, paul and bill. [applause] >> and thank you all for coming. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> remarks on the second anniversary on the signing of the health care law by joe biden. >> joe biden was back on the campaign trail in florida to talk about the benefits of the two-year-old health care law. this is 50 minutes.

>> good morning, everyone. i am your congressman. it is great to be back. how is everyone feeling today? are you fired up? is everyone excited that the vice president is here with us today? i want to thank you for joining us on this incredibly important day. how many of you remember, two years ago today, the president signed into law affordable, accessible, health care for all? how many of you remember? [applause] today is about the history that was made that day. it is also very much about our future. if the other guys get their way, we are headed right back to the failed policies of the past. you have heard them. you have for them on the campaign trail. it is all the same.

whatever they say about social security, let it go bankrupt. what did they say about the medicare? let it go bankrupt. what do they say about america is a new health-care law? let's eighth go bankrupt. what did they say it to florida seniors, let them go bankrupt, too. do you know what is bankrupt? their ideas. it is up to us to protect the change we fought so hard for four years ago. it is up to us to keep the promises that protect -- protect the promises that president obama and vice-president biden kept. [applause] if we do not get to work today, today, and if we do not get fired up, the historic health care of law, that will be

history. that is what we are here for today. it is my great privilege and my great honor to introduce someone who stands up for our values every day. who worked tirelessly on behalf of floridians. his stand up for all americans, as the leader of the democratic party, my great friend and neighbor, debbie wasserman schulz. >> thank you during much. it is great to be here. wonderful to be home back in broward county. thank you so much. [applause] i am so proud and sole privilege

to be able to stand in the chamber of the u.s. house of representatives, a fighting side-by-side on behalf of seniors, on behalf of working families and the middle class every single day. this community was so smart and so wise to send him to represent you in the united states capitol. thank you so much. good job. [applause] i am so excited, so thrilled to be able to be home. to talk about the tremendous progress we have made. it has been three years since president obama and vice president bijan were elected and handed the largest set of problems at once of any administration in history since fdr. i mean, really. they set about tackling them one by one. we have gone from bleeding 750,000 jobs a month.

three years later, we have had 24 straight months of job growth in the private sector. we have focused on the middle class and working families. [applause] we had a fight her alongside president obama and the vice president of the united states. joe biden and is more than 40 years of public service has given -- i did not mean that as a joke. it is remarkable. from the time he was 29 years old, joe biden has made a commitment to help improve the quality of life of all americans. he has been in their scrapping and scraping and standing up for working families. he is able to partner with this president. through history, vice-president have seen the ups and downs. some of them are fully embraced by the president. others were swept under the rug

or put in the corner. a vice president biden was selected by the president and serves with the president as a full partner and an adviser. he is a friend to all of us here in south florida. it is wonderful to be here with you. [applause] i am so excited, so thrilled that we are here. on the two-year anniversary of the affordable care acting signed into law. that is a big deal. it is very personal for me. a lot of the know that i am a breast cancer survivor. like so many millions of survivors like me. the affordable care act lifted that burden, lifted that angst, so that when it is fully implemented, we will no longer

have to worry about being dropped or deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. [applause] more importantly, for me as a representative of this community, a representative of thousands of senior citizens, a representative who has stood on line behind seniors at the drugstore when the pharmacist brings them their prescriptions and 546 come to the counter and they can only take two or three of them home. they're too expensive. because of the ridiculous gap in coverage in the prescription drug plan. it will finally be close to thanks to the affordable care act. [applause] 3.6 million seniors have already seen a reduction in those prescription drug cost. that is important. it is incredibly important that

we make sure that we continued to transform medicare from a sick care system -- what do so many seniors talk about? how often are you talking about your next doctor's appointment? and that you are not feeling is very well. do know what the affordable care and cuts down? it has made it 8 prevention and wellness program. now you are entitled to a free wellness' visit. you can go get a check of this because you want to make sure it to stay well. that is what you should be dealing with health care in this country. thanks to president obama and vice president biden, we have done that. finally. finally. let me tell you, we have a lot of -- we have a lot at stake in

this election. the other side, mitt romney, the other candidates, what to reverse all that. they talk about wanting to pull the affordable care act by the roots and fully repeal it. and replace it with nothing. no new ideas. they want to take us back to the time when insurance company bureaucrats would be making decisions about what kind of care you could have. they want to -- this take, they revealed, bite reintroducing the ryan budget plan. mitt romney a fully embraced this proposal to end medicare as we know it, to turn it into a doctor program. to make sure that safety net was no longer there for you when you turn 65. that is unacceptable.

[applause] that is why i am so proud to stand with the president and vice-president every single day as the chair of the democratic national committee. i can tell you we will never lets you down. ted and i will fight every single day to make sure the safety net for seniors, the medicare program is preserved. we will never again let you go back to the time when seniors could become mentally ill -- medically bankrupt, to the time when children have to worry about how they would have to care for their aging parents. that is why we need to make sure we do everything we can for the next 227 days to send barack obama and joe biden back to the white house. [applause] so now it is my great privilege

to really introduce the most important person in the room. i think the vice president will agree with that. because it is not the vice president. i want to make sure one of our a passionateidencts, advocate for making sure we have medicare preserved as a safety net for our seniors and he was committed to the reelection of the president and vice president of the united states. is my privilege to introduce your neighbor and friend. [applause] >> good afternoon, everyone. it is an honor to be here and to introduce vice-president bijan.

-- biden. my names is harold goldberg. i have served as the volunteer president of this community. as a native of pennsylvania, i think the vice president and i have a lot of comment. some other things we have in common are even more important. we share the belief that health care should be right in america. right for all, not just for the wealthy few. we both believed it was wrong that america was only developed country in the world where you could go broke just because you got sick. we both are grateful about two years ago, our president, barack obama, signed into law historic changes to right that wrong.

the law is already helping millions of our grandkids. as many of us in no, it is making a huge difference for seniors. one of the most important ways it is helping us is by closing the doughnut hole. that means a lot to me. like most of us, i have had some aches and pains over the last few years. i take prescriptions for some breathing issues. the bills are adding up. as you might imagine, i was happy to hear my insurance coverage, but only for so long.

the last time i went to the pharmacy, i asked them how close i was to hit in my limit. we figured out my insurance will cover my medicine until about may or june. just a couple more months. for the rest of this year, i'd be on my own. that is why i will be spending the rest of the sheer fighting to reelect president obama. -- rest of the this you're fighting to reelect president obama. [applause] the health care law is already saving seniors money on our prescriptions. when it is fully up and running, president obama will close the doughnut hole completely. [applause] when the other guys talk about repealing health reform, what they really mean is that they will reopen the doughnut hole completely.

they are telling us that when the going gets tough, we are on our own. that would hurt almost everyone here. it would hurt a whole lot of folks in florida. it would hurt a lot of seniors all across america. it is going to be a tough fight, and i am glad we have vice- president biden in our corner. when he goes out there and fight, he is fighting to protect our economic security and our health security. he is fighting -- it is my great honor to introduce him to you now. please join me in welcoming vice-president joe biden.

[applause] >> thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much. my taking my coat off does not mean the speech will be longer. howard, thank you very much. thank you very much for being here. folks, this is the second of four speeches that i will be making this spring on what is at stake from our perspective. what is at stake for the middle class in this election. the issue i will focus on today, with your permission, is retirement security.

i have to tell you, i come at this issue from a slightly different angle than it is usually talked about. my dad used to have an expression. whatd said, don't tell me you value. show me your budget. i will tell you what you really value. like many of you, i had the privilege of having my mom and dad live with me in my dad's final months and my mom's final years. neither my siblings nor i could separate the security of my mom and dad from our own well-being. neither my siblings nor i could separate the needs of our parents from the needs of our

children. this is all family. we talk about it like it is an either-or proposition. this is about to we are. this is about what we value. that is how our parents lived their lives. and how we lived hours. i was raised in my mom and dad's house. like many of you, as you grew up, there was no alternative. i think that is what is missing in this debate today. how the connective tissue. the notion we are all in this together. every generation, every generation. there is no question that the

baby boom generation puts incredible pressure on medicare and social security. the number of seniors will be doubling by the year 2040. are we going to strengthen it and sustain these programs of medicare and medicaid now and for the future? or are we going to use these challenges as a pretense to do what so many have been trying to do from the beginning? dismantled both of these programs. i said to the overflow room, which were kind enough to -- i went to see them before i came to see you -- at the end of the day, we have been around enough to know that it is not just what you hear or see, what you feel, what you taste, what your heart tells you. what your heart tells you about whether or not someone speaking to you means what they say.

the one good aspect of growing older is that mechanism gets more acute. we understand better. the president and i believe that every american, after a lifetime of hard work, should be able to look forward to security and dignity that social security and medicare provide. [applause] it is about dignity. it is not just about health. it is about dignity. it is about our dignity. if we had any doubt about the clarity of the choice, just how high the stakes are regarding both these programs, we got a reminder a couple of days ago from a good man. a guy named congressmen ryan. i disagree fundamentally with

him, but this is a smart, decent guy. he is a republican leader. this week, congressman ryan reintroduce the republican budget, embraced by every republican candidate for president. they made a clear choice. the choice they made was in order to save "the programs," the lower the standard of living for those on medicare broader than asking the wealthiest among us to help deal with the problem. you may remember the first ryan budget. nothing subtle about it. it dismantled medicare within 10 years, it was a voucher system. the average senior would be paying another $6,000 a year out of pocket for the medicare

benefits they now receive. their action to the nation was not very subtle either. after an overwhelming rejection of the last year's ryan budget plan, they went to work to drafting another one. if you take a look at it, it did not change anything they're trying to do. if you do not change much, what is the difference between these two budgets? the way they talk about it. literally the way they talk about it. do not take my word for this. all of you are adept with computers. go on line to politico.com. a well respected publication that all of the major newspapers looked to. read an article that was in

yesterday's or the day before. how paul ryan sold his budget plan. he sold it to all of his colleagues by telling them there is a new way to talk about what they will do without getting hurt politically. he told them they could win this debate this time would essentially the same plan if "you use the right poll tested words." go look at the article. if you use words like bipartisan, fix medicare, choice, the american people will not punish you. the american people, though, are not about to be fooled.

i've more faith in the american people that i think our republican colleagues to of being able to cut the wheat from the chaff here. [applause] the vast majority of the american people, whether they're democrats or republicans, not there is a fundamental difference between us and republicans on this issue. we believe in strengthening medicare. they do not. make no mistake about it, the republicans in congress, if any of them get their hands on the white house, i promise you, you'll see medicare ended as you know it. it is not just about medicare. it is about the other benefits for seniors they want to undo. we passed a law to close the doughnut hole.

saving the average senior $600 just this last year alone. that will increase. they want to repeal it. they simply said they want to repeal it. we passed a law to provide for preventive services. thank god my mother had two financially successful children. not me. [laughter] we would get my mom's prescriptions. we would have to lie to her and tell her that it was all covered. we all chipped in about $6,000 a month. at the very end, when she needed some care, she had

somebody there to help with her lunch. she always ask me, show me my check book. she had dignity. [applause] this is about what these guys do not get. it isn't more about whether or not my mother and father got the care they needed. it was how they got the care they needed. when my kids went off to school, we sold the house we had and we build another house. on the ground floor, it was on a hill, i built a whole suite for

my mom and dad. they would not move in. my whole life i had somebody living with me, and i will not do that to my kids. you know the deal. everyone of you feels that. what did they want to do? she knew it would cost 20% she would have to pay to get a checkup. she did not want to ask her kids. obviously, if we knew, we would have worked something beforehand. but she did not want to ask her kids. how many times do you feel that pain? and you do not know what it means? how many of you wonder whether that thing that just happened to you, is a harbinger of something

more serious? you just want to go ask the doctor. folks, these guys want to repeal all of that. in the process comment i would argue, that they will be appealing that sense of dignity. they want to repeal all the things that i have mentioned. the end result, you'll have to pay at least $600 more a year for your drugs, 20% for your visits to the doctor. he will see medicare change. we would be so much better off as a country if we spend a lot less time and energy fighting off these efforts to dismantle medicare. i mean dismantle it. if we spend a little more time together, working to figure out how to strengthen medicare, we

can make medicare solvent again. we do not have to cut it to make it last. look, in our health care law, we have already extended the life of medicare until 2024. we have on coverage and recovered over $10.7 billion since we have been in. if our republican colleagues would join us, we could reduce the cost of medicare by $100 billion just by doing one thing -- saying drug companies cannot charge medicare any more than they charge any other federal program. [applause] they cannot charge our elderly anymore they charge are veterans. that is $100 million. we could save another $20 billion by asking the very wealthiest of us, those who could easily afford health care,

if they have retirement incomes that are significant to pay a little more. that there's a lot more we can do to save this program but it requires someone on the other side who wants to preserve the system, really cares about preserving it and not gutting it. look, we're prepared to sit down, the president and i, inalready have. it's blown up, sit down and work with our republican colleagues. you may remember all of this talk about the biden budget talks with the republicans and we talked about all of these things. but not one single thing was able to get done. but if you don't start from the premise that this program, this program, medicare, must be preserved in its current form. look, folks, social security, social security is in better shape. but hoar again, republicans will go up with an approach on social security that they say, quote, saves social security for the

next 75 years. and they do it by cutting benefits. some salvation. a plan like the one governor romney introduced would cut social security benefits for your kids and your grandkids for a cut by $2,400 you and typical worker in their 40's would get by the time they get it. cut by $4,700 a year social security coverage anyone working in their 20's would get by the time they retire. and here's the thing. here's the other thing nobody's really noticed, governor romney and the rest have supported also a thing republican leaders call cut, cap and balance. they call it cut, cap and balance. now that's another one of those new republican party plans, which would probably the right tested words whofment can be against cut, cap and balance,

except nobody knows what it really means. nobody knows exact wlay they intend because like so many of the most damaging things, it looks and sounds innocuous. let me cut through, no pun intended, and tell you what it means in plain english. the cuts are significant cuts in social security benefits. they'll tell you don't worry, you won't be cut. you won't be cut. as if all you care about is yourself. as if all -- the thing that i get angry about, look at people like you and me and they think all we care about, after all you have done for the nation is that all we care about is ourselves, after a lifetime, lifetime of you not only caring for yourself but caring for all those people you love, caring for your community and they turn around and say no, no, as long as we tell you, you won't be cut, you

won't mind if your children, you won't mind if your grandchildren, you won't mind if your new englander neighbors and friends end up having to pay. they don't understand us. look, the cap they talk about is the cap on what we ask of the wealthiest americans, the top percentage of americans and what they pay to make this country work. and the balance they talk about is they balance the budget on the backs of seniors and middle class americans. why? so that they can preserve -- this is not your father's republican party, guys. so that they can preserve a trillion dollar tax cut. a new trillion dollar tax cut for the wealthiest americans. and that's not hyperbole, folks. that is not hyperbole. that's what this is about. governor romney supports cut, cap and balance and which is yet another zphon station that there is no day -- demonstrate that

there is no daylight between governor romney and leaders facing this country. not even romney's etch a sketch can change that. he's not going to be able to do that. he may buy a new one but he can't do it. folks, we can resolve d. we can resolve the challenge social security faces and do it in good faith. we does it before. i was there. nf 1983 did t looked like social security would run out of money, remember? it was coming to an end. 19 3 i sat down in a room as one of the junior guys with leaders like republican bob dole, bill roth, chairman of the finance committee, president ronald reagan, democrats like pat moynihan and tip o'neill. and we shook hands. we shook hands. everybody gave something. and we preserve the system through 2028. together we solved it for generations at that time. look, folks, you know in your gut, you know in your gut what i

know, it's about being willing to put politics aside. just for a moment, just put it aside for a moment to preserve the single most significant and consequential government initiative in american history. social security. look, some of you remember, i remember, these two guys won't remember -- [laughter] some of you and i remember. we all remember a day when we didn't have social security. we remember a day when our grandparents didn't have medicare. and remember what it meant. remember what it meant. we remember. look, what we need today is just a temporary, like i say in grade school, a time-out. just a time-out. and say ok, what are we going to do to deal with preserving both of these programs? and not dismissing this time, folks. there was in 1981 and '82 and

'85 and '89. because today's new republican party is fixed on one thing, additional stasm cuts for the very wealthy. we try to put 400,000 teachers back to work and 18,000 cops back to work because the city budgets are being crunched, we said carkse we'll have a .5%, .5 of 1% tax on every dollar after the first million you make that.s0 that would have paid for the whole thing. no republican would vote for that. millionaires were calling me saying they were for it. i come from a wealthy state of delaware. the people up there, the people who have the money knew they should be paying just a little more than to preserve that. folks, these guys won't budge a single inch on a trillion dollar problem. look, we know we have to bring our budget back into balance. it was a democratic president who last balanced the budget, i

remind you. and -- [applause] and, folks, the day that president obama and i were sworn in, the day we were sworn in, that magnificent day january 20th looking at with a million people on the mall watching, we were handed that day a guy ganic deficit. and an economy in free fall. and we moved ahead. we moved ahead to get the economy moving again. but we also moved ahead to begin to cut the deficit. last year with the help of my two colleagues we cut spending by $1 trillion. we also made a deal -- we also made a deal with the republican friends to cut it by another $1.2 trillion and set thaup super committee. remember. what did they come up with? nothing. and we're on our way on the cusp of negotiating. i was doing most of the

negotiation for an agreement that would cut the overall deficit by $4 trillion. but the republicans, they walked away from it. why? because they wanted to maintain every major tax cut for the very wealthiest and happen have them move in perpetuity. look, they wanted additional trill dollars in tax cuts and i want to explain, when you say that, it's leak, no, trillion, that doesn't -- i mean trillion, i can't -- can't even calculate this. let me put it this way. of that trillion dollars, $830 million of that trillion dollar tax cut will go to households making over $1 million a year. 315,000 of the wealthiest families in america average income $3.1 million a year would get $100,000 tax break per year for the next 10 years.

look, we're not asking anybody very wealthy to change their standard of living. we're not -- i'm serious. we're not asking them to do anything they can't do now. and 3.1 million, you don't need another 100,000 to maintain your home, drive the vehicle you drive, vacation where you want to vacation. but when we ask you to take a 20% cut or 30% cut in your medicare or your social security or your children, that changes the standard of living. ladies and gentlemen, we don't think it's fair and we don't think it's right. more importantly, we don't think it's in ine in the economic growth of this country. folks, it's simple math. either preserve medicare or fix social security and draw down the deficit or you spend another trillion dollars on tax cuts for the wealthiest. you can't do both of these things. you can't do both.

we refuse. we refuse to shift the burden and responsibility of putting america's fiscal house in order on the backs of those who will have to change their standard of living. who have played by the rules, who have worked hard all of their life and have earned the retirement benefits they're getting. ladies and gentlemen -- [applause] -- like so many of you i came from a family where medicare and social security made the difference in the lives of the people i love the most. i'm not sure as i said that these guys remember what it was like when folks didn't have medicare. but i can remember a lot of you can remember it as i said. it wasn't an era, it's not an era we want to go back to again. without social security nearly half american seniors, 17 million men and women would be struggling in poverty. just that. just that alone. before medicare, nearly half of

all americans age 65 lacked health care. one half of all americans lacked health care. these programs were afforded the elderly -- i don't like the word elderly anymore, man. i'm not big than word, are you? i don't like that word elderly. for years i used to rip up the aarp book. but i'm not ripping up my social security checks, you know what i mean? but i don't like elderly. those of us who are more mature. those of us who are more mature. [applause] but i tell you what, it's about, it's about our independence. it's about the dignity everybody craves. they argue cut noug is the only way to save programs for the next generation. i read an article in the paper today here about that. that's not how i see it. retirement is multigenerational. it's a matter, matters to your

children, if you have a retirement. every one matters to your children. if you don't, your children feel obliged to step up. caring for a parent is a privilege and one that any honorable child will try dwround take. but for some families, it would come at an incredibly high cost because they're struggling so badly themselves. the cost for my family was deminute muss because of the circumstances my mom's four children were in. a lot of families, you know, can't get their kid to college or having trouble paying the mortgage, out of a job and added burden looking up mom and dad and knowing they don't have the health care they need are having to make these choices that you talked about when go into the drugstore, that is something that is multigenerational. when families are stretched thin, it forces very hard

choices. i say families. not when we are stretched thin, when our children as well are stretched thin. so folks, this is about more than the monthly payment or access to health care. it's about who we are. the last thing my mother and father wanted do was be a burden to me, brothers and sisters or children. social security and medicare help them live independently right to the very end because they have dignity and most importantly from my dad's spur tech tive, his pride. when these guys in the name of saving the next generation choose to cut social security and voucherize medicare rather than asking for shared responsibility from all, they're not saving the next generation. they're thrusting an incredible burden on the next generation and thrusting it on them right now. [applause] making it harder for the middle class and time that we know if we want our economy to be strong, middle class has to be

strong. tearing the bonds that connect us generation to generation. at the very moment we should be strengthening those bonds. ladies and gentlemen this year you will make some choices about what you want, who you want to lead the country and who will speak up for you and speak in the way you want. on this and many other issues. on this issue i ask to you do one thing as i said in the beginning, when you look at barack and me, take our measure. i used to say when i ran as a kid, look me over. if you like what you see, vote for me. if not, vote for the other guy. but look us over. and look into your heart. look into your heart. and ask yourself the question after all of the speeches are done, who do you believe? who do you believe is genuinely committed to preserving the dignity of people in terms of their health care and their basic, basic ability to live? [applause] thank you all very, very much. i love you. thank you for having me.

♪ ♪

♪

♪

♪

♪

♪

>> next, remarks on the second anniversary of the signing of the health care law by republican presidential candidate mitt romney in louisiana and senate minority leader mitch mcconnell of kentucky. then president obama announces his choice for world bank president. tomorrow on "washington journal," former army judge advocate general lisa marie windsor talks about the charges against army staff sergeant balse. jacqueline simon from the american federation government employees discusses workforce cuts proposed in the house budget for 2013. and military times pentagon chief andrew tillman has details on the debate between the pentagon and justice department concerning benefits for same-sex military spouses. "washington journal" live at

7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> i remember lying in bed on alert late one night as i heard an argument brewing in my parents' bedroom, only to be shocked by the deafening sound of my mother's jaw being crushed. i remember watching in horror as my mother's head lay on the chopping block of our kitchen counter why my father held a large butcher's knife to her throat as she cried and begged to be put out of her misery. >> for five seasons sonja sohn starred in "rewired" and she started the nonprofit rewired for change to help high-risk youth and their families. >> we're looking for real healing. we're not looking for ok, get your ged and job and you're set, you're off the streets. that means something to us. but what has unfolded is what we want to see is a deep level of healing in the life of a young

person is -- person and also in the lifes of an entire community. >> more with sonja sohn on c-span's "q&a." >> on the day before the louisiana republican primary, presidential candidate mitt romney was in the state talking about plans to repeal and replace current health care law signed by president obama two years ago. the event was held at clearview mall in louisiana. this is about 25 minutes. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you. hi, there. hi, there. thank you. wow. you are very kind. thank you for getting up this morning and i was -- sit down now. sit down thrfment you go. i love you too. who was it that said that? appreciate the chance to be with

you this morning and to chat with you a bit about health care and obama care. but i wanted to say thanks first to scott sewell, who's been my chairman in the states more than one time, second time. this time it's the winner. and thanks to lieutenant governor jay darden for welcoming you here and introducing me. i appreciate your support in this effort. it's important that we get a republican in the white house and get this country back on track with good jobs and a bright future. i intend to be that republican. [applause] this has -- that has been a great experience so far. and i hope it will continue to be so right through november. and i've had the chance to go across the country, of course, and meet everyday americans and learn a great deal about their lives and you come away more optimistic, actually in some cases inspired as you see what americans are doing across the country in tough times.

i -- i'm buoyed also by the results in illinois, good win there and puerto rico. few other states as well. but i was in illinois speaking with folks there. i met one couple that was talking about their lives. they had a couple kids in college. mom stayed home to help raise the kids but now they were in college. she had decided to get out of the workforce again and they're living on a pretty thin margin but she's working so that her kids can two to college without having to amass massive loans. and i thought, isn't that interesting, a mom who's raised the kids is now taking her time away if herself, going out to the workforce and basically paying the extent possible for her kids' education. it's remarkable what people in this country will sacrifice for their kids and sacrifice for the future. have i met entrepreneurs of interest and significance. i met one guy who was an

executive at an advertising agency and decided to leave the advertising agency and start a business with his son. they make amplifiers for guitars. speakers that go with electric guitars. that's what he and his son make and sell around the country. they had two employees but then in the obama economy, they had to lay off the other two employees and so they're just doing it on their own. he did an interesting calculation, by the way. he said he calculated what he has to pay in federal income tax, state income tax, real estate tax, fica, which is the tax for payroll tax, gasoline tax, add it all up and concluded they spend roughly 65% of what they make goes to the government at one level or another. boy, that's not good news. but now another -- that's -- by the way, without the death tax, that's right. coming soon, i'm a -- afraid to all of us.

and then i met another fellow who worked for street of st. louis and he decided he didn't want to work for the city anymore. he wanted to be an entrepreneur and began a landscaping company and he said he's doing pretty well. he's got quite a few folk that's work for him. his challenge is paying for the gas that will take him from house to house and gas that goes into the lawn mower. he also spoke about the gas that goes into the snowblower but not much snow this year. so not doing real well in that front. just amazing, to see people across this country, to see what they're dealing with, what they're struggling with, what their concerns are but very hopeful. people are unhappy with the results that they've seen so far under this president. gasoline prices have doubledthee president, by the end of his four years, will have put almost as much debt on this country as all the prior presidents combined. and of course, you have 24

million people out of work or under-employed. so, this presidency has been a failure. at the center of this failure is this piece of legislation back here, obamacare. i say that for many reasons. one, you notice the white house is not celebrating obamacare today. they do not have any big speeches going on. that is for one reason. most americans want to get rid of it. i want to get rid of it too. and there are a lot of reasons for that. you may see some you want to add to that list. i see medical of uniforms today. you may have your own reasons. it is interesting how many doctors are unhappy about obamacare and went to see it repealed. not just their own profession and their own work, but also

concerned that young people coming up through educated ranks are not going to want to become doctors in the future because of obamacare. that is one of the great disadvantages and threats that obamacare represents. there was another one pointed out by marco rubio, the senator from florida. he said even if it was a perfect piece of legislation, and it is not, we cannot afford $1 trillion of additional federal spending. and we have just learned it is not $1 trillion. it is more like double that. obamacare is massively more expensive than had originally been estimated and we cannot afford more government spending. we also cannot afford more taxes. the president raised $500 billion in taxes to pay for obamacare. you think, that is just going to the companies that there providing health care products, but those companies have to get paid for the products they sell

and they will add to the products they sell the cost of additional taxation. by the way, it is not a tax on their profit. it is a tax on their sales. this goes directly into the price of the goods that will be coming to all of us who use health care products, and at some point or another, that is all of us, so this is a tax on all of us. the president also said that if you wanted to keep the health care you had you would be able to do that. except now we know that they have gone to employers and said, are you going to change things after obamacare gets put in place? 30% have said they will drop coverage for employees when obamacare is involved. for those americans that thought they would keep the health care they wanted, they are going to be surprised when their employer drops them from the health care coverage they have had. this is a piece of legislation

that is very different than what people were told when it was being sold by the administration. that is one more reason why i think it needs to be repealed. we learned some other things about it in the last few weeks. the catholic church is being told they have to provide insurance that covers morning after pills, sterilization and contraceptives. despite the fact that these very features violate the conscience of the catholic church itself. so the legislation not only is expensive, not only will cause people to lose the coverage they wanted it also intrudes upon religious liberty in this country. i will not go through the whole list, but the american people have taken a hard look at obamacare. i go to events now and then and i see signs being held up by members of the aarp. they say, "don't touch my medicare." if i am president, i will preserve medicare.

i will not cut $500 million out of the medicare that we have. [applause] it is critical that we repeal obamacare and also replace it. it is not just repealing it. i am the only person in this race who has laid out what i would replace it with. i want to describe for you a couple of things i would do. the people of america deserve --

you have probably heard that i will give a waiver for all 50 states. the president has been giving waivers to the unions and friends and so forth that y heels -- that he feels deserve a special deal. the people of america deserve freedom and i will get them free from obamacare. [applause] how will you care for the people who are uninsured? what kind of health care opportunities will they have? i will return to the states the authority and the responsibility that states have always had to care for their uninsured. we will learn from one another. we will have good plans and bad plans. there are differences between states. in my state, we have roughly 7%

of our population uninsured. the solution for massachusetts is quite different than the solution for taxes, or 25% are uninsured. different states have created different approaches. i will take the medicaid dollars that normally come from washington and block grant that money back to the lieutenant governor. with those dollars, they can care for their poor. second part, right now, almost all people that have insurance are getting it from their employer. nothing wrong with that. you might wonder, why is it that i buy my automobile insurance myself but my health insurance comes from my employer? a long time ago, we decided to

give corporations a tax deduction if they buy insurance for you. you do not get the deduction if you buy it for yourself. why is that? why is it you cannot buy your own insurance if you want to as opposed to getting it from your employer? what i want to do is make sure we return to individuals the opportunity to have the same tax its vantage the company's debt. i what small businesses, individuals to be able to buy insurance on the same tax advantaged basis that we currently get from employers. let's level the playing field. [applause] i happen to believe if we do that, you will see greater competition between the insurers, they will find different types of policies. we will find them -- people

being able to buy insurance across state lines the way we deal with auto insurance. insurance is a small parts of the cost of health care. the real cost of health care is the provider, the hospital, the doctor, the nurses. i believe that one way of doing that is to create greater incentives for us as patience, as the people who receive health care to shop around. what do i mean by that? i was with an orthopedic surgeon the other day. he said, i found it very interesting, when a person who has a health savings account

comes into my office and i tell them they need to get an mri, they asked me or they can get one at the best price. when i have people who do not have any -- to have already passed the deductible, they do not ever ask me. they will just go wherever because they do not care what the price is. in our health care system, many times, we do not care what something cost because we will not pay a dollar for it. if we do not care, it is going to get more and more expensive. we find health care costs going up and up. instead of the government mandating price and cost control, i would like to have individuals have a greater incentive to shop around. to make this more like a market. [applause]

obamacare, in my opinion, is the wrong direction. obamacare substitutes government intrusiveness for the dynamics of individual responsibility, individuals being able to pursue different options, and for the dynamics of a free market. i believe in consumers pursuing their own dreams. i believe in individuals being able to make their own choices. as i look at this administration, i see obamacare as one more example of a president pursuing his attack on economic and personal liberty. [applause] this nation and this economy is fueled by freedom. free people pursuing their dreams, living their lives in the way they think best, or what have driven america to be the most powerful nation on the planet.

when the founders crafted the declaration of independence, they chose carefully other words. we were endowed by our creator with certain rights. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. in america, we are free to pursue happiness as we choose. we get to select our course and life. by virtue of that, people have come to this place seeking freedom, seeking the opportunity, seeking a brighter future for their children. by virtue of them doing that and coming here with this innovative spirit, they have built enterprises that a change

the world. as you crush that, bureaucrats by bureaucrats, attacks by tax, you crush that innovative spirit, you crush what is that has driven america to be the economic powerhouse of the world. that is what is happening. every innovation is a product of a dream. as someone who had an idea. dreams are fragile. this administration crushes dreams. we have to stop it. we have to restore to america the principles that made us the hope of the earth. and i will. [applause] you look at this administration's agenda. virtually, from day one, everything they have done has made it harder for dreamers and

innovators to pursue economic liberty and freedom. whether it was proposing higher taxes, the president wants to raise the marginal tax rate from 35% to 40%. i told you about the guy making amplifiers. he calculated that the government takes 65% of what he makes. think what that does for the spirits in this country. dreamers when they say, if i am one of those lucky enough to be successful and make a profit, which is not the majority. if i am one of the lucky ones to be successful, the government wants 70% of what i make. i might as well not do it. >> [inaudible] >> if i am successful, i have to pay the government 70%. when you compare the risk with the return, a lot of people say, i will not do it. that is what happens when you

kill economic freedom. i hear how regulators are crushing our capacity to develop energy resources. the regulators and the president said no to the keystone pipeline. bringing in oil from canada. now the president is saying he will build the bottom half of that. let's actually connected to the oil. [applause] most people in this room do not give a thought about something known as dodd-frank. you do not think it affects you all on a direct basis. i am not trying to pretend like i am from louisiana.

it does not affect everybody in the room. [laughter] but it does affect everybody in the room. it makes it harder for community banks to make loans and to renegotiate loans. the big new york banks are getting bigger and the community banks have pulled back. it is the community banks that make loans to small business people. small businesses a couple people out of recession. one of the reasons this recession is been so hard is because community banks about a hard time making loans to these businesses. these regulators, whether it is banking, energy, health care, these folks are making it harder for this economy to get going again. as a result, you have all these

people at of work. people who are seeing sliding paychecks. the median income in america has dropped by 10% in the last four years. people in this country are having a hard time. their incomes are down and the cost of gasoline is up. people are having a hard time. >> [inaudible] >> there is no recession going on in washington, d.c. this has to attend. -- to end. there is that story about him hunting for raccoons. i guess he is fighting with a bobcat up in the tree.

this pain has to end one way or another. this overreaching by the government has to end. we have to return to the principles of our nation. [applause] if i am lucky enough to become president -- [applause] thank you. i will get that waiver. i will go to work to get it repealed and replaced with something that does bring down the cost of health care. it allows free-market dynamics

to be part of health care. but allows you to be able to pick your own plan. by virtue of doing these things, we will reinstate the type of economic freedom that has made america a powerhouse. i love america of. i love what this nation stands for. [applause] it is time to end of this anti economic liberty agenda out of washington. and returned to the principles that make us such a great nation. i will have is my inspiration the declaration of independence. and as my blueprint, the constitution of the united states. [applause] only one more thing i want to say. i need you to get out and vote. you have a contest coming up and i would love to have your help. you have a lot of delegates. i probably will not get all of them, but i want to get as many as i can.

give me a good sendoff. illinois did. puerto rico did. they lowered taxes. by the way, home sales are up 50% under this administration. our policies work. i need your vote, i need your help. together, we will get rid of obamacare. thank you. thank you. [applause] >> mcconnell says the affordable care act was "biggest mistake done in recent history." now he speaks with capitol hill

reporters on the second anniversary of the health care law. the supreme court will hear arguments challenging the constitutionality of that legislation. this is about 25 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> i think kentucky is going to win it. with a coach of the year, not a single one of his starters made the first, second, or third

team. not one of them. not a bad showing so far with not a whole lot of talent. [laughter] we have to talk about somethign ng else. >> baseball? surprised thate there wasn't a birthday cake at the white house to celebrate the second anniversary of obamacare. we have all noticed that not a lot is being said about the new law. people that were involved in passing it. i think there is a pretty good reason for that. after two years, it is pretty clear that it is full of broken promises. almost everything that was said about the law, predictions about

how it would turn out have not worked out. they said it would protect medicare, obviously, it doesn't. it took $500 billion out of medicare. it provided costs for new entitlement programs. they said it would bring about you were premiums, we know that that hasn't happened. they said it would lower costs, that hasn't happened. there are $500 billion in new taxes. they said if you don't like your plan, you can keep it. we know that is not working out. i'd think we can pretty safely say that the reason the american people like this lot even less now than they did two years ago is because nothing, essentially, that was promised

is occurring or will occur. even in the jobs front, we know the number one issue in the country. analysts have said that the law is "arguably the biggest impediment to hiring, particularly hiring of less- skilled workers. the cbo director said that it will remain a hundred thousand fewer jobs over the next decade." so as we go to the supreme court arguments, ironically enough, i just finished a biography of chief justice john markham. definer of a "the fin nation." there were a huge number of significant decisions defining what the constitution means. the commerce clause was a big

part of the number of those decisions. the supreme court and the nation has been wrestling with what the commerce clause means for 235 years. if you think about the argument that will be made next week, he will argue essentially this. if the federal government, under the commerce clause, can order individual americans to buy this product and tell each individual american what kind of product they must buy, because that decision, the failure to make a decision could affect the health care of someone else and is therefore interstate commerce. could the federal government order you eat carrots? could it order you to quit smoking? could it order you to lose

weight? all of those decisions you could make, could arguably have an affect on the cost of health insurance for someone else. none of us know what the supreme court will do, but it strikes me that if this is permissible under the commerce clause, it is essentially gone. that the commerce clause as meaningless and a relic of ancient times. those are the arguments that will be made. i think it will be a surprise to a lot of us and i think a lot of you that the court will be looking at the tenth amendment implications of the massive medicaid mandate in obamacare. in my state, for example, as every other state of the union, the current struggle to pay for medicaid at the state level is

already causing college tuition to go up. the biggest items in every state budget are medicaid and education. as medicaid goes up, education funding goes down. they pass it along to universities and they raise tuition. that is already a huge problem. in a state of 4.3 million -- what are the constitutional applications of that? i am not sure. initially, we thought, the tenth amendment granted to the federal government pacific powers and the rest was given to the states. they may conclude that the federal government could make states do so much that they are

taking over state budgets. i think that was a surprise to many, the court decided it wanted to hear arguments related to medicaid as well. this lot is a mass. the single worst piece of legislation that has been passed certainly in the time i have been here. look at what is going on in europe. we have a debt the size of our economy which makes us look a lot like greece already. and we are adding this on top of it. obviously, our hope is that the court will find this lot constitutionally deficient. whether or not it does, it was still a huge mistake for our country. if i were setting the agenda, i

felt like we would have an obligation for the american people to begin the process of trying to repeal this law. i will throw it open after this. you'll recall a skirmish in the majority leader and i had over scheduling which is not my responsibility. they said we don't have time. i think we already know that we don't have time to do the xm bank, but we will turn to the effort to raise taxes on energy monday and spent the next week, incredibly enough, having a discussion about what a good idea it would be to raise taxes on energy when gas is at $4 a gallon.

i look at that and said that we ought to do something about the price of gas, but it wouldn't have taken very long to clear the xm bank. a significant number of my members were in favor of it and that injured me that we could probably work that can. -- work that in. >> hhs issued a regulation on friday calling for all new health care plans to cover, without copiague, all fda approved contraception methods, procedures, for all women with reproductive capacities. cost for sterilization procedures, for all women. >> i don't have any comment about that. as a regulation, it cannot last week? we will talk about it in my office.

>> experts say that it will send the insurance market -- what can congress do at that point? [inaudible] >> that is a really interesting question. the way forward after the supreme court's's decision almost has to await the supreme court decision. a lot of it depends on what they do. i think most people look at it if they are as opposed to obama care as i am, they believe the individual mandate is kind of the linchpin of tit. [inaudible] discussing hypothetical of what they would do with this or that is probably not productive. as you can imagine, we will probably have to wait to see what the court does. yes? >> on hypothetical, say the mandate is constitutional, what

does it mean for republicans that have opposed health-care laws? >> something can be constitutional and still be a big mistake. this is a disastrous step. even if it is constitutionally permissible to do it, there are plenty of things that we should not do the but they are constitutional. it ought to be undone. >> they said this election is probably the last chance you will have to repeal the law before it goes into effect in 2014. what are your thoughts on that, and what will republicans do? >> is hard to look past the election. the american people will you always hear people say in

my line of work, this is a really important election, but this is a really important election. we've done the country, this administration and its compliant congress in 2009 and 2010 did a lot of damage to the country. i hope the american people will give us the support here in congress we need to undo a lot of that and i'd rather not speculate about what might be the situation on down the road. >> you say that the law is full of broken promises about everything that was said about the law, everything, but would you acknowledge certain pieces of the law are popular an working. >> there are two things that test well as you hear the democrats talk about, pre-existing conditions, and about the ability of young people to stay on their parents' policies until they're 26. look in a 3,000-page bill, i'm not surprised there are a couple of things you'll be able

to point to an these both test well in the polling and i think they will make every effort to try to get people convinced that this 3,000-page bill was all about those two things and they certainly are popular. >> you want to strike down the entire law, would you move quickly to -- >> you're asking me a question i can't answer, or i'm not going to answer. if we have a different majority here next year, we feel we have an obligation to the american people, not a single republican voted for this, to do everything we can to get it off the books and replace it, use a medical metaphor, what we did was take a meat ax to the best health care system in the world when we should have used a scalpel. and we'd like to undo this huge mistake at the earliest possible moment if the american people give us the support to

do it. >> what do you intend to replace it with, if you're able to repeal it? >> some of the things we've talked about which i would view as scalpel type ad justments to the finest health care in the world would be things like interstate sales for health insurance, being able to buy health insurance across interstate lines, medical malpractice, we don't think the problems we had in health care and we certainly do have them, required a massive overhaul of the current system and a raid on medicare and the kinds of cuts they made to hospitals and hospice and nursing homes, you know, all of us know people who are serving on the boards of hospitals, nursing homes, hospice, they are struggling under these provider cuts and every time we talk about trying to get a handle on

entitlements, all our friends on the other side want to talk about provider cuts. pretty soon, there won't be providers to take care of the burgeoning number of people on the rolls. a good example is medicaid which i've talked about. we're adding massive numbers of people to the medicaid rolls. >> senator mcconnel, there's been legislative response -- >> having a legislative response to what? >> to what the court decides, like the disclose act, both forms of it. i know they say if republicans win back the majority one of the first things you'll try to do is repeal the health care law but i'm wondering if there's any sort of legislative strategy or things you can do on the floor even before that to try to make a point about whatever the court decides. >> i think i've alreadyanced that. i think it's impossible to -- answered that. i think it's impossible to know what the court decision will be before we have a court

decision. >> you've mentioned this a couple of times, it's relevant, if not germane. where do you think the budget and the deficit are going to be on the issues you're talking about in the campaign relative to gas prices, or the economy or health care. as you know voters talk a lot about wanting to get the deficit under control, but then confront them with the choices, they don't want to cut medicare, they don't want to cut social security, how big an issue is that going to be for you? >> i think we all know things like jobs and the economy are number one. the obamacare mistake is a job killer, so it's directly related to the number one subject on the minds of the american people. it's not -- and i think they do care about debt an deficit but you're absolutely right, if you

look at what people are the most concerned about, it's down the list. i forget exactly how far down the list. if you're asking me if it's a huge campaign issue, i think it's a campaign issue, probably not bigger than jobs and the economy, certainly not bigger than obamacare. whether or not it becomes an issue in the campaign is an issue for our country. when you have a debt the size of your economy and you suffered a credit downgrade,ers kin bowles called it the -- erskine bowles called it the most predibblingtable crisis in the clint's history. s that big issue for our country. it's not going away and it'll still be there after the election. >> two years ago, there was so much passion with the rise the tea party, had the town hall, the big rallies, thousands of people here at the capitol.

do you think the tea party is as strong as influential as they were two years ago and do you expect to see that passion -- do you think the passion against the health care law is still there? >> i do. i think the passion that brought about the rise of the tea party had a lot to do with the issue we're talking about today. i believe the passage of obamacare, though the tea party had come into existence before christmas eve of 2009, i think obamacare is a metaphor for all the excess of this administration. this stimulus. the debt. the takeover of health care. the nationalization of the student loan program. all of this government excess. i think all the folks who have been involved in that movement understand that the sick single most important thing we could do is replace the current occupant of the white house and it would be an assist if they were to shift the majority in the senate. >> at the beginning of this

congress, you offered an amendment to repeal the entire law, some members of your conference want there to be another vote to repeal the entire law. of course you don't have control of the agenda, but you can press for an amendment if you really try. are you going to try that again? >> this has been an ongoing discussion within our conference about that. we're thinking about it. we already know where everybody is. we've had the votes to oppose obamacare, we've had the vote to repeal obamacare, every single republican voted to oppose the law in the first place and repeal it later. we know where everybody is. but it's a matter still under discussion. we haven't decided yet. >> senator, i wanted to ask you about the shooting death of trayvon martin. the incident has put a new spotlight on stand your grown laws. i wonder if in light of what happened, if this is time to re-examine those laws and whether or not they need to be changed?

in addition, the justice department is now investigating them, based on what you're looking at in this incident, do you agree it's right for the civil rights division to look at it and are you concerned that civil rights laws have been violated? >> it is an incredible tragedy, of huge proportions and i'm glad that it's being investigated and we'll take a look at it as the investigation moves along. >> and the stand your ground laws? >> snavert, cardinal red looks good in late march. >> it's a bit of a surprise. >> i wanted to ask about the transportation highway bill. if i'm not mistaken, you might oppose that. i wondered if you'd say why and the way forward that you perceive on that issue. >> the principle reason, transportation is very popular in our conference but it ended up having some no votes, including my own. my principal reason for opposing it, there was a

provision there, i believe senator bingaman, that would have prevented the innovative efforts of governors like mitch daniels to do outside the box funding mechanisms for their state highway systems, involving a public-private sector effort. wildly successful. yet the bingaman amendment prohibits any state from engages -- endangering in any kind of outside-the-box solution to transportation problems. you know, we don't have enough money generated by the gas tax to take care of all the train structure needs we have in this country. why in the world would we want, at the federal level, to prevent creative and innovative governors from figuring some out-of-the-box way to meet their transportation needs? that was my principal motivation.

the senator felt it violated the budget control act but my opinion was that was an outrage at a time when we ought to be encouraging state governments to engage in really innovative ways to meet our transportation needs and the most successful effort i'm aware of in the country was mitch daniels in indiana, made it impossible for any other governor to do that. >> what didn't -- [inaudible] >> you have to ask the house what they're going to do. they've had a number of discussions about how to go forward on the transportation bill. we had enough challenges other here without giving them advice. >> do you think next week that you'll have to pass the house three-month extension. >> next week what? >> that you'll pass the three-month extension the house has? >> is next week the expiration? we'll do some kind of extension. i'll take one more.

>> a lot of conservative groups are urging congress to -- they really -- >> urging congress to what? >> to -- [inaudible] are you concerned the opposition will prevent it -- >> i don't know whether it's my ear or your voice. >> i wonder if you're concerned about the conservative opposition to the x.m. bank is going to prevent it? >> we could do that quickly, the majority leader inside the to schedule it and he found time to turn to -- try to raise price of gas at the pump and it looked like that could end up dominating next week when we could have passed the x.m. bank probably in a day -- the ex-im bank in a day or. so thanks, everybody.

>> president obama has nominated dartmouth college's president to head the world bank. following the announcement, the president was asked about the trayvon martin case. this is almost 10 minutes. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> good morning, everybody. the president of the world bank announced he'd be stepping down at the end of his term in june. he's been a strong and effective leader at the bank for five years and when he told me about his plans, i immediately began to search for someone to fill his shoes. despite its name, the world bank is more than just a bank. it's one of the most powerful tools we have to reduce poverty

and raise standards of living in some of the poorest countries on the planet. in world -- in a world that's growing smaller and more connected every day, that's a critical measure, not just for those who are struggling, but for all of us. when we reduce hunger in the world, or help a farmer recover from a flood or drought, it strengthens the entire world economy. we put an end to a preventable disease, all of us are safer because of it. when an entrepreneur can start a new business that creates jobs in their country but also opens up new marks for our country, and ultimately when a nation gos from poverty to prosperity, it makes the world stronger and more secure for everybody. that's why the world bank is so important. that's why the leader of the world bank should have a deep understanding of pote the role that development plays in the world and the importance of creating conditions where assistance is no longer needed. i believe that nobody is more

qualified to carry out that mission than jfment jim -- than dr. jim kim. it's time for a development proppingsal to lead the world's biggest development agency. biggest development agency. that's why i'm nominating dr. jim kim to lead the world bank. he's spent two decades develop ing services around the world. he led the world health organization campaign to treat three million patients with h.i.v. aids. -- with hiv-aids. i've made hiv-aids and fighting that disease and world health a cornerstone of my agenda, building on outstanding work dobe by president bush. we do this because it's the right thing to do and also because healthy populations enable growth and prosperity. i'm pleased that jim brings

this particular experience with him to his new job. he was also chair of the department of health and social medicine at harvard medical school. he's earned a mcarthur genius fellowship and for the last three years served as president of dartmouth college. after immigrating to this country at the age of 5 if korea, he became president of his high school class, captain of the football team, i just found out he has a five handicap in golf, i'm a little resentful about that last one, but he does it all. he's worked from asia to africa to the americas from capitals to small vill annals. his personal story exemplifies the diversity of our country and anyone can make it as long as they're willing to work hard and look out for others. this makes him ideally suited to forge partnerships around

the world. ic not be more pleased to nominate jim for this job. i i think i can speak for secretary clinton and secretary geithner when i say we look forward to working with him. i want to thank bob zellic for his hard work. over the last five years, he's made the bank more transpanche, shored up progress in places like afghan, he's raised billions of dollars to help some of the world's poorest communities. jim is the right person to carry on that legacy and i know his unique set of skills an years of experience will serve him well. i'm grateful to him for his willingness to serve. i do not think that the world bank could have a better leader. thank you. >> thank you. >> all right. >> would you speak about the lingering racism being charged

in the stand your ground law, could you comment on the case of trayvon martin? >> i'm head of the executive branch and the attorney general reports to me, i have to be careful about my statements so we're not impairing any investigation that's taking place right now. but obviously, this is a tragedy. i can only imagine what these parents are going through. and when i think about this boy , i think about my own kids. and i think every parent in america should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this and that everybody pulls together, federal, state, and local, to figure out exactly how this

tragedy happened. so i'm glad that not only is the justice department looking into it, i understand the governor of the state of florida has forled a task force to investigate what's taking place. all of us have to do some soul searching to figure out how does something like this happen? that means we examine the laws and the context for what happened as well as the specifics of the incident. my main message is to the parents of trayvon martin. if i had a son, he'd look like trayvon and you know, i think they are right to expect that all of us as americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves and that we're going to get to the bottom of exactly what bottom of exactly what happened.

>> dr. kim is a korean-born physician and has done a lot of work with hiv-aids. in this portion he talks about the role of churches in preventing hiv-aids. >> let me just say, the american -- if you call evangelical churms the american conservative organization, you can trace their participation in a number of ways. i credit them with bringing to the attention of president bush

and jesse helms an others the problem of h.i.v. deaths in poor countries and they are the ones who really him move forward on the program. they have played an extremely important role on bringing attention of the number of deaths in the epidemic. they were losing missionaries and the stars of their work in poor countries. i commend them on that. in terms of the role of conservative organizations in areas like prevention, what we know is that we will never really know for sure exactly what particular intervention led to a particular change in a person's behavior and so what we recommend is that the full range of prevention interventions must be utilized. this is abstinence messaging certainry for children, behavior change when it's relevant, when it's relevant and can be helpful, and condom

use. we know that condoms prevent the spread of h.i.v. very effectively. any time you take one or the other out of it for ideological or religious reasons, you're putting a country at risk are there particular conservative groups who want to focus more on one than the other? yes. there's no question there are. there are rupe groups we would like to -- who would like to see abstinence only programs. to which we say, you can do that but you're pulling three legs out from underneath a four-legged chair. >> you can see the entire event with dr. kim on c-span.org. the schreck of the world bank president will be made next month by the bank's 25-member executive board. the united states has the world's largest economy and has the largest percentage of the votes. dr. kim is expected to travel on the world -- around the world on a listening tour ahead

of the vote. next a forum on a program to train and arm airline pilots, then remarks on the sec anniversary of the signing of the health care law by vice president biden in florida and republican presidential candidate mitt romney in louisiana. >> on monday, the supreme court start there's days of hearings on the constitutionality of the new health care law. hear the oral argument for yourself in its entirety as the court releases audio around 1:00 p.m. each day. on c-span.org, listen and add your comments. coverage starts monday live on c-span with washington journal and continues throughout the day and the ten the oral argument on c-span3. >> as a genetic scientist who finally nailed down a rough day for the day -- -- for the day

h.i.v. started, describes the world as tinderbox and moss. most of the world is moss, there's not much h.i.v., but some places are a tinderbox. so you say, what are the factors that keep the virus moving and what can we do as a world to end it? >> on "afterwords," author craig timberg tracks the spread of aids. >> in a moment a heritage foundation forum on arming airline pilots. funding for the program is being cut and that issue generated this exchange between homeland security secretary napolitano and minnesota congressman chip cravaack in a house hearing on the 2013 budget request. >> thank you, madam speaker, for -- madam secretary, for

being here today. the budget cuts the flight deck rah training program from $25 million to $12357b9 million. this means people may out of pocket than it costs for them to be fmbing fdo. for each ffdo flight to provide an officer costs the nation $15 million. that's how efficient the federal flight deck program is. i have to be to believe that is probably one of the most cost effective programs mt. united states government. these guys basically volunteer their time and money to be a vital deterrent to the -- to our country. frankly, they're the last line of defense when it comes to air piracy in this country, for flying. my question would be what would

you -- what -- did you make the cut? did it come from the president? where did this come from? >> the reduction for the federal flight deck officer program is predicated on the fact that the program is not risk-based. and you will have an ffdo just whether somebody is on a flight or not and we are moving in the t.s.a. to risk-based systems, those are the ones we're going to put money into. >> i fully agree with are iffing of based systems but i also fully blev a $15 federal flight deck officer is the last line of defense on an aircraft, is absolutely essential. would you agree they would be the last line of defense? >> there are many layers of defense. before people even get their ticket. up with of the things i continue to emphasize is, you know, the check point at the gate which causes -- has caused some concern is only one of other many layers.

there's a lot of things. the ffdo's have been useful, that's true. i don't know about the $15 figure but it is a program as we look around the universe of things we want to do in the aviation environment, like i say before, given -- we have to find places to cut, that was one of them because it's not risk based, that was put on the table. >> yes, ma'am, i fully understand risk based but again i ask the question is a federal flight deck officer the last line of defense for our traveling public. >> i think the armed cockpit door probably is. >> speaking of the -- as a 17-year pilot, ma'am, and also as a federal flight deck officer, i know about the cockpit door. and i will tell you, ma'am, speaking from the position that i've flown as a pilot and a federal flight deck officer, you may think the flight deck door is the last line of

defense, but it's that armed pilot in the cockpit that will be the last line of defense. thank you for your comments, though. is it your intention that this program be phased out? >> i think as the budget request shows, it's our intention to reduce it, yes. but not -- we have not predicted its demise. we just think we can do it with less. >> let me expound on that. what kind of message do you think it sends to pilots who are willing to join this program on their own dime, pay for their lodging to pay for the privilege and honor of protecting their fellow citizens how do you think it's going to affect the program? >> representative, obviously in a difficult budget, we had to make difficult decisions and this was one. >> again, ma'am, going for the last line of defense for the most efficient program i think

probably that you have in protecting the traveling public, i would strongly encourage you to re-evaluate that position. also it's come to my attention relatively recently, in line with the president's budget request, no rad proposed two 24-hour sites, duh luth and langley to be eliminated. the 148th duh luth were just chosen to be an active association, active duty combines with the air national guard there. and now they're pulling a vital mission from this -- from these two fighter wings. how is this going to affect you in responding to threats? after 9/11, these guy rrs flying 24/7. it's not only that they protect the northeastern sector of the united states but they deploy in a lot of places. my time has expired, but can you comment on that quickly? >> there are several other

similar type things around, particularly the northern border, but they have in the analysis that's been done, those operations can be covered from a consolidated center elsewhere. >> acreage preservation of a federal program that trains and arms airline flight crews. operating since 2003, the program would be cut in half under the budget request. he says are the pilots are the last line of defense against terrorist attacks. the cuts would effectively kill the program. his remarks are followed by a panel of speakers who also oppose the cuts. this is about 90 minutes.

>> let me run over the logistics before we get started. the congressman will make some remarks and then he will take some questions and answers. he will talk and then he has to run and catch a flight. we will do a quick chinese fire drill and bring up the following panel to discuss the remainder of the time. we are really pleased the congressman is hosting the event. it has been over one decade since september 11. we have learned so much on how to make this nation safe. and preserve our liberties and keep our economy moving. we have thwarted at least 45 terrorist attacks since 9/11, all but three of those were people doing their jobs. we know what works and what does not. when you start to see your

government do things that does not make common sense that are actually walking away from the kinds of things that are proven an effective, it is very frustrating. to take a timeout and talk about one of those things today is really worthwhile. thank our congressmen and our panel to do this. it is my honor to present chip cravaack. he has experiences as a navy pilot and also in northwest airlines pilot. that gave him the opportunity to see and experience and live in many parts of the united states and traveling around the world. wisely, if any of you have been there he decided to make northeast minnesota his home and represent the eighth district from that state. he was honored with several

awards including the joint service commendation medal. he has a bachelor of science degree from the united states naval academy. that is okay, even though i went to west. my wife went to the naval academy. from themaster's a university of west florida. he has attended the naval war college in the national defense university. we could not ask anyone with a better resume to talk about the issue. please welcome the enjoining the congressman. [applause] >> that is okay. not everybody can make it into the naval academy. i would like to tee why for coming here today. i would like would likeed fuller for all the work he does at the heritage foundation.

i would like to take the time to savor the conversation to thanked mike karn and tracy price. the advocate's currently working for all the work you have been doing as well. how this all started. i had my eight-month old and my arms. the baby sitter came in and said, there is an airplane that hit one of the twin towers. i said, they must've gone a little too close for a little sightseeing trip and hit one of the towers. she said, nope. it was a big airplane. i am thinking, i am thinking all

of the approaches. i said, how could that have happened? i am reaching through all the scenarios in my mind how that could possibly occur. then i turn on the television and i saw the second jet hit. i had my son in my arms. i turn to my wife. i said, our nation is under attack. that is how it started. of course, i was glued to the television. little did i know i had lost two friends that day. this is personal for me. my country was under attack, and i lost some friends. when i heard secretary the peloton no and the most recent security brief marginalize the dedication, the efforts, and

quite frankly the necessity of the federal flight deck program, i took that personal as well. one of the three things i would like to touch upon today is what it means to our national security, and the benefits of the ffdo program and the challenges i see on the horizon. 9/11 woke us up. as a pilot who flew countless hours going through countless amounts of security, we knew that our security was a little lax. this was a reality check. nowhere in any scenario we had ever thought about what we have thought that aircraft would have been taken over by terrorists and used as a weapon of mass destruction. the reality now as it was then is that we live in a very

dangerous world with very --. and morphing threats. while screening at the airports can produce the -- can reduce some threats, the enemy is constantly probing our weaknesses. i think we are doing a pretty good job for passengers coming through the airport. you have to remember the threat does not stop there. the threat is for anybody who is in the shadow of the aircraft that can possibly touch the aircraft. there are many and varied threats associated when a passenger gets on the aircraft and a pilot fires of the engines. we need the assets. we understand we are going through a wrist -- risk-based and intelligence based screening. we focus our limited resources on known or unknown threats.

we must also -- it is imperative that we have the safety net that is necessary in case of a failure of that system. in conversations this morning, we have seen failures within the systems for those who touch the airplane. we cannot seem to pick up a paper without seeing how drugs are being placed on our aircraft. how packages are being stolen. they are the last line of defense and the chief deterrent. ultimately, they are the ones that are going to stop the terrorists from entering the cockpit and allowing that aircraft to be used as a weapon of mass destruction.

terrorists have to consider a couple of things nowadays. before the walk on the aircraft and they sit in that cabin, they are not quite sure if they are surrounded by multiple officers that are willing to take charge if need be. even more so, behind the cockpit door there may be a federal flight deck officer ready to greet them with a 40 caliber. aviation security is a multilayer approach. on the ground and in the air. as soon as you buy your ticket, security starts. you go through automatically -- you start going through security measures. as much as the passengers that we take a look at them, i must reemphasize those that get into the shadow of the aircraft as well, it is equally important

taking a look at. we may have a passenger come through our screening process without a problem. if there is something on the aircraft that they can attach themselves to, that is where the threat occurs. that is where the flight deck officers come into play. in the air, passengers actually are the heroes. we saw that happen on flight 93. in other naval academy graduate at the helm of that aircraft. federal air marshal's -- that is the next -- to protect the cockpit from anyone entering the cockpit. the reinforced cockpit door is a deterrent, but it is the federal flight deck officer behind the door that is going to stop the threat. reinforced doors will slow the progress -- slow the progress of any person who wants to commandeer the aircraft.

it will be the federal flight deck officer the stops the threat. they are 18 who were very well together. air marshals are a vital part of that. the federal air marshal program, even to get in you have to be the best shot of any federal law enforcement. they are only present on a limited number of flights. thatffdo's expand deterrence even more and the ability to respond to the unexpected threat, which may be the achilles heel ave intelligence based, risk-based program. $15 per flightt segment. let me say that again. to protect an aircraft, to protect possibly the potential of thousands of people, the

federal flight deck officer costs $15 per flight. the the actual numbers are classified, currently at 500 as defend over 100,000 flight segments per month. 1.5 million flight segments per year. have beenof fdo's certified to the program despite the budget has not grown since its initial inception. currently, ffdo's are not allowed to receive reimbursement to many of the expenses for their own training. for example, i am a former federal flight deck officer. i went down to new mexico for training down there. i did it on my days off. it was my own cost to go down there to do that. to requalify, twice a year -- i want to remain proficient in my

accuracy. i spent money on my own ammunition to make sure that when i qualify once again in six months, i do well. i take that as a personal goal to ensure i am the best federal flight deck officer that i can possibly be. the federal flight deck officer doesn't on their own time and not compensated for what they do. they would because they are americans. they do it because of the honor they feel they must protect their passengers and their federal americans. -- fellow americans. many undergo personal expenses. for pilots if you are not flying, you have already gone from your home 16 days a month. going the way to spend their time so they actually pay for the privilege of defending this great country of ours. despite all this, even with the challenge that the federal flight deck officers have, if it

has been growing of dedicated volunteers that have been sacrificing to protect americans in the flying public. they consider it an honor to do so. the first 44 federal flight deck officers that graduate in 2003 at a budget of $10 million for it that grew to $25 million in 2004 and kept that level since 2004. but this funding is being eroded by a carved out for crew defense, about $1.4 million out of that program. last year, due to the funding levels, not one federal flight deck officer could have a background check. this is a challenge for us. the federal flight deck officer program is not expanding. it is contracting under the current open administration, for proposing to cut the program in half. sending it to an eventual course, in my opinion, of elimination.

janet napolitano hazmat is quite clear to me that they wish to erode the program down and cutting back and does not fit now the risk-based intelligence based security they're looking at. while i applaud the secretary, again, using this analysis, they're always must be a safety net. to capture those who might slip through the security based screening. but even as we focus on threats of higher unknown risk, and we must always remember that we cannot allow anything to slip through the cracks. one of the bus cost-effective ways to reduce the risk, increased deterrent, and also respond to the safety of passengers and the flying public. the secretary also fails to understand the thread. the threat does not necessarily come through the terminals of an airport.

the threat is in the shadow of the airplane as well it is a double threat and all threats must be analyzed. that is what the safety net must always be there. in the testimony before the committee of homeland security, she said the armed cockpit door was the last line of defense. as i have already said, it is the armed pilot that will most definitely be the last one -- line of defense from using an aircraft as a weapon of mass destruction. that is why i'm very proud that our staff will be introducing very soon a fully offset the bill, doubling the program from $25.5 million to $50.5 million for fiscal year 2013. our goal is to enable the program to cover all qualified volunteers and increase the security level for the national public. i don't want anyone to be

holding their kid and sing another airliner go into a building. passengernt another from minnesota say, let's roll, and overtaken airplane knowing there when the plunge to their own deaths to protect the united states. that should never occur. at $15 a flight segment, i think we can pay for it. thank you. [applause] >> we have time for some questions. if you have a question, raise your hand. wait for the microphone. also, state your name and affiliation. >> i am brian from the heritage foundation. thank you for coming and getting this presentation.

my question is, you touched on this a little bit, but what can congress do to fight back? clearly, the obama administration wants to end the program. the evidence is they want to cut the program in half as part of their budget. janet napolitano has publicly stated her intent to not include an her version of a risk-based system. how can congress fight back? >> we're introducing a bill to counter it right now. the program has remained stagnant the last years. with no new flight deck officers come on board. the program, not only stop the threat program, but also a chief deterrent. the terrorists will think twice before they realize when the open that cockpit door that they will have an armed, highly trained pilot behind it. what we need to do on the level of congress, introducing this

bill and lobbied hard on the hill for this program. quite frankly, when i come to congress, and i understand we're in a budget crunch, that is why this is offset by another program within the tsa for over to personnel. but this program is the central part of the safety net program. we cannot be this on the hill and i think i can get a lot of colleagues to sign and push this through. >> thank you for being here. you mention background checks were no longer being performed on pilots. how long has that been going on? was that a function of at defunding aspect of the program or just administration? >> the next panel will probably be better to ask. as i can understand, there has

been a backlog because of the amount of funds available, the backlog of getting new pilots into the program because of the background checks. background checks are expensive. we want to make sure those flying the aircraft with a weapon should be doing just that. i strongly support having a full background check, but give us the funds to do it to make sure we can get remained in a program and increase it. again, it is the least expensive program i think on the hill. i cannot see any other program for $15 a flight segment to protect an aircraft from being used as a weapon of mass destruction. i do not lead to underestimate the deterrents that a federal flight deck officer has. just the sheer program itself,

knowing there may be an armed highly trained pilots on that flight deck, would -- would achieve deterrence that is from a terrorist thinking twice about using a commercial airliner as a missile. do not underestimate that. if they see the program is going to be cut in half, to them, that is a window of opportunity. >> congressman, i went as to a broader question about tsa. the bureaucracy now has a bigger budget and the fbi, one of the largest federal work forces. could you give a broader assessment of tsa, where you see it going in the future, things should be doing or not doing, the strengths and weaknesses? >> with any program, there are

strengths and weaknesses. what the tsa does it is a highly valuable function and they do it well, but we have to be smarter and use a risc-based on intelligence-based issue and i agree with that. one bill we were able to pass, for example, military people coming home on orders in uniform with their id cards are going to be treated like the heroes they are and be a to go through expedited screening process. the same type of expedited screening process of their frequent-flier travel and programs have. instead of having our troops come home from afghanistan just trying to get home to their families, you see them in their stocking feet and t-shirts going through tsa. that is not how we treat our returning warriors. using risc based analysis so we can focus on the unknown or

known risks and then allowing those considered low risk go through expedited screening process. using that type of security basis, that is why it is absolutely imperative that we strengthen the safety net associated with it. that is why the program, dollar for dollar, probably has the most effective way of knowing this as a deterrent and also to stop the threat. >> thank you very much for your time, sir. my name is mark weiss. i am with the spectrum group in washington. i used to be the deputy chairman of security for the pilots at american airlines. in the past, the program had always been treated as a really unwanted stepchild. it never really had the support from the tsa, no matter who the

demonstrators seemed to be. at this point in time, as the fan program becoming a little more robust, have they been more supportive of the ffdo program? >> they realize, the men and women that are federal air marshals, they do a fantastic job. there on the road constantly. they have a tough life. i respect highly what the fams do. do not take away from this that i would want to cut the fam budget or degrade what they do. i do not. they work in tandem. i do agree with your analysis that the ffdo program was not embraced, so to say, by the tsa.

that is why there is some discussion that i would like to see possibly and working within congress and taking the program out of the tsa and possibly putting it in the doj. i think it might be the competing interests there might be alleviated. >> any further questions? join with me and thanking the congressman. [applause] >> i am excited to introduce the panel. these guys have done this for a

living. i will introduce them all right now and order and then we will run down the road and taken to their comments, then open it up to the floor for questions and comments but al aitken is retired marine corps botanic colonel, a veteran pilot, -- retired marine corps colonel, a veteran pilot. retired from american airlines. he was one of the founders and principal leaders and pushing for the establishment of the program. then we have mark karn. his the security director for the coalition of airline pilots association and secure the

chairman for the allied pilots association and also an american airline pilot and has been flying for 14 years. tracy price is commercial airline pilot for the past 25 years, 19 years as a boeing 737 capt. for a major u.s. airline and also founding publisher and chairman of national organization that did help create the ffdo program. you have a wealth of experience and not just flying, but also with the program itself. i cannot think of better panel of experts. let's just go in order. >> do you want us at the podium? >> it is up to you. i tell you what, i will just sit right here. thank you very much. i want to discuss a little bit about the inception of the program, the history of it. the obama administration had institutional hostility toward

the concept armed pilots, specifically the ffdo program since the beginning. i was chairman of the washington pundits for the allied pilots association back in september 2001. after the aerospace reopened, approximately four days later, i was on one of the first flights out of washington for dallas for our first board of directors meeting at which we set policy at the apa with a goal to arm as many of the united states commercial airline pilots as possible to defend against another repeat of the 9/11 attacks. there were other efforts going on at the same time. the air line pilots association, alpa, some in the leadership said we cannot be wyatt earp and sky king at the

same time. the vast majority of alpa pilots disagree. apsa was derived from that. my friend creek to well over 55,000 members, about half of which were pilots, but the rest were just cooks and bottle washers from all over america who thought pilots ought to be armed. at the same time, senator bob smith from new hampshire with young brian darling working for him introduce legislation to armed america's airline pilots. that all resulted in the transportation security act transportation security act 2001