instability where we get so much of our energy. things will only get worse in the next few years. alaska, half of 1 million barrels a day will go offline within the next five-to-10 years. we will not have any. we will not have enough production to keep the alaska pipeline flowing. there's not enough flow. it is too cold. it slows down to the point that it does not flow and they have to shut down production until they get more production in there. half of 1 million barrels a day

that we get right now that we will not have. mexico in the next five-to-10 years will be an energy importer. areas of the continent that can provide crude for our refineries for them to be able to produce a domestic supply to keep prices stable in the world -- we will not have the production anymore. the alternative is to go out and do the opposite of what president obama is doing. he gave a speech the other day, which you just -- i do not know how stupid he thinks america is. [applause] >> you know, blaming everybody but himself for policies that, let's be honest, were intentional, to drive up the

cost of energy. when he was campaigning, he and his secretary of energy and others were campaigning how we needed higher prices for energy because they were concerned about man-made global warming, and to do something the best way was to get energy consumption down. the penney charge in any country, and when energy -- look at any charge in any country, and when energy prices and availability is compromise, the standard of living is the standard of living goes down -- the standard of living goes down. looking in detroit. imagine if we did not have the price of gasoline. when this industry have been like if we did not have the availability of cheap gasoline for so many years in this country? why, because we produce it here. we were not afraid. we knew after a while we would

have the best environmental laws. we need to open up offshore, alaska, deep water, and take the permitting. this president has allowed more per mickey -- has cut permitting by more than half. i was just up in north dakota. there is an area in the northwest, and i do not know if i have a piece, i carry it in my suitcase, but it is a piece of rocks and the use say you cannot get -- rock, and you say you cannot get blood out of a stone, but you can get oil out of iraq, and -- out of a rock, and it is the highest-quality crudes you can get. they gave me a little bottle of it.

it is great crude oil. guess what, that it's a premium on the market but there they have to give a 30 two dollars a barrel discount, because they cannot get their -- $32 a barrel discount because they cannot get their product to the market because this president refuses to do anything to bring more oil to this country, either develop it here or bringing in from canada, where down from north dakota into the refineries in the gulf. ladies and gentlemen, we need a president that understands that energy drives america. it drives michigan. it drives manufacturing cassia drive quality of life in america. there are people -- quality of a -- a drives quality of life in america. there are people parking their car right now.

ladies and gentlemen, we need a president has a lean forward energy position. we will get gasoline prices down, and create jobs in the process. that is a promise number 1. [applause] >> the next thing we will do is look at the regulatory burden in this country. i talk a lot about how the country is struggling under a president who was put in place more high-cost regulations on businesses in this country than any president in history in one year. he did 150 last year the cost over $100 million on the economy. the average under clinton and bush was about 60. two and a half times.

day one, i would take every single one of those obama regulations, hundreds of them, some of them we would repeal outright and not replace, and others we would repeal and replace them with options that are lower costs that believe in it the american people and not have to have government micromanage everything they do in their workplace or their home. that would stimulate this economy. americans do not like to be regulated. they do not like people being there and micro-managing everything they do. they believe in freedom. that would be a huge impetus. one of the things i hear all the time for businesses is uncertainty -- water they going to do next? what will this administration

do to try to destroy my ability to make my business work, the to the early small business? these are the folks heard by regulation more than anyone else. a large business can hire other people in the compliance department, and it is just another body in a big corporation. if you're a small business, it is you, and one or two other people, and instead of selling products or doing modifications, or other things that make your business though, you are worried about government paperwork. you are consumed with complying with the federal government. this is one of the great opportunities to stimulate small business in america, and that is doing something about this regulatory burden. next, i talk about this all over the country, the importance of getting the manufacturing sector of this economy going again. we know weekend compete with

anyone in -- we can compete with anyone in the world. [applause] >> we can compete with anyone in the world in manufacturing. the american worker, the american engineer, the innovator, we are still probing -- proving that given a level playing field, we can be profitable, we can't out- engineer, we can out--- we can out-engineer, out-in of the year -- out-innovate, as long as we have a level playing field. this and we do not have a level playing field in this country. our government puts us at a disadvantage. our tax rate and regulatory burden multiplied by energy costs, the uncertainty of energy

availability has made us -- government regulations in all these areas has made us un- uncompetitive. we are 20% more costly in america to do manufacturing year, excluding labor costs, which is important. people say you need to cut costs in manufacturing and cut labor costs. no, if you take labor costs out, american regulation and taxation in particular make our country 20% more difficult to do business in than our nine top trading partners. that means we do not have a level playing field. what i have put forward is a plan that says, "let's look at what the government does to make our businesses uncompetitive." there is one unique sector of the economy that is at a disadvantage vis-a-vis the rest of the economy. the rest of the economy is not competing head-to-head with china, mexico, indonesia for

those jobs for the rest of the economy, but in manufacturing, we are. they want those jobs. why? because they know that manufacturing is a wealth generator for the economy. they know making things creates wealth. they also know that it gives opportunities for folks at all skill levels in the economy to be able to participate. in america today, we still have a lot of great innovation going on, but that innovation sometimes is made here in this country, but more and more often, it is not. the process and the opportunities are sort of limited -- more and more limited in this country to those who have succeeded in knowledge- based economy. that is great. we want them to succeed, but we also wanted products they are creating to be manufactured here so everyone else can participate. we do not have the horses and we cannot be competitive because someone else

has been as to the punch. but it is -- but if it is government causing the problem, the government has the responsibility to change the playing field. that is why the corporate tax on manufacturers in america -- eliminated. [applause] that is important for blue- collar america and it is important for small town america. small-town america, i know there is a big manufacturing mecca here. but you all know, almost every small town in america is there for a handful of reasons. there was a railroad crossing or an intersection of roads or a mine or agriculture that was processed there or there was a

manufacturing center that created something. almost every little town is built and run some sort of manufacturing and processing. that is small town america. guess what is happening to small town america. it is dying on the vine. manufacturing is dying on the vine. processing is dying on the vine. we went from 21% in the work force down to 9% involved in manufacturing and processing. a lot of those small towns -- the jobs are not around anymore. the kids have to go off to the bigger cities to get the employment opportunities. guess where manufacturers want to locate? they want to locate in small- town america. that is where manufacturers find

the land to be affordable. they are not gone to locate in the suburbs. this is an opportunity for a revitalization for a very key part of america. that is why manufacturing is so important. it is also a important for national security. it's critical components for our economy are not made here in america, with this hostile environment that is getting more hostile every day because of the ineptitude of this president, we are in a situation where critical infrastructure parts of things that we need to be able to survive in america it is important to america. manufacturing is great for detroit and is great for the

entire country. it is great for the national security for our country. [applause] it is not just manufacturers that we give a tax break to. i will take the corporate tax rate and cut in half to 17.5%, a flat tax. he would be able to the expense of everything, no depreciation. a simple tax code. leveling the playing field. how? the little guy and the big guy -- the little guy will play the same -- pay the same rights as the big guy.

they have the opportunity to have a level playing field. simplifying the tax code, one tax credit for research and development so we can keep this knowledge based economy going in america. we will have a dynamic market growth with lower energy prices, energy production, lower regulatory -- maybe that is not the best word. working with business to help them produce with a better tax rate and the zero tax rate for manufacturers. this will get america growing on the tax side. that is only part of the problem. we have to do some other things on the government side. government is hampering our economy and living our potential. it is creating that uncertainty as to what is going to have been

because every dollar we spend is a tax. it may not be a tax today, but it will be a tax at some point. pay it back or suffer the consequences. the other parts of the plan is to do something to get this budget deficit under control. first and foremost, day one, i will propose a bill to repeal obamacare right out of the box. [applause] the biggest issue in this election is freedom. i've just talked about creating economic freedom. the opportunity for everybody to get a job. the other issue in this country

is the reach of the federal government. president obama went out and promised everybody that he would give people the right to health care. careful. careful. when government says they can give you the right to something, we need to remember this. where do our rights come from? they come in the declaration of independence. that is what makes us unique. the bill of rights, if you think of the things that shine brightly in america, it was defend national freedoms in the bill of rights. it is not as the trampling of

obamacare on our economic rights, the ability to choose a health care plan, choose providers and hospitals, to is the kind of health service you want to purchase, you'll have five plans. you have to comply with the government. if you don't, you will be fined. your employer is going to be fined. it is prescriptive, it tells you exactly what to do and how to do it. they say it is not a government run health care system, but i do not know what is. it tells the insurance companies how much money they have to pay out in claims. imagine. if the government tells your business or tells your family how much money you have to spend on food dish year, this is what they're doing with the insurance companies. you have to pay 85% of the money received in claims. 15% to run their business and

make a profit. we would be telling business is how much money they can spend and keep and how to do it? why is it surprising that they think they can tell you -- look at what is by not in massachusetts. the same thing. -- look at what is going on in massachusetts. the same thing. it is not just economic freedom. it is also first amendment freedoms at stake. they can tell you what benefits you will have and what businesses have to provide and churches have to provide. this is one of the most outrageous affront to the first

amendment in the history of our country. [applause] i can tell you, on day one, and if that regulation is still around, it will be gone on day one under my administration. [applause] obamacare has to be repealed, but there is a lot of other things out there that need to be repealed, too. one of the other things is in the housing market. if you look at the housing market, it is a struggle. i am in a situation in our own

house where we happen to buy at a very bad year. the housing value of my house is a fraction of what it was when i bought it. i am not alone. a lot of folks here in michigan, if you bought at the wrong time, you'll be in that same situation. the market collapsed underneath you. what are we going to do about it? when things got bad and 2008, we made a mistake, in my opinion. we bailed out the wall street banks. we said we would make sure that you do not lose money. and then we will regulate you to the point where you will not take the normal course of flushing through these loans and getting through those books and trying to get the housing market to reach its equilibrium. they held on.

it is not going to work. what we need to do is completely restructure the housing system in this country. the first thing we can do to help folks who are under water, who were going to lose money, if you sell your house, we allow you to deduct the losses from the cell of europe -- sale of your house. you cannot deduct the losses on the sale of your house. i think this is the way to soften the blow for folks who will have to sell their house. without affecting the marketplace, without the government picking winners and losers. it is a fair way of doing it. it is a market-based way of dealing with the problems we have in the housing market

today. we have to do something about freddie mae and fannie mac. those are the organizations that -- they are not a horrible way of providing housing support. but what they are and what they became was a politicized wade. they became a way for a group of people -- barney frank and chris dodd -- all the people pressuring the organizations. what happened was it created a bubble. and the bubble burst. a lot of folks bought at the wrong time ended up holding the wrong -- holding the bag. we need to get the politics out of the housing industry. let the private sector deal with

it without the politicians. [applause] dodd-frank, and another when, -- another one, i do not believe in bailout. when i was in high school, we'll look back on the glory days in pittsburgh of the pittsburgh steelers in the 1970's. that is all we had to hang onto. the steel industry was collapsing. we were very proud of our pittsburgh steelers, but we will not -- were not producing a lot of steel. we lost huge icons. all the more gone, no longer

around. we struggled and we suffered, but we bounced back. there are still a few steel companies around. not anything like what it was before. i used to represent the district in congress. there are a lot of shopping malls and other high-technology businesses where they were in the past. but pittsburgh came back. it took a while, but we have a diversified economy. it is a great place to live again. the market worked. that is what i believed in. that is what i stood for. that -- i will build one group of folks and not bailout and other industry. you are either for them or against them, but don't start picking winners and losers.

he may not like my position on bail out, but i have been consistent, unlike other people in this race. [applause] as part of fixing the housing market, we have to do something about the successor to the bailouts. dodd-frank is a successor to the too big to fail philosophy that encourage you to do the bailout and the first place. on obamacare, con dodd-frank, i have been for private sector health care. i believe in capital markets. that has been my philosophy. i have stood for those things, on like other people in this

race. these are the huge issues of the day. these are the issues that will decide this election. it is about to your trust in what kind of america we will have. we have a strong track record that police and you, believes in it for the markets and free people -- that believes in you, believes in free markets and free people. we have an opportunity here with the right candidate and the right message to go out and tell the story to the american public. how we can build a strong prosperous america. we have the plans to do it. if we can put those plans in place and did that last piece, cut the government, i propose a balanced budget. i was fighting for a balanced budget before it was cool to fight for a balanced budget.

back in 1995 -- [applause] 1995, we had an opportunity to pass a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. we came within one vote. most people do not remember that. we came within one vote. i have no doubt it would have passed. it passed the house and we had 15 or 16 democratic senators willing to vote for it. on the last day, the chairman of the appropriations committee, who had been in the senate for 29 years, decided to flip his vote. i had been in the senate for three months, 36 years old, here

is this young guy from pennsylvania, was seen as a troublemaker. i just sent to the chairman of the ways and means committee to jail. we were a bad dude coming into the united states senate. i had a reputation for that. i'd better keep my head down because i have this reputation of being a troublemaker. the center -- the senator lauded by the media. i called for his resignation of chairman of the appropriations committee. why? he betrayed the very essence of what the republican party believes in, which is limited government and responsible

fiscal policy. we should not elect him to chair a committee that spent the money in congress. of course, they beat me upside the head. but i said, this is something we need to take a stand down. we need to fight for the things the american public wants for their government. limited government. we did not pass it and we never got close again. even though we have surpluses, and never could get the votes again. we lost seats in the next election and it was never able to happen. ladies and gentlemen, we have an opportunity again. we are looking at trillions of dollars in debt. we have an opportunity because the american public is recognizing the great threats

that this huge government is going to face. i will go out and i will go across this country and i will argue and i will do everything i can to get the american public to support and rally around passing a balanced budget amendment to the constitution that lennon's the size of the federal government to make import -- that limits the size of the federal government to 18%. if we keep the government limited to 18 cents of every dollar that is spent in america, we will have freedom in america for your children and grandchildren. guaranteed. [applause] that is a long-term plan. the short-term plan is we have to deal with the problems in our budget. i proposed $5 trillion in reductions over five years. no one else has come close to that number. not even ron paul.

i will spend less money every year for the four years as president. we will see the money -- you hear this in washington. the rate of growth will go down and we will consider that a cut in spending. we will see less money spent each year for four years in washington, d.c. we will limit the government. that is what our objective is. when i was born, the defense department was 60% of the budget. it is now 17%. if anybody thinks that is what the problem is, the answer is no. look at what this president is doing. he talks a good game about what he wants to do to prepare for the next war. he is not investing in the

technology to do it. he is creating a serious defense gap in this country. he is doing it because he wants to withdraw america from its influence and prominent around the world. if we do not have the tools to have the influence and to do -- and to have the type of equipment and manpower around the world to have that presence that is necessary that our allies trust us to be a reliable ally, we do not have the capability, we will not do it. we will pull back. what is what's the president going to do? he's going to keep buying votes. what we have to do is again go back to the basic principles. we've got to limit government in the best way to do that, limit dependency on government. that's the problem right now. [applause]

so i put forth a detailed plan of how we're going to limit government, we're going to take the appropriated accounts, that's about another 20% of the budget, everything other than entitlement programs and defense we're going to cut it 10%, we're going to go back to 2008, excuse me, cut it 10% and then freeze it. and make government more efficient, we'll put all sorts of -- there's a program called lean six signal which i signed onto to bring business programitieses into government, start getting rid of all of these agencies and personnel that simply don't do anything except push paper and roar about process. [applause] and then we're going to take on the entitlement programs. means-tested entitlement programs, there's 72 of them. i'm a catholic and i'm told that one of the responsibilities of the church is to care for those who are the least among us.

and i believe that. and that's a real responsibility for all of us. [applause] but i can tell that you doesn't mean it's government's role to take care of the least among us. it's our responsibility to take care of the least among us. and what we find is that when government is doing so, then people who believe and are taught that it is our responsibility, say, you know what? i pay a lot in taxes, there's all these government programs, maybe i just don't need to fill in the blank. we become detached from our neighbors, we become detached from the challenges in our community and the struggles of people within our community. that's not a healthy thing for our country. it's not a healthy thing for our neighborhoods and communities. we need to get government back in the position of being that

ultimate safety net, but being that position is a handup, not a handout. i was the author of welfare reform 15 years ago and we transfer transformed the welfare sthm in this country from a permanent dependency system to one that was transitional. why? because we do the the federal government out of it, we block granted it to the state. we cut it, we capped it. we froze it. and we said so the state, can you do -- to the states, you can do, we can redesign this program, working with local community, working with the nonprofit sector and can you redesign this program into a transitional program. why? becauseers there going to be two requirements. a work requirement and a time limit. that's compassionate. why? because poverty isn't the ultimate -- it's not a disability. it's a temporary condition that if you believe in the dignity of every human life and their ability to be able to pick themselves up and rise through

a struggle, that is the essence of america. that's what makes us great. we need to do that, we need to do that with all of the means-tested entitlement programs. get them back to the state. put a time limit, put a work requirement. and tell people, yes, we want to help. but the best way we can help you is to get you back on your feet so you can help yourself. that's the key to america. we can take these programs and not only can we save a bunch of money, we can save lives. we can transform communities. finally, and you know i always have to mention this, we're not going to turn this economy around unless we do more to help the american family. [applause]

we have seen over the past 50 years the breakdown of the american family. and as a result more and more people on the margins of society, why? because it's just a lot harder to economically succeed in a family where there's one person doing the job that's designed for two. it's no rap against those who are doing their best to try. but it's harder and what we're see something more and more children having children. i was at a -- down in texas yesterday and i ran into an eighth grade teacher in dallas who teaches in a school and her job is to deal with eighth graders, she has a classroom of eighth graders who are moms. a classroom of eighth graders who are moms. and she was talking about meeting the great-grandparents,

great-grandmother of this -- these girls and all of the other mothers and grandmothers up the line. it's generational. and it's not something that we can turn our eyes against, say, well, it's just a problem in a community and we can sort of just worry about everything else, not really worry about what's going on. with 40% of this children being born out of wed lock, 40%. daniel patrick important hand sounded the alarm in the minority communities in america back in the 1960's when it hit 20%. it's now 40% and in certain minority communities and in certain urban areas it's 75% and 80%. families are not forming. and government is there to provide but it's not, it's not the road to success. oh, there will be some that succeed. but far, far, far too many fail. and as a result of that our

society is hurting. we need to have first government programs that don't create that dependency, so there are some things that government does do to create that kind of dependency. secondly, we need to have a national discussion about this. there's a difference between me and the left. when i talk about the importance of building strong families, i don't necessarily mean that we have to have a government program to do it. but we do need to have a discussion about how we can do it. [applause] i talk about what went on in chattanooga, tennessee, which i'll be at this weekend. in chattanooga this they had this problem of out of wed lock birth rates, one of the highest rates of divorce, highest rates of single parenthood. and they decided they didn't -- they weren't aware of it, they were shocked to find out. so the community got together, churches, business leaders,

educators and philanthropists and they came together and they formed a nonprofit organization to promote marriage, to promote fatherhood. promote marriage in schools, talk about how important the institution of marriage is, what it means to be a mother and a father, what the responsibilities are. why it's good for them economically and socially, why it's good for the community. why it's healthy for a variety of different perspectives. same thing with trying to get fathers back engaged. there are things that we can and should do as a nation. we can rally together and start focusing on how we can build healthier families and health evercommunities as a result. you want limited government, you better have healthy families. because you can't have it without it. so -- [applause] yes, i've talked about the problems that confront america. but there are solutions to all those problems and guess who

they involve? you. ultimately every solution i put forward tonight talks about how the great -- greatness of the american people, your industry, your compassion, your willing tons step up when your country needs you, can transform this country back into a country that is growing, is vie is hopeful -- vibrant, is hopeful, believes in itself, not government to take on its problem, believes in informing and building strong communities as the way to address the problems most uniquely that we all have. we all have problems. but the best way to solve them is first at the family. next in your -- with your friends, your church, your community, your civic organizations. that's how america works best. but when you're out there all alone with no family, no church , a neighborhood that you're afraid to go out at night, you feel alone out there and all you have is government, that is

a very lonely place to be. we need to do better than that in america. and we can do better than that. [applause] that's what this campaign should be about. it should be about a vision for america. it should be about high-minded things. things that are high-minded yet very doable and practical. that's what americans are looking for in this race. they're looking for someone who can paint a vision, who can draw a contrast, who can show how we can get from here to there and how each american can be a part of that journey. everybody. this is an inclusive plan. it includes everybody in america. yeah, because i care about the very poor. i care about the guy who's not doing as wls as he could or as

a gal. i care about everybody. i'm a 100%er when it comes to a president not a 99% versus 1%. i appreciate you coming out here tonight and being with me. so i can lay out this vision here on the eve of this election in michigan. because we've seen too much just nasty politics. on issues that, well, frankly, i haven't even talked about tonight, have i? why? because they're not the key issues in this campaign. they are issues that are off and they're irrelevant in most cases. we have someone who has a vision, has a track record to back up that vision, has a contrast to a president who has a fundamentally different vision, has the energy and the drive to go out. i'm not going to be taking any golf vacations between now and

the general election. [applause] my dad and my grandfather, they always said, there's three keys to success in america. i heard it almost every day of my life. work, work, work. [laughter] i heard it every day. it drove me crazy. [laughter] but i heard it. because that's what my grandfather believed in and my dad always threw in a fourth, get a good education. but it was always about work. that's what -- i can tell you, i've been back to visit my relatives in the old country. just the work ethic isn't there. it's just different. it's just different. we are different. we're different because we understand what we're placed here today. we're placed here to provide for ourselves, that's our mission. provide for ourselves and our families. to take care of those in need in our society and help out our

neighbor. to build those strong communities and participate as active members of those communities. you know what? one of the great things about america is we believe if we just do that, everything is going to be fine in america. you know what? it usually is. but not now. why? because we have a group of people in washington who are structuring a government and a system that's going to rob you of the opportunity to do that. they're going to start managing how you do those things and those institutions that you were going to be a part of, they're going away. and unfortunately if governor romney, who proposes a tax bill just this week, who says to folks who are the biggest givers to charity in america, that we're going to limit your ability to deduct gifts to charitable organizations, you want to talk about torpedoing the very civic institutions that make america work at the grassroots level, you just take

their money away. you take the incentives for people to be generous to them and like it or not that is -- that plays a role in the amount of the donations that are given. ladies and gentlemen, i'm not going to do that. i understand how america works. it's not about making sure that my plan is revenue-neutral. it's understanding in your plan how it affects each and every american and the institutions that make this country great. i shared my vision with you tonight because it's probably the only time you're going to hear it. because most of the folks who are going to be romping -- reporting here aren't going to write about it, they're going to write about some controversial comment. [applause] but in one part or another, this is it's vision i've been talking about since i was driving around in a pickup truck in iowa. and you know what?

americans are responding to it. they're not responding to all the garbage, they're responding to a vision about what affects them. that's what this campaign's going to be about. we're starting it again here tonight. and we will finish this campaign on a high note and a positive vision and a winning one for america. thank you all very much. and god bless. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> more coverage tomorrow with

former house speaker newt gingrich campaigning in georgia. he will be speaking at a baptist church in georgia located in the congressional district he served while in congress at 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. coming up today at 3:00 p.m. eastern, coverage of the national governors' association meeting for a discussion on entrepreneurship and economic growth. that is at 3:00 p.m. eastern. nga coverage continues tomorrow cannot live beginning at 9:30 a.m. eastern with a discussion on education and eliminating childhood hunger. live coverage of the national governors' association meeting all this weekend here on c-span. >> one of thest things about writing this book for me was thinking through the way

particularly hal human rightsow were straddled between a moral imperative and aspirational ideals, and both practical and a formal mandate. >> richard thompson ford defines human rights and health reforms can lead to increased exploitation. also this weekend, today at 7:00 p.m., a house historian looks at the african americans who served in congress. he is joined by a former congressman. at 11:00, the life of a senator written by his former press secretary and chief of staff. every weekend on c-span2. >> this particular phone only

wrongs during a serious -- rings during a serious crisis. >> bush supports the death penalty for first-degree murderers. dukadkis allowed first-degree murderers to have weekend passes from prison. >> the accusations made against the veterans who served in vietnam or devastating. >> we can all point to an outrageous commercial or two or three or four. on average, negative commercials are more likely to be correct and talk about the issues. >> will 2012 be the most negative campaign cycle in history? watch this and past panels on

political ads online at the c- span radio library. search, watch, clip, and share. up next, a discussion on super pac spending from this morning's "washington journal." this is 40 minutes. ico" -- supe packs emerge as campaign gonzal. dave levinthal welcome to the program. guest: good to be with you. host: explain the phrase campaign godzilla is? guest: nobody expected them to exist. here they are, playing an incredibly upsize role. compared to what a lot of people thought they would be playing. you have to remember that back in 2008, the superpac did not even exist in the presidential race. nobody had ever heard of it

because the term superpac was not in the english lexicon. here they are and they are outside groups tt are nominally independent from presidential candites. at least the ones that are supporting presidential candidates directly. they can raise and spend unlimited sums of money that can take from -- they can take from corporations and individuals. they can spend that money on communications that are over the advocating for or against federal candidates. it can be presidential and also congressiona hse, senate. what we are seeing is that they are spending, at this juncture in the 20 job election cycle, tens of millions of dollars in doing so in millions -- many cases not to lovingly promote the candidates, but to tear them down in as pilot of terms as

they can with very negative advertising. messages that are some of the nastiest we have seen not only in this election cycle, but in politi over all. host: explain how superpacsre created and why we did not see them in 2008? guest: this all stems from two court decisions. the first was a decision called citizens united versus the federal election commission. this was a little more than two years ago right now. this decided that corporations or unions or anyone for that matter could go ahead and raise and spend as much money as they want to. i directly or through intermediary groups. they could do so whenever they wanted, however they wanted. they could make what are called independent expenditures. these are sort of a half step further than what groups previously could do, which are

called elections and communications were they can use and limited sums of money to make messages that would mention federal candidates. that would talk about presidential congressional candidates. not actually over the advocate for or against their elected or their beliefs. this took the shackles off outside groups when it came to their involvement in federal elections. you had independent expeitures in the past and you had vehicles through which you could come as an individual for example, a pump unlimited sums of money, but there was never a marriage of those two things going on in the way that we see right now. a second court decision, one called speech now forces the federal election commission was the court decision that triggered the advent of the superpac as we know it today. it allow for these types of groups to spring into existence

and since then, we have seen a number of examples going into the hundreds of superpacs being created. some do not do a whole lot but others such as we store our future, which is a superpac supporting mitt romney's -- mitt romney, which has raised tens of millions of dollars and has spent about $25 million in the presidential race for this state. host: we will get into some of those various superpacs and the people behind them. first,e want to let our viewers and listeners know that th can be part of the conversation with dave levinthal of "politico" regarding our conversation on superpacs. 202-737-0002. 202-737-0001. 202-628.0205. you can also send us e-mails and participate in the

conversation that is always taking place on facebook. before we get to the phones, dave levinthal, we want to go through and look at some of the people involved in this and we are using an item from the cbs news hot sheet, me the biggest donors of the 2012 campaign as our leadoff point. let us start with adelson. which tennessee is he supporting? -- which candidate is he supporting? guest: she is a multi-billion there. -- he is a multi-billion are. he has pumped more than $10 million into a superpac called the winning our future. not to be confused with restore our future. he has sort of been the

ultimate superpac man if you will because of the money that he has put in because a and -- and because of the promise of a hundred million dollars. a huge number. he would put that into support newt gingrich's candidacy. it remains to be seen whether newt gingrich is going to be in a position to benefit from that money. his poll numbers have not been greatly lee. adelson has allowed gingrich tuesday in the race at a level that he has been in today -- to stay in the race at the level that he has been in today. when newt gingrich won south carolina on the 21st of january, his success to be attributed to the very negative advertisements that were coming from the superpac -- winning our future superpac. host: let us take a call. the first call for this segment comes from florida. you are talking with dave levinthal of "politico" -- go

ahead. caller: in the senate race in florida, immediately after world war ii, i think it was 1945 or 1946, the incumbent was opposed by george mathers, a returning veteran. during that campaign, the camp of tribunate in an article published on the front page said that claude pepper had been identified as belonging to a thespian society. that ruined claude pepper because the brilliant people in florida thought that was some sort of sexual perversion. i would say there is nothing new under the sun it in this sort of thing. the same thing goes on today. of course, there is a much more

media. thank you. host: go ahead, dave levinthal. guest:-advertisement is all this country intel's. -- negative advertising is all this country in tails. the megaphone that you have in order to disseminate negative messages is around. perhaps what used to be pamphlets, if you go back far enough, you have more -- it has more to y type of media that you can think of. that is not just television or radio, but obviously, that is internet communications and any one who is receiving very news and communication. it is easier now to go ahead and get those messages out, not just in the city or a state, but across the country and do so instantaneously. this does not take a whole lot

of effort when you have a well- founded political operation. you can pretty much go up with the youtube video in a matter of hours or minutes that can be extremely negative on a campaign that you are running against. e message is being picked up by every media organization and the unit host: next up is frank from frazier park, california on the line for independents >> thank you for taking my call. could you comment on "the new yorker" article on the guy who camep with the willie horton ad? his name is mccarthy and man, alive, that is a really good factual article. if you have not read that new new yorker article about that, you have to read it. and one of the things i have been worri about is unfriendly nation nations secretly giving money to

dummy corporations or already rich individuals and we american people could have our elections subverted by a nation like iran or north korea or china. we don't know where this money is coming from. so, in fact, a foreign nation could actually give money to one of these p.a.c.'s secretly and have a mountain of willie horton style ads. host: go ahead. uest: to the question, i have n not read the article but i will check it out. but the point you are making in the question, that plays back to the fact that campaigns and political operations have been using negative advertising for many, many decades, many years

going back. recently on television of course. what is different this time is many of those ads previously were coming from the campaigns themselves. so, when an advertisement that was very negative was going up on the air it was the campaign that was typically the one that was funding it or behind it. not always the cas but definitely the case many teams. that is still happening today but it has been largely the per p.a.c.'s using the bulk of their money to promote very negative advertising. is is particularly true for the restore our future super p.a.c. the romney super p.a.c. and the landscape of campaign finance is changing. there is sort of the bad cops of the election. not all super p.a.c.'s are doing negative advertising but the big radars are -- dollars are going toward that type of message. host: is there any sort of enforcement or oversight as to

looking where the money is coming from? the caller's concern if the money comes from under the table or outside the united states that foreign influence could have a significant effect on the outcome of the presidential election? guest: that is less a concern with super p.a.c.'s because they have to say who is donating. writes a check for $100 million to the super p.a.c. it is a matter of public record. one point on that is that purpose p.a.c.'s are finding a loophole in federal law to occlude there are donors for an extra amount of time. i don't want to get too technical but they typically have to file on a quarterly basis but many in december or early january switched from quarrly to monthly. what that allows them to do is avoid filing the pre-primary

reports they would have otherwise had to file prior to new hampshire, south carolina, florida, et cetera. so it is something nobody could ha predicted but good lawyers were looking at this and they, bottom line, didn't have to reveal their donors until all the primaries were over and we got the numbers on them on january 31. then to the point about foreign less a concern with super p.a.c.'s, but that is a specter that has arisen with n nonprofit organizations. these are organizations that are set up under the internal revenue service's 501-c-4 code. it is an important point. many of these organizations have sprung up, some super p.a.c.'s have unanimous profit arms and these organizations by law a supposed to exist for the social welfare. they are not supposed to have a primary purpose of engaging in

politics. but even members of congress and government groups have roundly criticized some of these groups for breaking that oren beginning in -- or engaging in politics and spending money on politics and the big difference between them and super p.a.c.'s is they do not have to disclose donors. so there is no way to empirically say they are getting their money from domestic sources or foreign sources or wherever because they don't have it tell us. host: david leventhal is a political influence editor for politico. you can find his work at politico.com/politi politico.com/politicoinfluence. back to the phones, nebraska, jerry on the line for republicans. caller: whenever i hear anybody

talking about super p.a.c.'s it is always about the republicans. president obama has super p.a.c.'s. and nobody ever brings that up. he's expected to raise up to a billion dollars for his campaign this year. become in 2008 -- back in 2008 when skrpb mccain agreed to take federa funding for kpeupcampaig decided not to take matching funding when he found out how much money he could raise. i want you to comment about that. nobody talks about how much money president obama is raising in his fund-raising deals. thank you. guest: one of the guys we talked about elier film producer jeffrey katzenberg, tell us about his donations and comedian and talk show host bill maher.

guest: we have been talking about it because president obama ishe number one fund-raiser in the history of u.s. presidential campaigns. nobody has ever raised more than obama did or spent more than obama did in the 2008 presidential election. so, the issue of super p.a.c.'s is not one of republicans or democrats. it is one of the political process. republicans have been quicker to the punch. they have spent more and really ramped up the efforts through and no better number than what we saw a group priorities u.s.a. action a super p.a.c. that is supportive of barack obama that is run by two former aides who worked in the white house. and what is happening there is in january they barely raised $59,000. so we are talking about millions and tens of millions in this super p.a.c. was not able to

raise $100,000 say nothing of $100 million or $10 million. ned? that was of january 31. it was in the long after that president obama himself basically said ok, have been rallying against super p.a.c.'s, i ve been rallying against the citizens versus f.t.c. decision, you may remember the notable speech against outside influence in politics during the state of the union address where he got into a little fight with the supreme court as the speech was going on and a couple of weeks ago he is saying again that big dollar donors whether katzenberg who almost funded about half of what priorities u.s.a. has raised you can go ahead and donate to this super p.a.c. i don't like the idea of the super p.a.c.'s but to compete with my republican competitors and certainly compete in the

general election we are going to to play by the rules that have been given by us even if we don't like the rules. it is, to use a football me metaphor one teen has to go 10 yards for a first down and some go two. some will view it as hypocritical and others will view it the political reality they are faced with. but jeffrey katzenberg big money. bill maher gave a million dollars. host: we want to show our viewers and other listeners a priorities u.s.a. action super p.a.c. ad that is running in michigan right now. this is the group that is pro obama and the ade are about to show deals with former governor romney and letting detroit go bankrupt. a statement that the governor made when the auto industry was in trouble.

>> his message was clear. let detroit go bankrupt. >> mitt romney. no question he made a fortune from businesses he helped dry. >> bankrupt. >> he pocketed huge fees shortly before companies collapsed. bankrupt. >> even when the businesses failed, romney came out ahead. are those the values we want in an american president? priorities u.s.a. action is responsible for the content of this advertising. host: our next call for dave leventhal is michigan, iris on the line for ends. have have you seen this ad and how did it affect you? caller: i just saw it for the first time and they make me sick. i'm so tired of negativity i can't tolerate it any more. i think they are the biggest turnoff for elections that ever came down the pike.

and i think they should be outwill youed. i think it is a -- outlawed. i think it is a shame washington doesn't live by the same rules we have to in the real world. imagine going into an employment office and knocking the people that are in the waiting room waiting to interview for the sa job and there would be a foot mark on your back side. it is revolting. and if the super p.a.c.'s had to pay taxes there would be a shortage of money to give to the politicians. something needs to be done about our taxes. everybody pays rent in the u.s.a. host: go ahead. guest: you do have to wonder if something is going to give after this election. the campaign finance system is in constant tumult.

you have the mccain-fine gold decision. you have citizens united in 2010. if you go back, buckley versus val everyone -- valeho. now we have mitt romney calling p.a.c.'s, though he is benefiting greatly from them, a disaster,is wos. barack obama has been critical of them and is now using them. but both republican and democrat people are looking for perhaps a different way than the situation we have right now. and a suation that is very upsetting to people like our caller. ultimately, whether anything change in the future remains to be seen. it probably won't change for this cycle but it raises a points about negative advertising that they will be so sick of it they want tout restrictions through congress or federal election commission or

the courts will get involved to change yet again the way things are. host: st. louis, missouri, tony on the line for democrats. how are you, tony? caller: good morning. host: your questn or comment for david leventhal. caller: i want to just point something out. after the decision was handed down in the state of the union address the president warped us of the perils of the judgmt coming from the supreme court and judge alito sat there and like not true, no, it is never going to happen. yeah, right. alito has not been to the last stat of the union address. i' wondering if the president got re-elected do you think alito will actually show up at another state of the union address? because i think he is too much of a coward to show up again.

guest: very difficult to say whether he would show up again. he is a member of the supreme court so he has a right to do what he wants to do or not do whether he will attend the state of the union address. to the point of the supreme court's involvement in outside spending and the types of communications and types of political groups that we are seeing right now, there is a school of thought that says the way things are today is actually even if it is tumultuous and even if it is turbulent for a lot of people, it is great for the first amendment because it allows groups, even if it has side effects that are not very tasteful, to involve themselves in the political process in a way they have not before. a lot of policeman are not going -- a lot of people won't but it is out at there. and mitt romney, whene talked about saying super p.a.c.'s are a disaster his prescription for it is to allow political

campaigns, not outside groups but the campaigns themselves to raise unlimited sums of mon to take the money i for their use so that tend of the day when the go up and nts communications go out it is the campaign that will have to be behind it as opposed to an outside group which is often very difficult to track who they areers what they are about, why they are involved in the process and who is funding them. and, as we have seen now with the numbers that are coming in and groups that are funding the super p.a.c. organizations, some of the money, and most of it, is coming from individuals, donors who have to put their names on a piece of paper and say i'm joan smith or jane smith and iave a million dollars or whatever it but many of these donations are also coming from corporations, some of which are notoriously difficult to track down who they are and who is behind them and even in a few cases this is not prevalent but

in few cases they appear to be kind of shell corporations set up for the purpose to engage in politics and not sell groceries or make wages. host: we want to show our viewers some of the numbers involved particularly with regard to presidential campaign fund-raising through january 2012. a total of $315 million has been raised by the existence. the republicans have raised $177.6 million, the democrats and president obama $137 mill n million. the breakdown among the remaining republican candidates, romney has raised $62.3 million, representative paul $30.9 million, former speaker gingrich $18.1 million. former senator santorum approximately $6 million.

back to the phones and our discussi with dave leventhal of politico, call from indiana, possible on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. i'm not so troubled about the super p.a.c.'s as long as they disclose. what i'm troubled with is the corrupt media. you have this guy, politico based on the obama network, msn msnbc. i mean, the head of g.e. is on board for job czar. g.e. got a big deal out of the tarp and they didn't pay no taxes. and all of this money that is collected, where does it go but the media? host: sorry about that, bob. go ahead, david. gut: sure. many people criticize the media

as the unit backward and forward. people on the left think the media often is going it skew too far right and bring up fox news and on the left with msnbc. it is a debate that is out there every day. so, the caller i can only speak for myself. i have appeared on msnbc, fox and cnn and what i want to do and i think i can speak to colleagues is report t news as we can best report it and make sure that issues on super p.a.c.'s and influence mighte that the best they can possibly know about both sides of the coin and i wouldn't want to do anything less. host: we have a tweet from c-span junky, still an individual who talks about representative ron paul saying he gets no money from banks or financial institutions like other ndidates. we've got a chart here that shows the january balance sheet

and money raised and spent b each ofhe candidates. arguab arguably, ron paul's numbers are not as big as the other numbers. but it does show that he is getting some support from a group called endorse liberty. tell us about them. guest: endorse liberty is another super a.c. it is important to note all four of the main republican presidential campaigns have super p.a.c.'s that are independently supporting the campaign structure itself. endorse liberty is the outfit that is supporting ron paul. they have not raised or spent quite as much as the other super p.a.c.'s supporting mitt romney or newt gingrich. but peter teal, founder of ebay he has been instrumental in giveing what is now about $2

million and perhaps more when we see new reports next month to the super p.a.c. funding for endorse liberty has been largely an online advertisement campaign. they have taken a bit of different approach in supporting ron paul. there is a gentleman, abraham, in utah who is really behind the day-to-day operations of endorse liberty. i ha talked to him on several occasions. he's basically said we see ron paul is a different candidate, we want to take a different approach and we. the best way to get people excited about ron paul is not through millions of dollars of television or radio adrtisements but online entkpwpblgment -- engagement, connecting with performance in virtual space. host: backo the phones, tennessee, donaldor independents. go ahead. caller: good morning and i'm

grateful for this kind of in the country where you can call in and put in their this cents' worth. i find it laughable, with all of the candidates, you know, campaigning about fixing the economy and being financially responsib is laughable t about howuick they can burn up other people's money, which is exactly what we are trying to get rid of in washington. they have a little becomes -- check if you want to give a dollar. why does the federal government the dollars and say this is all we have to work with for you to campaign on. i don't know. thank you for your time. guest: the caller was referring to, i believe, a public financing system for presidential campaigns which has existed for many years but is largely obsolete as most of the candidates who are involved in the presidential election this

time around and was the case with obama in 2008, have opted out of the system because there is so much more money above what they could get through the public financing system as they run as presidential candidates. so, the candidates, i would hardly want to speak for them but it seems their philosophy is why would i want to hreupt myself when there is all this money that i can raise because if i limit myself and the other guy doesn't then i'm kind of disarm i disarming when i know they have a big bomb they can drop on me. to the point of public financing, there are many groups that think that public financing and radical reform that would change the way campaigns are waged in terms of fund-raising is the way to go. this has been something that has been notoriously difficult to task if it was easy it probably would have happened. there are other people cming

for a constitutional amendment, a constitutional convention. not a lot of policeman are happy on the right or left with the situation that we have. there are some who are but my who are not. it kind of goes back to the point that you have to wonder if after this election is all done and all over and we have a new president or not, that something is going to have to give and change. host: we have a tweet from spoony 35 who wts to know aren't the big banks and many corporations supporting both candidates via p.a.c.'s hedging their bets? guest: yes, it is a very good point and one we have seen trendwise for a long time. wall street, financial institutions, banks, they are notoriously fickle in who they support. you go back to the 2008 election and look at the individuals who are giving money either to the campaigns or political action committees,

wall street, the banks, were very supportive of democrats, very supportive of became. what happened -- obama. in 2009 or 2010 when financial reform was taking place, wall street, dodd-frank bill, all the things that were designed to change the way the nation's financial structure was shaking out in the aftermath of the economic collapse we had, the money went the other way and the political money really started supporting republicans. this is something that has persisted well past the midterm elections in 2010 and has been rolling along just fine for the republicans. host: we want to show our viewers and listeners an ad being put out by the chamber of commerce. this is attacking tim kean in his run for the senate in virginia. then we want to talk about outside spending groups that are not ser p.a.c.'s and groups

that are putting big money in campaigns that are not presidential. >> i think healthcare reform will go down as one of the great achievements. obama care could cost virginia up to $2 billion. it will kill jobs across america. >> one of the greatest achievements of this president. >> higher cost, less jobs. these are no great achievements. call tim kean. ask him why he continues to support obama care. we needor jobs. the u.s. chamber is responsible for this advertising. host: dave leventhal, talk to us about that. guest: that type of advertisement is notable because like we talked about before it is not coming from a super p.a.c., the u.s. chamber of commerce is a nonprofit business trade group which has the ability, s long as it doesn't exist just to engage in politics, to make political communications like that one.

that is called an election communication. but it with actually go out and say vote against tim kae or vote against barack obama. anyone muching that ad won't mistake that foromething that is supporting barack obama or supporting tim kaine but it able to make a message that is based on an issue that mentions the candidates and go forward and basically get right up to the line of advocating for or again against the candidate without doing it. host: back to the point of the chamber of commerce. guest: since it is not a super p.a.c. it doesn't hav to disclose its donors. we do not know where the money that fueled that advertisement is coming from because whether it is the chamber or any other group that is organized as the chamber or as we were talking about like a social welfare

organization is, they just simply, based on the laws we have right now, which are very contentious and a lot of people disagree with, they do not have to disclose the source of their money and therefore we know less about these ads when it comes to funding sources than the advertisements from supe p.a.c.'s, which are a step further in terms of how overt they may be in terms of support of candidates but the down side perhaps of having to is disclose where e money is coming from. host: union bridge, maryland. bill on the line for republicans. go ahead. caller: yes. what i wted to find out is the amount of money spent on the campaign and amount of votes acquired divided into the

money.for the votes acquired and what each vote cost the campaign runningit. host: when it is all said and do how much per vote is this going to cost the winning campaign? guest: without a calculator and can't add it up on the fly but you have campaigns that are spending a lot more per vote than other campaigns. and it is easier, i think, to calculate this in the primaries when you can really add up some of the votes. i haven't seen the latest numbers for the ones, the and caucuses that were waged in colorado and minnesota and elsewhere. but if you look back to iowa, look back to new hampshire, you had candidates spending

more for the votes they were getting. and that really speaks to how expensive it is to run a nationwide campaign, how expensive to go state by state, primary by primary, caucus by caucus all across the country and be successful in a presidential campaign such as this. this is not a cheap endeavor or operation. doing it on the fly, doing it on the cheap, it is very difficult. rick santorum is learning that firsthand how difficult it is. he's doing a lot better now raising more money than he was before because he has to. host: our last call is homer on the line for democrats from shreveport, louisiana. caller: i was wondering if all of this money that they are wasting is -- why don't they put that in the treasury and lower the deficit? host: we will leave it there.

we have an article here that i can't find but the super p.a. that was supporting herman cain, now that he is out what can he do that, or what can the super p.a.c. do with that? guest: we have a story it was called the 9-9-9 fund. indeed its money to another super pac's according -- super pac supporting the plan. have toc's do not support a specific candidate. they can have a broader approach. they said our work is done. herman cain is out of the race. we will give it to another group with the philosophy

>> tomorrow, nolan finley. also, virginia gov. bob mcdonnell at the national governors' association meeting. and a pollster on the history of women voters and how they are trending in 2012. that is tomorrow on "washington journal." coming up today at 3:00 p.m. eastern, back to live coverage of the annual nga meeting. that is at 3:00 p.m. eastern. nga coverage continues tomorrow beginning at 9:30 a.m. eastern with a discussion on education and eliminating childhood hunger. homeland security and the role of the national guard at 2:30

p.m. eastern. the obama administration thursday outlined a privacy bill of rights at an event attended by members of congress and the private sector. the white house said the proposal would give people more control over how their personal information is used on the internet. the commerce secretary announced the start of a public-private partnership to find consensus on the rules. [applause] >> good afternoon, everyone. i want to thank you all for coming. we have a distinguished line of speakers. we are going to hear from the director of the council, the

secretary of commerce, the chair of the federal trade commission, and then finally from the federal policy director of the consumers union. we are thrilled to have them all. thanks. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you for being here. obviously, i want to thank a few people. i want to thank our science adviser, our former cto. i want to thank the secretary for his leadership on this and so many things since he has come. i hope i am not preaching the

independence of the ftc to thank the chairman. you can find ways to stick it to us if i compromise deal in any way. thank you. i would like to thank the congresswoman for being here and her leadership. i am looking forward to working with her on advancing this blueprint. i would like to think some of the people who were driving forces behind it. larry strictland and cam kerry for their leadership and driving this through. obviously, the industry leaders and consumer groups who made this we have a few speakers. let me make a few basic points. when we ask ourselves, as we