what is he doing that there's no chance of winning? he is in debt. >> what else is he going to do? a shout out to the birthday boys. jonathan martin tweeted earlier that president obama gave newt gingrich incentive to stay in the race today. newt can push back on that and halt and people will post his response. he is looking at any reason to stay in. he is as close to a suspended campaign is anyone i can remember. >> we have a good video that

looks at the greatest hit spots of new gingrich. the polls have closed in d.c. and maryland. polls close at 9:00 in wisconsin. ap has just called maryland for romney, no shocker. mike was right on the demographics. as we cue the greatest hits of newt, i want to ask, how much money does santorum have, and why does he struggle? >> maybe $2.50 million, but anything can happen between the end of february and now. every time santorum struggles in a contest, it will be harder and harder for him to make money in this race. we are continuing to seek that

santorum is struggling, having a hard time raising money from donors. even his big donors are starting to look around and say what is happening here? his biggest donor win out and started spending money, maybe because he did not feel the super pac was doing a good enough job of spending money. there is some jockeying in the santorum world in terms of whether he can raise money and whether his biggest donors will continue to fuel the super pac. the new tech and we will have a surprise birthday guest on set. [video clip] >> are you calling mitt romney a liar? >> yes. can we drop a little bit of the

pie as baloney? now it is desperate baloney. >> did you owe a half-million dollars to a jewelry company at one point? >> i am very concerned about not zany.ring to be kazem we will have the first american -- the first base on the moon and it will be american. >> you got a fancy new birthday suit. you just turned 18. i want to move away from newt because he has no chance of winning. as he helped or hurt himself with the campaign? i read a piece recently where republicans are wringing their hands saying he is really in jeopardy.

>> i certainly agree with that. i think if he had gotten out of the race sometime in february, there would have been a certain quality of dignity to his campaign. my colleague would say, you need to know the right time to leave the bar, and newt has stayed in the bar to long. >> we treat him like he is relevant, to whatever small degree, and he will keep hanging in there. >> let's talk about president obama for a second. i want to get back to my favorite topic, which is how unbeatable is president obama? i think he is much more at beatable and people think. independents remain skeptical with him. the debate went to the heart of

his policy, his landmark piece of legislation. independents did not like it. there is no way to spin it as anything other than a big loss for the party. i don't think he will have the huge money-is that people thought he would have a short time ago. you will have the etch a sketch moment, talking about shake it up and change it as soon as you have the nomination. you are going to see a different romney, a different message. how beatable is president obama? what do you see as his biggest liability? >> i think he is extremely beatable. whether he is unbeatable by mitt romney is a trickier question. there has been a case study about what kind of weaknesses and vulnerabilities he has.

$1.50 million of ads in six swing states. it is not responding to ads from mitt romney, not setting the terms of the debate for 2012 in the same way he did. it is responding to a group that went on air last year -- last week. for the president, the general election has already started. they are chipping away at his image in some of these states on an issue like gas prices. the challenge for romney is how be introduced negative information about obama to voters that they do not already know. >> we obsess about this because we think is important to the election. there is the republican party and then there is the shadow republican party like karl rove,

people with tons of money you are willing to put literally hundreds of millions of dollars in debt. a lot of people want to spend a ton of money that want to beat president obama. they don't like his policies, they don't like him as president. >> that is going to be a huge factor. i think the obama people believe -- and joe biden said a clearly the other day, that the events are hurting the president more than the candidate could. i think there is something to that. there are things beyond their control that they cannot do anything about, the economy, iran. this is something for the other side and other outside groups to take advantage of. i don't know if mitt romney can capitalize on that. >> he made the decision to do health care as opposed to doing the economy. he could have done tax reform. he could have set the pace for more rapid recovery, and this is

where health care and some of these issues can hurt him. >> they would argue is not actions that have taken, with the exception of health care. what happens with health care is obviously going to be very significant, depending on who you believe. it is too soon to say where it will fall out. >> it is the skill of the folks doing the groundwork in the research. is the obama team superior to the romney team? the best the republicans have to offer. what is your assessment to >> i think that is right. combining what is happening on the outside is essential because the romney campaign is much smaller than the obama

campaign. the romney folks have talented communications professionals and good strategist and ad makers. they don't have the sort of battleship operation that the obama folks have. the rnc is now trying to wrap up its presence in the states. they do not have the on the ground, grass-roots infrastructure that the democrats have had for a while. >> that have pulled up stakes. they don't have offices they have left in place for these primaries in the swing states. >> mike, what do you think is the president's greatest vulnerability heading into the general election? >> his greatest vulnerability is that his agenda has been totally out of step with people. the problem is that the supreme

court ruling may well reinforce that idea. the president has been going so hard after the court in a risky way for him. it is potentially damaging to his image. it makes you wonder if he has a sense of what the outcome is going to be. one of the big complaints that people have about this president is the idea of overreach. the people between the 40 yard line. the people who elected him in 2008 and made 2010 a big year for republicans. >> let's bring juana back in. one of the charges that santorum makes against romney is saying that i don't think he can necessarily beat obama. the contrast is not that stark. do they believe romney is that

week of a general election candidate? >> the news that three centaur made yesterday in wisconsin, he said mitt romney would be better than barack obama, but it is harder for republicans to win the general election in november. softening that argument as we get further into the primary battle. >> keep the e-mails coming. where is the tea party in all these primaries? he wants to flash back to wisconsin in 2010. ron johnson wins the race, a tea party favorite. he taps into all that frustration among conservatives over the sizects and reach of government. do you get the sense that the tea party is alive and well?

is it behind rick santorum, or is it splintered? >> there has been a significant tea party presence at his rall ies. i am not sure they have been galvanized. from the early exit polls, rick santorum is not holding a very strongly there. is that support for iraq during off a little bit? >> stand by, we will get to you. what is the most annoying thing about covering mitt romney? >> nothing is annoying about covering mitt romney.

it is nothing but wine and cheese and puppy dogs' here in mitt romney-land. it is not something we are there is a lot of free flow of information. you have to work a little harder to find out what the story is sometimes, but certainly experience juana's with rick santorum, the romney campaign has infrastructure that helps reporters do their job. they have buses and schedules and tables and electricity. when i have been dealt with santorum, they do not have any of those things. -- when i have been out with santorum. >> it is a grind, but that is not necessarily the only thing. >> how much access do you get to mitt romney? does he know the names of reporters and is secretly?

-- and is he friendly? >> there is not a lot of action. if you are covering santorum, you can go up and have a conversation with him after an event. he is barely accessible as these things go. -- he is fairly accessible. romney will have two or three events. he rarely holds press availability where he takes questions from reporters. occasionally you can get him on the rope line with something that there is not a lot of access to the candidate. there is some access to the staff, depending on who is traveling with him. certain members of the staff are more talkative than others. as far as talking to romney directly, it is very controlled. it is almost all local television interviews, local talk radio. he will do occasional town halls where he will speak with preselected supporters.

for the reporters covering from the, you do not get to ask him questions all that often. it has been several weeks since there has been press availability. i would not expect he would do a lot of them going forward, given his propensity to misspeak at times when he goes off the cuff. has called some campaign difficulty in the past. >> which campaign collectively has the thickest skin and the thinnest skin? >> that is a hard question to answer. mitt romney is the only campaign that i would consider a professionally organized campaign, the way we are used to them. >> that put on a charm offensive recently. that just last one day? >> i think after the egg to

sketch, it became less charming. i think they will get back into that after tomorrow. one thing that is interesting to watch for tomorrow -- >> i am going to use that line again. >> the thing i wanted ask, i wonder about -- that have developed a habit of every time they went, there is a goof the next day. -- every time they win. there weren't -- there was that line about not being concerned about the very poor. i do wonder what tomorrow will bring. this has been an issue for him in the past. >> what is the most interesting thing you found out this week about the campaign? >> i hate to recycled material.

i do think the responsiveness of the obama campaign is interesting. this is a thing that maggie has raised more than i have, but the explicit, not a subtle attempt by the romney campaign to repair some of the problems with women. >> what are they doing specifically to try to get back some of the women voters who they lost over the last couple of months? >> they are still figuring out messaging, still figuring out exactly what they want to say. i saw romney talking about education in an interview last night. that was clearly targeted toward women. i thinks anne romney has limits

in terms of what she can help him with. he is going to have to find a way to talk to women voters that stays away from social issues and does talk about the economy. >> this is the david axelrod of romney world? who is that that is the person who really puts the words and thoughts into his mind when he does not have them on his own? >> he has a long time boston operative who shares the role of the romney and narrative maker along with a few others. know if you have someone of those proportions. >> i think it is more shared.

with romney, his son plays a role in advising him, and i would not discount that at all. >> it seems like there is tension in his book between the family and the professional handlers about letting him be mitt. how much do they really want him to be mitt? there are parts of him that are just plain weird. he has spent almost all of his life among people who have extreme wealth. he has had success that most -- most of us cannot fathom having. it helps explain the last three

months of this campaign. he tried to predict when he tries to improvise or fit in with the crowd, it does not work -- when he tries to ever buys or fit in with the crowd, it does not work. in the last two months, i feel like they have run one of the worst campaigns we have seen. when he focuses on doing a great job in massachusetts and fixing the olympics, i want to take that success and applied to the federal government, which is a mess. everybody agrees the country is headed for financial train wreck. when he says i am the guy who can apply real success to fixing the economy, to fix the deficit, to reform the tax code, to strike a balance with regulation. i think that message works for him. when he tries to be one of the dyes or trust be something he is not, he looks like something he

is not. >> i agree with that in general. one of the challenges with the idea of talking about how your going to fix it, a lot of the solutions are politically risky. the idea that americans are mature and sophisticated and concerned enough about the debt they will tolerate ideas like massive entitlement reform. i know the democrats are delighted they are taking that step. what does it mean in terms of the specifics of policies, and what are the costs of taking those positions? >> this is what we have talked about before. he is known for not giving anything that the opposition can attack. they are trying to buy as much time as they can. >> joe williams is one of our white house reporters. give us some insight on

president obama. do they have any concerns that they look too political? they are weighing in on saying how the justices should rule on the health care bill, running ads in response to an outside republican group that they are clearly targeting with their rhetoric and ideas. women voters are skeptical from the because of the recent debate. are they concerned about that? >> they are not concerned about looking too political. as far as they are concerned, it is game on. this is like catharsis for the president. you saw his speech today where he was very demonstrative about how bad the republican budget is going to be and how much mitt romney and newt gingrich have embraced it. their main perspective is, we have to engage these people and define ourselves before they define us.

if it looks political to a large majority of the country, so be it. >> what worries the white house most about this campaign? are they concerned about the polling we saw when we had this show in the south, in mississippi and other states, where a lot of people are still skeptical of whether or not he is a muslim? they are skeptical of him as a person. a lot of that stuff stays below the radar screen. how sensitive are they that that is a problem for them politically? >> they are well aware of the problems this kind of othernes'' that the republicans have been able to portray president obama as is going to work against them. speaking of the south, they are not all that concerned in places like mississippi, alabama, georgia. anyplace considered it dixie,

they are considering a 58 state strategy. that problem that does keep them up, because it tends to infect a lot of other brokers, not to mention that it will put to bed all evidence to the contrary, those rumors and whispers kept going on. >> let's look at weaknesses for mitt romney. every time i go and do something outside of washington, you get done and i always have at least one or two conservative women come up to meet and want to whisper about romney's mormon ism. they said i cannot believe it is not being talked about more. they are never going to vote for mitt romney because he is a mormon. how concerned is the campaign about the mormon issue? do you think there might be

concerned that there has not been enough attention to it now, which might dilute it as an issue if it becomes a huge issue for months from now? >> they are very concerned about it. i think it would have been close to impossible for him to win the primary if there had been more attention on it. you had haley barbour, he thinks the mormon issue could have played a role in why mitt romney did not win his state. you saw rick santorum making impassioned speeches about his faith. there is nothing they could do to control this issue. it is not one that saw to define on their own terms. mitt romney did a religious tolerance speech in 2008. he is not going to do anything of a kind like at this time. >> is this debated or talked about much?

it almost seems like because we covered it so early in 2008 that his media organization -- people are confused about what a mormon is, what they do, what they believe in. it leads to misconceptions or correct perceptions about mitt romney. is there much discussion about this in the conservative blogosphere? >> i don't think there is much discussion about whether it is appropriate to have a mormon president. i agree that there has been a gap. a lot of americans do not really know much about mormon isn't at all. i would put myself in that category -- don't know much about mormonism at all. there is a school of thought that says this will be a bigger

issue for him in the general than in the primary. a lot of southern religious voters are uncomfortable with mormonism. wait until you get too secular, college educated, suburban women like in philadelphia and ohio. >> i think that is right. i agree that there should be some more explanatory reporting picks i think you do cross into a fine line. >> you have yourself an assignment for next week. i love that. >> that might be one of those tapes that we go back to. we'll go back and look at it again. >> the interesting calculations in the newsroom -- obama will

never raise it directly as an issue, but there are going to be people connected with the president that want to raise it through back channels, especially if the campaign is close, just like republicans wanted to have the reverend wright by close to the election. the you hear much talk from the outside group? they have a lot of shad are groups that have been set up outside of the white house who can do a lot of the same things that the carl rove groups can do. will there ever be a day when they play the mormon card? >> it is interesting, because there are people who want to talk about that, given the fact that obama went through the wringer with the whole reverend wright thing and never quite got settled. there are some who view any means necessary to get romney

talking about things that would make him uncomfortable. you raised the specter of if you do it to him, he will do it back to you. that would be a bomb that the white house does not want to detonate. it is always dangerous when you are talking about religion as a political issue. religion may make some people uncomfortable, but you have to respect him for his belief and his they come and it should be out of bounds. the outside groups can do what ever, and you are not supposed to have any coordination. it may come up. i have a hard time seeing them get the seal of approval inside the white house. >> what are you hearing from the campaign? >> we are hearing from the romney campaign that in the next

few weeks, mitt romney will never said the words rick santorum. he will try to continue to marginalize him by ignoring him and engage the president on specific issues come to give him a work out. the campaign will respond to rick santorum. we will hear from the press secretary or the communications director, not from mitt romney. he will try to send the signal, try to starve rick santorum of oxygen in the next couple of weeks. >> i think they were doing that in the lead up to the primaries today. they were trying to look more like the nominee, like this is already done. i think it will become a bit easier for them, but we are seeing pennsylvania as the last gasp for rick santorum. after pennsylvania, it becomes much easier.

>> the polls have closed in maryland and d.c. maryland has been called for mitt romney. polls close in wisconsin at 9:00. we will talk about what is happening with the grass-roots in wisconsin and around the country. >> we have an actual wisconsin motor, john from oshkosh. what is your question for us? -- an actual wisconsin voters. >> what do you believe the impact on the upcoming packers' season would be if newt gingrich were to be an upset at the polls this evening? [laughter] >> if newt winds, the packers will have a losing season. it will mean the whole universe has blown up. >> my mom and dad both have an

ipad. my mom got one for her birthday. >> does she have it already? >> did you vote? >> yes, i did. >> for who? >> i voted for mitt romney. i think he is going to be the eventual winner could we have to get this circus of a primary over with. >> you vote based on who is electable? is there a core set of issues that animate your life? >> sure. >> i do indeed have a cold. you can hear it, there is no hiding in.

>> he was cruel enough to make you work. >> it is a privilege to play sick. [laughter] we have cheese heads here. >> where did you vote, and what was it like there? >> i was no. 265 at 9:30 this morning. i think there is going to be a good turnout, at least where we are. [unintelligible] >> all is fair. >> we will check-in with you every 10 minutes.

>> thank you, john from oshkosh. >> we will have charlie spikes on and we'll have governor on how they are reviewing what is happening tonight. >> what john from oshkosh was saying, the fact that 8 in 10 people in wisconsin thought that mitt romney would be the nominee is an astonishing number to >> we have seen it -- we have seen a growing steadily in all these primaries. when you are barely beating newt gingrich and rick santorum -- you know, he lost south carolina

by big numbers. when you have people like haley barbour who are just openly not backing you -- that was a friendship. when you have people chattering behind the scenes about airlifting in some other candidate like chris christie, that does not make people think you are a winner. that is a problem. >> there is a twitter question that just came in. >> i think the fact that the members of the party who were still not in love with mitt romney, i think until mitt romney can string together a couple of good weeks with some solid policy decisions, good performances on the trail, just showing some growth as a candidate, these are things that

have really elude him. on paper, he remains a good candidate. i think he does have a chance. he just has to show that he can be a better candidate. >> it is going to be charlie time. charlie sikes in wisconsin will tell us everything about what is happening with the grassroots. is there anything you are pulling out that she find to be interesting? >> which charlie are you talking to? you did not read any of the exit polling data? what is interesting is the number of evangelical voters compared to other states is really low. everyone expected that would be the case in maryland.

it is not the environment in which rick santorum bribes. -- in which rick santorum bribethrives. there is some growth area for mitt romney and republicans are almost ready for him to take a gander at becoming the republican nominee. >> give me the next place where santorum thinks he can do well going forward. what should we read into the fact that the latest poll has him up by six. , but other polls have had him tied? >> there are real problems for rick santorum. if you look at all the trend lines, they are not great for rick santorum. im.ney is gaining on han it has been a long time since he

has been on the pennsylvania ballot. if you look at the chicago suburbs, they are remarkably similar economically and politically to the philadelphia suburbs. those are well built for mitt romney. he will run into some of the same problems in pennsylvania. santorum has a lot of work to do before he can claim pennsylvania. that has to be a concern, and you can see that in their rhetoric. we are going to charlie who knows more about wisconsin politics than you. are you with us? >> yes, i am. >> you are a talk-show radio guy and you are being interviewed by us on our show. i love it. >> the world is turned upside down. >> tell our viewers on c-span about your reach in wisconsin. i would love to hear your take

on romney's support among conservatives in particular. >> we are the flagship of the green bay packers and the milwaukee brewers, so you can imagine we have a pretty good reached here in wisconsin. the last week has been extraordinary. he had paul ryan going all in on romney. here in wisconsin, we have very conservative primary voters but they are very pragmatic. we have not had conflict between the tea party and the "establishment." i think you are going to see how relevant their endorsements are. my sense is that a lot of people bought if it is good enough for paul ryan and ron johnson, we are ready to seal the deal.

i was a head of the curve on ryan and johnson on that one. texted you have any hesitation? >> quite frankly, i was a little bit, although i have known him for some time. four years ago, i remember when in national review labeled him a true conservative. i was not completely sure that the conservative talk-radio world was going to embrace him, but i think what you will see is romney will run up some pretty good numbers. >> how much does the campaign reach out to you? >> here in wisconsin, the oxygen has been sucked out of the political environment by the

walker recall and all the things going on here. literally, we heard nothing from anybody before the illinois primary. was the day after that that he reached out and it said it would you like to have mitt romney on the show. there has been a very small footprint of any of the campaign here in wisconsin until the last week and a half or so. >> how was governor romney as a guest? >> he was great. is very disciplined. i had him on my show today. the staff under sells his wife. she does not really talk politics. she wants to talk about life style stuff. she was fantastic. she was funny, in gauging -- engaging.

>> what do think will happen in the recall election? >> i think it is going to be very tough, very close. i think did manage as to go to scott walker in the sense that he has got the money. you have a very defensive democratic primary. it will be fun for you guys to watch that, too. it is all going to happen very quickly. you cannot overstate how motivated the left is, but you also cannot overstate how much conservatives are prepared to walk through fire or glass for scott walker. >> another great mystery, who knows? voters are not going to focus on

that until after the recall election as well. you have a very good field of candidates. this is not going to be a primary to hand out of gold watch for good service back in the 1980's. he will have to run a very good campaign. >> thanks for joining us. when ron johnson came out of nowhere to win the race last year to become a senator, one of the first things he did was set out to get his ideas right in sykes.of charlie spike talk radio seems almost as powerful today for conservatives as it was 20 years ago. they have tremendous clout, and

there is so much interesting stuff to watch. let's bring in the other charlie. when it comes down to whether or not republicans can win control of the senate, when it back, which would be huge, especially if they lose the white house. wisconsin, is it a tossup? not long ago democrats had boat seats. --both seats. you have one republican, with a chance to add another. >> much will depend on who the nominees will be. you have some strong candidates in the race. i think charlie sykes touched on

that. there's a lot of energy on the left. >> in the category of things you just cannot make up, some of us have been here since 6:00 in the morning creeks calling us from florida, eric, are you with us? >> that was a very area died analysis of wisconsin. -- a very erudite analysis of wisconsin. i just finished up spring training a couple of days ago. we were watching the boston red sox. my boys got to be honorary batboy. this will be a treat for you. we are in pensacola, the home of

naval aviation. my brother, captain jim harris, u.s. navy. >> easily the most articulate harris and the most passion and when it comes to politics. but this race today in context. you have been saying for a couple of weeks that this thing is over. do you think mitt romney is not even paying attention to santorum? >> i do not think that is the case. he has a continuing mathematical problem that is compound it by the rules of the republican nominating contest. that mathematical problem, he

does not have the nomination locked down. it is going to magnify the fundamental problem going into the general election against barack obama. there is an aura of implausibility. a longer the nomination contest plays out, the and more reassume see is the nominee, the more of a problem that is. >> john and i have a shared obsession with parlor games. if you were advising mitt romney, what do you think is the most effective approach he can take against barack obama to diminish some of his weaknesses and amplify the strength he has as a candidate? >> that he cannot be trusted to control spending. spending went out of control in the first term, and he has no

particular appetite for bringing it back in control in his second term because he fundamentally unlike some big spending. to use it not just as a issue narrowly but as an issue of whether the country is on the right track. he is a fine person as an individual, but fundamentally he doesn't have a firmer grasp on the wheel of the country. to attack barack obama as weak as a way to make himself look stronger. >> governor o'malley from maryland is going to join us now. can you call us later, and we will get the true conservative view of barack obama and mitt romney. >> he is extremely smart and a

great war hero for us. governor, are you with us? we are talking about what is happening in wisconsin and then your state. we are talking about reasons obama would have to be worried about going into the general election, whether skepticism among independents, the debate over the health care bill. what worries you most when you think about president obama's position heading into the general election? >> the biggest challenge we face is that sense of insecurity we face about our own economic future, and the doubts that so many of us have about whether we will be able to give our children a better future, which means better jobs and opportunities than the ones their parents have enjoyed. that is why those remarks today at the event in washington were so important for the president

and for us in framing this race and the choices ahead. this really is all about the economic security of america's middle class. i think when the american people are presented with the choice of moving forward or going back to the failed policies that got us into this record job losses and deficit, i think people will choose to move forward. >> did you worry a little bit when you heard the president say he was sounding too political? we heard him talking very caustically about republicans. >> i think the president has to declare the truth here. the truth can defend herself, but she needs to be stated. but the president did today was laid out the truth about the rise in budget, the truth about the choices mitt romney has had

to embrace. that contrasts needs to be given to the american people. i think the president has a responsibility to draw those contrasts. only he can do it with the clarity and sharpness that is needed for people to make a good decision. people will usually make the right decision if they are given the facts. that is what a campaign is about. i do not think he was to caustic. he cares passionately about our country's future. he has a vision for america that is growing jobs and expanding opportunity and extending for opportunities to more people. that is a sharp contrast to their view of a contrasting, shrinking america, rolling back women's rights and workers' rights. and people are given the choice, they will to face growing -- they will choose a

growing and expanding america. >> what is the most appealing thing about mitt romney? >> i suppose his success in implementing health care for all in massachusetts. >> good answer. that was very good. >> not bad at all. >> mitt romney has boxed himself into a couple of quarters to win the nomination. he has had to twist himself into becoming a candidate that he never was when he was governor. he was more moderate as governor and said things that he just will not say now that he is playing the role of being the arch conservative guy in this new republican party. he has boxed himself into being pretty detached and a leading

exemplar of the 1% that has a swiss bank accounts, that pay lower tax rates than their secretaries. it is not a pretty picture for the republican party in the fall, but sometimes the parties have to take it over the head before they change and return to their true selves. hopefully the republican party will find the spirit of lincoln again. >> one report said you had called him governor etch a sketch. >> if there is one thing people are sick of right now in our country, it is politicians who will not say what they mean and mean what they say. the etch a sketch notion that you can win an election and then shake it up and change your

positions afterward, that is exactly the sort of rudderless type of leadership, say anything to get through the election, that people are sick of. you cannot eat cake and lose weight. you get what you paid for. every generation needs to be rebuilt and strengthened, not weaken or thrown away like some failing business or old car. >> thank you very much for joining us. your chairman at the democratic governors association. you get a sense of how the white house bills as they look ahead to the fall. >> i think the white house is firing on all cylinders right now. their staff is very focused. they are clicking as a team, better than i have seen them in the three years i have had the honor of being able to work with

the obama and biden administrations. i think they have a clarity that comes from being laser focus on jobs and opportunity and moving our country forward. the plan that the president articulated today of restoring the economic security of america's middle class is a truthful, resonant, powerful statement about what has always made us a great country in every generation. i think that is the theme that is going to carry this president into a second term, where i believe he will be even more effective than he has in the first. >> thank you for joining us today, governor. one of the many reasons to pay attention to governor o'malley is that he is on our short list of people who might run in 2017.

we think hillary clinton will probably run for the presidency. martin o'malley is very much in that mix. the polls will close in the next four minutes in wisconsin. they have already closed in d.c. and maryland. maryland has been called for mitt romney, as expected. we expect the wisconsin results will show a win for mitt romney somewhere between seven and 10 points. we will get your questions. we have several interviews we are trying to balance here. we will have reince priebus on line soon. we will go into the newsroom for it ginger gibson who has covered newt gingrich from beginning to end. [laughter]

we will talk a little bit about ron paul, the reason he is not going to win the nomination. >> my prediction on the order the candidate's drop out, santorum, ron paul, gingrich. here is why ron paul is second. maybe you have noticed a fraction he has developed on a personal basis between romney and paul. you can see him having a conversation with the romney campaign. they do not want the young, ron paul voters to go democrat. they want to keep them republican. >> you saw that mitt romney said

something interesting, he said remember 1992, ross perot is why clinton won. this libertarian movement that ron paul represents. i think the movement -- there is concern about ron paul as a third-party person. i think ron paul is worrying about his son rand. i think his name will get mentioned. >> that libertarian movement is extremely powerful now. it does represent 15% at the low end, and 50% at the high-end of the republican party. he often does better than gingrich or santorum, partly because he does so well with

younger voters. ginger has been on the road from beginning to not quite the end for newt gingrich. she has done some reporting on ron paul. where is ron paul today? >> he is laying low. he is still not doing it more of the big things we saw like iowa and some of the early states. >> what about newt gingrich? where is he today? >> he is on a plane. he left the d.c. area earlier today. he is flying to north carolina where he will be campaigning tomorrow.

that pretty much quicker at -- they pretty much quit. >> what are newt gingrich's speeches like these days? his supporters think that is a strength. you want a candidate to have a consistent message. are his speech is becoming more or less? >> they are full of all these ideas talking about transcontinental railroads. his trying to expect here -- he is trying to stick here.

he is talking about religion. he will go sometimes have a speech, even if it is not a heavy religious crowds. >> how aggressive is he being when he is talking? of how aggressive is he being about his opponent's attacs? >> he tried to ram it up. he has backed off of that. when he talks about his opponents, he talks about them largely. his opponents do not get a him. otherwise, it is a really strong attack. he has backed off of that. >> polls have now closed in wisconsin. we should know relatively soon

if romney, what the margin is in wisconsin. we have a question here from which a parent -- from here. the right to be old as ronald reagan. talking about the fact that behind the scenes, vice president bthe joe biden seems to like the idea. >> we're talking about all these people he is hiring and how we would like to run in 2016. two days later, he gives this campaign speech if he did not

like that story -- >> the guy loves politics. he is young at heart. piping qe1 see run. >> i think he wants to run -- i think he want to run. >> he absolutely wants to run. >> if the president is reelected, joe biden will get zero reason why they need him this time. >> obama has a problem with working-class owners they did not have before. >> they can bless us with their presence. >> i would have said two months ago that does everything was nonsense. i think there is a real chance

she runs. where faltering thousand conversations that are happening internally. has she been a great secretary of state? i think there is no accident to what bill clinton says about his wife. what is interesting, i think she could very well run. this is not what they do. >> with your reporting, how much friction does it cost with the white house? and never thought joe biden would want to run. >> the twist to the hillary thing she's much more likely to run in the barack obama loses. if he loses, the energy that people thrive on will be out there. she will say we need to fix this.

if he wins, she will know it is not on her side. >> i think they are real followers. i think they will take stop. >> he would love it more than biden would. >> i think he would love it on one hand as an indication. >> there is the push/pull. >> we're going to go back to juana summer sioux's with rick santorum. what is the latest you are hearing about what will happen in wisconsin? map out the next couple of weeks. >> usually when i am covering right santorum, i see a lot of advisers. they are not on site tonight. i can talk to you about what the

next few weeks will look like for santorum. there are going to be watching the home state of pennsylvania. they say tonight tends to be the big kick off. it is going back across across the state. it is the first time he has taken off in a while. >> juana, you leave tonight to go where? or do you leave in the morning? >> we will be staying in the pittsburgh area tonight. santorum will be campaigning outside of pittsburgh tomorrow and then the central part of the state where we will be going. >> and are you filing a story tonight? what are you writing about? >> i'm looking to write about how rick santorum is counting on the states that gave them 18.

not good 2006. he said that pennsylvania is a must win state. he needs a pennsylvania when. -- win. i think he wanted a lot of your time. he wanted a lot of your money. that includes rhode island. >> did you are the right to the peace? >> i may have been using my blackberry off-camera. >> who is editing it that's charlie? -- it? charlie? >> i have no idea. >> we're going to come back to

you. thank you. we will come back to you when we have the results out of wisconsin. nobody has called it yet. we do assume that in the next hour we will know who won wisconsin. we are here till 10:30. he think it does at "q & a #politicolive. we will get a conservative take on president obama. let's talk about wisconsin politics. we have this race and recall election that is historic. tens of millions of dollars coming in from the left and right. this is very much and not just in wisconsin thing. this is about the future of the labor movement. there are huge pushes by conservatives to rein in their

bargaining rights. >> that is what they have been focusing on. that is the race that you said where all the energy is. i think there are a couple of things here. for scott walker, if he loses this recall, it is huge for labor. they are seen as public enemy number one, given deficits and pensions of all these expansions that are mandated. in fairness to labor, i think that they have done a fair amount of damage to scott walker. they are trying to send a message that even if they lose the recall about overreaching, they have had some targeted successes in ohio against basik. grace. be an amazing

nobody knows where it will come down. >> he did years of fighting around on air force one followed by true believers. it is capitalized. this might be enough to make year a little out of touch. which one of us is more out of ted? >> this is something we will see for a while. this is a way for him to attack the president on saved ground. i think that mitt romney did not have a choice. it was presented months ago as a

republican witness. i think there is an argument he made. you are here. the most vulnerable have been hurt. this is what they will talk about. but in terms of presentation and tone are you expecting to hear? you talked a bit about this before. the special with the obama campaign doing an ad. -- especially with the obama campaign during an ad, how will this do you expect him to be? >> and they're going to throw punches, too. there are more signs that he is heading toward a general election. what is that going to look like? what is your sense that the signs are more focused on the general leaving rick santorum?

>> tomorrow we will see the general election. they're feeling very confident. they cannot ignore rick santorum. they do not want to ruffle feathers. obama is engaging. what i found interesting today was that president obama seem to be using some of the same language republicans use. he said the riot plan was radical. republicans have called him -- the paul ryan plan was radical. republicans have called him radical. it is interesting. he's taking a page out of their paplaybook. he used the words "trickle-down" three times. this race is going to join as a class warfare race. it is going to be very

interesting to watch. >> is your sense that they are excited about getting to trepidation? i've heard them referred to the obama campaign as the death star. they realize what they are going up against. what is the mood? >> they are apprehensive. >> we are going to leave our lives cast of political's coverage of the primary night. we will take you to rick santorum's rally with his supporters in pennsylvania. this is live coverage.

>> thank you so much. it is fun to be home. here with karen and the kid, that is not all of karen's family bought most of it. her parents had 11 children. it is great to be here with friends and family. we have now reached the point where it is have time. have the delegates in this process have been selected. who is ready to charge out of the locker room for a strong second half? [applause] it is great to be here in southwestern pennsylvania.

i grew up in a steel town about 20 miles northeast of here. how about a shout out to? this area, like the town of people in it, forged steel to build this country to help win world wars and not if we just build it, we forged people with strong values about what made america great. , too.n applaud that comment t [applause] i can always be interrupted for applause. this is why we came here. this is what we want to go back to southwestern pennsylvania to kick off the second half. this is a part of the country to

where america started. not only do we forged steel in this day, we forge liberty. this was forged right here in in pennsylvania. there is no place for this value is -- where the values are more and still been in this great commonwealth. ladies and gentlemen, this great commonwealth has given a

tremendous amount to our country. if you look at the history of our great state, of not only the declaration and the constitution created here, but we won key battles. washington crossing the delaware .o save th some have said that all of the significant people have spoken in this race so far. general washington knew that not all the cigna began people are those elites in society. the where rank officers. what general washington understood, some of the best plans for what made this country great. we have listened to real

significant voices of everyday americans. he crossed the delaware. he turned the tide of the revolution. ladies and gentlemen, pa. and tap the other people in this country have yet to be heard. -- and have the other people in this country have yet to be heard. we're going to go out and make sure they are heard. we know who we are. we know who we are.

we know the stock we are made of. we have contributed a lot. great deeds have occurred here. great pennsylvanians have been born here. i went to every one of those counties every year. i understand the greatness of the people of this state. i understand how important this race is in pennsylvania. this is called the keystone state for a reason. we are the keystone. we are the place for which our country was built and great things continue to happen here. great things like in manufacturing and oil and gas production that is turning our economy are around and creating opportunities for us to grow our economy because of lower

natural-gas prices. we're seeing manufacturing comeback in spite of the crushing burden barack obama and his administration has put on this nation. we need someone who understands what liberty is all about, someone he will go out and fight to make sure that the biggest and most crushing burden that this administration has put on us, one that was debated last week about government taking alth andof your hel dictating to you what you will do, how much you will pay, what insurance you will get, and even the practice of your faith will be dictated by the government. we need someone in this race who will go out and make the clarion

call for liberty, someone who has stood tall and oppose government health care. this is what obamacare does and what his agenda of government control and his attempt to do cap and trade or he will dictate how much energy and health care he will use, this is a fundamental change in the relationship between the people and their government. if we're going to win this race, we cannot have little differences between our nominee an president obama. we have to have clear contrasting colors. in last 120 years -- [applause]

in the last 120 years, we have had one time or the republican party has defeated a democratic incumbent. time and time again, the republican establishment and aristocracy have shut down the threat of republican party and people across this country, moderate republicans, because we have to win by getting people in the middle, there's one person who understood we do not win by moving to the middle. we win by getting people in the middle to move to us and move this country forward. not only do we know who we are and what we stand for, but you know who i am.

you are going to hear a lot of things being thrown as happened in all the other states where we have seen a whole bunch of negative campaigning. we have gone across this country with the most improbable of odds and with limited resources except one in which we have had incredible resources. that is human resources. the people of this country have stood up and followed because they have seen someone with a positive vision, someone whose convictions are also forged in still not on an etcfh a sketch. [applause] you will be seeing the negative ads. you will be getting the robert shiller calls -- the robo

calls. you know how hard i work. you know how strongly i believe in the games that the value of southwestern pennsylvania have instilled in me. i come from a steel town of immigrant parents. my grandfather worked in the someone who lived in government housing on the d a grounds and saw the great sacrifice of our men and women, serving them as they served our country. you know me. they will say all the things that i am someone who does not stand up in what i believe in. you know me.

i ask you over the next three weeks, and this is not have time. no marching bands. we are hitting the fields. the clock starts tonight. we have three weeks to go out there. we will win this state. after winning the state the field looks a little different in may. the one time that we did when in last 120 years, the republican party had the courage to go out and nominate someone who all the experts and contents and republican establishment costs said could not win. it was too conservative. he lost almost every early primary. he only won one until may. everybody told him to get out of the race. this was that in 1976.

we need a moderate. in 1976, he did not get out of the race. he was able to stand tall and when the state of texas, which we have every intention of doing. [chanting "go rick go"] he took that to the convention. he fell short. in the fall, republicans fell short. we nominated another moderate. cannot galvanize our party and bring those votes to our side to

get the change. four years later they fought him again. we need another moderate. we have to defeat this incumbents. let's not make the mistake of 1976. but bypassed that era -- let bypass that era. you can help me now go pennsylvania. thank you very much. got less you. thank you.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [playing "rick santorum is our man" by the harris sisters]

[playing "rick santorum is our man" by the harris sisters] >> you are watching the live coverage of the wisconsin, d.c., and maryland primaries. senator santorum just finished speaking to his supporters. he will continue campaigning in his home state. we are waiting for remarks from governor romney who is in milwaukee, wisconsin.

we are waiting for the associated press to call a winner. ecb update on your screen. in maryland the race has been called. mitt romney is the winner at 51% 28%.o rick santorum's newt gingrich at 11%. rick santorum not on the ballot in dc. as we wait for governor romney, we will open up our phone lines and take some calls. we have a divided by supporters of candidates. those of you who support governor romney, up one is a supporter of senator santorum.

for those supporting speaker gingrich, this number. we will also take some tweaets and mix that in as there waiting for governor rabbani's supporters. we are going to watch for just a second tier. -- a second here. [playing u2]

[playing "where the streets have no name" by u2"] >> a microphone in check, one comment to, at three, four, five. >> they are checking the microphones at governor robin a puzzle in advance. it will not be too long before he comes out to speak to reporters. we will use that time to speak to you. christine is washington in

arlington. >> a lot of these states have meetings where they actually votes for the delegates to go to their state capital. >> thank you very much. you are on the air. go ahead. >> just listening to santorum made me sick. this is the man that wants to beat obama? he is destroying the republican party. he says his little things. he cannot be elected. he keeps saying the middle and that people will come in. who? this guy is a net. i what mitt romney. -- this guy is nuts.

i awnwant mitt romney. santorum winds all the time. that is what you do. you raise money like president obama is doing. you run for election. politico is talking about this. it seems side. every day they have their shows. see beat up the republicans that i have never seen. why did you have some other group? can you have another group aside politico? i never heard one nice thing out of their mouth for a republican. he heard allusions senator

santorum said to reagan. r is it is his -- hea ri his reaction. mayor romney is reporting strongly. in washington, d.c., and this is what the results look like. mitt romney at 68%. ron paul at 58%. taking your telephone calls, your reaction to the results and the race as we know its. next is a call for new castle, pa.. >> the head. >> 5.

-- go ahead. >> hello. i am for rick santorum 110%. the man walks and talks and walks the top. he does not get off on all this. mitt romney cannot win this race against obama. they used his health care as a guideline to put a bomb in there. i do not understand what people cannot get this together. what is wrong with the republican party? mitt romney cannot win this. we need rick santorum who is a conservative. we need to get him as our

nominee. thank you. >> >> santorum is going with regan. next is a call for miama. kathy is supporting governor romney. you are on. >> ok. >> your comments please. you are on the air. we will take another call of we can hear it we're waiting governor romney.

let me give the the phone numbers once again. we have your support for candidates. if you are a supporter for governor romney, if you are a supporter of rick santorum, this is our line for ron paul supporters. next up is a call from washington.pirie i he supports governor romney. >> i do support mitt romney. i actions supported him in the last election. unfortunately, he lost out. i feel like it's the only person who has the financial intelligence and background to pull this country out of the economic slump. thank you.

>> we appreciate your telephone call. >> next up is a call from memphis. you are on the air. >> paulo? -- hello? i am a democrat but i am in support of santorum. there is no way that i can see met romney can beat barack obama. also i am a democrat. >> can you tell us about what issues are most important to you? >> do you know what? mitt romney has this stuff. i see santorum is not serious about what we can do about this country. you have to give a young man a chance.

>> the little change in the percentage there. santorum is at 29%. the district of columbia's updating those numbers. mitt romney and 68%. next up is west chester new york. you are on. good morning. >> i want to say that santorum is doing a very good job. he is making statements that are

so out of line. i told him not to speak ill about other republicans. he is doing the work, especially with his last advertisements that he had a couple of days ago. i would like to make a comment with regard to politico if i may. why is it that c-span is not doing what it used to do? is used to present the news in the political events, especially in these elections.

now they change. i do not know why you're making this change. millions of americans watched c- span ford news -- for legitimate news are complaining that c- span is turning to a partisan political agenda which i really feel bad about. i really love c-span. i get so much information about c-span to get involved. and i get other friends of mine to get involved. now it is a partisan presentation. thank you very much. i hope there is some change in the future. >> kelly, we always had analysis from different news

organization. we still bring the candidates speeches and get your reactions. there's not a lot of change here tonight. thank you. next is milwaukee. he supports governor romney. we are waiting for the real results of your statements. tell the how the governor did. >> with great apologies, paul ryan has just stepped up to the microphone. we are going to listen in. >> first off, we have a lot of special people we need to think. i want to thank the good people of maryland tonight. i want to thank my friend, the chairman of the romney campaign, bob ehrlich. i also want to thank co- chairmen paul. thank you for what you have done to deliver all of those

votes for mitt romney tonight. i want to thank senator ron johnson. i want to thank jensen brenner. i want to thank the romney cochairs here. thank you for all your hard work. i also want to thank my good buddy market grain for what he has done tonight. -- mark green for what he has done tonight. we all know that president obama cannot run on his record. we know that he cannot run on his broken promises.

after the 2010 election, when the voters told him to go a different direction to change course, did he moderate? did he do that? no. he doubled down on his partisan agenda. it cannot run on his record and if you will not change course, then what does he have left? we found out today he is going to try to divide us in order to distract us. i seem to remember him saying that he would be a nightmare, and not a divider. this is one and the worst of his broken promises. we do not need a campaigner in chief. we need a leader that america deserves.

the presidency is bigger than this. he was supposed to be bigger than this. notneed solutions, and excuses. we have a president who takes the lead in not one that spreads the blame. we need someone who appeals to our dreams and aspirations, not our fears and anxieties. we as americans deserved to choose what kind of country we you want and what kind of country we want to be. it is not too late to get america back on track but our country on a path to prosperity. guess what? we have a leader who can do that. we have a leader that will give

americans that choice. we have a leader that will put our country back on the right track. tonight wisconsin have spoken. republicans are unifying. we are united because we believe in the american idea. we believe that we have a leader that is right for this moment. that is the man i am introducing to you as the next president of the united states, mitt romney.

>> thank you. thank you. congressman ryan is a great leader, a wonderful speaker. this. you for providing th this has been quite a night. we won a great victory tonight in our campaign to restore the promise of america. finde not like to

americans with bigger hearts. as i have been traveling across the state, i visited with far too many whose hearts are filled with anxiety. so many good and decent people seem to be running hard just to stay in place. for many, every day it puts them a little further behind. it is that way across so much of america, too much of america. under this president to watch, more americans have lost their jobs than during any other time frame during the depression. many have lost their homes. a record number of americans are living in poverty. 30% of single moms are living in poverty.

new business start-ups are down to the lowest level in 30 years. you know our national debt is as a record high. when you drive from tonight and you stop by the gas station, just take a look at the prices. ask yourself, a former years of that? -- four more years of that? i agree. it is important to understand one extraordinary fact. president obama thinks he is doing a good job. he actually thinks he is doing a great job. he thinks he's doing is starkly great job. he did not say this on saturday night live. it is enough to make the think that years of flying around air force one, telling you that you are doing a great job, that is enough to make you think you may become a little untouched. that is what has happened.

this campaign will deal with many complicated issues. there is a basic choice we will face. the president has pledged to transform america. he spent the last four years laying the foundation for a new government centered society. i will spend the next four years rebuilding the foundation of a people and by free free enterprises. the different divisions we have i think are a product of the different lives we have led, the values we had. when you is a community organizer and communities were hurt, his reaction was to turn to the government for help. he saw free enterprise as the villain and government as the solution. he never seem to grasp the basic

point that a plant closes one a business loses money. he is also attacking the very communities he had wanted to help. at least that is how it works when america is working. under barack obama, america has not been working. the ironic tragedy is that the community organizer he wanted to of those hurt by a plant closing became the president on his watch more jobs has been lost since the great depression. in his government centered society, the government has to do more because the economy is said to do less. when you attack business of delphi success, you are going to have less this is an less success. the debate becomes about how much is to extend unemployment insurance. he guaranteed there will be millions more unemployed.

and barack obama's government centered society, of tax increases that only become a necessity but also a desire tool for social justice. there is a finite amount of money. in barack obama's government center society, government spending always succeeds. there are other nations that have followed this path. it leads to chronic high unemployment, crushing debts, and stagnant wages. this is beginning to sound

familiar. i do not want to transform america. i want to restore the economic values of freedom and opportunity and limited government. [cheers and applause] it is opportunity. it is opportunity that is always driven america and defined as as americans. i am not naive enough to believe that free enterprise is a solution to all of our problems. nor am i naive enough to doubts that it is one of the graces forces for goods. free enterprise has done more to the people out of poverty to build a strong middle class, to educate our kids, and to make

our lives better than all of government combined. if we become one of those societies that attack success, why not become certain that there will be less success? the promise of america has always been that if you worked hard, and had the right values, it took risks, that there was an opportunity to build a better life for your family and next generation. this means that government has to be smaller and have strict limits. taxes have to be as low as possible. in line with those of competing nations, designed to foster innovation and growth, i will

cut marginal taxes across the board. we understand that regulations are necessary. they have to be continuously updated, a streamlined. regulators have to see their jobs as protecting economic freedom. washington has to be an ally of business, not the opposition of business. workers have the right to join unions. union should not be forced upon workers. union should not have the power to take money added members' paychecks to support politicians who are favored by the boss is.

out of touch liberals like barack obama say they want a strong economy. in everything they do, and they showed they did not like business very much. the economy is simply the product of all the businesses added together. we have to build successful businesses of every kind imaginable. we have always been a country of dreamers. one team helps another. if the streamers are rewarded with prosperity, we use this as big as well.son to dream

this is a lot worse by the mistakes and failures of the president's leadership. if the bill before us a steeper, we always been a nation of big steppers. i then all of the country from student unions to kitchen tables, from bridegrooms to boardrooms. i've heard frustration and anger. rarely hopelessness. a lot of americans have given up on the president. they have not thought about giving up. we have a duty placed upon our shoulders by the founders of the

nation, a sacred duty to restore the promise of america, and we will do it. we will do it because we believe in america. tonight, i have seen the good people of pennsylvania, new york, rhode island, delaware, and connecticut to join me. join me in the next step to that destination of november 6 when across america we can give a sigh of relief and other promise of america has been kept. the dreamers can dream a little bigger. help wanted signs candid dusted off and put in the front yard -- can get dusted off and put in the front yard. we will start again. we will stop apologizing for success at home and never again apologize for america abroad. [cheers and applause]

together, we will build the greatest american of we've ever known, where prosperity is grown and shared, not limited and divided. an america that guarantees ours is the door that innovation and greatness always knocks on first. there was a time not so long ago when each of us could walk a little taller and stand a little straighter, because we had a gift that no one else in the world had. we are americans. it meant something different to each of us, but something special to all of us. we knew without question -- so do the people in the rest of the world -- those days are coming back. so join me, walked together, take another step every day until november 6. we believe in america. we believe in ourselves. our greatest days are still

ahead. we are, after all, americans. god bless us. god bless the united states of america. [cheers and applause] thanks to wisconsin and maryland and the district of columbia. thanks, you guys. ♪

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

♪ >> governor romney greeting supporters in wisconsin where he picked up three more wins. let's take a look at the result of the three primary states tonight. we will begin with the maryland primary with governor romney ahead substantially at 48% to rick santorum 30% and newt gingrich's 11. we have been telling you a reminder of rigs santorum not on the ballot there.

we are going to continue our conversation about the results today with our journal tomorrow morning. the budget chief and house are presented as paul ryan introduced governor romney. and tomorrow morning we will be talking about paul ryan's budget, which the president criticized directly in his speech today. it will begin at 7:00 a.m. eastern time with mr. kerpen as our guest at 7:45 a.m. david brody is with us now. he is joining us by skype. he is the chief political correspondent for cbn, the christian broadcast network. and where do things stand for your -- from your perspective for the candidates? >> clearly, this is mitt

romney's race. so far, it looks like he is going to be in a coasting position. if creek santorum cannot pull off an upset any time soon, this race is over. -- if rick santorum cannot plot and ups at any time soon, this race is over. he is close, but close, but no cigar. it is all about pennsylvania at this point. rick santorum will lay it on the line in pennsylvania. he talks about continuing on in may and even further into june. the truth of the matter is, if he does not win in pennsylvania, there will not only be calls for him to get out of the race, but some serious misgivings by a lot of folks -- i should not same misgivings, but serious concerns by a lot of people in the party about what he is doing exactly. this is not about 2016, in other

words, rick santorum on the for president in 2016. he will actually be doing the party more harm than good at that point. >> what are the extent form's challenges in his home state of -- what are his challenges in his home state of pennsylvania? >> you broke up there a little bit, susan, but there are quite a few challenges. the number one challenge for him is not just in pennsylvania, but a challenge he has had all along, which is this aura of inevitability by mitt romney. if you look at the exit poll tonight, and this is a broken record all throughout, people think that mitt romney has the best chance to beat barack obama. it does not just stop in places like wisconsin or florida or ohio. it is also in places like pennsylvania as well, probably. that is the number-one reason voters go to the polls.

they want someone who can beat president obama. rick santorum has not yet cracked the code. mitt romney has won in the number one exit polling category every single time. it will be his main challenge in pennsylvania, no doubt. he will do well in pennsylvania and a few big parts of the state, but the major -- but the truth of the matter is that he has a major uphill climb. >> even if he has a -- an uphill climb, let's talk about the kinds of voters that are followers of your network. you have done a lot of polling, particularly christian and evangelical conservatives. in the primaries ahead, where will they go if there are not two or three candidates in front of them? my second question is obvious. if mitt romney is a clincher for the nomination, where do these people go in the general election? >> that is a great question.

let me answer the generally quiet -- general election question in a moment look at the primary. look at the exit polling in wisconsin. it was relatively close. if you look at the polling by evangelicals in these states that have voted so far, rick santorum does lead with the evangelical vote, about 33% voting for him. but about 29% for mitt romney. he is not too far behind. and newt gingrich is right there also. about 29%. it is not a slam-dunk that all evangelicals are voting for rick santorum. mitt romney is getting his fair share. the problem is in the general election is that come general election time if mitt romney is the nominee, he has not been courting evangelicals

whatsoever. he has not been courting the two-party voters. -- t party voters. the problem is that a lot of those who are with rick santorum or newt gingrich now, they will go to the polls and vote for mitt romney, but they may not invite their friends or organize for him. voter enthusiasm is an issue that he has to work on. he may not win the general election if he does not start to make inroads with evangelicals. if he assumes that they will just show up and vote for him because they have nowhere else to go, that may be true for certain evangelicals, but mitt romney need a bunch more of the evangelicals, an organization to win in the general election. >> president obama today making headlines with speeches to the editors' group here in washington.

it would you talk a little bit about when you have observed the president and his strategy? what are you seeing right now? >> [unintelligible] the president, as we saw today, is going to try, and these are his words, to demonize the republicans. everything from during granma off a cliff and all of it. he has to take paul ryan's budget and some of these other situations that relate to the tea party and the debt ceiling and all of the roadblocks that the democrats talk about, and make a very simple case to the american people and say, look, there are problems as it relates to what the republicans want to do in this country. he will play the politics of vision. the question is, how will the republicans respond? quite frankly, it is an easy

narrative for president obama to make. in other words, it is very easy to say that paul ryan's budget goes to the heart of low-income cuts in this country. it is something very easy for folks to understand. it is a lot more complicated than that, but it is an easy narrative for the president to tell. >> we are talking about the economy and mitt romney made a point to point out gas prices for the people watching him tonight. what are the pitfalls for the president with regard to gas prices? >> i think the onus is on the republican candidates. and quite frankly, republicans across the country to make the link between high gas prices and the presidency. right now they are saying, look at the price of gas and look at the president's energy policy because we are not drilling for oil. that may be too simplistic an answer. in other words, it is hard to say is $3.93, or $4.42 for gas

and it is all president obama's fall. i am not sure that americans quite by that. we need to explain exactly why it is the president's fault, because if you're going to say is his fault, you need to have a short, coherent, communicative answer that voters will be able to understand. >> i want to assure the audience the upcoming schedule of republican primaries. the next big date is delaware, new york, pa., which mr. brody has been talking about, and ryland. tomorrow, mitt romney will be campaigning. speaker gingrich is in north carolina. wondering about your own schedule with these campaign

events spread out over the next couple of drinks -- weeks. where are you heading? >> we will be going to pennsylvania. that is pretty much where rick santorum is going to be camped out. really quickly about mitt romney's speech tonight, the campaign set out prepared remarks as to what he was going to say. in those prepared remarks he said, i want to have all the people join me across this country, connecticut, delaware, pennsylvania, new york. actually, in his speech, i did not hear him say -- i did not hear him say pennsylvania. i will have to go back and look at that. they were in the prepared remarks. they will not -- were not in his actual remarks that he said tonight. as for the campaigning, he just

got done north of here in wisconsin. we had a conversation with gov. scott walker where he is facing the big recall election june 5. we will focus that on our news blog, the brief filed along with cbs news. that is coming up in the next 24 to 48 hours. in addition, we will sit down with paul ryan. and we were meeting with campaign -- campaign operatives this afternoon. >> i do not want you to give away all of your news with governor walker, but can you give us a sense of what he thinks his prospects are? >> he thinks his prospects are up in the air, quite frankly. he believes the big unions in this country are using intimidation tactics as it relates to money and power and all of that. then we got into talking about how god is in control.

scott walker is an ebb angelico christian of a non the nominal -- is an evangelical christian of a nondenominational church. he talks about how he is not anti-union at all. he is big union. he is not a fan of big union, but he also talks about all of that out of state money he is receiving from folks around the country. liberals are not as happy about getting money from wisconsin, but he talks about the out of state money he is receiving. >> what is it l the reelection headquarters in chicago? >> what can i tell you about that? it was buzzing, for sure. there are some young people involved in this campaign. there are over 300 staffers inside this huge chicago high-

rise building. it is on the top floor. there are a lot of young folks with laptops everywhere. it is a very kind of hip, swanky type place, but very serious, and folks that are doing serious work. we met with the campaign manager there. and david axelrod. we have all of that coming up. it has been a busy day. >> thank you for spending time with us tonight. david brody, chief cook -- chief political correspondent for cbs news. you can read him regularly at cbn.com on the brody blog. thank you for your update. >> thanks, susan. >> let's go through the results once again in the three primary states, beginning with maryland.

mitt romney, 48% to rick santorum's 30% and newt gingrich @ 11%. on "washington journal" tomorrow morning phil kerpen will be here talking about the importance of the republican's budget and how both parties will be debating that as the campaign unfolds. phil kerpen will be on tomorrow morning to talk about the republican budget. he is the vice president for

policy there. and david shapiro with the aclu opposes national prison project, reacting to the -- with the aclu national prison project, reacting to the news that prisoners can be strip searched regardless of why there were arrested. and our final guest list jamelle bouie, talking about his recent addition in spotlight magazine, "the other glass ceiling: impediments to black politicians breaking through the system." as our coverage continues tonight, we will show you senator santorum speaking to his supporters in his home state of pennsylvania. he was in the town of mars. ♪

[applause] >> thank you so much. it is fun to be home. here with karen and the kid, that is not all of karen's family bought most of it. [laughter] her parents had 11 children.

it is great to be here with friends and family. we have now reached the point where it is have time. have the delegates in this process have been selected. who is ready to charge out of the locker room for a strong second half? [applause] it is great to be here in southwestern pennsylvania. i grew up in a steel town about 20 miles northeast of here. how about a shout out to? this area, like the town of people in it, forged steel to build this country to help win world wars and not if we just build it, we forged people with strong values about what made america great. you can applaud that, too.

[applause] i can always be interrupted for applause. this is why we came here. this is what we want to go back to southwestern pennsylvania to kick off the second half. this is a part of the country to where america started. not only do we forged steel in this day, we forge liberty. this was forged right here in in pennsylvania.

there is no place for this value is -- where the values are more and still been in this great commonwealth. ladies and gentlemen, this great commonwealth has given a tremendous amount to our country. if you look at the history of our great state, of not only the declaration and the constitution created here, but we won key battles. washington crossing the delaware to save. -- to save the revolution.

some have said that all of the significant people have spoken in this race so far. [boos] general washington knew that not all the cigna began people are -- not all of the significant people are those elites in society. the where rank officers. what general washington understood, some of the best plans for what made this country great. we have listened to real significant voices of everyday americans. he crossed the delaware. he turned the tide of the revolution. ladies and gentlemen, pa. and tap the other people in this country have yet to be heard. -- and have the other people in this country have yet to be heard. we're going to go out and make

sure they are heard. we know who we are. [applause] [crowd chanting in distinctly] we know who we are. we know the stock we are made of. we have contributed a lot. great deeds have occurred here. great pennsylvanians have been born here. i went to every one of those counties every year. i understand the greatness of the people of this state.

i understand how important this race is in pennsylvania. this is called the keystone state for a reason. we are the keystone. we are the place for which our country was built and great things continue to happen here. great things like in manufacturing and oil and gas production that is turning our economy are around and creating opportunities for us to grow our economy because of lower natural-gas prices. manufacturing comeback in spite of the crushing burden barack obama and his administration has put on this nation. [boos] we need someone who understands what liberty is all about, someone he will go out and fight -- someone who is going to go out and fight to make sure

that the biggest and most crushing burden that this administration has put on us, one that was debated last week about government taking control of your health and dictating to you what you will do, how much you will pay, what insurance you will get, and even the practice of your faith will be dictated by the government. [boos] we need someone in this race who will go out and make the clarion call for liberty, someone who has stood tall and oppose government health care. this is what obamacare does and what his agenda of government control and his attempt to do cap and trade or he will dictate how much energy and health care he will use, this is a fundamental change in the

relationship between the people and their government. if we're going to win this race, we cannot have little differences between our nominee an president obama. we have to have clear contrasting colors. in last 120 years -- [applause] in the last 120 years, we have had one time or the republican party has defeated a democratic incumbent. time and time again, the republican establishment and aristocracy have shut down the threat of republican party and

-- have shoved down the throats of the republican party and people across this country, moderate republicans, because we have to win by getting people in the middle, there's one person who understood we do not win by moving to the middle. we win by getting people in the middle to move to us and move this country forward. [applause] not only do we know who we are and what we stand for, but you know who i am. you are going to hear a lot of things being thrown as happened in all the other states where we have seen a whole bunch of negative campaigning. we have gone across this country with the most improbable of odds and with limited resources except one in which we have had incredible resources. that is human resources. the people of this country have

stood up and followed because they have seen someone with a positive vision, someone whose convictions are also forged in still not on an etch a sketch. -- forged in steel, not on an etch-a-sketch. [applause] you will be seeing the negative ads. you will be getting the robert shiller calls -- the robo calls. you know how hard i work. you know how strongly i believe in the games that the value of -- in the dean is that the values of -- in the thing that the values of southwestern pennsylvania have instilled in

me. i come from a steel town of immigrant parents. my grandfather worked in the mines, someone who lived in government housing on the d a grounds and saw the great sacrifice of our men and women, serving them as they served our country. you know me. they will say all the things that i am someone who does not stand up in what i believe in. you know me. [applause] i ask you over the next three weeks, and this is not have time. no marching bands. we are hitting the fields. the clock starts tonight. we have three weeks to go out there. we will win this state. after winning the state the field looks a little different in may. the one time that we did when ---- that we didn't win in

that we did win in the last 120 years, the republican party had the courage to go out and nominate someone who all the experts and contents and republican establishment costs said could not win. it was too conservative. he lost almost every early primary. he only won one until may. everybody told him to get out of the race. this was that in 1976. they said, get out of their race,we need a moderate. in 1976, he did not get out of the race. he was able to stand tall and when the state of texas, which -- and win the state of texas, which we have every intention of doing. [chanting "go rick go"]

he took that to the convention. he fell short. in the fall, republicans fell short. we nominated another moderate. cannot galvanize our party and bring those votes to our side to get the change. four years later they fought him again. we need another moderate. we have to defeat this incumbents. let's not make the mistake of 1976. but bypassed that era -- let bypass that era. you can help me now go

pennsylvania. thank you very much. got less you. -- god bless you. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [playing "rick santorum is our man" by the harris sisters]

[playing "rick santorum is our man" by the harris sisters] ♪ >> former gov. mitt romney was nominated tonight -- was the winner tonight of all three

primaries today. governor romney and exchange in wisconsin. that is what we are going to watch next. >> you are watching the live coverage of the wisconsin, d.c., and maryland primaries. senator santorum just finished speaking to his supporters. he will continue campaigning in his home state. we are waiting for remarks from governor romney who is in milwaukee, wisconsin. we are waiting for the associated press to call a winner. ecb update on your screen. in maryland the race has been called. mitt romney is the winner at 51% to two rick santorum's 28%. rick santorum not on the ballot in dc. as we wait for governor romney,

it cannot run on his record and if you will not change course,

then what does he have left? we found out today he is going to try to divide us in order to distract us. i seem to remember him saying that he would be a nightmare, -- a uniter, and not a divider. this is one and the worst of his broken promises. we do not need a campaigner in chief. we need a leader that america deserves. the presidency is bigger than this. he was supposed to be bigger than this. we need solutions, not excuses. we have a president who takes the lead in not one that spreads the blame. we need someone who appeals to our dreams and aspirations, not our fears and anxieties. we as americans deserved to choose what kind of country we you want and what kind of country we want to be. it is not too late to get

america back on track but our country on a path to prosperity. guess what? we have a leader who can do that. we have a leader that will give americans that choice. we have a leader that will put our country back on the right track. tonight wisconsin have spoken. republicans are unifying. we are united because we believe in the american idea. we believe that we have a leader that is right for this moment. that is the man i am introducing to you as the next president of the united states, mitt romney.

[cheers and applause] ♪ >> thank you. thank you. congressman ryan is a great leader, a wonderful speaker. but he will not take ann's place, i will tell you that. [laughter] thank you for providing this. this has been quite a night. we won a great victory tonight in our campaign to restore the promise of america. you're not like to find

americans with bigger hearts. as i have been traveling across the state, i visited with far too many whose hearts are filled with anxiety. so many good and decent people seem to be running hard just to stay in place. for many, every day it puts them a little further behind. it is that way across so much of america, too much of america. under this president to watch, more americans have lost their jobs than during any other time frame during the depression.

many have lost their homes. a record number of americans are living in poverty. 30% of single moms are living in poverty. new business start-ups are down to the lowest level in 30 years. and that is where we generally get job growth. you know our national debt is as a record high. when you drive from tonight and -- drive home tonight and you stop by the gas station, just take a look at the prices. ask yourself, a former years of that? -- four more years of that? [boos] i agree. it is important to understand one extraordinary fact. president obama thinks he is doing a good job. he actually thinks he is doing a great job. he thinks he's doing is starkly great job. like abraham lincoln and lbj and fdr. he did not say this on saturday

night live. it is enough to make the think that years of flying around air force one, telling you that you are doing a great job, that is enough to make you think you may become a little untouched. that is what has happened. this campaign will deal with many complicated issues. there is a basic choice we will face. the president has pledged to transform america. he spent the last four years laying the foundation for a new government centered society. i will spend the next four years rebuilding the foundation of a society led by free people and free enterprises. [cheers]

the different divisions we have i think are a product of the different lives we have led, the values we had. when you is a community organizer and communities were hurt, his reaction was to turn to the government for help. he saw free enterprise as the villain and government as the solution. he never seem to grasp the basic point that a plant closes one a business loses money. he is also attacking the very communities he had wanted to help. at least that is how it works when america is working. under barack obama, america has not been working. the ironic tragedy is that the community organizer he wanted to of those hurt by a plant closing became the president on his watch more jobs has been lost since the great depression. in his government centered society, the government has to

do more because the economy is said to do less. when you attack business of delphi success, you are going to -- and you vilify success, you're going to have have less this is an less success. the debate becomes about how much is to extend unemployment insurance. he guaranteed there will be millions more unemployed. and barack obama's government centered society, of tax increases that only become a necessity but also a desire tool for social justice. there is a finite amount of money. in barack obama's government center society, government spending always succeeds. there are other nations that

have followed this path. it leads to chronic high unemployment, crushing debts, and stagnant wages. this is beginning to sound familiar. i do not want to transform america. i want to restore the economic values of freedom and opportunity and limited government. [cheers and applause] it is opportunity. it is opportunity that is always driven america and defined as as americans. i am not naive enough to believe that free enterprise is a solution to all of our problems. nor am i naive enough to doubts

that it is one of the graces -- one of the greatest forces for goods. free enterprise has done more to the people out of poverty to build a strong middle class, to educate our kids, and to make our lives better than all of government combined. [cheers and applause] if we become one of those societies that attack success, why not become certain that there will be less success? the promise of america has always been that if you worked hard, and had the right values, it took risks, that there was an opportunity to build a better life for your family and next generation. this means that government has to be smaller and have strict limits. obamacare violate both of those

principles, and i will get rid of it. [applause] taxes have to be as low as possible. in line with those of competing nations, designed to foster innovation and growth, i will cut marginal taxes across the board. we understand that regulations are necessary. down forp taxes employers. they have to be continuously updated, a streamlined. regulators have to see their jobs as protecting economic freedom. washington has to be an ally of business, not the opposition of business.

[applause] workers have the right to join unions. union should not be forced upon workers. union should not have the power to take money added members' -- out of members paychecks to support politicians who are favored by the boss is. [cheers and applause] out of touch liberals like barack obama say they want a strong economy. in everything they do, and they showed they did not like business very much. the economy is simply the product of all the businesses added together. it is like saying you like an omelet, but you do not like eggs. we have to build successful businesses of every kind imaginable.

president obama has been attacking successful businesses of every kind imaginable. we have always been a country of dreamers. one team helps another. -- one dream helps launch another. if the streamers are rewarded -- if the dreamers are rewarded with prosperity, we use this as a a reason to dream big as well. this is a lot worse by the mistakes and failures of the president's leadership. if the bill before us a steeper, and -- if the hill before us is a little steeper, we always been a nation of big steppers. i then all of the country from -- i have been all over the country from student unions to kitchen tables, from bridegrooms to boardrooms. -- factory break rooms to board rooms. i've heard frustration and anger.

but they have not thought about giving up, not on each other, and not on america. [applause] we have a duty. placed upon our shoulders by the founder of the nation, a sacred duty to restore the promise of america. rarely hopelessness. a lot of americans have given up on the president. they have not thought about giving up. we have a duty placed upon us to restore the promise of america. tonight i am asking the good people of rhode island, delaware, and connecticut's to join me. across america we can give a sigh of relief and know that the promise of america has been kept. the dreamers can dream a little bit bigger. help wanted signs can get dusted off and put in the front yard, and this time we will get it right and we will stop

apologizing for the successes at home and never again apologize for america abroad. [cheers and applause] . together, we will build the greatest america we have ever known, where prosperity is grown and shared, not limited and divided. an america that guarantees that ours is the door to innovation and greatness -- of that innovation and greed is always knocks on first. it was not that long ago that each of us could walk a little taller and stand a little straighter, because we had a gift that each must -- that no one else in the world had. it meant something to each of us. we are americans.

those days are coming back. that is our destiny. join me. walk together. take another step every day until november 6. we believe in america. but we believe in ourselves. our greatest days are still ahead. we are, after all, americans. god bless you, and god bless the united states of america. thanks, you guys. [applause] thank you. ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] ♪

♪

♪

♪

♪

♪

♪

♪

♪

>> c-span throw to the white house coverage continues on april 24 with the republican primaries in connecticut, delaware, new york, pa., and ryland. may 8 is indiana, north carolina and west virginia, followed by nebraska and oregon -- and oregon on may 15. you can have the whole line up at c-span.org/campaign2012. coming up next, president obama on his opposition to the 2013

republican budget proposal. after that, susan rice, ambassador to the u.n., addresses the situation in syria. that is followed by republican presidential candidates comments, rick santorum and mitt romney. >> tomorrow on "washington journal" phil kerpen on the budget proposal. then david shapiro on this week's court decision finding aat police can strip searche suspect for any crime. that is followed by jamelle bouie about his article. >> this year's studentcam competition asked students across the country what part of the constitution is important to

them and why. today's third pride -- third prize winner selected the third amendment. >> our teacher did not do a good job of explaining this. prouts i do not understand the first amendment, especially the power of freedom of speech. does it give us the right to say anything we want? >> a good reason -- a good question. let's do some research. ♪

>> and your lungs will be black, too. >♪ >> today, some big tobacco companies are trying to block these labels because they do not want to be honest about the consequences of using their products. unfortunately, this is not surprising. we have always known the fight to stop smoking in this country will not be easy. ♪

>> it is simple. smoking skillet -- smoking kills. send this message to smokers and those starting, or thinking about starting just got a lot easier. it will be on everything from east -- from cigarette packs to in-store tobacco displays. it will now graphically illustrate on every ad and on every pack of cigarettes a painful and deadly reality of tobacco use. >> for years, we watched tobacco rates fall in the country. in 1965, we were at a situation where over 42% of americans smoked. by 2004, the good news is that it had fallen to just under 21%, a fairly significant drop. the bad news is that in recent years, despite the well-known health risks, youth and adult

smoking rates have been flat. they have been dropping for decades, and have stalled at about 20%. every day in america, about 4000 kids under the age of 18 try their first cigarette. and about 1000 of those young americans become lifetime smokers. >> do you think the fda has the right to require these images on cigarette packages? >> i think that goes back to the first amendment argument, and i'm going to suggest that they do, but i may be wrong. >> i do not know if it violates their first amendment rights. they do, as a counter that i do not think the government has any business sticking their -- they do cross the boundary that i do not think the government has any business sticking their noses in. >> do you think that ordering these labels is constitutional? >> [unintelligible] >> it lead to many diseases.

it can start with the lungs, which people know it can cause emphysema and it can cause lung cancer if you go head to toe, you can have to recount her. people can have strokes. it can cause osteoporosis. >> mandating these labels, is the government of using the constitutional rights of freedom of speech? commercial speech does not have as much protection as individual free speech. they are able to control

commercial speech. it shows substantial interest. it is alerting the public of house arrest. if it's a the government billions of health-care costs. it showed pictures of dead and pictures and will further their interests. according to the supreme court, the government has the right to mandate these labels. >> people who are addicted will continue smoking. it might cause people to think twice like the younger kids. as far as people quitting, i do not think so. >> i think some people will do it regardless. >> would you consider smoking? >> probably not. >> i do not.

i do not what my lungs to look like that. >> to you think this picture would stop the? >> e s. yes. a lot. >> these are not too graphic. they have been field tested by the food and drug administration. strong warning labels are the best way to get the attention of young people and the best way to the young people to think about the actual health hazards of smoking. there are no negative consequences, only positive affects. more kids will think about the health effects of smoking. >> images i saw are very realistic. they tell the tale of what happens to some people when they do smoke. >> a lot of people are not aware of what they could do. i think it may change their

minds about smoking. >> teenage cigarette smoking has a crease in -- has decreased. 18% of americans believe these labels will decrease the number is a smoker's. 80% believe the americans are already aware. those fries?crave del plata of the arteries. don't bother going to work today. so what if you're family doesn't have any money? if you drive, you will die. you not be thinking much more about anything if you do. there is a good chance to get enough like this guy. >> we all received an a on our test.

continue the conversation about today's documentary at are facebook and twitter pages perce >> is the first time since launching his reelection campaign, president obama criticized met romney by name and the budget. president obama call the house republican budget plan "radical" and a trojan horse disguised as a budget plan. it cut $5.30 trillion over the next three years. these remarks are just over an hour. please welcome. [applause]

it's do you have @? during the 2004 national convention, are keyed not speaker visit to canada from illinois, introduced himself as a skinny kid with a funny name. in 2006, as the junior center from illinois, he spoke to the annual luncheon about his vision for america. two years later, in 2008, as a presidential candidates, he spoke again to the ap annual luncheon. i asked him a question from the audience related to how he might to deal with obama bin laden if elected. he asked, might he be referring to osama bin laden? it was a slip of a time heard around the world.

i will not forget that embarrassing moment, even four years later. we do have the answer to the question. [laughter] [applause] and today there is no mistaking his name. even i cannot mess it up. it is mr. president. he's the first minority to be elected president. many felt proud of our country as he took the oath of office. as president, he inherited the headwinds of the worst economic depression since the economic depression. he let a government reorganization save them from

oblivion. he pursued domestic and foreign policy agenda is that or controversy ultimately, highlighted by the most comprehensive legislation. the budget plan's proposed by and republicans are not even on the same planet. many democrats believe this does not go far enough. republicans believe it goes way too far. while wheat bought the 2008 white house race was rough and tumble, it makes it look like bumper cars by comparison. it becomes even more polarized. the one% and the 9% are at each other's throats.

the only thing anyone seems willing to compromise on is, why cannot think of anything. q. would want this job in the first place? we are very honored today to have the man currently holding the office and aspiring to it for another term. with apologies to al green, my new favorite singer. ladies and gentlemen, if the president of the united states of america. [applause] >> thank you so much. thank you. thank you very much. please have a seat.

good afternoon and thank you to dean singleton and the board of the associated press to inviting me here today. it's a pleasure to speak to all of you and to have a microphone i can see. [laughter] feel free to transmit any of this to vladimir if you see him. [laughter] clearly, we are already in the beginning months of another long, lively election year. there will be gaffes and minor controversies, there will be hot microphones and etch-a-sketch moments. you will cover every word we say and we will complained vociferously about the unflattering words you write, unless you are writing about the other guy, in which case, good job. but there are also big, fundamental issues at stake right now. issues that deserve serious

debate among every candidate and serious coverage among every reporter. whoever he may be, the next president will inherit an economy that is recovering, but not yet recovered. from the worst economic calamity since the great depression. to many americans will still be looking for a job that pays enough to cover their bills for their mortgage. to many citizens will lack the sort of financial security that started slipping away years before this recession it. a debt that has grown over the last decade, primarily as a result of two wars, to massive tax cuts, and an unprecedented financial crisis will have to be paid down. in the face of all these

challenges, we will have to answer a central question as a nation -- what, if anything, can we do to restore a sense of security to people were willing to work hard and act responsibly in this country? can we succeed as a country where a shrinking number of people do exceedingly well while a growing number struggle to get by? or are we better off when everyone gets a fair shot and everyone does their fair share and everyone plays by the same rules? this is not just another run-of- the-mill political debate. i have said it is the defining issue of our times and i believe it. it's why i ran in 2008 and it's what my presidency has been about and it's why i'm running again. i believe this is a make or break moment for the middle class and i can't remember a time when the choice between competing visions of our future has been so unambiguously clear.

keep in mind, i've never been somebody who believes government can or should try to solve a problem. some of the know my first job in chicago was working with a group of catholic churches that often did more good for people in their communities than any government program could. in those same communities, i saw no education policy, no matter how well crafted, can take the place of the parents love and attention. as president, i've eliminated dozens of programs that were not working, announced over 500 regulatory reforms that will save businesses and taxpayers billions, and put annual domestic spending on a path to

become the smallest share of the economy since dwight eisenhower held this office. since before i was born. i know the true engine of job creation in this country is the private sector, not washington, which is why i have cut taxes for small business owners 17 times over the last three years. i believe deeply that the free market is the greatest force for economic progress in human history. my mother and grandparents to raise the value personal responsibility. i also share the belief of our first republican president, abraham lincoln. a belief that true government, we should do together what we cannot do as well for ourselves.

that belief is the reason this country has been able to build a strong military to keep us safe, and public schools to educate our children. that belief is why we have been able to lay down roads and highways to facilitate travel and commerce. that belief is why we have been able to support the work of scientists and researchers whose discoveries have saved lives, unleashed technological revolutions, and led to countless new jobs in new industries. that belief is also why we have sought to insure every citizen can count on some basic measure of security. we do this because we recognize

that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, anyone of us, at any moment, might face hard times, might face bad luck, might face a crippling illness or lay off. so we contribute to programs like medicare and social security which guarantee health care and a source of income after a lifetime of hard work. we provide unemployment insurance which protects us against unexpected job loss, and facilitate the labor mobility that makes our economy so dynamic. we provide for medicaid, which make sure millions of seniors in nursing homes and children with disabilities are getting the care that they need. for generations, nearly all of these investments from transportation to education to retirement programs had been supported by people in both parties.

as much as we might associate the gi bill with franklin roosevelt or medicare with lyndon johnson, it was a republican, lincoln, who launched the trans continental railroad, the national academy of science, the land grant college. it was eisenhower who launched the interstate highway system and new investment in scientific research. it was richard nixon who created the environment protection agency. ronald reagan worked with democrats to save social security. it was george w. bush who added prescription drug coverage to medicare. what leaders in both parties have traditionally understood is that these investments are not part of some scheme to redistribute wealth from one group to another. they are expressions of the fact that we are one nation. these investments benefit us all. and they contribute to genuine, durable economic growth. show me a business leader who would not profit if more americans could afford to get the skills and education that today's jobs require. ask any company where they would

rather locate and hire workers, a country with crumbling roads and bridges or one committed to high-speed internet and high- speed railroad and high-tech research and development? it doesn't make us weaker when we guarantee basic security for the elderly, sick, or those who are actively looking for work. what makes us weaker is when fewer and fewer people can afford to buy the goods and services are businesses sell. when entrepreneurs don't have the financial securities to take a chance and starting a business. what drags down our entire economy is when there is an ever widening chasm between the ultra rich and everybody else. in this country, broadbased prosperity has never trickled down from the success of the wealthy few.

it has always come from the success of a strong and growing middle class. that is how generation who went to college on the gi bill, including my grandfather, helped build the most prosperous economies world as ever known. that is why a ceo like henry ford made it his mission to pay his workers enough so they could buy the cars that they made. that's why research has shown that countries with less inequality tend to have stronger and steadier economic growth over the long run. yet, for much of the last century, we have been having the same argument with folks who keep peddling some version of trickle-down economics. they keep telling us that if we convert more of our investment in education, research and

health care into tax cuts, especially for the wealthy, our economy will grow stronger. they keep telling us if we strip away more regulations and let businesses pollute more and treat workers and consumers with impunity, somehow we will all be better off. we are told that when the wealthy become even wealthier and corporations are allowed to maximize profits by whatever means necessary, it's good for america and their success will translate into more jobs and prosperity for everyone else. that is the theory. the problem for advocates of this theory is that we have tried their approach on a massive scale. the results of their experiments are there for all to see. at the beginning of the last

decade, the wealthiest americans received a huge tax cut in 2001 and another huge tax cut in 2003. we were promised that these tax cuts would lead to faster job growth. they did not. the wealthy got wealthier, we would expect that. the income of the top 1% has grown by more than 275% over the last few decades to an average of $1.3 million a year. but prosperity sure did not trickle down. instead, during the last decade, we had the slowest job growth in half a century. the typical american family

actually saw their incomes fall by about 6% even as the economy was growing. there was a time when insurance companies and financial lenders did not have to abide by strong enough regulations and found ways around them. what was the result? profits for these companies soared, but so did people's health insurance premiums, patients were repeatedly denied care, often when they needed it most, families were enticed and sometimes just plain tricked into buying homes they could not afford, huge, reckless bets were made with other people's money on the line and our entire financial system was nearly destroyed. we tried this theory out. you would think after the results of this experiment in trickle-down economics, after the results were made painfully clear, the proponents of this theory might show some humility. might moderate their views a bit.

you would think they would say, you know what? maybe some rules and regulations are necessary to protect the economy and prevent people from being taken advantage of by insurance companies or mortgage lenders. maybe, just maybe, at a time of growing debt and widening inequality, we should hold off and giving the wealthiest americans another round of big tax cuts. maybe when we know that most of today's middle-class jobs require more than a high-school degree, we should not get education or lay off thousands of teachers or raise interest rates on college loans or take away people's financial aid.

but that's exactly the opposite of what they have done. instead of moderating their views even slightly, the republicans running congress right now have double down. they have proposed a budget so far to the right it makes the contract for america look like the new deal. in fact, that renowned liberal, newt gingrich, first called the original version of the budget radical. he said it would contribute to right wing social engineering. this is coming from newt gingrich. this is not a budget supported by some small group in the republican party. this is now the party's governing platform. this is what they are running on. one of my potential opponents, governor romney, has said he hopes a similar version of this plan from last year would be introduced as a bill on day one of his presidency. he says he's very supportive of

this new budget and he even called it marvelous. which is a word you don't often hear when it comes to describing the budget. [laughter] it's a word you don't often hear generally. [laughter] here is what this marvelous budget does. back in the summer, i came to an agreement with republicans in congress to cut roughly one trillion dollars in annual spending. some of these cuts were about getting rid of waste, others were about programs we support but cannot afford given our deficits and our debt.

part of the agreement was a guarantee of another trillion in savings for a total of about $2 trillion in deficit reduction. this new house republican budget, however, breaks are bipartisan agreement and proposes a massive new cuts in annual domestic spending. exactly the area where we have already cut the most. i want to go through what it would mean for our country if these cuts were to be spread out evenly. bear with me, i want to go through this because i don't think people fully appreciate the nature of this budget. the year after next, nearly 10 million college students would see their financially cut by an average of more than $1,000 each. there would be 1600 fewer medical grants, research grants for things like alzheimer's, cancer and aids. there would be 4000 fewer scientific research grants, eliminating support for 48,000

researchers, students and teachers. investments in clean energy technologies helping us reduce our dependence on foreign oil would be cut by nearly a fifth. if this budget becomes law and cuts were applied evenly, starting in 2014, over 200,000 children would lose their chance to get an early education in the headstart program. 2 million mothers and young children would be cut from a program that gives them access to healthy food.

there would be 4500 fewer federal grants at the department of justice and the fbi to combat by the crime, financial crime, and helped secure our borders. hundreds of national parks would be forced to close for part or all of the year. we would not have the capacity to enforce the laws that protect the air we breathe, the water we drink, or the food we eat. cut to the faa would likely result in more flight cancellations, delays, and the complete elimination of air- traffic control services and parts of the country. over time, our weather forecasts would become less factor because we would not be able to afford to launch new satellites. that means governors and mayors would have to wait longer to order evacuations in the event of a hurricane. that's just a partial sampling of the consequences of this budget. you can anticipate that republicans may say that we will avoid some of these cuts since they don't specify exactly the cuts they would make.

but they can only avoid some of these cuts if they cut even deeper in other areas. this is math. if they want to make smaller cuts to medical research, they have to cut even deeper to things like teaching and law enforcement. the converse is true as well. they want to protect child education, it would mean further reducing financial aid to people who are trying to afford college. perhaps they will never tell us where the knife will fall, but you can be sure that with cuts this deep, there is no secret plan or formula that will be able to protect the investments we need to help our economy grow. this is not conjecture. i am not exaggerating. these are facts. these are just the cuts that

would happen the year after next. if this budget became law, by the middle of the century, funding for the kinds of things i just mentioned would have to be cut by about 95%. let me repeat that. those categories that is mentioned, we would have to cut by 95%. as a practical matter, the federal budget would basically amount to whatever is left in entitlements, defense spending, and interest on the national debt, period. money for these programs that have traditionally been supported by bipartisan basis would be basically eliminated. the same is true for other priorities like transportation, homeland's security, and veterans' benefits for men and women who risk their lives for this country. this is not an exaggeration. check it out for yourself. this is to say nothing about

what the budget does to health care. we're told medicaid would simply be handed over to the states. that is the pitch. let's get out of the central bureaucracy, the states can experiment, there will be able to run the programs a lot better. but here is the deal the states would be getting. they would have to be running these programs in the face of the largest cut to medicaid that has ever been proposed. a cut that according to one non- partisan group would take away health care for about 19 million americans. 19 million. who are these americans? many are someone's grandparents who, without medicaid, will not be able to afford nursing home care without medicaid. many are children. some are middle-class families with children with autism or down's syndrome.

some are kids with disabilities so severe that they require 24- hour care. these are the people who count on medicaid. then there is medicare. because health care costs keep rising and the baby boom generation is retiring, medicare, we all know, is one of the biggest dryers are long term deficit. that is a challenge we have to meet by bringing down the cost of health care overall for seniors and taxpayers who share in the stakes. but here's the solution proposed by republicans in washington and embraced by most of their candidates for president. instead of being enrolled in

medicare when they turn 65, seniors to retire a decade from now would get a voucher that equals the cost of the second cheapest health care plan in their area. if medicare is more expensive than at private plan, they will have to pay more if they want to enroll in traditional medicare. if health care costs rise faster than the amount of the voucher, as, by the way, they have been doing for decades, that's too bad. seniors bear the risk. if the voucher is not enough to buy private plan with bit specific doctors and carry need, that's too bad. most experts will tell you the way this voucher plan encourages savings is not through better care or cheaper costs, the way these private insurance companies save money is by designing and marketing plans to attract the youngest and healthiest seniors, cherry picking, leaving the older and sicker seniors in traditional medicare where they have access to a wide range of doctors and guaranteed care, but that makes the traditional medicare program even more expensive and raises premiums even further.

the net result is our country will end up spending more on health care and the only reason the government will save any money is because we have shifted it to seniors. they will bear more of the costs themselves. it is a bad idea. it will ultimately end medicare as we know it. the proponents of this budget will tell us we have to make all these draconian cuts' because our deficit is so large. this is an existential crisis, we have to think about future

generations, so on and so on. for their proposal to also spend $4.60 trillion over the next decade on lower tax rates. we are told that these tax cuts will supposedly be paid for by closing loopholes and eliminating waste full deductions. but the republicans in congress refused to lift a single loophole but they're willing to close, not one. and by the way, there is no way to get even close to $4.60 trillion in savings without dramatically reducing all kinds of tax breaks that go to middle- class families, tax breaks for health care, tax breaks for retirement, tax breaks for home ownership. meanwhile, these proposals and tax breaks would come on top of

more than a dollar trillion in tax giveaways for people making more than two and $50,000 per year -- more than $250,000 per year. let's step back for a second and look at $150,000 pays for. a year's worth of prescription drug coverage for senior citizen plus a new school computer lab plus a year of medical care for returning veterans plus a medical research grant for chronic disease plus a year's salary for a firefighter or police officer plus a tax credit to make a year of college more affordable plus a year's worth the financially. $150,000 would pay for all these things combined. investments in education and

research that are essential to economic growth that benefits all this -- all of us. for $150,000, it would go to each millionaire and billionaire in this country. this budget says we would be better off as a country if that is how we spend it. this is post to be about paying down our deficit? -- this is supposed to be paying down our deficit? it is laughable. the bipartisan simpson decibels committee that i treated, which the republicans were for until i was for it, that was about paying down the deficit. i did not agree with all the details.

i proposed about $600 billion more in revenue and $600 billion -- i am sorry, it proposed about $600 billion more in revenue and $600 billion more in defense cuts than i propose in my own budget. but it was a balanced effort between democrats and republicans to bring down the deficit. that is why, although it differs in some ways, my budget takes a similarly balanced approach. cuts in discretionary spending, in mandatory spending, and increased revenue. this congressional republican budget is something different altogether.

it is a trojan horse. it is disguised as deficit reduction plans and is really an attempt to impose a radical vision on our country. it is thinly veiled social darwinism. it is antithetical to our entire history as the land of opportunity and upward mobility for everybody who's willing to work for it. a place where prosperity does not trickled down from the top, but grows out for from the heart of the middle class. by getting the very things we need to grow an economy that is built to last. education and training, research and development, our infrastructure -- it is a prescription for decline. and everybody here should understand that because there are very few people here who have not benefited at some point from those investments that were made in the 1950's and the 1960's and the 1970's and the 1980's. that is part of how we got

ahead. and now we will be pulling up those letters for the next generation. in the months ahead, i will be fighting as hard as i know how for this to truer vision of what united states of america is all about. absolutely, we have to get serious about the deficit. that will require tough choices and sacrifice. i have already shown myself willing to make these tough terraces when i signed -- tough choices when i signed into law the biggest tax cuts in history. the overall spending next year will be lower than any year under ronald reagan. i am willing to make more of those difficult spending decisions in the months ahead.

but i have said before and i will say it again. there has to be some balance. all of us have to do our fair share. i have also put forward a detailed plan that will reform and strengthen medicare and medicaid. by the beginning of the next decade, it achieves the same amount of animal health savings as the plan proposed by simpson- bolles. it does so by making changes that people in my party have not always been comfortable with. but instead of saving money by shifting costs to seniors like to the republican congressional plan proposes, it will go after excessive subsidies to prescription drug companies, gets more efficiency of medicaid without gutting the program.

it ask the wealthiest to pay a little bit more. new incentives for doctors and hospitals to improve their results. and it slows the cost american costs by strengthening an independent commission, one not made of bureaucrats from government or insurance companies, but doctors and nurses and medical experts and consumers who will look at all the evidence and recommend the best way to reduce unnecessary health care spending while protecting access to the care that the seniors need. we also have a much different approach when it comes to tax. if we are serious about paying down our debt, we can afford to spend trillions more tax cuts for folks like me. for wealthy americans who do not need them and were not even asking for them and that the country cannot afford. at a time when the share of

national income flowing to the top 1% of the people in this country has climbed to levels blast scene in the 1920's, those same folks are paying taxes at one of the lowest rates in 50 years. as both i and warm but have pointed out many times now, he is paying a lower tax rate and his secretary. that is not fair. it is not right. and the choices really very simple. if you want to keep these tax breaks and deductions in place or give even more tax breaks to the wealthy, as the republicans in congress propose, then one of two things will happen either these higher deficits or it means more sacrifice for the middle class. seniors will have to pay more

for medicare. college students will lose financially. working families who are scraping by will have to do more because the richest americans are doing less. i repeat what i said before. that is not class warfare. that is not class envy. that is math. if that is the choice of the members of congress want to make -- and we will make sure that every american knows about it -- in a few weeks, there will be a vote on what we call the buffet rule. it is a simple concept. if you make more than $1 million annually, then you should pay at least the same percentage of your income in taxes as middle- class families do. on the other hand, if you made under% $250,000, like 98% of american families do, then your taxes should not go up. that is the proposal. you will hear some people point out that the buffet rule alone will not raise enough revenue to solve our deficit problems. maybe not.

but it is definitely a step in the right direction. and i intend to keep fighting for this kind of balance and fairness until the other side starts listening could i believe this is what the american people want. i believe this is the best way to pay for the investments we need to grow our economy and strengthen the middle class. by the way, i believe it is the right thing to do. this larger debate that we will be having and that you will be covering in the coming year, by the size and role of government, this debate has been with us since our founding days.

during moments of great challenge and change like the ones we're living through now, the debate gets sharper and more vigorous. that is a good thing. as a country that prizes both are individual freedom and our obligations to one another, this is one of the most important debates that we can have. no matter what we argue or where we stand, we have always held certain beliefs as americans. we believe that come in order to preserve our own freedoms and pursue our own happiness, we can just think about ourselves. we have to think about the country that made those liberties possible. we have to think about our fellow citizens, with whom we share a community. we have to think about what is required to preserve the american dream for future

generations. and this sense of responsibility to each other and our country, this is not a partisan feeling. this is not a democratic or republican idea. it is patriotism. if we keep that in mind and uphold our obligations to one another and to this larger enterprise that is america, then i have no doubt that we will continue on our long and prosperous journey as the greatest nation on earth. thank you. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> thank you. thank you, everyone.

thank you. >> we appreciate you so much being with us today. i have some questions from the audience. the republicans have been sharply critical of you as well. americans want both sides to stop fighting and get the job done. >> i completely understand the american people's frustrations. the truth is that these are imminently solvable problems. another christine lagarde is here. the kind of challenges they face fiscal is a much more

severe than anything we can confront if we make some sensible decisions. the american people's impulses are absolutely right. these are solvable problems the people of good faith came together and were willing to compromise. the challenge we have right now is that we have, on one side, a party that will book no compromise -- and this is not just my assertion. we had presidential candidates who stood on stage and were asked would you accept a budget package, a deficit reduction plan, that involves $10 of cuts

for every dollar in revenue increases -- a 10-1 ratio of spending cuts to revenue. not one of them raised their hands. think about that. ronald reagan, who was a recall is not accused of being a tax- and-spend socialist, understood repeatedly that come when the deficit started to get out of control, for him to make a deal, he would have to propose both spending cuts and tax increases. he did it multiple times. he could neither did through a republican primary today -- he could not get through a republican primary today.

let's look at booles-simpson. i proposed less revenue and slightly lower defense spending cuts. the republicans want to increase defense spending and taking in new revenue -- and take in no revenue. if you essentially eliminate discretionary spending, not just cut it, everything we think of as being pretty important, from education to basic science and research to transportation spending to national parks to do environment of protection, we would have to eliminate them. i guess another way of thinking

about this -- and this bears on your reporting -- i think there's oftentimes the impulse to suggest that, if the two parties are disagreeing, the near equally at fault and the truth lies somewhere in the middle. and and equivalents is presented, which reinforces people's cynicism about washington in general. this is not one of those situations where there is an equivalence. i have some of the most liberal democrats in congress who are prepared to make significant changes to entitlements that go against their political interests and who said they were willing to do it. and we could not get a

republican to stand up and say we will raise some revenue or to even suggest that we will not give more tax cuts to people who do not need it. i think it is important to put the current debate in some historical context. it is not just true, by the way, of the budget. it is true of a lot of the debates that we are having here. cap and trade was originally proposed by conservatives and republicans as a market-based solution to solving environmental problems. the first president to talk about cap and trade was george w. h. bush appeared now we have a party that essentially says we should not even be thinking about environmental protection. let's gut the epa.

healthcare, which is in the news right now, there is the reason why there is a little bit of confusion. in the republican primary about health care and the and did -- and the individual mandate. it originated as a conservative idea to preserve the private marketplace and health care while still ensuring that everybody got coverage as opposed to a single-payer plan. suddenly, this is some socialist overreach. as all of your doing your reporting, it is important to remember that the positions i'm taking on the budget and a host of other issues, if we had been having this discussion 20 years ago, or even 15 years ago, it would have been considered

squarely centrist positions. what has changed is the center of the republican party. and that is certainly true with the budget. >> [inaudible] the need for a lower deficit and lower taxes. how do you respond to that? >> she is absolutely right. when i travel around the world to these international forums, i have said this before. the degree to which america is

the one indispensable nation, the degree to which -- even as other countries are rising and their economies are expanding, we're still looked to for leadership, for agenda-setting. not just because of our size and our military power, but because there is a sense that, unlike most superpowers in the past, we tried to set out a set of universal rules or a set of principles by which everybody can benefit. and that is true on the economic front as well. we continue to be the world's largest market, an important engine for economic growth. we cannot return to a time when, by simply borrowing and consuming, we end up driving global economic growth. i said this a few months after

rose elected at the g-20 summit. -- after i was elected at the g- 20 summit. driving economic growth by taking imports from everyplace else, those days are over. we do have to take care of our deficits. i think christine has spoken before and i think most economists would argue as well that the challenge, when it comes to our deficit, is not short term discretionary spending, which is manageable. as i said before and i want to repeat, as a percentage of our gdp, our discretionary spending, all the things that the republicans are proposing to cut, is actually lower than it has been since dwight eisenhower.

there has not been some massive expansion of social programs, programs to help the poor, environmental programs, education programs. that is not our problem. our problem is that our revenue has dropped down to between 15% or 16%, far lower than it has been historically, far lower than it was under ronald reagan. at the same time, our health care costs have surged and demographics show that there's more and more pressure placed on financing our medicare and medicaid and social security programs. at a time when the recovery is still gaining steam and unemployment is still very high, the solution should be pretty apparent. even as we continue to make

investments in growth today, for example, putting some of our construction workers back to work rebuilding schools and roads and bridges or helping stage rehire teachers at a time when schools are having a huge -- or helping states rehire teachers at a time when schools are having a huge problem retaining quality teachers in the classroom, all of which would benefit our economy, we focus on a long-term plan to stabilize our revenues at irresponsible level and to deal with -- at a responsible level and to deal with our deficit in irresponsible way. and that is exactly what i -- in a responsible way. and that is exactly what i am proposing. during the clinton era, wealthy

people were doing just fine and the economy was stronger than it had been. and let's work on medicare and medicaid in a serious way, which is not just taking the cost of the books, of the federal books and pushing them on to individual seniors, but let's actually reduce health care costs. we spend more on health care with not as good outcomes as any other advanced developed nation on earth. that would seem to be a sensible proposal. the problem right now is not the technical means to solve it. the problem is our politics. that is part of what this election and what this debate

will need to be about. are we as a country willing to get back to common sense, balanced, fair solutions that encourage our long-term economic growth and stabilize our budget? it can be done. one last point want to make that i think is important because it goes to the growth issue -- if state and local government hiring were basically on par to what our current -- all part to past recoveries, the unemployment rate would probably be about a point lower than it is right now. if the construction industry were going through what we normally go through, that would be another point. part of the challenge we have right now in terms of growth has to do with the basic issues of huge cuts in state and local

governments and the housing market still recovering from this massive bubble. those two things are huge headwinds in terms of growth. if we put some of those construction workers back to work or we put some of those teachers back in the classroom, that could actually help create the kind of virtuous cycle that would bring in more revenues just because of economic growth, would benefit the private sector in significant ways, and that could help contribute to deficit reduction in the short term, even as we still have to do these important changes to our health care programs over the long term. >> president, you said yesterday that it would be unprecedented for the supreme court to overturn law passed by an elected congress. if the court were to overturn

individual mandate, what would you do or propose to do for the 30 million people who would not have health care after that ruling? >> first of all, let me be very specific. we have not seen a court overturn a law that was passed by congress on an economic issue like health care that i think most people would consider commerce. they'll like that has not been overturned -- a lot like that has not been overturned at least since locklear. that is pre 1930's.

the point i was making is that the supreme court is the final say on on the constitution and our laws and all of us have to respect it. but it is precisely because of that extraordinary power that the court has traditionally exercised significant restraint and deference to our duly elected legislature, our congress. so the burden is on those who would overturn a law like this. as i said, i expect the supreme court to actually recognize that and abide by well established precedents out there appeared to have enormous

confidence that come in looking at this law, not only is it constitutional, but that the court will exercise its jurisprudence carefully because of the profound power that our supreme court has. as a consequence, we're not spending a whole bunch of time planning for contingencies. what i did emphasize yesterday is that there is a human element to this that everybody has to remember. it is not an abstract exercise. i get letters every day from people who are affected by the health care law right now, even though it is not fully implemented. young people who are 24 or 25 who say, you know, i just got diagnosed with a tumor.

first of all, i would not had it checked if i did not have health insurance. and i would not have had it treated if i were not on my parents' plan. thank you and thank congress for getting this done. i get letters from folks who have just lost their jobs. their cobra is running out. there in the middle of treatment for colon cancer or breast cancer and they are worried that, if there cobra runs out and they are sick, what will they be able to do if they cannot get health insurance? the point that was made very ably before the supreme court, but i think that most health care economists have acknowledged, it assures that people will get coverage even

when they have bad .... one way is the single-payer plan. everyone is in a single system like medicare. the other way is to set a system in which you do not have people who are healthy but do not bother to get health insurance and then we'll have to pay for them in the emergency room. that does not work good as a consequence, we have to make sure that those folks are taking their responsibility seriously, which is what the individual mandate does. i do not anticipate the court striking the stem. i think they take their responsibilities very seriously. i think what is more important is for all of us, democrats and republicans, to recognize that,

in a country like ours, the wealthiest and most powerful country on earth, we should not have a system in which millions of people are at risk of bankruptcy because they get sick. or and waiting until they do get sick and then go to the emergency room which involves all of us paying for them. >> you have been very generous with your time. we appreciate so much you being here. >> thank you so much, everybody. [applause] thank you.

>> tomorrow, republican presidential candidate mitt romney speaks before the american society of news editors conference. live coverage starts at noon eastern on c-span. later, at 2:00, a meeting about gas prices and speculation posted by the democratic steering committee. that is also live on c-span. earlier today, u.s. ambassador to the united nations susan rice told reporters that the u.s. is concerned and skeptical of the syrian government over the cease-fire deadline. she added that what she has seen is not encouraging.

held in new york, this is about 35 minutes. >> a good afternoon, everyone. we have a lot to cover. i'll turn it over to ambassador rise. and then we will take your questions. >> a good afternoon, everyone. thank you for coming. what i would like to do is go to the program of work and tell you what we plan for the month and make a few comments which we will discuss this morning in the council which i otherwise would have breached you on, but was briefing the non-members of the council just now. i thought we could kill two birds with one stone, and then, of course, take your questions. the secretary general is at lunch with senior women. let me go to the program of work as shortly as i can.

i hope you have the latest version in front of you. i will just highlight various agenda items without necessarily going through it in chronological order. let me begin with the subject of the 19th of april, which is a session on nuclear non- proliferation, disarmament, and security. from the u.s. point of view, the greatest danger that we and all states around the world face is a nuclear weapon, or nuclear material falling into the hands of terrorists. as you know, president obama put nuclear security and non- proliferation as the very center of our policy agenda. he took steps towards a world without nuclear weapons. a crucial part of this effort

was -- during the event in september of 2009, shared by president obama. when we're first in the presidency of the security council. resolution 1887 recognize the need for all states to take effective measures to prevent nuclear materials or prevent them from becoming available to terrorists. with the conclusion of the summit last month, it is a program, we think, to take stock of international efforts on this issue. the goal of the upcoming session is to highlight nuclear proliferation and terrorism. and to underscore the international community is broadly shared interests and responsibilities to respond to these threats. it is also an important opportunity to reinforce the council's support of the

worked, implementing resolution 1540. i also want to point to the event on the day of april 25, the following week. the illicit flow of materials, goods, and people. the title of the advance is threats to peace, international security and peace. how such transfers with it are talking about wmd, small arms, drugs, terrorists, even human trafficking can be a threat to international peace and security.

we often look--- we often look at each individual threat. we have agencies that are designed to assist states that need assistance and what assistance to build the capacity to deal with these threats. we have beat 1540 committee. all essentially trying to assist to build their capacity to deal with the same essential problems, whatever the person is being comfort -- transferred across borders. it is building the capacity of state.

it is securing borders and building capacity to control what is coming in and out of their sovereign territory. we wanted to look at this issue from a more holistic point of view and to see these efforts, these mechanisms and challenges as a part of a larger whole. while there are substantial effort underway to help states develop effective customs and immigration systems or to foster intelligent cooperation, the security council has not undertaken a comprehensive effort to consider how the u.n. structures most effectively supporting states for trafficking. this session will provide an opportunity to hear from the secretary general who will also a brief on non-proliferation and nuclear security. we will hear about the structures to help states accomplish better control of their borders. we will consider asking the secretary to provide us with a better understanding of what the current structures are and

how they might be strengthened to better support member states. let me turn to other items on the agenda. we will have a couple of sessions on the situation in sudan and south sudan which remain high on the council's agenda. on the 11th, the council will get a briefing which may shift potentially by the head of the force commander. on the 25th, we will hear from the secretary general on carfur. -- darfur. with respect to syria, that remains an important perennial on our agenda. we had a briefing yesterday by our joint special envoy kofi annan. we heard that the regime has apparently committed to begin

and complete by april 10 the cessation of all forward deployment, this use of heavy weapons and to withdraw its forces from populated areas. the security council is now working on a draft presidential statement which we introduced this morning. it will be negotiated today and probably tomorrow which is essentially aimed at trying to give support to join special envoy annan's initiative and to underscore the importance of the syrian government is adhering to its commitment to halt all offensive actions by april 10. i am sure we can return to that during questions and answers. from the u.s. point of view and that think the view of many states, what we have seen since april 1 is not encouraging.

should the government of syria use this window rather than to intensify violence, it will be most unfortunate and certainly our view that the security council will need to respond to that failure in a very urgent and serious way. we will be talking with joint special envoy annan about the potential to have him return to brief the council soon after april 10 so we can have an update and proceed accordingly. quickly, let me mention that on the 24th, we have a session on peace and security where the council will be briefed. we are eager for the opportunity to do this.

president obama has launched a national action plan on women peace and security and has built a foundation for powerful change in the way that the world prevents war and it makes peace, bringing the role of women to the front and center of that. let me turn to one other point. that relate to young people. the united states think it is important for the council to bring the voices of half the world's population, those under 25, more directly into the work of the security council. it is the lives of young people that are being shaped by what we do and do not do every day. in so many ways, they have the greatest stake in the work that we do. 15 months ago when the u.s. last held the presidency of the security council, which

organized an unprecedented opportunity for young people to participate in a discussion with members of the council on what they viewed -- young people from around the world -- what they viewed as the most pressing issues facing the world and the council today. we want to return to the theme of youth and do it in a different way. i hope over the course of the month, he will be seeing a few younger faces -- you will be seeing a two younger faces. we will be part during with high schools, universities, and ngo's to come to open sessions of the security council. we will be organizing a special program for young journalists which i hope will be of interest to you. we will be inviting them to report on what we believe is an issue of critical importance to young people and their generation which is of course the issue of proliferation of nuclear weapons technology.

we are going to draw young people from area schools and also several member states that will be able to participate. we hope that you will take some time to join us in gauging with these young journalists and encouraging them while they are here. if they happen to break a story ahead of you, do not let professional jealousy get in the way of bringing up the next generation. finally as we close, i will take at the end of our press conference one question that has been selected among many that were submitted via twitter. the question comes from a handle entitled @freepeople. why are you not acting swiftly towards the killing in syria like you did in libya? i will come back to that at the

end. let me say a quick dewpoints on mali -- quick few points on mali. we heard a briefing on the situation in mali. he told the council that the situation has taken a turn for the worse over the course of the past several days. groups have capitalized on the confusion caused by the military seizure of power in key towns, including in timbuktu. these towns have fallen to the rebels. government forces are effectively abandoning their positions in the north without much of a fight. the council is working on this topic as well which we hope will be issued as soon as possible. we heard from the undersecretary general that the leader has imposed measures as of yesterday including border

closures, blocking access to account, and a travel ban. he has placed a force of some 3000 troops on standby, both to respond if necessary to the coup as well as respond to the rebellion that is of grave concern in the north. he also noted the humanitarian situation is deteriorating and refugees have increased to 130,000. council members were united in their demand that the leaders immediately step down and restore constitutional order. let me stop there and take your questions. >> thank you for coming.

you say that the announcement -- that the opposition could interfere with the timetable of kofi annan. >> i want to be sure that i understood the question. >> -- interfere with the mission and time table of kofi annan. >> i assume you are asking me that in my national capacity. in my national capacity, the answer is no. we do not think it interferes in any way. the friends of democratic syria underscored their support for the work of the joint special envoy and his six-point plan. the syrian government has a decision to make. it has made a commitment to accept the annan plan. in the meantime, it is thus far

not doing so. arguably, quite the opposite. that has nothing to do with what was done and said in istanbul. that is a pattern that this regime has pursued over the course of more than a year where it has used excessive and outrageous force against its own people. the friends of democratic syria recognize that against the overwhelming force is being inflicted upon the people of syria, that the opposition which is far less capable of defending itself needs political support. some members have also agreed to enhance material support including the provision of financial support to elements of the opposition. we, the united states, are providing not only a doubling of our humanitarian assistance

but also communication equipment and related non-lethal support to strengthen the cohesion of the opposition. you only get to say that every 15 months. >> i would follow up on syria by asking you mentioned initially that if there is an escalation, that the council would need to respond in a very serious way. could you give us some indication of what you would in vision? any kind of sanctions?

do you think they would have -- even a threat of sanctions would have a more reasonable chance of being adopted? >> first of all, it is the hope also i would not say the expectation of members of the council that when we review the situation after april 10, the violence will have seized on the part of the government and we will be in a round of considering how the council can reinforce that halt to the violence. the reality is that has not been the pattern thus far. the united states is concerned and quite skeptical that the government of syria will suddenly adhere to its commitments.

in the event that it does not, we will be consulting with colleagues on the security council as to what our appropriate next steps. it is no secret that the council has been divided in the past on actions that it might take to halt the violence in syria. what we hope maybe different now is we are now united and around the initiative of the joint special envoy annan. the council has endorsed the six-point plan. in that context, should the syrian regime continue its violence, we hope that will create a climate that would be perhaps improved over the past in which all member states see the wisdom of delivering not

just a strong message but strong action that might change the calculus of the government in damascus. >> did mr. annan say -- if they carry out these three points, the on voigt will go to the opposition and call on them to carry out the cessation -- >> halt to offensive actions. if you take the three elements of the special envoy's proposal, that amounts to the government halting its side of the military activity. the joint special envoy was clear that the subsequent step would be to prevail upon the opposition within 48 hours to reciprocate in halting violence on its side.

at that point, he was asking that the council be ready should that both of those steps occur too swiftly consider endorsing the dispatch of a monitoring mechanism. >> you just said that the government should stop offensive actions. are the rebels an offensive force to overthrow? what incentive do they have to stop fighting? >> i am making a very simple point to try to relate what it is we understood mr. annan to be expanding to the counts against today. the first step is for the government to implement elements a through c in the plan which amount to halting the

describe further military action against populated areas. then for the opposition and the subsequent steps to halt all violence on its side. i was not attempting to put a moral character -- >> are they purely defensive or offensive? are they just protecting civilians? why would they stop if they know millions of dollars are coming? >> from the u.s. point of view, we have taken the view that this began obviously as a peaceful expression of popular will among the large swaths of the people of syria against a government it viewed as a repressive. the government's response was to use unrelenting and overwhelming force over the

course of more than a year. during that time, what began as a very peaceful, civil protest has evolved into opposition elements taking up arms in self-defense. we have been very clear that while we want the violence tutsis, we understand that in the face of such overwhelming violence directed against the state, it is to be expected, that eventually people will take the steps necessary to defend themselves. what that evolves into i am not prepared to predict. we have said clearly this is a very worrisome and a volatile situation. we do not want to see this descend further into an all-out civil conflict. that is among the reasons why we are supporting the diplomatic

efforts of joint special envoy annan. >> speaking about the urgency of deploying emergency assistance in syria. do you think you can really deploy monitors without a revolution? how fast are you going to act to adopt a resolution? what should the security council could do about ramifications of the refugee issues in neighboring countries like turkey, lebanon, jordan, and other countries? thank you. >> with respect to the second question on refugees, that falls under the broader work of the humanitarian situation about which the council has expressed concern but we are looking to the humanitarian agencies to try to address the

very serious and growing problem of refugees outside of syria. they have the lead from the u.n. point of view. on the monitoring mission, i think there may be some confusion in applied in your question. join special envoy annan has not asked the council to endorse a monitoring mission today, yesterday, or tomorrow. nobody i am aware of that can be accomplished without a resolution. it would be an observer mission. however small it begins. there will need to be a resolution. i think all council members think you cannot send in unarmed military observers into a hot conflict.

we need a cessation of the violence for on unarmed observers to effectively deploy and operate. the joint special envoy was asking that the council be in close communication and coordination with the secretariat who will present proposals to the council and then the council be ready to respond swiftly when that time comes. >> [inaudible] -- i thought there were already eight members headed to the country this week. isn't there an advanced piece of this mission that is beginning without the security council? also, just more broadly in terms of as a u.s. representative, if you could give us a sense of what the

americans are thinking about beyond the commitments that were made in istanbul and the communication, what the u.s. is considering doing to support the opposition. >> the first one was -- >> i thought that the plan was -- >> first of all, i think it is six. it is not an advance team. it is the second reiteration of a planning team. you may recall a couple of weeks ago there were folks from the joint special envoy personal team that went to damascus to have technical talks with the government about the modalities of potential monitoring mechanism. my understanding is another

iteration of that team perhaps with a somewhat different composition will go back to continue those discussions with the government and the opposition so that information and planning can inform dpjo's proposal to the council if and when that is appropriate. >> dave are staying there permanently. >> no. that is not my expectation or understanding. with respect to the united states and our approach, we have been very clear. the outrageous islands thta assad is committing against his people make him unfit to continue to govern. as you have heard many of us say, his time is limited. we think the best approach now rather than to fuel additional

violence is to increase the pressure of all forms on assad to meet the commitments he has made. the pressure of the united states and from many others in the region have imposed is economic and we have stepped up the sanctions both on the national basis over the last several days in coordination with other states which we think is vitally important. we have put in place the beginnings of what would be an accountability clearing house in which we provide assistance and support to train syrians to gather evidence used down the road to provide a legal basis for accountability. we are also increasing our support to the people of syria through humanitarian assistance. we are working actively

diplomatically and politically to help the opposition develop a more coherent approach both internally and externally. we have contributed and are contributing certain forms of non-legal assistance including enhanced communication support which is all part of a larger effort to enable the opposition to be in a position at the appropriate time to negotiate and charter its own future. >> [inaudible] >> i am not really going to get into a hypothetical. there are many different ways that the situation could unfold. as has been the case from the start, there will be different views among members of the security council as to how to approach any number of different contingencies.

from the u.s. point of view, we have been clear that we think it is vitally important that that deadline which in our view is already too long must be credible and adhered to. if not, we will be consulting with our colleagues on the council as to what the appropriate next steps are. but we are united around the view that the work of joint special envoy annan is important and we support it. as difficult as the diplomatic terrain is, and he would be the first to acknowledge it, supporting him is a wise and best course. >> the twitter question was also on syria. >> let me be very clear. i am supposed to be at a luncheon with the secretary general. in seven or eight minutes.

i am happy to answer the sudan question. i would be happy to answer the twitter question at the end. i am trying to accommodate all of these different requirements in one morning. who is all doing the sudan question? >> [inaudible] how close are we to a full- scale war? what is your assessment, your evaluation of the remediations? >> i will speak in my national capacity. the united states is deeply concerned about the growing violence, the escalation, and fighting along the sudan, south sudan border. we have urged both sides to

halt the violence to return to negotiations in a spirit of seriousness and resolve the many underlying issues related not only to the area but relations between sudan and south sudan that are at the heart of this conflict. you may have noticed that our diplomacy included a conversation yesterday between president obama and the president of south sudan. a special envoy continues his efforts to support the mediation process that is ongoing on a national basis and as well as a council. we have lent our strong support to the high-level implementation panel. >> you had said that the president is unfit to govern because he has killed these people.

if the u.s. and the security council is calling on the opposition to not see a regime change, to become a part of the door for process, what is the difference -- darfur process, what is the difference? what is the difference in terms of telling the opposition not to seek a change in government? >> the democratic dispensation for the people of syria -- that is quite similar to our view as to what is the optimal outcome in the context of sudan where there has been war and fighting for generations. it has not led to greater freedom or greater security for many of the people of sudan. the challenge of the area is inherently a political one as both sides recognized in the context of the cpa.

they are facing an intensified rebellion. the prescriptions are annapolis. yes, we have been at the forefront of demanding justice and accountability of the war crimes committed by the president and many around him. that remains an essential part of u.s. policy. >> we do need to take our last question. guys, we could stay here all day. >> i could stay here all day. excuse me? >> [applause] -- [inaudible] can i ask one? >> with all due respect, let me do as i said. >> [inaudible] >> i am sorry? [laughter]

>> could you read it again? >> why are you not acting swiftly towards the killing in syria like you did in libya? >> i take that directed at the security council. i think it is well known and i will say for the benefit of the folks there that the security council has been woefully divided on the issue of syria and unable to adopt a resolution that would entail relatively modest action. in the case of libya, we have resolution 1970 which imposed strong sanctions and made a referral to gaddafi to the international criminal court. then we had resolution 1983 making a request to the security council for te