>> just talking about reform doesn't solve anything on either the expenditure side or the revenue side. you've got to get specific about it. like i said, i'll bet if

everybody in this room had a plan, i could sign on to 80% of them. >> warren buffett, saturday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span. two days of live coverage from the chesapeake bay's "lit fest" on "book tv." at 5:00, r. duane betts was convicge 16. miss memoir finds him coming of age in prison. sunday at noon, gail collins. at 2:00, thomas mallon has a story to tell in "watergate -- a novel." madeleine albright growing up

in czechoslovakia. "book tv" this weekend on c-span2. >> now the house ways and means committee discusses how to evaluate tax provisions set to expire this year, also known as tax extendsers. you'll hear from the tax issues director of the accountability office, jim white. this is an hour and 20 minutes. s >> thank you for joining us today on what are commonly known as tax extenders. as most of you know in april we had the opportunity to hear from a number of our colleagues about the merits of extending or, in some cases, not extending many of these tax policies. by all accounts it was a

productive exercise and i commend chairman dave camp for his leadership in providing the opportunity then and now and in the future to examine these tax provisions. list leadership in setting fort a transparent process for reviewing the tax extenders is what the american people expect from their congressional representatives. i think it's likely accurate to say that the days of simply rubber-stamping and extending an entire package of extenders is now behind us, and today we pivot to exploring what we hopefully will hear, and that is ideas to providing a framework that congress should use in evaluating these tax extenders. our witnesses today will share their views on principles of good tax policy and the specific merits and pet tricks

against which congress should test the merits of particular provisions. i look forward to their testimony and the ensuing conversation. before we begin, i would like to take a moment to thank a congressman for serving as a ranking member. congressman richie neal could not be with us because he's attending a funeral for a fallen police officer. i now yield to mr. thompson for his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think i can speak for everyone when we say that our thoughts and prayers are with the family of those in mr. neal's district who lost a police officer today. i know as the father of a detective, i know that is something that all of us care a great deal about and it is mindful to most of us how dangerous those public servants are. i thank the chairman for convening this hearing today. we appreciate that the

subcommittee has decided to begin consideration of certain expired and expiring tax provisions, as this consideration is long overdue. businesses have been desperate for certainty in the tax law when attempting to make decisions that can help to grow the economy. however, many may view today's hearing as actually increasing uncertainty for businesses and for individuals that use these tax benefits. as we learned in our last hearing, so many of these benefits enjoy broad and bipartisan support. their extension should not be difficult. as we learned from the recent jobs report, our economy is struggling and job creation is still too slow in coming. unfortunately, proven job creation programs have not received adequate consideration in this congress. press reports indicate that the highway conference may be solved and possibly gridlocked and provisions on the president's to-do list to create jobs have not made it to

a vote. the public's losing faith in congress's ability to act and act quickly to turn this economy around. frankly, i don't blame them. we've had a hard time finding agreement on a lot of things, but it's important to remember that there are things we can do in this committee that can help alleviate some of the pressures people are feeling and the uncertainties facing businesses. as we learned from the last subcommittee hearing, so many expired provisions that are under consideration today enjoy broad bipartisan support. in fact, many of us are lead sponsors of important job creation provisions, including the new markets tax credit, the r&d tax credit, the conservation easement credit and the list goes on. we've all worked well together on these provisions and we should now work to get them across the finish line. i appreciate the testimony from the witnesses today, evaluation of temporary provisions is as important as evaluating all

provisions in the tax code. there are a number of loopholes that can be closed or provisions that provide wind fauls to certain industries that should be examined fixcally close. the temporary nature of provisions should not automatically make it more eligible for termination than some of the provisions in the tax code that are permanent. many of these provisions were enacted on a temporary basis due to budgetary constraints. that does not automatically detract from the merit of the provisions themselves. but today we're talking about provisions that have already expired. businesses large and small rely on these provisions when making investment decisions. we have allowed almost 18 months of the 112th congress to pass without doing our job to move legislation providing extension of these provisions. i mentioned in detail at the last hearing, last time we had

a tax extender hearing a few weeks ago, just how important some of these extenders are to my district and to my constituents. i won't go into detail again, but will mention that mr. gur lack and i have been able to make permanent the enhanced conservation easement incentive. it's one of the most successful tools we have to support preservation of open space and family farms, which protects our watershed and ensures food security. today it has 308 co-sponsors, including the chairman, which i appreciate very much, and wish that we were marking that bill up today or better yet, had it on the suspension calendar. i couldn't agree more with our chairman that this committee has a duty to ensure that the tax code is working to create jobs and grow our economy. it is an exercise that is necessary and takes time. but so much of the rest of congress is gridlocked. this committee can act quickly

and do so in a bipartisan way to extend expired provisions that need to be extended and help kick-start our job creation and get the economy going. i believe that such legislation should include not only job-creating provisions that expired in 2011 but also proven job-creating provisions that were allowed to expire in 2010, such as the build america bonds and the 48-c advanced manufacturing investment tax credit. the committee should engage in proper oversight and review of all the tax provisions to identify those that are meritorious based on their economic performance and find ways to strengthen them and make them permanent. but this oversight should not come at the cost of inaction on important job-creating provisions. i hope that the subcommittee and the full committee can get to doing our work and get these in front of the full house for a vote and in front of the president for his signature so we can help improve the

economy. i thank the chairman for allowing me to read this testimony. >> thank you, mr. thompson. all that and no mention of grapes or vineyards. inside joke. [laughter] >> can i get unanimous consent to -- >> speaking of unanimous consent, can i have unanimous consent to allow for the submission of mr. neal's opening statement? without objection, well, next it's my pleasure to introduce the witnesses here today. we have an excellent panel of witnesses seated before us. today's witnesses bring both tax policy and oversight experience to us. today's witnesses begin with, from my left to the right, we'd like to welcome back dr. jim white from the general accounting office, where he is the director for tax issues. dr. white is responsible for g.a.o.'s work pertaining to the i.r.s., tax administration and tax policy.

thank you for being here, sir. second, we welcome back dr. donald marron, the director of tax policy for the center at the urban substitute here in washington, d.c. dr. marron's research has focused on tax reform, as he has previously served as the acting director of the congressional budget office and as a member of the president's council of economic advisors. thank you for being here today, sir. third, we will hear from mr. alex brill, a research fellow at the american enterprise substitute here in washington, d.c. mr. brill is an alum of the ways and means committee staff, and he has also served on the president's council on economic advisors and has served as an advisor to the president's fiscal commission in 2010. welcome back to the room, sir. glad to have you here. and finally, we'll hear from alex gornstein, the undersecretary for housing and community development for the commonwealth of massachusetts. go, celtics!

and being from ohio, there's even an added little emphasis on that. [laughter] thank you for being here today, folks. the subcommittee has received from each of you written statements, and they will be made part of the formal hearing record. as you know, each of you will be recognized for five minutes for oral testimony and then we'll have questions. with that, dr. white, the floor is yourself. >> thank you. mr. chairman, acting members and members of the subcommittee. i'm pleased to be here to discuss how to evaluate the expiring tax provisions, sometimes called tax extenders. most are tax expenditures, so i will focus on those. however, the evaluation principles i discuss do apply more broadly. tax expenditures, special credits, deductionings, deferrals and so on, that reduce the taxpayer's tax liability from what it would have been under a normal tax, under a "normal tax." tax expenditures o have policy

goals similar to those of spending programs. they may promote economic development, energy efficiency or research and development, because tax revenue is foregone, some provisions may in effect be viewed as spending channeled through the tax system. like decisions about spending, decisions on whether and how to extend tax provisions involve tradeoffs between policy goals and costs. my written statements summarizes factors commonly used to evaluate government policy, including tax policies such as the expiring provisions. first is the effect of extending the provisions on revenue. tax expenditures shrink the tax base. they either reduce funding available for other funding activities or require higher tax rates to raise the same amount of revenue from the smaller base. put another way, revenue the government would have collected absent the tax expenditure could have been used to fund other programs, deficit reduction or tax-rate reductions. second is the effect on equity,

the economy and taxpayers compliance burden. equity or fairness is a subjective judgment, but asking questions about who benefits from a provision and how ability to pay taxes affected can help policymakers reach conclusions about it. the effects on the economy is what my statement calls economic efficiency. lightly taxing one activity shifts resources to it and away from less tax-favored activities. the overall effect depends on whether the favored activity provides great erben fits than the less-favored activity. the effect on taxpayers costs to comply with the provision depends on its simplicity and transparency. can taxpayers understand the provision? what kinds of records will they need to keep? and, of course, simplicity and transparent say affect the i.r.s.'s ability to administer and enforce a provision. a third factor to consider when evaluating the expiring provisions is whether the tax system is the best way to deliver the benefit or whether

some other tool of ben fitch, such as spending, a lone, ar loan guarantee can provide the same benefit at lower costs. tax expenditures may have a benefit when benefits are means tested. one goal is to prevents fragmentation, overlap or duplication among programs, not just to save money, but also to avoid confusing the public. also important is the pool, credit versus a deduction, for example, affects incents yiffs and the distribution of the benefits. a final factor is measurement. too often programs are implemented with little attention to how we will measure the results. in the case of tax provisions, measuring results is complicated because i.r.s. administrators the provisions, but it is not the agency with functional responsibility for energy efficiency or community development or any of the other goals to the expiring provisions. decisions are needed about who should collect necessary data and so on.

now i want to briefly illustrate how g.a.o. has applied these factors in our reports. regarding the credit for ethanol, we found that while the credit helped create the industry during its formative years, having both a tax credit and a renewable fuel standard now is duplicative. thus, we suggested that congress consider modifying or phasing out the credit. a report on higher education tax assistance raised transparency questions. there are multiple such complex provisions, and we found many eligible taxpayers either failed to claim anything or claimed one that did not maximize their financial benefit. we looked at the efficiency of the research credit. while economists tend to support a subs defor research because the social returns -- subsidy for research, we found it introduces inefficiency because incentives are distributed unevenly across firms and estimated that more

than half of the regular credit is a wind fall for research that would have been done anyway. we suggested changes to improve the bang-for-buck of the credit. we also looked at whether the new markets tax credit succeeded in moving resources as intended. the credit did appear to increase investment in low-income communities. however, we also reported that its complexity makes it difficult to complete smaller projects and results in less money flowing through to low-income community businesses than might be possible with alternative designs. we suggested that congress consider offering grants instead of tax credits with one option being a side-by-side test of the two approaches. mr. chairman, acting ranking member and other members, we've done a number of other such assessments all intended to provide congress with factual information about the evaluation factors i outlined up front. how to use the information to make tradeoffs between the factors is up to policymakers. i'd be happy to answer

questions. >> thank you, dr. white. doctor marron, you have five minutes. >> great, thank you. chairman tiberi, ranking member thompson and members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to appear today to discuss the perennial challenge of the tax extenders, which might be better called the tax expirers. as you know, the united states faces a sharp fiscal cliff at year end when numerous policy changes occur. if all these changes happen, they will reduce the fiscal 2013 deficit by $500 billion, according to the budget office, before taking into account any negative feedback from a weaker economy. about 1/8 of that cliff, $65 billion, comes from the expiring and expired tax cuts that are the focus of today's hearing. in deciding their fate, you should consider the larger problems facing our tax system. that system is needlessly complex, economically harmful and widely perceived as unfair. it's increasingly unpredictable and it fails at its most basic task -- raising enough money to

pay our bills. the expirers o worsen these problems, they create uncertainty, complicate compliance. some make the tax code less fair, some more fair. some weaken our economy, while others strengthen it. fundamental tax reform would, of course, be the best way to address these concerns, but such reform isn't likely soon. so you must again grapple with the expirers. as a starting points let me note that they come in three flavors. the first are tax cuts that were enacted to address a temporary challenge such as a recession, a meltdown or regional disasters. the second are tax cuts that have reached a sunset review. prolonged economic weakness and recent extensions mean there aren't that many of these at the moment, but they do exist. and third, there are tax cuts that expire to gain budget rules. these appear to be the most common. supporters intend these provisions to be long-lived or permanent, but they haven't found the budget resources to do so. to determine which of these policies should be extended and

which not, you should consider several factors. does the provision address a compelling need for government intervention? does it accomplish its goal effectively and at reasonable cost? does it make the tax code more or less fair? do its potential benefits justify the revenue loss or the need for higher taxes elsewhere in the economy? in short, you should subject these provisions to the same standards you apply to other policy choices, and in this case you should keep in mind, as jim said, that most of the so-called tax extenders are effectively spending through the tax code. you should thus hold them to the same standards as equivalent spending programs. you should also reform the way you review expiring tax provisions. first, i think you ought to flip the burden of proof. today's standing presumption is that most of these provisions will ultimately be extended. that's why they are called the extenders, even after they expired. ultimately, though, we should move to a system in which the presumption, rebuttable to be sure, is that expiring provisions will expire unless

they are justified to be continued. in short, they should be the expirers. second, you should divide them up. like musk oxen, the beneficiaries have realized that there are safety in numbers. they must do their best to coalesce as a herd and try to migrate with as little individual attention as possible. you should break up the herd. reviewing each in detail might not be practical, but you can identify specific groups for careful review. for example, you can separate out the stimulus provisions, the charity provisions, the energy provisions and so on. you should also try to spread scheduled expirations out over time. if fewer expire in any given year, you will be able to give each one more attention. third, i think you ought to change budget rules for temporary tax cuts. pay as you go budgeting creates crucial discipline but has an unfortunate side effect. long-term tax policies often get chopped into one-year segments. in addition, 10 years of offsets can be used to pay for

a single-year extension. to combat this you could require that any temporary tax provision be assumed to last no less than five years in the official budget baseline. proponents would then have to round up enough budget offsets to pay for those five years. in addition, you could require that offsets happen over the same span of years as an extension. that would eliminate situations in which 10 years of offsets pay for one year of extension. thank you for inviting me to appear today. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, dr. marron. mr. brill, you're recognized. >> thank you very much, chairman tiberi, congressman thompson and members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to appear before you to discuss the regularly expiring tax provisions commonly known as tax extenders. i believe today's hearing is on an important topic as the number of and budgetary magnitude of these regularly expiring tax provisions have ballooned in recent years. some of these policies can serve an appropriate goal, but

many have crept into the tax code with little evaluation. for example, in 2001 13 tax provisions were set to expire that year or the next year. a decade later 129 tax provisions were set to expire in 2011 or 2012. the budgetary consequences extenders has increased as well. for example, in september of 2004 congress enacted a one-year extension of 23 tax extenders for a cost of $13 billion. in 2010 a two-year extension of these policies costs over $55 billion. and if congress were to extend those policies again this year, the costs would be even higher. let me summarize three key conclusions from my written testimony. first, no tax policy should be intentionally temporary. any tax extenders deemed

appropriate should be made permanent, and the rest should be allowed to expire. second, each of the tax extender provisions must be considered individually on its own merits and against a clearly defined policy objective. each extender must be shown to meet that objective, such as promoting economic efficiency or tax equity. and third, a successful evaluation of the tax extenders. keeping the good and eliminating the bad or inefficient may set a useful precedence for the bigger challenges of tackling tax expenditures broadly and ultimately tax reform. to guide the evaluation of tax extenders, policymakers, i believe, need to answer simply two questions. first, intent. does the intent of the provision improve economic

efficiency, increase growth, promote fairness or achieve some other desirable goal? for example, the r & e tax credit is intended to increase research and development because r&d generates benefits to society beyond that is realized by the firm. but one key point i'd like to stess is that with any -- stress is that with any tax extender intended to subsidize an activity, special care must be given to its net economic benefit. most subsidies will increase the subsidized activity, but that does not mean that it will produce such a net benefit or improve overall economic efficiency. in the absence of example tern altease, it will lead to a misallocation. a provision that encourages more of a particular activity does not necessarily promote

overall economic growth. the second question after determining the intent that policymakers should ask is, would the policy be effective if it were permanent 1234 --? and evaluate it on a permanent basis, regardless of the fact that it's

extended without consideration. we have seen a lot of hearings on this topic of oversight. a review historically would indicate more often than not these policies are extended without serious review. allow me to conclude by observing this committee knows well that the tax base has eroded over the last 25 years. a proliferation of tax credits and exclusions have what the system that misallocates resources, creates complexities and has compliance problems. reducing them offers the opportunity to reduce the company -- uncertainty and promote proficiency. i hope the effort will set a' a person for the greater challenges the committee will face.

>> thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i want you to extend critical programs that support community development. some of them expired in 2011. others were deemed not traditional extenders. the new markets tax credits bills american bonds. they have created hundreds of thousands of jobs and housing units across the country. these programs pay a final swirl in encouraging investment. as we continue our climb out of the great recession, now is a perfect time to extend these programs and the critical word they support. the first to market tax credit allocations were awarded nine years ago. they have achieved excellent

outcomes. $45 billion invested, 92 million square feet of retail commercial and office space developed, over 300,000 jobs created. they are restoring abandoned buildings, revitalizing small business defects -- districts. a western massachusetts city was once the world's largest paper manufacturing city. this project created 350 jobs. a few blocks away, a computer technology center. $168 million project is under construction with 600 jobs already created. universities are actively supporting the initiative.

it is not too late to extended. make the program permanent. extend the program for five more years with an annual allocation level of $5 billion. thank you for the congressman of the sponsorships. allow me markets to be used to offset taxes paid and the alternative minuted -- alternative minimum tax. massachusetts issue close to $5 billion in bonds with over 3 billion supporting our it celebrated bridge program. boston issued 130 million in tax-exempt bonds to help blighted neighborhoods.

it stimulated retail and commercial development where none have occurred in years. reinstating the rebuilding bonds program could put hundreds of thousands back to work nationwide. i encourage you to include it in every extenders package. the low-income housing tax program has created are preserved over 2.5 million units of rental housing. no other federal half from it = this. the credit is not just the housing program. it creates jobs and supports retell and commercial opportunities. it is highly flexible. it serves families, seniors, people with disabilities, veterans and former homeless families. we urge congress to extend the fixed 9% credit established in the housing and economic housing recovery act of 2008.

congress thought consistency and clarity to the program. we appreciate your leadership on this issue with your introduction and ranking member neil to make the credit permanent. these provide many important benefits. they leverage private sector funds for development. they create jobs and rebuild infrastructure and transform distressed neighborhoods. i would urge you to extend these credits on a long-term basis so we can use them to continue to build the road to economic recovery. as you consider ways to streamline and reform the tax code, consider the important contributions of these programs have made, especially what undertaking efforts to lower the top corporate and individual rights.

thank you. thank you you all. you both talk about how we should change the automatic nature of extending the extenders, which is the goal of chairman camp. can you focus a little bit more operationally from your perspective on how we shall put the burden on having supporters each extender provide us and how we should proceed in separating the different types of extenders and the worthiness of staying in existing -- in the law. ? i appeared itime i thoug thought i started -- the last

time i appeared i thought i had a good start. while the tax extenders expiring length is long, you can try to focus on those and figure out which ones make sense. >> should supporters be providing certain data points? any thoughts on that? >> that would be great if they could. our friend gao sometimes a bit on this as well. on that particular issue, i do not want to over emphasize these particles are provincial -- pursued other provisions. there are a lot that do not get enough review. there are things in the permit tax system that deserve more review than they currently get as well. some way of separating them out,

requiring data and justification for what they are doing. spread them out in time. one last five years, he will only have one fifth as many to look at every year. you'll be able to give those closer attention. >> thank you. you are raising a critical issue. the burden of proof question. it is the responsibility of the constituents and advocates to prove to congress seaworthiness of these policies or is the burden -- the worthiness or is it the burden of congress itself or other federal agencies to prove the policies are not working?

i think we would be well served by trying to pursue both agendas. as jim noted in his remarks, there is oftentimes not a lot -- there may be oversight on the administrative side, but not a lot of a valuation by the government on the effectiveness of these programs. these are hard questions, however. simply observing that a subsidized activity -- that that activity is doing well does not prove the effectiveness of the policy itself. for any given credit, there may be lots of energy production, but that does not mean that we are encouraging that in investment or activity. rather, we may just be providing a windfall. analysis necessarily requires that you develop -- in absence of this policy, what would be the outcome? you do not have the control case. the conclusion there is that that bar should be very high. we need to set up very high expectations for the outcome. >> thank you. some of the work thatgao -- that gao has done on the new

market tax credit suggests that we should convert the credit into a grand program. i have two questions related to that. first, since 2003, the program has been about $5.2 5 billion. in exchange, it is allocated roughly $29 billion in tax credits that have resulted in a roughly $45 billion in new market investment. that is the leverage of 821. in addition, some estimates -- that is a leverage of 8 to 1. also, they estimate that new jobs are retained at a cost of 17,000 hours per job. can you elaborate on the thegao's perspective on how that ratio would work through a grant program in the place of the tax credit program? >> yes.

the question we are looking at with the grant program is the amount of money flowing through the treasury to beneficiary community-based businesses. because of the way the credit is structured, credits are allocated and then sold to investors. there is a fairly complex process for raising the funds from the private sector. in effect, tax credits are sold to them. in that process, not all the money is flowing through to these all to mid beneficiary businesses in the communities. the question we have is whether a grant would allow the same cost to the treasury and more money flowing through to

beneficiary businesses. we suggested running an experiment. divide up the funding, have summer gr reant -- have some run to a grand program, have some ground to tax credits, and see which one is more beneficial to community businesses. >> it appears to me that one of the driving factors in gao's conclusion is that tax credits are running at discount. certainly, the economy and recession have probably intensify that issue. so mr. gorenstein suggested that one way of improving that is to treat the new market taxpayer program like the lower income housing program by exempting from the alternative minimum tax as we do for low-income housing tax credits and historic tax credits.

what are your thoughts? >> he still have the basic question of whether there is some alternative designed to the tax credit that will allow more money to flow through. -- to the beneficiary businesses. a whole separate issue -- what we are talking about is how much assistance from the treasury flows through. a separate issue is the effectiveness of these programs overall. we have tried to look at that. our look at that suggests that there was some increase in the amount that investors were investing in this program. those are two separate questions. one is the effectiveness of the money from the treasury flowing

through. the other one is the effectiveness of the program overall. >> since you brought it up, and you have any thoughts? >> i do. let me get to the question of the grant obverses tax credit issue if i can. a tax credit attract significant private investment that otherwise would not be made in a low-income communities. i think gao's study found 80% of investors would not have made the investment without a tax credit. asgrant program will not give you that private leverage that is so important to getting money into communities. you also not have an ongoing monitor under a grant program. convert into a grant program brings the appropriation risk. as there is so much pressure on domestic programs, which will certainly run into that as a convert to a grant program. those are concerns we could have.

the program is working well. it is becoming more efficient since the recession at the two- year recession that congress provided. we have seen yields going up and records increasing to record levels in 2011. i think a permanent expansion would build on that momentum. >> thank you for your testimony today. >> thank you very much. >> mr. thompson is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to follow up on the new market stuff on behalf of mr. neill. i want to know a couple of things. one, all the issues that have been explained, from uncertainty to the difficulty of the code are clearly important. the effect of this committee's

work on local tax code and the economy i do not think should be overlooked. >> we are in a unique position here. a lot of this stuff is just a math problem. it is the political side that gets in the way. that is where this committee's responsibility really needs to be stepped up. we need to get beyond some of the political bickering and a focus on what tax policy is going to improve our economy and the lives of american people. we need honest debate. i know that you mentioned in your written statement the whole issue of the provision. -- nascar provision. it gives the impression that the tax code is full of private interest giveaways.

it only keeps them from keeping one at theme park like another theme park, basically. we did the same thing a couple of years ago. it was media fodder over the errors. there was a company in san diego that made aluminum errors. they're going to move offshore because the tax code made it more lucrative for them to make the arrows in correa rather than in the united states of america because they could make them one place and assemble them here and get a tax break. when that was fixed, it kept a bunch of jobs in the united states. we handled aluminum eras the same way we handled aluminum baseball bats.

they talked about it being a giveaway to the bow and arrow makers. we all have a responsibility to make sure that the debate is honest. i appreciate your bringing that up. i hope that we can get to that honest debate to make sure that we have honest policy. on at the new markets tax credits, i think this deserves more discussion. not only is this in a -- important in massachusetts, but it is being used all over. i have a clinic on the north coast of california that is one of the major health care providers on the north coast. they are looking to do their expansion.

not only is a growth in construction jobs, it is a growth in medical jobs. doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners -- all the folks who have good jobs. you have good jobs and a good infrastructure, which saves us money in the future as well. on behalf ofmr. neill, i would like to ask you this question. he would like you specifically to comment on the gao's recommendation on this issue. could you please do that? >> as i have said before, we certainly have to look for every way to make the new market tax credit more efficient and

effective. i think the community welcomes the scrutiny and evaluations and appreciates all but the gao has done to point out areas where it could be strengthened. we do have concerns about shifting to a grant program. that would be around the issue of leveraging private-sector investment. it is critical to get the private sector involved in these distressed entities. this is a highly targeted tax credit that is benefiting thousands of low-income people in low-income neighborhoods around the country -- as he cited, in california as well. it is a program that brings oversight from that private- sector a round underwriting. this is true in the low income housing tax credit. you are getting the market discipline imposed and having another set of values on these projects in underwriting and ongoing monitoring to ensure that the benefits continue

going forward. again, new markets. the housing credits are very high, i believe. the very nature of the tax credit is a reason for that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i want to thank you for the series of hearings we are having on these temporary tax provisions and a thoughtful approach taken care -- taken towards them. gentlemen, i share the oversight committee. we have been looking very intensively at a number of tax credits and administrative problems -- propensity for fraud and abuse. while it is fairly easy to look at that particular aspect, you mentioned a number of other areas that we are looking at and some of the challenges. i am curious -- help us figure out what we should be looking at while we try to make

distinctions between a tax provision that is very well written but yet hard to measure vs one that may be flawed in the way it is written -- that treats measurement problems and distortions as well. -- creates measurement problems and distortions as well. could you give us an idea of how we could approach that dilemma as policymakers? >> yes. a couple of things i would emphasize. first, as some of the panelists have discussed, first to be setting clear goals for the programs, spelling out what the affect is that you are looking for. >> would you do that in a statute? >> it could be done in a statute.

the community development program -- is focused on construction or jobs? is it focused on jobs for existing residence or new jobs in that community that might come in from the outside? a second issue would be focusing on evaluation. one issue, especially in the case of tax issues, is what agency ought to be responsible. the irs administers tax provisions, but they are not an executive-branch agency responsible for housing programs or community development programs. what happens with tax provisions is that they are administered by the irs, an agency with functional responsibilities that in many cases does not pay much attention to the programs. defining responsibility for

actual -- doing assessments of the program would help. >> thank you. do any of you want to comment further on this? >> i just want to add briefly to jim's comment. the valuation of the effectiveness of any given tax extender or otherwise needs to also occur while recognizing other programs from the other side of the ledger. we need to think about the net consequences of tax policy -- for example, towards housing -- but also spending policies. we need to put those in a single from work and make a determination. >> if i could shift gears for a moment. he said that tax policy should be intentionally pat -- temporary. we clearly want to streamline the process, see more permanency, creed and environment of certainty. that sounds of great, but if we

are going to have provisions that sunset, what is a reasonable timeframe? clearly, one year makes it very difficult. when you are doing things year after year -- several of you have elected that -- highlighted that. what is a reasonable time frame for a temporary provision? >> i think it depends on the policy itself. i know that the committee has fought in the past about how to create a temporary policy that convincingly -- that is convincing to the beneficiary is that it is permanent. in essence, how you work around the budget constraints systems yet still convinced the users that this is something they can rely on? certainly, on the reinstating policies retroactively is to

create a windfall benefits. on the other hand, looking back to 2003 when the caps were lowered on a temporary basis due to a budget process issue. at that point, it was viewed that five years would give that amount of certainty and confidence to the market. other policies were considered at that time that were much shorter and not pursue because of the importance of convincing beneficiaries or constituents that the intent is to create policy determinants. >> thank you. my time is expired. >> thank you, mr. chairman. over the years, the various industries have urged the adoption of tax provisions with the stated purpose of incentivizing investment in

certain types of energy. in selling the merits of these to congress, it was indicated that these taxpayers supports would only be required for the amount of time necessary for these industries to mature. today, very few, if any, of these industries have independently determined that the subsidies are no longer necessary. could you address the methods and criteria that congress have used to make their own of valuations as to whether or not the originally stated exact -- objectives of these subsidies have been achieved, and what the appropriate means of discontinuing this taxpayer funding would be? >> this goes to one of the hardest questions for congress or the private sector, which is the rate of technological progress. while many will be hopeful that their technology will quickly mature and that the cost of production will fall quickly in such a way that they will no

longer need the government support, these are very hard issues to ultimately predict ahead of time, how well these markets will mature. we are seeing a lot policies work their way into code on exactly that argument. we only need this encouragement for a limited date of time. altman, the industry can -- ultimately, the industry can grow to be dependent on these policies. economic activity will rely on the availability of a taxpayer subsidy. the ability to wean and industry off of these credits is proving very difficult. i would suggest that, to the extent that the committee pursues an effort to reduce these credits, you need to be careful, perhaps, about a transition or a phase out that might see how they will step down and ultimately and.

>> so a strategy for an energy source that is heavily reliant on the subsidies -- >> a strategy to come to this committee would be to demonstrate very clearly at what point they feel like they would not need a subsidy anymore and then codify that and put that into law? >> that is exactly right. if you codify the step down or phase out of that policy instead of having it go away overnight, that might make it more likely that the policy will actually terminate. >> in the investor community, an investor would look at that and make a decision whether that

investment was, in fact -- if you could tie the risk of the investments to the step down of it. it might more realistically reflect how actually feasible that industry was. mr. white, you mentioned in your written statement that, with some tax expenditures, it is difficult or impossible to determine whether a provision is having its intended effect. should congress decide to extend a given tax expenditure, what steps should it take to measuring its impact? >> as i said earlier, i think that setting goals, assigning responsibilities to an executive branch agency for doing the of violations -- that ought to be the agency's functional responsibility, not

irs. irs is a tax agency. i cannot think they should be in the business of assessing a housing or energy program. that agency then would make some determinations about the type of data that would be needed to actually conduct of valuation. right now, the only data that is collected on many provisions is stated that the irs needs for ensuring compliance with the law. the irs is not collecting information suitable for assessing the effectiveness of many provisions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> as a follow-up to that question on energy -- i am sure your blues -- glued to your computer screen while we had that last hearing, with members on both sides of the aisle talking about the reduction of tax credits. we had a lot of consensus from members and supporters on this

issue of phasing out the tax credits over the period of several years. that is interesting. as a side question, since this is already expired, having an impact on reinvestment. people do not know whether or not we are going to be extended. as we look at this, how does that impact policy? it is already expired and you have advocates now saying we will phase it out. >> there is no question in my mind that many of these policies have real, measurable, observable consequences in the market. taxpayers act or do not act depending on whether or not they are getting quality.

it is a determination that subsidy is desirable. one more of that activity. there are many that work that way. it is observable in the energy sector how the level of investment has decreased and decrease overtime as the credits have changed or expired. in particular, with regard to letting them lapse and then going back, or than arguing about whether you are going to back and reinstate them, that will have a big consequence to, creating additional uncertainty for that industry. to that extent that we are trying to develop a policy where washington is free and private sectors to do as they wish or setting up a policy that encourages them, but not constantly interfering -- we are failing that test when we let credits expire and then

reinstate them. >> can yield? i will yield for one minute. >> that is all i need. talking about the energy tax provisions -- we talk about all of them, not just the renewable. the deduction for gas and oil -- are talking about everything? >> i was speaking generally of tax credits for activity in a given sector, including energy. >> so the reduction for gas and oil would be when you are talking about? >> that is not an expiring provisions. >> i understand. but if you will talk about energy tax provisions, i do not know how you can talk about one side without talking about the other side. >> section 199, which applies for manufacturing income through energy production, may have an effect on the allocation of resources towards those

activities in a way -- >> similar to tax expenditures on the allocation of resources as it pertains to renewable energy. >> that is correct. >> thank you. >> i was actually trying to be helpful. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first of all, thank you for your thoughts on this issue of the new market tax credit. i share your view on keeping the program as is and growing it in terms of the amount of allocations. i think it does a fairly terrific thing in a lot of communities. if i can, however, go back to

your testimony or your gao report that its into good tax policy. i am interested in the terminology you use. simplicity, economic efficiency, transparency, as well as the relationship to other policy tools. interestingly, as we are talking about what you say and what should be taken out of the tax code as we go through this process in the hope of simplifying it, you would think, in most of the conversations we have had centered around job growth, making it more easy to grow capital and making it easy for investment economy -- you term it as economic efficiency. can you describe more fully that term relative to jobs, relative to capital formation, as a criteria for how we ought to look at a lot of these provisions down the road?

>> yes. essentially, what you are doing with the tax provision -- and this applies not just to taxes, this applies more broadly to extending programs or other types of programs -- you are shifting resources, providing incentives to move resources from one area in your economy to another activity. the question is whether there is net gain or not from doing that. in some cases there may be a net gain. the research credit, for example, it is argued that private businesses may invest in research because they cannot capture all the benefits of that research. there is evidence for some government subsidy to shift resources into basic research. tax provisions are one way to do that, but not the only way. >> does that relate to this issue of policy tools? let's take the new markets tax

credit that can be used, for example, in my district to undertake renovation of older housing stocks and turn it around for affordable housing. yet you can find a federal programs that are federal programs that may do the same sin -- thing, saidhud --say, hud program. is it better to have some entity go and file a grant application with hud and get it done that way? take a look at a situation where you might have an r &d tax credit, or does have and get a loan to do something? -- or just have them get a loan or something? should we look at these issues not only from the context of what would happen in the private sector, but also what is available on the programmatic side that is also available to people, and maybe even think about whether those programmatic approaches to the

private sector, whether those ought to be reduced and provide better opportunities in the tax code so individual companies can make decisions without having to go through the bureaucratic process of going through a grant review, maybe get the grant, maybe not. rather than relying on the government to give them some benefit to redraw christie, have a tax code that can be more responsive -- through some bureaucracy, have a tax code that can be more responsive. >> there are a advantages and disadvantages to using spending programs verses the tax programs. with the low income tax credit,

the way that is structured, the private sector does have some incentive overtime -- over time to ensure that project will stay in compliance. that is a way to bring in some private sector management experience. another example is the system is provided to higher education. you have a title for spending program and a number of tax programs at the same time. what you would like to do is provide the evaluation criteria across the board to all those programs. one of the things we found in our work right now is that it appears that these programs are not very transparent to many people. they are either not claiming anything when they are available -- eligible or they are claiming the wrong program. they seem to be overwhelmed by

the program. it seems to be resulting in people making bad decisions from their own pet -- financial perspective. >> does anybody else on the panel have a thought on that, in terms of the relationship of current grant loan programs administered through a massive bureaucracy in washington verses allowing the tax code to be a better tool to stimulate private sector investment in our economy? >> one more point about that. grant programs are extremely important, but the low income tax credit and the new markets tax credit are the engine that drives these deals. grant programs alone are not enough to move forward on most development prague -- projects in most communities. the typically need a combination. the biggest resource is the tax credit. i feel that if we lose tax

credits or there is uncertainty, it will have a detrimental effect on our ability to do more projects and very targeted communities. >> any others? thank you, mr. chairman. >> -you for your leadership on the new markets tax credit. dr. white has been an advocate. in my district, which is urban and suburban, the fact is that if you and i drove through it and saw differences in housing policy at the federal level between a housing authority, a hud property, versus a new market tax policy that has private sector involvement and oftentimes local support from cities and counties, the differences are unbelievable. i would love to see you all doing a study on how those

different policies at the federal level impact, in the end, what the bricks and mortars are built on the ground and how that impacts communities. >> i do not think we have done as comprehensive of a look as you were asking about. i have been involved with other reviews of low-income housing tax credits. i have visited projects myself and seen that difference. i think that ultimately it boils down to the question of if you are comparing programs. also, the overall effect of the combination of programs. for example, to what extent our programs crowding out private sector investment in the area? that would be part of that

evaluation. one of the things we found in our reviews of the new market tax credit is that it did appear to increase overall investment in targeted communities. >> you probably would not answer this question. you probably could not. there is an amendment in the appropriations bill to zero outhud grants. >> i had better cut in there. thank you, mr. chairman. i think the panel for being here. this is really the next step. there is no question about the problems we have in the tax code. the uncertainty, the lack of visibility -- those have costa much doubt throughout our economy. i think this is one of the keys -- the key things we need to get fixed to what our economy turned around. there is no question. having said that, there is a lot of question about comprehensive tax reform. that is something that many of

us in this committee would like to see happen. i would like to ask the panel. briefly, we have the extenders -- if we do that outside of a comprehensive tax reform, what are we accomplishing? or should they not be part of this combination of tax reform? i think everybody who is a beneficiary of these -- make them stand up, make and say here is why this is important. let them stand on their own merit. i think that is important. so many of these are short-term because of the budget problem. these are some long-term decisions that, quite frankly, need to be made, as well as long-term comprehensive tax reform. my question is, can we do this outside that, or should they all be part of this comprehensive tax reform? >> i think you want to do both.

you want to look at the merit of individual provisions for the package of programs targeting a specific area such as assistance for higher education. then, on tax reform, you have broader issues. tax expenditures as a whole, not just the provision. tax expenditures as a whole are so large. that affects what tax rates caps could be. there is so much revenue given up from shrinking the base that tax rates on the remaining bass have to be higher or there are economic consequences for those higher tax rates. there is a tradeoff there that needs to be taken into account at a more macro level. thank you. >> i would absolutely agree. there are a bunch of expiring provisions that ought to be permanent features of law.

mr. thompson gave an example. those kinds of things ought to be performed permanently. the challenge is that legislation does not suggest that we will have tax reform before people have resolution in the near-term about what will happen to resolutions, particularly those about to expire. >> you have the opportunity to let some of them die permanently and keep them out of the next discussion of tax reform. frankly, i think the legislative climate or require that you address a whole bunch of these in another year or two. >> i would just note that many of the policies in the tax extender package are tax expenditures. there has been a dialogue over the last two years or so more

focused on the notion of broadening the tax base, killing of these tax expenditures, whether they are permanent parts of these -- the tax base today. then, with a broader tax base that is more efficient, there is the possibility to reduce tax rates, which would be pro-growth and would potentially reduce the deficit. i think that we should consider the tax extenders and the distortion area affected many of them have as we have had a debate about tax expenditures generally. >> given the urgency of the need to extend the expiring credits, i would hope that congress would move quickly on that as soon as possible and not wait for the broader package that has been pointed out may or may not happen by the end of the

session. new markets in particular -- a flat 9% risk -- fix. those are our priorities. >> thank you. >> on the issue of a comprehensive tax reform and doing away with tax expenditures to get the rate down -- you all agree that we need to do it? do you all agree that it needs to be revenue neutral? >> you do not think that we should grow the debt and the deficit to do this? >> certainly, the united states is on a long-term budgetary path that is not sustainable. >> should tax reform revenue neutral? >> i think that has to be answered in the context of how you will reduce the debt and bring down the deficit.

>> so you may answer if you want. >> if you experience it as much as i do, the phrase revenue neutral, you wonder what on earth that means. it is easy to see yes or no without -- the way i would summarize the point is that we need a tax revenue target for tax reform. my reading of the tea leaves as you look into the future, the federal government will have to raise more revenue than it has to starkly in the past, given spending pressures that will continue. >> i agree with donald's comment. we need to think about what that revenue will be to get all the spending objectives that we have. we need to find a balance.

it is a question that will need to be answered. obviously, there are significant spending pressures. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will be very brief. i would like for our committee to also interject another aspect of the extenders and their viability. that is, the probability that a programmer extender, having the same ability to attract investment and the proper amount of investment in a reformed tax code where, if i am at 39% and i am an investor, i am looking at yields based on a the tax affect on my personal tax firms. i am looking at income credits. at that point, the value of all the credits and that investment is different.

if we follow through as a committee and lower the tax rate, simplify the code, in one year or two years, many of the programs that we renewed our coming back on the books and they will not have the same level of liability in the investor community because they simply will not have the horsepower to attract the investment that they will at the higher rates. i would like to inject that as in other criteria for these extenders and see if there is some -- >> excellent point. >> this concludes today's hearings. i really appreciate this. it provided an excellent testimony. i appreciate the dialogue and

even some of the questions outside of the area to which we focused. we will continue as a committee and a subcommittee to go through this process and try to determine what that -- what it standards should be extended and which ones should not be. what should be a permanent part of tax reform. we appreciate your input. please be advised that members may submit questions to the witnesses. those and the answers we may part of the official record. i thank you all for taking time. i think our members for being here today the hearing is adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> jamie diamond testifies before the senate committee. the house financial services committee will hold it hearing on the public policy implications of j.p. morgan on tuesday, june 19 on c-span 3 and c-span radio. >> they think linebacker operations. they think of the history of the b-52/ there is a different kind of power associated with it. >> the unit in the confederate knew each other prior to the civil war.

they fought against each other. there at 100 years old talking about the old days. >> the gate to the west is marked 93. the referenced the moment of the bomb, which at -- which was that not cockatoo -- was at 9:02. >> look for the history and literary country -- program at our next stop. president obama is up next. >> tonight, president obama's news conference from earlier today on the economy and claims about the white house leaking classified national security information. he claims the house has a -- white house has zero tolerance policy. he will investigate information.

he urged congress to act on passing the remaining parts of the american jobs? . this is about 30 minutes. >> good morning. i want to say a few words about the economy. after losing jobs, our businesses have created jobs for 27 months in a row.

one concern is europe. this matters to us because europe is our largest economic trading partner. if there is less demand for our products it could mean less business for manufacturers in places like the spring or milwaukee. there is a path out of this challenge. the decisions are fundamentally in the hands of europe's leaders and they understand the urgent need to act. thembeen in contact with over the past several weeks and we know there are steps they can take to prevent the situation from getting worse. in the short term, they have to stabilize their financial system. part of that is taking clear action as soon as possible to inject capital into weak banks. just as important, leaders can lay out a framework and a vision for a stronger eurozone.

getting there is going to take time, but showing political commitment will be a strong step. with respect to greece, which has important collections next weekend, we've said it is in everyone's interest for greece to remain in the eurozone while respecting commitments to reform. we recognize sacrifices they have made and leaders understand the need to provide support if the greek people choose to remain in the eurozone. they also need to recognize that there hardships will likely be worse if they choose to exit from the eurozone. over the longer term, even as countries with debt half -- they have to promote economic debt and job creation. as some have discovered it is harder to rein in deficits if

your economy is growing. it is positive the conversation has moved in that direction and leaders like angela merkel thate conversation has removed in that direction. leaders like angela the bottom line is, solutions to these problems are hard but there are solutions. europe has the capacity to make them. they have america's support. their success is good for us and the sooner they act, the more disaster -- the size of their actions, the sooner people will gain confidence and it cheaper the cost of cleanup will be down the road. in the meantime, given the signs of weakness in the world economy, not just in europe but also in asia, it is critical we take the actions we can to

strengthen the american economy right now. last september, i sent congress a plan full of ideas that would put more americans back to work. it had support from the american people, it was paid for, if congress had passed it, we would have 1 million more americans working this year. unemployment would be lower. our economy would be stronger. of course congress refuse to pass this plan. they acted on a few parts on the bill, the payroll tax cut which is putting more money in the paycheck right now, and i appreciate that taking that action. they left most of the plan sitting there. in light of the head winds we are facing, i urge them to reconsider. there are steps we can take right now to put more people back to work. not just my ideas, they are

ideas that independent economists believe would make a difference in our economy. keep in mind the private sector has been hiring at a solid pace. one of the biggest weaknesses has been state and local governments which have laid off 450,000 americans. these are teachers, firefighters, congress should pass a bill putting them back to work right now, giving help so that they are not occurring. in addition, we have more than 1 million construction workers out of work. there is nothing responsible at waiting to fix your roof until it caves in. we have a lot of the maintenance in this country. we could be putting a lot of people back to work. there is work to be done and workers to do it. let's put them back to work

right now. the housing market is stabilizing. there are still millions of responsible homeowners who have done everything right the struggle to make ends meet. as i talked about this a few weeks ago, let's give them a chance to save an average of $3,000 a year by refinancing their mortgages. that is something we can do right now. it would make a difference. instead of just talking about job creators convert -- creators, congress should give them a tax break for hiring more workers. these are ideas that have gotten strong delegation from independent economists. it would make a difference in our economy. there is no excuse for not passing these ideas. we know they can work. if congress decides they're not going to do anything about this

because it is an election year, they should explain to the american people why. there is going to be plenty of time to debate our plans for the future. it is a debate i am eager to have. right now people should be focused on doing everything we can to keep our recovery going and keeping our country strong. that requires action on the part of congress. that is why i urge them to take a look at some of the ideas that have been put forward. i will take a couple of questions. he is not to go get a fancy job with the national journal. we are very proud of her. congratulations to you, karen. >> can you tell the american people what role the united states is playing in the european debt crisis and you think european leaders have a

handle on what is needed to stem the crisis? you talked about a number of ideas you have party put forward to shield the american economy, to you plan to lay out a speech now that the crisis is escalating? >> a couple of things. the situation in europe is not simply debt crisis. you have countries like greece that have spent more they are bringing in. they have problems. there are other countries that were running a surplus and had responsible fiscal policies but had weaknesses similar to what happens here with respect to the housing market or the real estate markets and that has weakened their financial systems. there are a bunch of issues in europe. it is not simply a debt crisis. it is true that the market's are getting nervous and have started

making imports more expensive for them to borrow. that gets them on a downward spiral. we have been in constant contact with europe over the last two years. we have consulted with them at the head of government and state level. i speak to the leaders in formal settings but also on the telephone or a video conference. our economic teams have gone over there to consult. as i said in my opening remarks, the challenges they face can be solved. right now, the focus has to be on the strengthening their overall banking system in the same way we did back in 2009. making a series of decisive

actions that gives people confidence that the banking system is solid, the capital requirements are being met, stresses that may be out there can be absorbed by the system. i think that european leaders are in discussions about that and they are moving in the right direction. in addition, they are going to have to look at achieving growth at the same time as they are making the structural forms. countries like spain and italy have embarked on some smart structural reforms that everybody thinks are necessary, everything from tax collection to labor markets, a whole host of different issues. but they have to have the time in the space to succeed. if they are cutting in cutting,

and the unemployment rate is going up, and people are pulling back further, from spending money because they are feeling pressure, that can actually make it harder for them to carry out some of these reforms. i think there is discussion now about sensible ways to do with the debt and finances, there is a parallel discussion among european leaders to figure out encouraging growth and showing flexibility to allow some of these reforms -- keep in mind, this can have a potential impact on us because europe is our lording trading partner. -- largest trading partner. a lot of the work we have done has put our financial system on

a much more solid footing. our insistence of increasing capital carmen's for banks means that they can absorb some of the shocks that might come from across the atlantic. folks in the financial sector have been analyzing this and are prepared for a range of contingencies. but even if we were not directly hit in the sense that our financial system stayed solid, if europe goes into recession, that means we are selling fewer goods, fewer services, and that is going to have some impact on the pace of our recovery. we want to do everything we can to make sure that we are supportive of what european leaders are talking about. ultimately, it is edition they have to make in terms of how to move forward -- it is a decision they have to make in terms of how to move forward and accomplish the needs of reform and growth.

the most important thing we can do is make sure that we continue to have a strong, robust recovery. the steps that i have outlined are the ones that are needed. there are a couple of sectors in our economy that are still weak. overall, the private sector has been doing a good job creating jobs. we have seen record profits in the corporate sector. the big challenge we have in our economy right now is that state and local government hiring has been going in the wrong direction. you have seen teacher layoffs, cops, firefighters being laid off. the other sector that is still weak has been the construction industry. those two areas we have directly addressed without jobs plan. the problem is that it requires congress to take action, and we will keep pushing to see if they move in that direction.

jackie calmes. where'd jackie go? >> i want to know if you agree with former president bill clinton who said in the past week that the european policies being described here today are much like those of the republicans in this country, the politics of austerity that would take us in the same direction as europe. the republicans come up for their part, have said that you simply blaming the europeans for problems that have been caused by your own policies. i would like you to respond to both of those, and also, tell us precisely how much time you personally spent on the european situation. >> any other aspects of the question? [laughter] um -- [laughter]

first of all, in terms of the amount of time i spend, i think it is is fair to say that over the last two years, i've been in consistent discussions with european leadership and consistent discussions with my economic team. this is one of the things that has changed in the world economy over the last two or three decades, is that this is a global economy now, and what happens anywhere in the world can have an impact here in the united states. certainly that is true after the kind of, we saw in 2008 and 2009. you know, if you think about the situation in europe, they are going through a lot of the things we went through in 2009, 2010, where we took some very decisive action. the challenge is there is that they 17 governments that have to court and ei -- coordinate.

that makes things more challenging. what we have tried to do is be constructive, to not frame this as us scolding them are telling them what to do, but to give them advice based in part on our experiences here, having stabilized the financial situation effectively. ultimately, though, they are going to have to make a lot of these decisions, and what we can do is prod, advise, suggests. ultimately, they are going to have to make these decisions. what is absolutely true -- this is true in europe, true here in the united states -- is that

we've got short-term problems and long-term problems. the short-term problems are how do we put people back to work out how we make the economy grow as rapidly as possible, how do we ensure that the recovery gains momentum, because if we do those things, not only is it good for the people who find work, not only is it good for families to help them pay the bills, but it actually is one of the most important things we can do to reduce deficits and debt. it is in lot easier to deal with deficits and debt when you are growing, because you are bringing in more revenue and you are not spending as much because people don't need unemployment insurance as much, they don't need other programs that are providing support to

people in need, because things are going to get. -- going pretty good. that is true in the united states and and he europe. the problem president clinton identified is that when the economy is still weak and the economy is still fragile, you resort to a strategy of let's cut more, so that you are seeing government layoffs, reductions in government spending, severe cutbacks in major investments that helped the economy grow over the long term -- if you do all those things at the same time as consumers are pulling back because they are still trying to

pay off credit-card debt, and there is generally weak demand in the economy as a whole, you can get on a downward spiral where everybody is pulling back at the same time, that weakens demand, and that further crimps the desire of companies to hire more people. that is the pattern that europe is in danger of getting into. some countries in europe right now have an unemployment rate of 15, 20%. if you are engaging in too much austerity too quickly, and that unemployment rate goes up to 20 or 25%, that actually makes it harder for them to pay off your debts. and the markets, by the way, respond when they see this type downward spiral happening -- they start making the calculation that if you are not growing at all, you are

contracting, you will have trouble paying us off, we will charge you more, your interest rates go up, and it makes it that much tougher. i think that what we want, but for ourselves but what we have advised in europe as well, is a strategy that says let's do everything we can get to grow now even as we locked in a long-term plan to stabilize our debt and our deficits and start bringing them down in a steady, sensible way. by the way, that is what we proposed last year, that is what has been proposed in my budget. what i said is that make long- term spending cuts >> let's make long-term reforms, let's make sure we have a pathway to fiscal responsibility, but at the same time let's not under- invest in the things we need to

do right now and the recipe of short-term investments in growth and jobs with a long-term path of fiscal responsibility is the right approach to take four, i think, not only the united states, but also for europe. >> republicans saying you are blaming europeans for the failure of your own policy? >> the truth is we have created $4.3 million needed jobs for the past 23 months, over 800,000 this year alone. the private sector is doing fine. where we see weakness is in the state and local government, often times in the cuts

initiated by governors or mayors that are not getting the kind of help they have in the past from the federal government and do not have the same flexibility as the federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in. so, if republicans want to be helpful, if they really want to move forward and put people back to work, what they should be thinking about is how do we help state and local governments and how do we help industries because what they are promoting policies that would result in further layoffs, would not provide relief in the housing

market and would result, i think most economists estimate, in slower growth and fewer jobs, not more. all right? >> there are reports of terrorists killed. there are reports of cyber attacks on iranian nuclear program said you ordered. what is your reaction to the information getting out in public and lawmakers accusing you of leaking the details to support your reelection bid? >> first of all, i will not comment on the details of what are supposed to be classified items. second, as commander-in-chief, the issues that you have

mentioned touch on our national security, critical issues of war and peace, and they are classified for a reason, because they are sensitive and because the people involved may, in some cases, be he in danger in these missions -- be in danger in these missions. when this information or reports, whether true or false, surface on the front page of newspapers, that makes the job of folks on the front lines tougher, and it makes my job tougher.

that is why since i have been in office my attitude has been the zero tolerance for these kinds of leaks and speculation. now, we have mechanisms in place where if we can root out folks that have leaked, they will suffer consequences. in some cases these are criminal acts when they released information like this and we will conduct thorough investigations as we have in the past. the notion that my white house would purposely release classified national security information is offensive. it is wrong and, you know, people, i think, have the

better sense of how i approach this office and how people around me approach this office. we are dealing with issues that can touch on the safety and security of the american people, our families, or our military personnel, or our allies, so we do not play with that. it is a source of consistent frustration at not just from my administration but from previous administrations when this stuff happens, and we will continue to let everyone know in government, or after they leave government that they have certain obligations. as i think has been indicated by these articles, whether or not the information they receive

is true, the writers have stated it did not come from this white house and that is not how we operate. >> is the investigation going on now? is that what you are saying? >> what i'm saying is we consistently, whenever there is classified information that is put out into the public, we try to find out where that came from. thank you very much, everybody.

>> house speaker john boehner and eric cantor blamed president obama for the weak economy. the spoke to reporters after the president called on congress to pass jobs legislation. he also said they will extend current tax rates. >> good morning, everyone. mr. president, take it from me, the private sector is not doing well. listen, the american people are still asking, where are the jobs? stopping the looming tax hikes will help job creators because they will have more certainty about what the tax rates are going to be and it will create a better environment for them to create jobs. we will vote next month on extending all the current tax rates and the president should

assure the nation that when the bill gets to his desk he will sign it into law. we know that the president is making it harder with the health-care bill law for companies to hire and we are learning more about the back room deals that led to its passage. e-mails obtained show the white house treated billions of dollars in policy concessions to pharma for millions of dollars worth of advertising. the administration created and managed a super pac paid for by pharma and run by the west wing of the white house. this is wrong and the administration must be held accountable for their actions. >> good afternoon. as the speaker said, we just listened to the president said the private sector is doing

fine and my question would be to the president, are you kidding? the private sector is not doing fine. frankly, i would ask the president to stop engaging in the blame game. it is not because of the headwinds of europe. it is not despite of his attempts in congress, it is not because of house republicans. it is because of failed stimulus policies and other items in his agenda that small businesses in this country just are not growing, and we know, as the speaker said, it is to talk to -- it is too tough to start a small business. small businesses are facing uncertainty, facing the prospect of the largest tax increase in history, on end but did -- connected with health care costs because of obama- care, and uncertainty because of a hostile regulatory posture taken by the obama

administration in washington. our summer agenda will be focused on making the environment better for small business men and women to grow and create jobs in this country. we will take a bill to the floor that will ensure that taxes will not go on anyone. we will take several measures to the for the begin to cut red tape and roll back regulations this administration continues to turn out, making it more difficult for businesses to create jobs. yes, we will take to the floor a bill that calls for a total repeal of obama-care so we can start over, tell the american people we are on your side, we care about your health care, and we want quality care and affordable price because many americans are looking for that to happen. >> do you think the lack of federal money to state and federal jobs is hurting the

economy? >> i believe the government continues to spend money we do not have. the fact is was looming tax hikes and regulations coming out of washington we have frozen employers in place. if he would have a moratorium on regulations and expend all of the current tax rates we would free employers, provide more certainty for them to go out and begin to hire american people. [unintelligible] >> europe is a drag on the economy? >> europe is a problem. there is no question. it is providing a liquidity issue to the global economy. there is certainly a sense that governments on that continent are not addressing their problems and it should signal to all of us that we have to get serious. we have continued to put forth solutions, to tell the truth

and say we are here to solve problems. >> just because europe has problems does not mean we cannot begin to solve our problems. we can help american job creators by taking the actions we have outlined. there is no excuse why we should wait for the convenience of an election. let's get to work. >> one of the reasons europe is in the situation they are in is because of the austerity measures they tug. >> the reason europe is in the shape they are in is because they waited too long to deal with their problems. that is why i was insisting last summer we address our that the problem. it is why last month by called for us to address our deficit problem. it is the debt in europe. if we do not get busy dealing

with our debt we will be in the same shape. we have time to deal with this. understand the debt is tied to jobs. 16 trillion dollars worth of debt that serves like a wet blanket over the economy schering employers of all sides. if you want to create more uncertainty, let's stop the regulatory -- let's deal with our debt. we will give job creators the freedom to create jobs that they want to create. thank you.

it is a great pleasure to house. i had the opportunity to spend a lot of time with him, most recently during my asia trip, when we met most recently in bali. and at that time, we discussed how important the u.s.- philippine relationship was, the historic ties, the 60 years of a mutual defense treaty, the extraordinary links between filipino-americans that have brought our two countries so closely together.

and we pledged to work on a whole host of issues that would continue to strengthen and deepen the relationship for the 21st century. we talked about how we could work on security issues, on economic issues, on people-to- people exchanges, and on a whole host of regional issues. and i just want to thank president aquino for his excellent cooperation, because we've made a great deal of progress since that time. on economic issues, the philippines is the recipient of a millennium challenge grant that is helping to foster greater development and opportunity within the philippines. we have a partnership for growth that is working on how we can make sure that we are structuring a relationship of expanding trade and commerce

between our two countries. i want to congratulate president aquino for the work that he's done on the open government partnership that is consistent with his campaign to root out corruption that can facilitate greater economic development within the philippines. and on security and military issues, we had discussions about how we can continue to consult closely together, to engage in training together, work on a range of regional issues together -- all of which is consistent with the announced pivot by the united states back to asia, and reminding everybody that, in fact, the united states considers itself, and is, a pacific power. throughout all these exchanges and all the work that we've done i've always found president aquino to be a thoughtful and very helpful partner. and i think that as a consequence of the meeting today in which we discussed not only military and economic issues, but also regional issues -- for example, trying to make sure that we have a strong set

of international norms and rules governing maritime disputes in the region -- that i'm very confident that we're going to see continued friendship and strong cooperation between our two countries. so, mr. president, thank you for visiting. we are very proud of the friendship between our two countries, and we look forward to continuing in the future. >> i would like to thank president obama for all the support that the u.s. has given us in our quest to really transform our society. ours is a shared history, shared values, and that's why america is just one of two that we have strategic partnerships with. today's meeting has really even deepened and strengthened a very long relationship we have, especially as we face the challenges that are before both our countries in the current situation.

and again, we'd like to thank them for all the expressions of support that even now has led to the resolution of situations within our territory. thank you. >> all right. thank you, everybody. >> mr. president, mitt romney says you're out of touch for saying the private sector is doing fine. what's your response? >> listen, it is absolutely clear that the economy is not doing fine. that's the reason i had the press conference. that's why i spent yesterday, the day before yesterday, this past week, this past month, and this past year talking about how we can make the economy stronger. the economy is not doing fine. there are too many people out of work. the housing market is still weak and too many homes underwater. and that's precisely why i asked congress to start taking some steps that can make a difference. now, i think if you look at what i said this morning and

what i've been saying consistently over the last year, we've actually seen some good momentum in the private sector. we've seen 4.3 million jobs created -- 800,000 this year alone -- record corporate profits. and so that has not been the biggest drag on the economy. the folks who are hurting, where we have problems and where we can do even better, is small businesses that are having a tough time getting financing. we've seen teachers and police officers and firefighters who've been laid off -- all of which, by the way, when they get laid off spend less money buying goods and going to restaurants and contributing to additional economic growth. the construction industry is still very weak, and that's one

of the areas where we've still seen job losses instead of job gains. so if we take the steps that i laid out to make sure that we're not seeing teacher layoffs and we're not seeing police officer layoffs, and we're providing small businesses with additional financing and tax breaks for when they hire or if they're giving raises to their employees, if we refinance housing -- or allow homeowners to refinance so they've got an extra $3,000 in their pocket so that they can spend money and contribute to further economic growth, if we're making sure that we're rebuilding, work that has to be done anyway, deferred maintenance on roads and bridges that could put construction workers back to work -- all those things will strengthen the economy, and independent economists estimate it would create an additional million jobs.

goodyou can't give me a reason as to why congress would not act on these items other than politics -- because these are traditionally ideas that democrats and republicans have supported. so let me be as clear as i can be. the economy needs to be strengthened. that's why i had a press conference. i believe that there are a lot of americans who are hurting right now, which is what i've been saying for the last year, two years, three years, what i've been saying since i came into office. and the question then is what are we going to do about it? and one of the things that people get so frustrated about is that instead of actually talking about what would help, we get wrapped up in these political games. that's what we need to put an end to. so the key right now is for folks -- what i'm interested in

hearing from congress and mr. romney is what steps are they willing to take right now that are going to make an actual difference. and so far, all we've heard are additional tax cuts to the folks who are doing fine, as opposed to taking steps that would actually help deal with the weaknesses in the economy and promote the kind of economic growth that we would all like to see. all right. thank you very much, everybody. thank you. thanks. thank you, guys. >> now, a discussion about congressional reaction with recent leaks of classified information. last friday we showed viewers.

this is about revelations that the u.s. and israel were people have gotten agitated about this in recent days. guest: that was a big story. reporters and pundits had speculated about that for years. there was widespread belief that the u.s. and israel were probably behind it because it had done so much damage to the iranian centrifuges, apparently, but this story came out and quoted numerous officials as saying the obama administration signed on to a program begun by president bush called olympic games, which was very much a covert effort to launch cyber attacks. that was quite a huge newsbreak. so it has sort of reached a

tipping point in this town where people on capitol hill in particular are wondering why we have had a number of leaks culminating about covert operations. previously there were stories about the obama administration's drawn program and a way that target are identified, whether the president personally oversees the "kill list as well as other leaks. host: there was a pretty lengthy press conference in which democrats and republicans participated. let's hear dianne feinstein and what she had to say. [video clip] >> when people say they don't want to work with the u.s.

because they cannot trust us to keep a secret, that is scary. when allies become concerned and when an asset's life is in jeopardy or his family is in jeopardy, that's a problem. the plight of intelligence is to be able to know what might happen to protect this country. we cannot do that if the intelligence is no longer kept with strict scrutiny, with in the number of people that need to have it. host: 1 happens after that? the national intelligence director spoke about the leaks and what can be done about them. and the white house response to the call for a special prosecutor. where do you see this all going? guest: there certainly will be hearings. the fact that dianne feinstein,

was a democrat and chairs the intelligence committee has said she is outraged by what she has seen and it's the worst is ever seen in terms of leaks, means it will lead to something. as of now, we have the white house appearing to reject calls for a special prosecutor even though it appears that the justice department opposing national security division has at least partially recuse itself from the investigation, which is why some republicans were calling for a special counsel or a special prosecutor. we have something of a standoff right now. we will see how that goes and whether this dies down. this is not the first time there's been some fuehrer. over leaks to the fuehrer they do tend to die down rather quickly. but i think that we will hear a lot more in congressional investigations that are to come without probably knowing what the real source of the leak is. host: let me show you and our audience, a lot of these stories came out in the new york times and looked as though they were the course of reporting for

a book that came out this week. this story about the drones was in this book. i want to go to this note on sources in the back and read to you what he says --

does that sound like leaks to you? guest: no. he is a very dogged reporting. there's no question he spent months working on this. it does not work that way. they usually get information because reporters are pressing and have to make who a make to talk to. david is someone this particular white house talks to because he has been an important figure in the media in this town and has been distinguished for a long time. i have no doubt that it was mainly his reporting, probably piecing together different parts of conversations that he has had with many different administration officials. that being said, what i'm trying to say is it was not that

the president or one of his top aides said we will tell you all about stuxnet. he was pressing and a some point they decided to crack the door open a little on some of the aspects of the program. that being said, there's no question that the obama political scene has been key to get out the image of the president as being strong on national security. they have talked to other reporters about how good a national-security president the commander in chief is. one of the most effective things obama has done is a covert program, specifically focused on drone strikes on all. , the all so they are trying to get that story out while at the same time not reveal classified information. it is a very tricky line to walk. it is entirely possible that some officials working for the president stepped over the line or appear to have stepped over the line, and reveal classified information they should not have talked about. host: about the reporting of classified information, here -- you as a citizen, are you

concerned about? that is the crux of the discussion as washington is battling its swords over the latest reporting on some classified programs that counteract terrorism. the phone lines are on the screen. you can also send us a tweet and there is facebook and e-mail. dutch ruppersberger is on the house intelligence committee. the's is an editorial from newspaper in his hometown -- now we know about the programs and that gives the opportunity to say do we like them what are your thoughts the editorial sums things up quite well it

leads us into uncharted territories in terms of the new type of war that obama is overseeing it is largely a covert war, which time, the president has felt compelled to justify it morally he has directed some of his top people to speak about it.

is counterterrorism coordinator gave a speech some weeks back at the wilson center, in which he attempted to make that justification. the previous two years they had refused to talk about it. the feeling they need to talk about it in order to make the case of why it is necessary -- you run into the contradiction that diene -- dianne feinstein talk about -- intelligence and classified information are secret for a reason. programs are more effective that way. when they are revealed, lives are put in danger. reporters think about this all of the time. they will make decisions about not printing details because they realize they could put lives in danger. it is a very tough tightrope walk that we do. host: i want to get to calls.

you have written a piece. it is in praise of cyberwar. host: missouri. beverly is a democrat. caller: yes. i am all for knowing everything that our government is doing, secret or not. if it puts somebody's life in jeopardy i do not like that, but if we're willing to have an honest government, we need to be honest and i am glad obama felt it was a moral obligation to tell what he was doing. if you do not, you have germany all over. everything is secret. like the justices you talked about, it was when the far right took over when the judges went south.

if the newspapers go south, we will have a far right country and a holocaust all over again. host: thank you. michael hirsh? guest: i think that is the best argument for talking about this, not necessarily in full detail, but talking about these types of programs. this is the new way of american war. if there is anything like an obama doctrine, it is to have a very light footprint, use special operations and droned strikes as a way to pursue national objectives rather than sending in large armies. we are not going to do that for a long time. we have to have a discussion about this. this is not an aberration.

it is probably how we will see worse conducted for all long time in the future and it does not matter who is elected. i have a feeling mitt romney will adopt these policies. it's called there is a list of the five recent -- host: there is a list of the so-called leaks.

host: san antonio, texas. bob is a republican. caller: i wanted to talk about the security clearances. people are leaking secret information, classified information. it is dangerous for the people out there trying to help the country and -- and when you become a person with a security clearance, you have an obligation to maintain that. there are penalties. the people that are doing it need to be prosecuted because it is endangering the lives of those that are keeping us safe. it's called thank you.

michael hirsh, anything about security, -- host: thank you. michael hirsch, anything about security clearances? guest: this a administration has been more aggressive than any other in pursuing leaks, attempted to prosecute someone at the national security agency that had discussed a flawed computer system. many of us thought that was in the national interest. yet, when questions are raised even by fellow democrats like dianne feinstein about these latest leaks about the central program that we have this attitude that we do not need a special prosecutor, the do not seemed to be concerned, which

only lends itself to charges made by john mccain and republicans that these leaks were for political purposes and the president wants to present himself as tough on national security. as long as the white house effects the story going away, these will be prevalent. host: we are talking to michael hirsch about leaks. let's hear your defense upper cyber war. guest: is a facetious headline, but there has been too much human cry over the danger of cyber war in the future and what we have seen very possibly with a computer virus and other efforts against iran is a program that might have kept the israelis from doing an actual attack on iranian nuclear facilities, which could

have been disastrous for all sides, the specially israel and the u.s. so, the point is if this is the only substitute, it is better than real war, and i also argue that as long as we have cyber capabilities built up by russia, china, we could have a situation like the cold war, or where there was a sense both sides would begin a standoff. if the u.s. were somehow in tension with china, the chinese might not be eager to hit the u.s. if they thought gps would be taken out, in the same way the u.s. would if they thought satellites were in jeopardy and that might lead you to a situation where you are less

likely to launch an attack, and that is for the good. host:, the hill, called this morning -- "the hill this morning. next, penciled -- pensacola, florida. caller: thank you. mr. michael hirsh and people that hold his viewpoint seem to be very '90s. having had some experience in -- and i need. having had some experience in security is -- people did not realize what it does to methods. we had the leak in the middle east very recently. s. senator dianne feinstein

pointed out, she is correct that we will lose cooperation of other intelligence agencies. this nation needs to strengthen laws by adopting something similar to what britain heads, going after these people and putting them in jail. there is a law against leaking classified information. the final point is you could pick a good argument about what should and should not be classified. i think this country over- classified. the argument is solved. when you read the information you are breaking federal law. it is that simple. host: thank you. guest: the caller seems very well-informed and his points are well-taken -- this is a direct threat to sources, methods and a gathering of intelligence.

i think the point that senator dianne feinstein was making are extremely valid. if you do not pursue weeks like this, and your covert, -- leaks like this and your covert programs continue to be exposed, the people your intelligence agencies work with will be less likely to cooperate. that is a direct threat to the way this country conducts war. i agree there should be a probe into what happened here. host: let's listen to mike rogers, house representative, republican chair of the intelligence. [video clip] >> in publicly available comments and appears the sources of these leaks could be in position to influence investigations.

we're still trying to agree on where this is the best place to happen. it must be complete. it must be in power to examine any office or department of the united states government, free of influence from those who conducted or reviewed the programs, fair and it must be non-partisan. two problems. one is we get to the bottom of a growing and serious problem. second, we put together legislation quickly that gives the tools to the intelligence community to prevent this from happening in the future. i've afford to working with the members here to make sure that -- i look forward to working with the members here to make sure that happens. host: the chairman talking about how he hopes an investigation could be structured, but what he -- what does he mean when he says they

could influence the investigation? guest: that was referred to earlier where some of the senior officials who may have been -- i do not know as i certainly do not know who the sources were for the media outlets that reported the story is -- i do know what my sources are and i've written about these programs -- but the question is whether some of those senior officials would be both in a position to leak the information and in a position to make a decision about whether there should be an investigation, but the special counsel for example. that is an obvious conflict of interest. so, that is a concern. host: can you explain the process by which a special counsel would be appointed? this covers make the decision or the administration -- does

congress make the decision or the administration? guest: the administration, and they reject that, lending itself to the suspicion that some of these leaks might have been politically motivated in an election year. the point is a special counsel is perceived as needed when an investigative body might be in a conflict of interest, may have been involved in something like a cover up, where the issue that needs to be investigated so you do not have a traditional source that can be relied on, so you need an independent counsel. that is the argument behind it. the argument here would be that perhaps the national security division of the justice department was somehow involved

and cannot investigate itself. host: this tweet. guest: again, there is a very tough line to walk. if somebody is breaking the law clearly and talking about information to someone that is not authorized to get it there is justification for investigation and possibly prosecution. you cannot simply flout the laws and expected will be observed in the future. that is the point that people like mike rogers are making. i cannot argue with that. host: jacksonville, florida, for michael hirsch, naomi. caller: good morning. i want to speak to your guest just me and him because he is sketching around the edges, trying to protect our president. let's go back to scooter libri.

do you remember him? guest: i do. caller: the remember what they did to this man because of some one the worst in the department -- worked in the department and how they went after him when he was not even the leaker. i'm just a normal woman looking at all of this, how different it is under this president. that was to meet a minor event. here you have a budget that was to be a minor event. -- that was a minor event to me. here, you have a major event and mr. michael hirsch feels that he does not recommend a special prosecutor to go out and find out in this small group of people.

guest: i am not recommending anything. i am simply trying to lay out the issues. there are parallels to this and the allegations of the misuse of the intelligence that led to scooter libby's prosecution. that was obviously about a war in which a lot of people died. i do not except the point that this was a minor issue and this is a serious one. they were both serious. it is not always clear-cut. there are legitimate reasons for a serious probe into what happened here. at the same time, i think the

media was doing its job. i am certainly not defending the obama administration. there is also reason to believe this may have been politically motivated in an election year in which the president is in a tough fight with mitt romney. all of this has to be considered. guest:, well, the best argument is to go back to kenneth starr and the whitewater investigation morphed into the model kolinsky -- monica lewinsky issue that morphed into something different because the prosecutor kept looking. there are concerns of this could become an open-ended operation. host: we have a lot of people

tweeting about bradley manning, the soldier being prosecuted. do you see parallels? guest: he was a soldier that was alleged to have divulged the state department cables and lead them to wikileaks and were printed and published all over the world. of course there are parallels. it is a completely legitimate question. why is the government prosecuting bradley manning, and appears at this moment less than eager to pursue leakers who might be in the white house itself. you have to wonder about consistency. host: georgetown, mass.. dan is an independent. caller: thank you. hi country, the constitution. -- i want to go back to the

foundation of our country, the constitution. it is clear that the founders were looking for to the biggest problem the people in the country were going to face and that is the pot -- the power and size of the government and that is why we could have arms to protect ourselves for an -- from an overwhelming, over- reaching government. here we are. the government basically has unlimited control. they secretly kill people with drones. they have been authorized to use them in the domestic united states.

the u.s. military has the authority to detain and shipway american citizens with no evidence, no injury or trial. -- jury or trial. people are scratching their heads, busy, raising kids and going to work, and it takes a lot to dig into this. we are losing our rights on a daily basis. host: thank you. guest: no, some of the things the caller said are not true. there are no drone strikes authorized in the united states. the military is not allowed to detain citizens here in the united states. his larger point is a concern of a lot of people -- it is government too big, too secretive and are we not able to hold them accountable? that goes back to the constitution and is why we're having these debates. that is why the obama-care

administration felt they needed to try out some of the rationale for the drone program because of these constitutional issues. this is not a country that can conduct a secret war. it does need to be debated. yet you come up against this issue of classified information. it becomes a tough issue to come down on either side. host: said antonio, texas. good morning. democrat. caller: these are good and necessary for the country to grow. take 9/11. cia and fbi offices were in building seven. bad building fell down -- that building fell down seven hours later.

of course there should be gary krist -- leaks. they should be able to speak and say how is it that our building fell down and they should be thoroughly investigated. i have never heard of anyone that had an office in power seven come out and say anything. leaks are necessary. host: let me stop you. leaks are necessary? guest: one of the issues that becomes clear as to why you need open government is because when you keep something secret it lends itself to conspiracy theories like the one this caller outlines which persists that somehow 9/11 and what happened at the world trade senator was at least partially the result of some sort of u.s. government conspiracy, and there's been no evidence to suggest that. again, it is one reason you need a public airing of issues, and why a certain amount of

leaking, not necessarily of classified information is seen as necessary. by think it is necessary -- i think it is necessary. it is a way of getting people to talk about things in a way they would not if they were on the record. it is the way that washington works. there is no getting around that. host: thank you for being here. there'll be more discussion in this town about the leaks, whether or not to investigate, and the programs behind them, how we are confronting people who would do this country harm in the age of cyber security. thank you for being here, michael hirsch. >> tomorrow, david limbaugh

talks about his new book "the great destroyer." raven brooks talks about social media sites promoting the progressive agenda. dr. donald lindberg talks about how electronic health records are filed. >> they are often referred to as the conscious of the congress. after working there for two years, i could not think of a better name. >> angela rye on the role of today's caucus. >> it is designed to make sure the gun together on issues plaguing the community at

large, their district. really come together to discuss it dancing the causes of people who do not have a voice. >> more with angela rye 8:00 eastern. >> now, the radio correspondent dinner. john boehner and comedian, actor, singer wayne brady. [cheers and applause] >> put your hands together for your rtca executive committee members. [applause]

a graduate of yale university, weighing in at a balk and a quarter from c-span the ben o'connel. a graduate from sarah lawrence college, the beautiful and funny libby casey. from penn state university, producer for the else is there a network, also known as mr. president, jeff.

from the university of washington, a producer for cbs news, her awesome ness, jill jackson. from indiana university of pennsylvania, a camera guy for a fox news and 2012 rtca chairman, john wallace. from north carolina state university, multimedia and

journalist for cbs forleigh ann caldwell. from montreal, canada, reporting live -- todd. finally, ladies and gentlemen, your dinner chair, the first camera guy elected as chairman of the rtca executive committee, jay mcmichaels.

[applause] >> i think i will stand behind this because i feel more comfortable this way. can everybody hear me in the back of the room? that is a guy i followed all over the earth for about 20 years. i am done. this is an incredible group of kids who work alongside a group

called the musicianship. we want to thank the musicianship for being here tonight. we have not heard the last from these guys. trust me. [applause] let's get right to it. as the first camera dead to chair the rtca executive committee, what an honor it is for me to be here tonight as the host of the 68th annual radio and television correspondents association dinner. as most of you are aware we are the celebrity. dinner-- celebrity predinner. we do not have any celebrities here. i looked. except for this guy that looks like george clooney. i do not think he knows anything about darfur.

he is over here going, what about me? he can write an awesome article about us. >> the greatest dinner generation ever. one of our members who could not be here tonight is my cnn radio colleague, she will be the chair person in 2013. we want to say hi to lisa. we want to keep the energy going. we have the rest of the table to introduce. with that said, give me that skin.

the director of the gallery, mike. we have the communications director for the speaker of the house and all-around nice guy, kevin smith. you have to watch out for kevin. he is very animated. we have the chairman of the house rules committee from the 46 district in the foothills of the great state of california, david dreier. next is the assistant democratic leader of the house and

congressman representing the six district from a state where my mom lives, south carolina. from south carolina state university please welcome james clyburn. on this end of the table we have the director of the house radioed tv gallery and a great friend of mine for the last 25 years, all got ramirez. next is a communications director for the house minority leader pelosi, please give it up -- next to nadim is a communications director. please welcome adam.

it is my high honored to introduce to you representing the eighth district in the great state of ohio, i do not want to say too much more because i do not want him to get too upset. a graduate of xavier university, speaker of the house of representatives, john boehner. [applause] by the way, that was a fatal mistake on my part. i am a camera guy. is ok.

thank you. so tonight will be like jimmy fallon and the routes, only we do not have jimmy fallon or the roots. thank you for joining us tonight. it is an honor to be here. i want to see how much we have appreciated your efforts to expand the press coverage on capitol hill. as well as for the additional parking for the crew covering the hill. as you all know, mr. cliburn, mr. dreyer, mr. john boehner, if the cruise cannot park-- crews

do not park, you cannot get on tv. this is a symbiotic relationship last time i checked. that is just a thought for my future parking schemes. i hope to take that under consideration. did you like this? i also want to thank your staff. you guys have been great in helping us. also on the senate side i would like to thank the members of the house rules committee. this benefits all of the networks. the faster they get to the hill, the faster you get your comments on the air and the faster you make ad dollars. right? that is how it all works. our association is fortunate enough to have the house and senate readier to the gallery here tonight.

they help us do their job on capitol hill. we could not do our jobs without them. i want to extend a special thanks. we have and the, brian, and aliyah. thank you on the house side. on the senate side we have michael lawrence, we have a thompson braddock. we have a mallory. i want to thank you guys as well. i also want to get some things out of the way. i want to thank our as monsters. hugo creative has provided all of the graphics from the opening video you just sawincluding the

new logo. it is a large logo. all the way down to the programs and one bottle labels. they will be showing us all what a google hangout is. we hope you are going to the after party because we put an effort into it. it is a friday night, so no one is going home early. a camera guy is throwing a party. thank you. president obama could not attend our dinner this evening. according to a spokesperson, he is a pity -- busy governing and campaigning.

they give for that response. we like to call up the white elephant in the room. president obama really does not like these dinners at all. he pretty much hates them. the white house thought it would help us out tonight by sending us a message from the president. here is a message from the white house. ♪ good evening correspondence. i am sorry i was unable to attend this year. >> i have a struggling economy to take care of so what i sit down with people -- >> i am sure it will be a wonderful evening.

i wanted to send a message wishing you well. we need strong journalists more than others. >> a specially all of the hollywood gossip. >> we are lucky to have all the talented reporters and correspondence. >> all of the interesting>> alls is coming from the internet. >> we are lucky to live in a society that values freedom of speech. >> [unintelligible] except when it is spoken by louie ck. >> where would we be without the freedom to say what we feel? >> none of you will be interviewing joe for a long-ass time. >> i know you work your hardest every day to create a better society. >> all of you except for fox who is doing everything it can get to create a society of --

that believes i am a socialist moslem. after four years i still have to defend my faith. why does he need to wear magic underwear. >> rufus. [unintelligible] >> you blow up my earpiece. >> may god bless you, and god bless america. >> even you, greta van susteren. good night. [applause] >> where is greta van sundstrand. last i checked she was boycotting this organization. thank you,, the central, and the

comedy team of key and peele. on a more serious note, we give journalism awards out every year, and this year will be recognizing excellence of the hist nbc reporter david bloom, a cbs face the nation producer john, and this year we have on -- added a new zero award honoring the memory of cnn photojournalist jerry thompson. [applause] our first award of the evening -- of what you did to me? -- look what you did to me, boehner? i put all my money on him crying first.

12 kids, fuzzy rabbits. flood the golden retrievers. -- fluffy golden retrievers. the plume of war will be -- bloom award will be presented by three young ladies that i used to see as young girls when the they were brought on white house trips during the clinton years. they would play with my kids. it is crazy to look at them now. there are all grown up now. please welcome nicole, christine, and eva bloom. [applause] >> our dad passed away and 2003

while covering the war in iraq. it is our honor to be here to have the privilege of recognizing our father as well as other journalists to read this award is for daring reporting and excellence in journalism. >> this year's david bloom award for the first time honors two incredibly brave journalists. the rest their lives to share -- both journalist risk their lives to share images inside of syria during the yearlong military crackdown that has cost more than at 9000 lives. internet censorship and syria is expensive. -- extensive. the syrian government has kept most independent journalists from entering the country.

they are making first and reporting next to impossible. most troubling of all, but journalists have been arrested and even killed. the bbc was one of the first to sneak into syria up from 11 on. -- from neighboring lebanon. they spent a week under cover with the factors and the syrian -- with defectors from the syrian military where some of the worst violence has taken place. they reported on this group's struggle to defend themselves against the syrian government's brutal and deadly crackdown. >> these men are taking in the guns in support of the growing insurgency. they have been under siege for 40 years. the syrian army is all around. there will probably shoot if they spot us.

after months of protesters being shot down in the street, the myth of an armed insurgency has become reality. the army is going on the offensive. a sniper prepares to fire on a soldier guarding an army post. they believe that they can win if there is help from our side. more joined every day. a gun battle signals another defection. we heard him screaming, he says. we could not go back. there were too many troops chasing us. they have been ordered to shoot unarmed protesters. we are all one people, one blood. we cannot just kill them. [applause]

>> cbs news foreign correspondent clarissa ward was also reporting from syria up. she entered the country alone posing as a tourist. she captured a rare and first hand look at the tragic resolution -- revolution. meeting with anti-government activist and members of the three syrian army. ward was blindfolded in the back of a car with her journey to meet with the underground group. it facilitated a part of our reporting. >> i entered as a tourist carrying only a small camera. are you scared? >> who is not? >> she took us to a family of this small boy who had been captured by force is the day before. -- shot at a protest the day before. the violence has only fueled the protests.

after a certain point, we were blindfolded to protect the location of the safe house where we would find members of the free syrian army. >> are you not scared that turning this into an armed conflict, civilians might be heard? >> civilians may be hurt in this conflict. >> this 20-year old will be back on the street at the minute he can walk. they are stockpiling medical equipment. basic necessities art scarce. we just had another black out. one soldier pulled out a photograph of his son. he said he was willing to sacrifice himself so that the next generation could be free. [applause] >> under extremely difficult circumstances, both paul would of the bbc and clarissa ward of

cbs offered images that were rarely seen up syria. they embody what the david bloom award is about. not only do they exemplify courage, they continue to apply pressure on policy makers and the international community to stop the bloodshed in we are honored to award this year's bloom awarded to them. [applause] >> thank you so much. i never had the pleasure of meeting your father but we had a lot of friends in common.

they told me what an absolute gentleman he was. he was a much admired correspondent in our business. i am happy to be sharing the platform with you here this evening. syria is not an easy place to work in and we had a lot of help. on our last trip, we spent three weeks hiding. we were taken in by syrians who were taking us in in what was already a very risky place. i did it along with my cameraman and my producer. [applause] he was a medic and a translator as well. i would like to thank the managers of bbc taking some very difficult decisions to send us and their four times now. and also the staff at world news

america. we are only at the beginning of the serious story and have a long way to go. we are absolutely committed to seeing the story through to the end. i am deeply honored and grateful for this award tonight. thank you very much. >> the bureau chief is accepting on behalf of clara's award. issa ward. >> thank you very much ladies. thank you, association. clarissa is disappointed she cannot be here.

she will be very disappointed in ashe is on assignment in europe. missing the rtca wine. she asked me to convey her thanks to everyone here. especially to the many brave the syrians who risked their lives to get in and out of the country so she could tell the story. thank you. [applause] >> thank you bloom girls. our next presenter has been a friend and mentor of mine for the last 20 years or so. he is a hard-hitting, no nonsense, asking hard questions without fear journalist for cbs

news. he will also travel many miles out of his way for a superb a bottle of wine. present this award, please welcome my friend and colleague bill. [applause] >> thank you very much. did i ever tell you my first lot of wind. -- wine? almost any wine is better than no wine at all. thanks for the dinner wine. good evening. this award honors the memory of joan barone. she started out as a researcher and became the executive producer of cbs's "face the nation." women were no where near as represented as they are today.

she was smart and tough and funny and left us too soon. she had the kind of standards that the critics say do not exist anymore. the winners of this honor year after year are proof that the standards do still exist. it is my honor to announce this year's winner of the award. for the "60 minutes," story on congressional insider trading, steve cbs news. i want you to note that the judges called his story a journalistically strong piece of work which showed a spotlight on the inequity of lawmakers to make the stock trades on nonpublic information.

these stories served as a catalyst to move the insider- trading bill. it showed how journalism can make the difference in lives of everyday americans. i think she would be proud. i think so, too. colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, steve croft. [applause] >> you bought some insurance stocks. did you make those trades based on non-public information. >> i did not do it. >> do you think it is all right for a speaker to accept very preferential and favorable stock deal? you participated while you were speaker of the house. >> is only a conflict if you decide to will elaborate on a

false premise. it is not true. that is that. [applause] >> thank you very much. i want to of knowledge gabrielle and kyle rose and who were the producers on this story. i want to thank peter for giving us an early look on some of the research he had been doing. i want to thank kris for giving us the visa to come down and do this story. for showing us where to go when we got here and helping us out and telling us which news

conferences we could go to and which we could not. it is quite an honor for somebody from "60 minutes," who has never lived a day of his life in washington. i always somewhat regretted that. to be here among you to night -- i want to thank all of you, whether you work on the hill or are a member of the congress or a speaker of the house, or journalists, for keeping this story alive. for showing that it is possible to rescue a long neglected piece of very good legislation and enlist support from both sides and get it passed. thank you very much. [applause] >> cool.

this next award is a very personal or for myself and many of the people in this room. this award is new, meaningful, and it serves the journalism community well. i want to thank my colleagues for approving the creation of the jerry thompson award. please welcome my friend and colleague, the second camera guy ever elected as the chair, john wallace. >> good evening. i want to take a moment to tell you about a very special journalist, jerry thompson. we now have an award to honors him and his legacy. he was the epitome of what journalists stand for to ensure -- i am sure that all of you have worked with someone like

him during yr career. we cared for him greatly, because above all, he represents all of the best qualities of a human being. he was a videographer at cnn for 25 years. he was a professional, an enormously talented, always reliable, and a mentor to many. he was always willing to lend a hand, even to the competition he was a friend to all of us who work in the field. he was courteous and kind to everyone he met. cnn new the talented they had in the jerry, so when the berlin wall fell, he was called upon to go there a media the.

they knew he would get the best pictures, and he did. i knew what i had in a partner, through the smaller moments that told a bigger story. one time during an interview in williamsburg, he stopped to care for a bird who had flown into a window. he ended up driving miles so that they could get the care that it needed. he always did what was right. i was his partner for six years, and honored to call him a friend for 25 years. i have never met a finer human being. what made him unfamiliar to most of you, he was a pretty quiet guy. he would not jump in your face if you got in his shot.

he would go about his business and always get the job done. i never heard him utter a foul word the whole time i knew him. that should be a separate award for someone in our business to right there. [laughter] he lost his life to bring cancer -- to brain cancer a little over a year ago. he left behind his wife and two teenage sons and his young son brandon. inez is with us here tonight. would you please stand up and be recognized? [applause] this award honors his memory, but also what those in of fields emulate in and their careers.

it is our way of saying thank you for being a friend and colleague for what can be a demanding profession. i am proud to say that the first recipient is also a friend and -- respected colleague. please join me in honoring our cbs colleague, george christian. [applause] where is george? where is george? we have a few more things here. >> and his decades as a photographer at cbs, he had a front seat to history.

he was the network pulled camera. he was aboard air force one on september 11, and covered the white house for more than 40 years. he was in south africa for the release of nelson mandela. along the way, he continued to grow his craft and was recognized as one of the best photojournalist in the country. he can assemble and create a working at a news bureau anywhere in the world. george is known for entering a -- mentoring the younger generation at cbs, and as -- for his loyalty he is truly walking in the footsteps of the late jerry thompson. >> i want to say a word about george christian. owlet the headline first. he is the best photojournalist that i have ever worked with. it is one thing to have your pictures in focus. it is one thing to have the distance right. what george brings to the table

is that he has the sense of knowing when something is going to happen and where it is going to happen. >> it is left to all of us to tell you about george because he would never let on that that he was anything but a humble camera man. any president from richard nixon on could tell you all about george. he is an uncompromising journalist, a finder of facts, in addition to being an absolute artist with a camera. on the night that richard nixon resigned the presidency for the first time in american history, he ordered everyone out of the oval office as he prepared to make his address, everyone except for george christian. every time i went to the white house to interview george bush, it was a christian that he spoke to more than i.

the president was proud to see him because he knew -- he knew about george's uncompromising values and ethics when it came to journalism. george has been a fixture in the washington pyrrho of cbs news for so many decades, and a teacher to every young man who has come through there. we have all learned so much from george. he has been so instrumental in everything that we do here at cbs news that i worry if george were to ever retire, we would have to take the seat out of the cbs. -- the c out of cbs. [applause]

>> i do not believe what i just saw. jerry was a great guy and had a lot of talent he was loved by all of his colleagues. to be the first recipient of this award, this makes me speechless. i do not know what to say. i would like to ask that my wife marion please stand up. [applause] in the last couple of weeks -- i've heard people say things to me, congratulations, poops, i am sorry. this is a complete and total surprise. thank you everyone. thank you. i do not know what to say.

thank you very much. i appreciate it. [applause] >> just so you know how these awards work, we had nothing to do with how any of these people were chosen we had subcommittees to work on these, and we were free and clear of any of the decisions that were made. when we got out that george won this award, we were both very happy about this. cbs has a total suite tonight. george just said that the check was in the mail. [laughter] i've been all over the earth with george christian.

that act and do anything. -- that guy can do anything. it is incredible, and no one is more deserving than the -- for the award. that award was not a competition of any type. it was simply about the humanitarian and a colleague and a professional that we all look to and admire and trust. that is george christian. thank you george. how many camera guys are in the room tonight? let me see some hands. a few more than before. that call to the bureau chief helped. i want to talk about an organization that we recognize and support and help. it is called radio roots.

it was created by one of our colleagues. it is an after-school program that offers inner-city youth the opportunity to learn about and developed journalism skills. ethics and technical training. if you would like to make a donation, -- it is a worthy cause. i have done it that some of my own time to it. these kids are really hungry to be journalists. professional journalists. they have a passion for it, and it is a great group. for our guests of honor, john boehner. i was told he was not going to be funny. he does not do funny.

he is that funny. -- bad at funny. we just want speaker boehner to speak. the speaker never attends these dinners, but somehow we got him here tonight. [applause] we have a pretty special relationship. i don't think he knows that either. we have a lot in common, we have football in common -- he played in high school under a legendary coach. i played at university. i was a quarterback and he was a linebacker. linebackers hate quarterbacks.

i was confused one night and told him he played center. he told me to back up. i didn't play center. i told them i just wanted him to come to dinner. [laughter] he has a 10, and i do not. -- tan, and i do not. i say hi to him in the hallways. he does not speak to me because i am wearing a camera. i would like to show you some voters of are more touching moments. -- photos of our more touching moments. i was showing them how to take a

snap from center. >> he looked like he wanted to practice a little bit. this is the speaker of letting me know i should probably go on a diet soon. i think his words were, "that is kind of big." this is the speaker looking lovingly at me. yes, we have a man that crash. -- man crush. he is going to cry, i know it. from laughter. please put your hands together for the speaker of the house, john boehner. [applause] >> thank you. i wish you would get your camera out of the way. i m tripping over it. thank goodness you do not have

that steelers hat on. we have seen enough of it already. good evening, everyone. i hope all of you are fined. -- fine. some of you are slow out there. it is truly an honor to be waned brady's warm up act to night. -- wayne brady's warm up act. i mentioned that i was going to be sitting next to the guy that host let's make a deal. one of my colleagues said, but do not even think about it. so you talked -- you can imagine that they are already circulating a letter. when i get ready to do an event like this, my staff usually comes in and tells me what to say.

more accurately, they usually tell me what not to say. you cannot go out there and make fun of the press. i say, fine, i do that all they anyway. he is loud and reared and taller than everybody. the hate yourself. -- behavior yourself. -- p. hate yourself, jr.. i think we should take our work seriously. you only teased the ones that you love. i never believe we should take ourselves as seriously as most people here do. i am trying to make our life a little easier. i was happy to work with other

folks on capitol hill to help expand media. it was not much of a list, but when they said to me that expanded media access did not mean i had to do an interview. -- with ed schultz. that was my idea of a grand bargain. some of you are out there tweeting. that is not real polite. and it is having a real tough week. i do not watch either, so i do not know. my staff told me to say it. the i have come a long way when it comes to dealing with the media. back in 1952, just as radio and television were coming a live, they banned cameras and microphones in all areas. uncovering all public proceedings. they also refused to do any sunday shows. you hear that?

the one who followed him was not much better. he once said that the media plays a largely intrusive role on capitol hill. what gave him that idea? tip o'neill came along. his point was that the public opinion of congress -- wait until they put us all on tv? then there was newt. he is in a league all by himself. when it comes to the media. when it comes to almost anything. these days, making our operation more transparent and accountable is a real priority. we have got cameras and a rules committee now. you can watch all of my press events on line.

a word to the allies. before you go up there, understand that the microphones and cameras are already on. i learned this the hard way when we were waiting for the president to come, and i was standing up there with the vice president. we were talking about golf. thank god we were talking about golf. it could have been anything. thank goodness it was just golf. people ask what we do up there. usually what we do -- what i do is just listen because joe talks. he tries to give me advice on keeping it together. you know the rest of the story.

i am proud of the fact that we have opened up the people's house to a vibrant congress. i think that is a good thing for all of us. i never imagined i would have the chance to be the speaker of the house. never imagined i would appear on all of these programs. i am thankful for the privilege and opportunity to make all of you look good. before i close, this is going to sound funny, we brought together the first branch of government and the fourth the state. i want to a knowledge everyone who did a great job for all of us on capitol hill.

[applause] i want to thank them and their staff and the people who keep all of the trains running on time and help all of us do a better job on behalf of the american people. thank you for having me and god bless the congress and got less are united states. -- god bless the united states. >> for those of you who do not know, he is a merlot man. he loves it. we wanted to get him a good bottle of merlot. we found out there was a $10 limit to the kids we could give to congress. so --

we went to 7-11. [applause] the guide told us this taste just like merlot. why don't you get ready, but do not start yet. i want to thank a couple of people joining us here. you have helped us of immensely on our projects. really great work from the awards committee people. amazing work.

this has been a fun at dinner tonight. it is not over yet. we have a wayne brady still. i would like to hear from the howard thunder machine one more time. ♪

>> that was thunder machine. i see people walking. either you are going to the bathroom or you are coming right back, we are about to see wayne brady. he is totally unpredictable. this is going to be amazing. he needs no introduction. he is a superstar performer, a grammy nominee, an amazing musical artist. he will star in a new show on abc in july called "trust us with your life." please welcome wayne brady.

[applause] >> hello, everybody. how're you doing? c'mon now. i understand you are all very wealthy and you are full. not to criticize, but the thunder machine was amazing. they were playing their behinds off. and you were -- that is so wonderful. that they are doing this. could you play again and every single person clap your hands to the beat to make howard feel this. if you guys could play for me.

you can do all that you were doing. [laughter] ready? >> one, two -- ♪ >> wait a second. stop. i'm sorry. there was one table that was so eager -- wow. save that. now i know what i'm working with. this is a good thing. thank you for that intro. those of you who do not know me, i started off as an improvisational comic on a show called "whose line is it anyway?" of done a bunch of other stuff. i am going to need you to be active part of this even though

you are very happy with to liquor that was provided free. we're going to do a little bit of improvisation that i think you will be comfortable with. we are going to do an improvisational rap, because that is what you look like you love. [laughter] oh yeah, for real. a one i show you that this is truly made up on the spot. we have this easel right here and we are going to get words from you folks in the audience. in fact, i need an assistant. i need an assistant to help me. who would like to volunteer to help me? i would love to get a lady. you, right there. your dress was calling to me. give her a big round of applause.

hello, madam. what is your name? >> shawmut thomas, nbc news. >> nice to meet you. i'm going to give you this microphone. in order to make this fly, i'm going to get words from the audience. i am going to take them word by word and create to the song as we go along. besides being my word turner and page person, you will also be my backup dancer. >> no problem. >> she said that quickly. no problem, back to you. back to you, wayne. and my family from howard, if you could back me up on this. that is what we're going to do. i needed words and and you never hear on the radio in a hip-hop song.

pickles. true. let's make it hard. i know we have a lot of intelligent people. sequestration. sequestration. ok. we also have pickle's just to balance things out. more words for me. jubilee. us not what you said? wolf pulitzer. that is not a word, that is an epic event. wolf blitzer. cotillon, you never hear that on hot 97. filibuster. let's get two more words. compromise.

way back there in the glasses. sorry? segue. perfect. now i need something. there are a couple of guys that they are angry about everything. i am going to be angry right now, too. i am angry about something stupid. unmatched socks. let's sing if we can go even further. something i am angry about. puppies. puppies and unmatched socks. why don't we do that. with all of my family from howard be able to come over here? or would that be a logistical nightmare?

he is running, with cymbals. ♪ look at that. you can skip with attitude. that is amazing. ♪ >> how got so much attitude. >> i'm going to use a hand-held for this one. hello, gentlemen, ladies. you guys follow with whatever he is playing. make this up on the spot. don't embarrass me because we are on c-span. everybody over 50 is seeing you. ♪ ♪ puppies, mismatched socks, i

am a bachelor i hate being a bachelor listen i cannot even cut my yard what: they are. i just sit at home all by my lonesome. a sudden there because you see i can get none. people just getting angry at me. people are getting angry at me i got one a sock and the the other is blue and do not have a girlfriend who knew? sitting over here , close have not been washed where's the tide? i do not understand. you do not like me because you

don't have any hair out there and thought i might have a cotillion i am just a bachelor i get busy when i seeing the blues. i cried to myself i hate these puppies i can keep anything alive? not even the puppies. one and keep talking, my girlfriend goes blah blah blah filibuster. did not want to do it. both of us will never reach a compromise. i guess the rest of my life i will be single i cannot afford a memo, i rode upon a segue

mime beautiful backup lady. you guys were amazing. thank you so much. let me help you off of here. this way, this way. that is what i am talking about. [applause] thank you somites. another round of applause for my friends from howard. ladies, you are dismissed. i have never seen four people walk like that. that is awesome. for a school. one would look crazy. [laughter] what i would like to do right now, do you want to do the thing? should we get a lady out of the audience? i was told -- i know we have a lot of news ladies here. there was a weather lady here.

a gwen, or was a completely lives to earlier? to my right? gwen talbot could you join me on stage? could you join me on stage? [vocalizing] hey, gwen. [drumming] nice to meet you. a friend of mine in the audience told me you would like to come on stage is so i figured we would bring you on and talk and then we are going to build a song just for you. she gets her own songs. stand up here. lovely dress, by the way. come on over here. i want you to grab the

microphone. just talk. >> you're not going to make me do the weather? but it is nice out today. i get some credit. >> i do not trust you. tell me about yourself. i know you do the weather. >> right, in washington, d.c. i have been there for 11 years. it is whether whether you like it or not. >> and tell me the secrets to your trade. what are the secrets of the world of whether that you can share with us? you have been doing its 11 years and you do it well. people like you. if they did not like you, you would not do it 11 days. your own secret. >> make sure however i convey my message is that everybody

understands it. the businessman going on the trip, the mother going out for the construction worker. i tried to use basic language and not get scientific. >> so you dumb down to whether four people. we're going to do a song for you right now. incorporating your message of dumbing down the weather, all love song conveyed to you in a way we hope you like. ♪ if our president can do it, i can do it. ♪ i -- i want to make weather with you. precipitation = dew.

it's all we need. keep it simple for the other folks when the water gets really cold, that is what it is doing yes i'm a hot -- i'm coming over the west we collide, and we make what type of weather ooh -- let's get together over the midwest i think you are the best ooh

because you do not use fancy words, that makes me happy when the water comes down you just dumb it down for normal people to see is a cold outside wear a jacket, ok baby, i want you to know, let's make some weather ♪ [applause] thank you for being a part of them. kwame take that from you. let me help you down. thank you. i will watch you do the weather when i am here. which is not often.

you will need to tell me if the sun is hurting me. it is hot. must wear a shirt. we're going to finish this right now. earlier, some of you till thou song titles. this is the true nature of improper right now. -- improv now. the whole thing is just say a tight wire act. i do not know what is coming next. we're going to do three. i am going to -- these titles do not exist. you will never hear them on the radio. unless it is right here. i will read their title and then i will perform the song. we will call out a style of music. the first one as sarah from manhattan.

her title is "stop drunk texting me or i am changing my number." let's do that as an elvis song. ♪ where is the camera? hey, mama. take my number, from your contact list or else when you're drunk or butt dialing, leave me stop drunk texting me or i'll change my number

youryou're out with friends phoneyou ever take your up again i just want to tell him i love them. because i avoid you for a reason your obsessive qualities that make you text me when you are drunk like a river blows into the sea, if you text me again, so help me i will call my friends at at & t. and i won't get back with you no matter what for i i am begging you on my

knees, please do not ever, please stop texting me when you are sitting there in the club and you are like oh my god that's our song and i'm going to move my butt and texting is the same as calling -- that's not cute don't call me anymore ♪ ♪ [applause] that just is not a song title, it is the last eight months of my life.

lauren from baltimore, she is a sensitive type. her song title is, "stay away, your breath is kicking." why don't we do that as the rolling stones? ♪ ♪ i can smell your breath from over here i was sitting there and your breath came out your rear i was standing next to the speaker of the house but it smells like something died when it comes out of your mouth, what the hell are you talking about?

you make me one a crime your breath kicked me right in my eye. because your breath is kicking it smells like doo-doo sticking. [applause] that is a love songs, by the way. this last one is from colin from norfolk. are you here? he chooses not to put his hand up? it says love me even though i am republican. [applause] that sounds romantic so i think

we should close out by doing a little prince. i think it fits. ♪ [vocalizing] i never meant to make you runaway that doesn't mean -- maybe you and i have a varying views on how things should be run

what can i do? because i love you love me even though i am a republican i am just looking out for you hands of government. yeah but to know that i'm not love a net. all i want to do is make love to you

i think i love you i'll make an exeption of do anything to be with you i will pass any bill that needs to be passed yeah love me even though i am a republican right in the heart i have a heart yeah people think of being a

republican makes me a bad person and does not republicans need love, too. when i lay down on my bed of money at night, and the house that i built spelling my name out from hieroglyphics i took from the moon republican needs love [applause]

thank you for having me tonight. i appreciate being here. thank you. what an honor. you guys are amazing. my mama's watching because i am on c-span. mom, i love you. i love you. take care, good night. [applause] >> who knew his keyboard player looks like david spade? i had no idea david spade could play keyboard. ladies and gentlemen, this is what happens when a camera guy throws a party. i hope you have had a great time tonight.

you have been a spammed relentlessly with these e-mails. it is a tradition for one chairman to pass to the other the gavel. it is my honor to pass this gavel to my dear friend john wallace. we're going to do a toast with paper cups because that is what camera guys do. before i give this gavel to john, i want to say thank you to cnn for letting me wrong. to all of my bosses and gave me the time to work on this committee. we got a lot of stuff done in the last year-and-a-half. that is partly because of my bosses letting me do this. with that said, -- i love you, too. i have no clue who you are.

i don't know how people do this. i want to pass the gavel to john wallace from fox news. it is great to have you as a colleague and a friend and the 2012 chairman of the rtca. everyone follow the howard thunder machine to the after party. thanks for coming. have a great time. take care. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

♪

>> just talking about reform the not solve anything. you have to get specific about it. i bet that i could sign on the 90% of the plant's. >> inside the global economy with a warren buffett saturday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c- span. >> two days of live coverage from the printer's row fast this weekend on book tv. starting 11 at saturday, the making of present a chicago. bridge: on the banana man in latin america. at 5:00, convicted as an adult at age 16. his memoir find some coming-of- age in prison.

kilcullen is on texas's role in politics. inside gaddafi's libya at 1:00. a story to tell and watergate. also this weekend, madeleine albright on growing up and not seek -- not see occupied czechoslovakia. book tv on c-span to. >> now the house ways and means committee discusses how to evaluate tax provisions set to expire this year, also known as tax extenders. you'll hear from the tax issues director of the accountability office, jim white. this is an hour and 20 minutes. >> thank you for joining us today on what are commonly known as tax extenders. as most of you know in april we

had the opportunity to hear from a number of our colleagues about the merits of extending or, in some cases, not extending many of these tax policies. by all accounts it was a productive exercise and i commend chairman dave camp for his leadership in providing the opportunity then and now and in the future to examine these tax provisions. list leadership in setting fort a transparent process for reviewing the tax extenders is what the american people expect from their congressional representatives. i think it's likely accurate to say that the days of simply rubber-stamping and extending an entire package of extenders is now behind us, and today we pivot to exploring what we hopefully will hear, and that is ideas to providing a framework that congress should

use in evaluating these tax extenders. our witnesses today will share their views on principles of good tax policy and the specific merits and pet tricks against which congress should test the merits of particular provisions. i look forward to their testimony and the ensuing conversation. before we begin, i would like to take a moment to thank a congressman for serving as a ranking member. congressman richie neal could not be with us because he's attending a funeral for a fallen police officer. i now yield to mr. thompson for his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think i can speak for everyone when we say that our thoughts and prayers are with the family of those in mr. neal's district who lost a police officer today. i know as the father of a

detective, i know that is something that all of us care a great deal about and it is mindful to most of us how dangerous those public servants are. i thank the chairman for convening this hearing today. we appreciate that the subcommittee has decided to begin consideration of certain expired and expiring tax provisions, as this consideration is long overdue. businesses have been desperate for certainty in the tax law when attempting to make decisions that can help to grow the economy. however, many may view today's hearing as actually increasing uncertainty for businesses and for individuals that use these tax benefits. as we learned in our last hearing, so many of these benefits enjoy broad and bipartisan support. their extension should not be difficult. as we learned from the recent jobs report, our economy is struggling and job creation is still too slow in coming. unfortunately, proven job

creation programs have not received adequate consideration in this congress. press reports indicate that the highway conference may be solved and possibly gridlocked and provisions on the president's to-do list to create jobs have not made it to a vote. the public's losing faith in congress's ability to act and act quickly to turn this economy around. frankly, i don't blame them. we've had a hard time finding agreement on a lot of things, but it's important to remember that there are things we can do in this committee that can help alleviate some of the pressures people are feeling and the uncertainties facing businesses. as we learned from the last subcommittee hearing, so many expired provisions that are under consideration today enjoy broad bipartisan support. in fact, many of us are lead sponsors of important job creation provisions, including the new markets tax credit, the r&d tax credit, the conservation easement credit and the list goes on. we've all worked well together

on these provisions and we should now work to get them across the finish line. i appreciate the testimony from the witnesses today, evaluation of temporary provisions is as important as evaluating all provisions in the tax code. there are a number of loopholes that can be closed or provisions that provide windfalls to certain industries that should be examined fiscally close. the temporary nature of provisions should not automatically make it more eligible for termination than some of the provisions in the tax code that are permanent. many of these provisions were enacted on a temporary basis due to budgetary constraints. that does not automatically detract from the merit of the provisions themselves. but today we're talking about provisions that have already expired. businesses large and small rely

on these provisions when making investment decisions. we have allowed almost 18 months of the 112th congress to pass without doing our job to move legislation providing extension of these provisions. i mentioned in detail at the last hearing, last time we had a tax extender hearing a few weeks ago, just how important some of these extenders are to my district and to my constituents. i won't go into detail again, but will mention that mr. gur lack and i have been able to make permanent the enhanced conservation easement incentive. it's one of the most successful tools we have to support preservation of open space and family farms, which protects our watershed and ensures food security. today it has 308 co-sponsors, including the chairman, which i appreciate very much, and wish that we were marking that bill up today or better yet, had it on the suspension calendar. i couldn't agree more with our chairman that this committee

has a duty to ensure that the tax code is working to create jobs and grow our economy. it is an exercise that is necessary and takes time. but so much of the rest of congress is gridlocked. this committee can act quickly and do so in a bipartisan way to extend expired provisions that need to be extended and help kick-start our job creation and get the economy going. i believe that such legislation should include not only job- creating provisions that expired in 2011 but also proven job-creating provisions that were allowed to expire in 2010, such as the build america bonds and the 48-c advanced manufacturing investment tax credit. the committee should engage in proper oversight and review of all the tax provisions to identify those that are meritorious based on their economic performance and find ways to strengthen them and make them permanent.

but this oversight should not come at the cost of inaction on important job-creating provisions. i hope that the subcommittee and the full committee can get to doing our work and get these in front of the full house for a vote and in front of the president for his signature so we can help improve the economy. i thank the chairman for allowing me to read this testimony. >> thank you, mr. thompson. all that and no mention of grapes or vineyards. inside joke. \[laughter] >> can i get unanimous consent to -- >> speaking of unanimous consent, can i have unanimous consent to allow for the submission of mr. neal's opening statement? without objection, well, next it's my pleasure to introduce the witnesses here today. we have an excellent panel of witnesses seated before us. today's witnesses bring both tax policy and oversight experience to us.

today's witnesses begin with, from my left to the right, we'd like to welcome back dr. jim white from the general accounting office, where he is the director for tax issues. dr. white is responsible for g.a.o.'s work pertaining to the i.r.s., tax administration and tax policy. thank you for being here, sir. second, we welcome back dr. donald marron, the director of tax policy for the center at the urban substitute here in washington, d.c. dr. marron's research has focused on tax reform, as he has previously served as the acting director of the congressional budget office and as a member of the president's council of economic advisors. thank you for being here today, sir. third, we will hear from mr. alex brill, a research fellow at the american enterprise substitute here in washington, d.c. mr. brill is an alum of the ways and means committee staff, and he has also served on the president's council on economic

advisors and has served as an advisor to the president's fiscal commission in 2010. welcome back to the room, sir. glad to have you here. and finally, we'll hear from alex gornstein, the undersecretary for housing and community development for the commonwealth of massachusetts. go, celtics! and being from ohio, there's even an added little emphasis on that. \[laughter] thank you for being here today, folks. the subcommittee has received from each of you written statements, and they will be made part of the formal hearing record. as you know, each of you will be recognized for five minutes for oral testimony and then we'll have questions. with that, dr. white, the floor is yourself. >> thank you. mr. chairman, acting members and members of the subcommittee. i'm pleased to be here to

discuss how to evaluate the expiring tax provisions, sometimes called tax extenders. most are tax expenditures, so i will focus on those. however, the evaluation principles i discuss do apply more broadly. tax expenditures, special credits, deductions, deferrals and so on, that reduce the taxpayer's tax liability from what it would have been under a normal tax, under a "normal tax." tax expenditures o have policy goals similar to those of spending programs. they may promote economic development, energy efficiency or research and development, because tax revenue is foregone, some provisions may in effect be viewed as spending channeled through the tax system. like decisions about spending, decisions on whether and how to extend tax provisions involve tradeoffs between policy goals and costs. my written statement summarizes factors commonly used to evaluate government policy, including tax policies such as the expiring provisions. first is the effect of extending the provisions on revenue. tax expenditures shrink the tax base.

they either reduce funding available for other funding activities or require higher tax rates to raise the same amount of revenue from the smaller base.

>> come countries in europe right now have an unemployment rate of 15%-20%. if you are engaging in too much austerity too quickly and that unemployment rate goes up to 20% or 25%, then that actually makes it harder to then pay off your debts, and the markets, by the way, respond. when they see this type of calculation happening they say if you are contracting, you may have more trouble paying us off, so your interest rates are going to go up and it makes it

tougher. so i think what we want both for ousts and what we have advised in europe as well is, let's do everything we can to grow now, even as we lock in a long-term plan to stabilize our debts and deficit and start bringing them down in a steady, sensible way. and by the way, that's what we proposed last year and what we have proposed if my budget. i said, let's make long-term spending cuts, reduce our spending. let's make sure that we have got a pathaway -- a pathway to fiscal responsibility. but at the same time let's not ever in invest in the things we need to do right now to grow, and that recipe in short-term

investments and growth and jobs with a long-term path of fiscal responsibility is the right approach to take for -- i think not only the united states, but also for europe. ok? >> -- you're blaming the european -- for the failure of the policy. >> as i said, we created 4.3 million jobs over the last 23 months, over 83,000 just this year alone. the -- is doing fine. where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy had to do with state and local government. oftentimes cuts initiated by, you know, governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past

from the federal government. and who don't have the same type of flexibility in their federal government in dealing with fewer revenues coming in. and so if republicans want to be helpful, if they really want to move forward and put people back to work, what they should be thinking about is how do we help state and local governments, and how do we help the industry? because their recipe at the moment are basically the kinds of policies that would add weakness to the economy. would result in further layoffs and would not provide housing relief in the market and would result, i think most economists

estimate slower growth. >> details on the national security issues, there's reports of national kill lists and your support of the cyber -- first of all, what information is getting out in public and second, what's your reaction to lawmakers pointing the finger at your administration to help the election? >> well, first of all, i'm not going to commencht on the details of what are supposed to be classified items. second, as commander in chief, the issues that you've mentioned touch on our national security, touch on critical issues of war and peace and are

classified for a reason. because they are sensitive. and because the people involved may in some cases be in danger if they are carrying out some of these missions. and when this information or reports, whether true or false, surface, surface on the front page of newspapers, that makes the job of folks on the front lines tougher, and it makes my job tougher. which is why since i've been in office, my attitude has been zero tolerance for these kinds of leaks and speculation.

now, we have mechanisms in place where if we can root out folks who have leaked, they will suffer consequences. in some cases, these are criminal acts when they release information like this. and we will conduct thorough investigations, as we have in the past. the notion that my white house would purposely release classified national security information is offensive. it's wrong. and you know, people i think need to have a better sense of how i approach this office and how the people around me approach this office. we're dealing with issues that

can touch on the safety and security of the american people, our families or our military personnel or our allies, and so we don't play with that. and it is a source of consistent frustration. not just for my administration but for previous administrations when this stuff happens, and we will continue to let everybody know in government, or after they leave government, that they have certain obligations that they should carry out. but as i think has been indicated from these articles, whether or not the information they have received is true, the writers of these articles have indicated they did not come

from this office. >> are you saying that -- >> what i'm saying is consistently, whenever there is classified information that is put out into the public, we try to find out where that came from. ok? thank you very much, everybody. thank you. >> house speaker, john boehner and -- blame president obama

for the weak economy. mr. boehner also said the house next month will vote to extend current tax rates. >> good morning, everybody. well, mr. president used to ran small business, and mr. president, take it from me, the private sector is not doing well. listen, the american people are still asking the question, where are the jobs? stopping the looming tax hikes will help job creators, because they will have more certainty about what the tax situation will be and will create a better environment for them. we're going to vote next month on extending all the current tax rates, and the president should assure the nation that when this bill gets to his desk, he will sign it into law. we also know the president's health care decision must be

repealed in its entirety. this morning we learned more about the back room deals that were made that led to its passage. emails obtained show the white house traded millions in pharma for millions in advertising. the administration managed a super pack paid for by pharma and run by jim mussina out of the west wing of the white house. this is wrong, and the administration must be held accountable for their actions. >> good afternoon. as speaker said, we just listened to the president say that the private sector is doing fine, and my question would be to the president, are you kidding? did he see the job numbers that came out last week? the private sector is not doing

fine and i would ask the president to stop doing the blame game. it's not because of europe or because of house republicans. it's because of the failed stimulus policies and other temperatures in his agenda that small businesses in this country just aren't growing. and we know, as the speaker said, it's too tough right now to start a small business. small businesses are struggling because of the uncertainty. they are facing the prospect of the largest tax increase in the country and security because of the health care and facing uncertainty because of a hostile regulatory posture being taken by president obama and his administration and this summer we are focused on how we can make the environment better for small businesses and men

and women to help grow our economy. we want to assure taxes won't go up on anybody and take several measures to the floor that will begin to cut the red tape and roll back the regulations this administration continues to churn out making it more difficult for this economy to create jobs. and we want to start over and we can tell the american people, we're on your side and we care about the american people and many americans there looking for that to happen. thank you. >> mr. mayor, the public sector jobs do you think they are hurting the economy? >> no. i believe the government continues to spend money we don't have. and the fact is with these looming tax hikes, regulations coming out of washington, we have frozen customers in place,

and if we would have a moratorium on regulations and extend all of the current tax rates, we would free customers, provide more security for them and go out and begin to hire american people. >> stating yesterday that europe is a drag on the economy? >> sure. europe is a problem. no question. it's providing a liquidity issue to the global economy. there's certainly a sense that governments on those continents aren't addressing their problems, and it should be a signal to us that we have got to get serious. i agree with the speaker. we have continued to put forward solutions and tell the truth and if they were here to help solve problems and lead. >> but just because europe has problems doesn't mean we can't start to help our problems.

we can take the jobs outlined. there's no excuse why we should wait for the convenience of an election. let's get some work done today. >> the austerity measures taken, do you think the house republicans are asking for -- >> the reason europe is in the shape that it's in is because they waited too long to deal with their problems. that's why i was insistn't last summer that we address our deficit and debt problem. it's why i again last month called for us to address our deficit and debt problems. remember one thing. it's the debt in europe. we have time to deal with this. but understand the debt is also tied to jobs. this $16 trillion worth of debt is like a wet blanket over our

economy, scaring customers of all sizes, and if you will, if you want to create more uncertainty for jobs,t let's give job creators in america the freedom to go out there and create the jobs they want to create. thank you. >> president obama clarified his remarks concerning the private sector. during his conference he said the private sector was doing fine. mitt romney responded by saying the president was out of touch on the economy. it came during a meeting in the oval office with the philippine president, this is about 10 minutes. >> that was really a long time ago. [laughter] yes. all right. everybody set up? well, it is a great pleasure to welcome president aquino to the

oval office, to the white house. i had the opportunity to spend a lot of time, most recently during my asia trip, when we met most recently in bally. and at that time, we discussed how important the u.s. -philippine relationship was. the historic ties. 60 years of a mutual defense treaty, the extraordinary linux between -- links between fill pane -- philippineo ancestry that have brought our countries together, and we continue to work on issues that will strengthen our relationships and talked about how we could work on security issues, economic issues, on people-to-people exchanges and on a whole host of regional

exchanges, and i just want to thank president aquino for his excellent cooperation, because we've made a great deal of progress during that time. and they are the recipient of a grant to help foster greater partnerships for growth in philippines and working on how we can make sure we are structuring a relationship of expanding trade and commerce between our two countries. i want to congratulate president aquino on the work he's done with the open partnership fund which helps root out corruption and can root out greater efficiency in the philippines and we had discussions about how we can continue to pull corporate

together and engage in training together and work on a range of regional issues together, all which are consistent with the announced pivot by the united states back to asia and reminding everybody that in fact the united states considers itself and is a pacific power. and throughout all these exchanges and all the work we've done, i've always found president aquino to be a very thoughtful and helpful partner, and i think that in the meeting today in which we discussed not only military and economic issues but also regional issues in trying to make sure that we have a strong set of international enormous and rules governing maritime disputes in the region that i'm very confident we're going to see continued friendship and

strong cooperation between our two countries. so mr. president, thank you for visiting. we are very proud of the friendship between our two countries and look forward to working more on it in the future. >> in our quest to -- in our society is shaped by news and that's why americans are one of the strategic partnerships and through these meetings it's deepened and strengthened a very long relationship we have had, especially as we take the challenges on which affect our two countries and express support that we pledge to resolutions. >> thank you, everybody. >> [inaudible]

>> listen, it is absolutely clear that our economy is not doing fine, that's why i spent yesterday and the day before yesterday, this past week and month and year talk act how we can make the economy stronger. the economy is not doing fine. there are too many people out of work. the housing market is still weak and too many homes underwater, and that's precisely why i asked congress to start taking some steps that can make a difference. now, i think if you look at what i said this morning and what i've been saying consistently over the last year, we have actually seen some good momentum in the private sector. we have seen 400 million jobs created. record corporate profits. so that has not been the

biggest drag on the economy. the folks who are hurting, where we have problems, and where we can do even better are small businesses that are having tough times getting financing. we've seen teachers and police officers and firefighters who have been laid off. all of which, by the way, when they get laid off, spent less money buying goods and going restaurants. you know, contributing to economic growth. the construction industry is still very weak, and that's one of the areas where we have still seen job losses instead of job gains. so if we take the steps that i laid out, and make sure that we're not seeing teacher layoffs and we're not seeing police officer layoffs and we're providing small businesses for financing and

tax brakes if they are hiring and/or if they are giving tax breaks to their employees and allowing home owners to refinance so they have an extra $3,000 in their pocket so they can respend on the economy. if we are doing construction, work and maintenance that needs to be done on bridges and roads , all those things will strength at any economy and economists estimate it would create an extra million jobs. now, you can't give me a good reason as to why congress would not act on these items other than politics. because these are traditionally ideas that both democrats and republicans have supported. so let me be as clear as i can be. the economy needs to be strengthened, that's why i had a press conference.

i believe that there are a lot of americans who are hurting right now. which is what i have been saying for the last year, two years, three years, what i have been saying incidence came into office, and the question then is what are we going to do about it? one of the things that people get so frustrated about is that instead of actually talking about what would actually help, we get wrapped up in these political games. that's what we need to put an end to. so the key right now is for folks -- what i'm hearing from congress from mr. romney is what steps are they going to take right now that will make an actual difference? so far what we have heard is additional tax cuts to the folks that are doing fine already as opposed to promoting the kind of economic growth

that we would all like to see. thank you very much, everybody. thank you. thanks. thank you guys. >> just talking about reforms doesn't solve anything on the expenditure or revenue side. and i'll get everybody in this room put up a plan, i could sign on to 90% of them. >> warren buffett tonight on c-span. >> two days of live coverage from a "chicago tribune's" -- this weekend on book tv starting today at 11:00, rich cohen and latin america when the people shouted "yankee, go

home" he was why. and convicted as an adult at age 16. and gail collins on texan's role on her issue and tomas has a story to tell. also madeleine albright in growing up in nazi-occupied check sla vacya. >> the b-52. everyone thinks back to vietnam. they think linebacker operations and think of the history of the b 52, cold war. so there's a different kind of power associated with the be 52 as opposed to other long range bombers. >> these are two friends. con fed rats who knew each other prior to the civil war and fought against each other

in 1862 and here they are at age 100 sitting on a porch, talking about the old days. >> it's marked 901, and the gate to the west is called 903 and really reflect and reference the moment of the bomb which was 9:02. >> look for the history and literary culture of our next stop in jefferson city, missouri the weekend of july 7 and july 8, on c-span 2 and c-span three. >> now radio and television correspondent's association dinner, an annual black tie affair that draws various figures. house speaker john boehner and actor and singer wayne brady and recognizing journalists who have excelled in their field.

>> please pit your hands together for the rtca committee members. [applause] weighing in at a buck and a quarter, from c-span, dan o'connell. from sara lawrence college formerly aalaska the beautiful and funny libby casey. [applause]

from pen state university from the al jazeera network, also known as mr. president, jeff ballou! [applause] >> from the university of washington, producer for cbs news, her awesomeness, jill jackson! [applause] >> from indiana university of pennsylvania, a camera guy for fox news channel and 2012 rtca's chairman john wallace.

[applause] from north carolina state university, multimedia journalist cbs interactive, leigh ann caldwell! [applause] from montreal, canada which is why harvard has fewer candidates. todd still i can and finally

your 2012 dinner chair, the first camera guy elected as chairman of the rtca executive can committee from towson university, camera guy for cnn, jay mcmichaels. [applause] >> i think i'm just going to stand behind, this because i feel more comfortable this way. can everybody hear me in the back of the room? [applause] >> that's a guy i've followed all over the road for about 20 years. i'm done. i'm done.

hey, let's hear it for the howard thunder machine! [applause] this is an incredible group of kids. they work alongside a group called the musician ship which sponsors youth taking part in musical activities, so we want to thank them for being here tonight. we have not heard the last from these guys. trust me. [applause] ok. so let's get right to it. as the first camera guy to chair the rtca executive committee, i want to first say what an honor it is for me to be here tonight as the host of the 68th annual photo journalists and

radio-television correspondents association dinner chamber. as you know we are actually only celebrity-free dinner. i looked through my camera and didn't see any except for guy here that looks like george clooney. he's over here going, what about me? [laughter] >> tom brokaw can now write an awesome article about us. the greatest dinner generation ever. anyway, you just made your rtca executive committee, one of our members who could not be here tonight was lisa desjardins, she will be the chairperson in 203. so we want to say 4 hi to lisa. she had family coming in tonight, so we say, hi. we want to keep this going.

that said, like the thunder machine, gimme that skin. [drums] >> at the end of the table over here, the director of the radio senate tv gallery, mike. [applause] we have the communications director to the speaker of the house and all-around nice guy, kevin! [applause] you got to love kevin. he's very animated. we have the chairman of the house rules committee from the 26th district in the foot hills

of the great state of california, david dryer. [applause] congressman david dryer. next is the assistant democratic leader of the house and congressman representing the sixth district from the state where my mom lives, south carolina. from south carolina state university, please welcome congressman james clyburn. [applause] on this end of the table, we've got the director of the house, radio/tv gallery and a great friend of mine for the past 25 years, olga rearms core knacky. [applause] next to olga is a communications director to the house minority leader pelosi.

please give it up for nay deen elstonich. [applause] next to nay deen is a communications director to the senator majority leader mcconnell, please welcome adam gentleson. [applause] you know wayne brady is performing tonight. he's gone backstage to get himself ready, so he'll be out later. so right now, ladies and gentlemen, let me say it is my high honor to introduce to you, representing the eighth district in the great state of ohio, and i don't want to say too much more, because i don't want him to get upset, a graduate of xavier university, speaker of the house representative, john andrew boehner. [applause]

by the way adam is have harry reid's office not mitch mcconnell. that was a fatal mistake on my part. but i'm a camera guy, so it's ok. [laughter] [applause] >> thank you howard thunder machine. [applause] so tonight it's going to be sort of like jimmy fallen and the roots only we don't have jimmy fallen and the roots. it's jay mcmichaels and the howard thunder machine. so it's going to be fun. mr. boehner, thank you for joining us tonight. on behalf of the rtca i want to say how much we appreciate your effort to improve and expand coverage, press coverage on capitol hill.

as well as the additional parking for the crew. covering the hill. [applause] now as you all know, mr. clyburn, mr. dryer, mr. boehner, if the crews can't park, you don't get on tv. [laughter] [applause] and this is a sim by yacht i can relationship the last time i checked. so that's just a thought for my future parking scheme, sir, and i hope you take that under consideration. [laughter] would you like this? [laughter] i also want to thank your staff and kevin, you guys have been great in helping us. also on the side i'd like to thank members of the house rules committee who also helped us impart the issues and the fact that the the faster the

crews get to the hill the faster we can park, the faster you can make money and the faster you make ad dollars, right? that's how it all works. our association is important to to have house and radio galleries here tonight. they help us do our jobs day in and day out on capitol hill. onbehalf of the rtca i want to extend a special thanks. on the house side we have olga and her whole staff. we have andy alliance, kim otis, anthony kell her, kensy harvey, ryan gall andlya kaplan. thank you so much on the house side. [applause] and on the senate side with mike massey, we have ellen eckert and michael lawrence, we've got aaron yakeman, a towson grad, and we have chris and mallory. i want to thank you guys as well.

[applause] i also want to get some things out of the way and thank our sponsors and partners for tonight's evening. hugo creative has provided all the of the graphics for the evening from the opening graphics revealing our new rtca logo -- [applause] it's a large logo. this state that, matters. all the way down to the programs and the wine bottle labels, our gold sponsor tonight is google. they will all be showing us where the google hangout is at the rtca after party which everybody here better be going to, because we put a lot of effort into getting something out there tonight. it's friday night. no one's going home early because camera guy is here to party, everybody got that? thank you. now as you know, president

obama could not attend our dinner this evening. jen, according to a spokesperson, he said quote he is busy governing and campaigning. [applause] thank you for that very spokesman-like response, jay. as a camera guy, we all like to point out the white elephant in the room. when we see it, we hate it. so the deal is president obama really doesn't like these dinners at all. he pretty much hates them, so the white house thought they would help us out and send us a message from the president. so ladies and gentlemen,, a message from the white house from president obama. >> good evening radio and television correspondents. allow me to present my anger

translator, luke, i'm sorry, i was unable to attend rtca dinner here. >> off struggling economy to take care of, so why don't i sit down and make the day of people. >> it is going to be a wonderful ink. >> but on the budget cut you have to write your own damn men knew. >> and i wanted to send a message wishing you well. we need strong journalists more than ever. >> yes. especially since the hollywood gossip and things i want to see. >> we are lucky today to have so many talented reporters and correspondents. >> and cameras on the internet. >> although i don't always agree with your points of view, we're lucky to live in a society that values freedom of speech. >> especially when it -- >> where would we g without being able to say with a what

we truly feel. >> none of you will be interview for a long-[beep] time. >> but i know all of you work your hardest every day when informing the public and create a better-informed society. >> all of you except for fox which is doing everything you can create society that hates muslims, can you believe that? after four years i have to defend when nobody asks romney, why are you getting -- when he dies or when -- [high screeching] >> you blew out my ear. >> i'm sorry, sir. >> no sense of day corm -- >> may god bless you and may god bless america. >> even you -- good night! [applause]

>> where is regret avan susteren? last i checked she was boycotting this horrible organization. thank you to comedy central and for that video, that very presidential message from the white house. on a more serious note at the rtca we give journalism awards out every year, and that year we will be recognizing the memories of nbc reporter david plume, face the nation producer and this year we've added a new award honoring the memory of cnn photo journalist gary thompson. [applause]

our first award of the evening. look what you did to me, boehner. [laughter] i'd have put all my money on that you would cry first. you know? all right. 12 kids, fuzzy rabbits, fluffy golden retrievers. [applause] [laughter] ok. our first award of the evening, the david plume award will be present bid three young ladies i used to see during clinton years and they would play with my kids and they are all grown up now welcome nicole, christine and ava bloom.

[applause] >> our dad, david bloom passed away in 2002. while covering the war in iraq. it was an honor to be here tonight and to have the privilege to recognize our father as well as other journalists with the david bloom award. this award is for press and daring reporting in journalism. this year's david bloom award for the first time honors two incredibly brave journalists, both journalists risked their lives to share inside syria during this year-long military

crackdown that has according to the u.n. cost more than 9,000 lives. the censor ship in syria is extensive and they bar journalists from entering the country making reporting nearly impossible. and under syrian president assad, journalists have been arrested and trade and even killed, last year the bbc's paul was the first to be mean the from lebanon, with cameraman scott would go undercover in the city of homs where some of the worst violence has taken place. news that would rely exclusively on bbc footage was reported to defend themselves against the syrian government brutal and deadly crackdown. >> syria's border, these men

are taking in guns and reports are growing and surfacing, the regime had us undersiege for 40 years, into homs. the syrian army is all around. they will probably shoot in they spot us. after months the protesters being shot down in the streets, the myth has become reality. free syria army is starting to go on the offensive. a sniper prepares to fair to on a soldier guarding an army post. the rebels believe they can win if there's help from outside. more join every day. a gun battle signals another defection. we heard him screaming, he says, he couldn't go back.

there were too many chasing us. we left after being ordered to shoot those defenseless, you can't just kill them. [applause] >> cbs news foreign correspondent clarissa ward was also one of the few western journalists to have reported independently from syria. december she entered that country alone posing as a tourist, with a small camera she captured a rare look inside the revolution meeting with anti-activists and members of the free syria army. she was blind folded in the back of a car to meet with an underground group which facilitated part of her interview. >> we entered as a tourist

carrying only a small camera. she took us to the funeral of a 16-year-old boy these people say was shot by security forces the day before. >> if you come, you will see real bodies. >> the violence has only fueled the protests. just outside -- after a certain point we were blind folded to protect the location of the safe house where we would find members of the free syria army. >> by turning this into an armed conflict, syrians may be hurt? >> this 20-year-old was shot three times but stays minute he can walk he will be back on the streets. basic necessities are scarce. people lean up for cooking gas. >> so we just had another blackout. >> one soldier pulled out a photograph of his son. he told us he's willing to

sacrifice himself so that the next generation of syrians can be free. [applause] >> under extremely difficult circumstances, karl wood of the bbc and clarissa ward offered compelling images of the military crackdown in syria. their reports embodyy all that the david bloom award is about. not only do these reporters exemplify courage. they continue to apply pressure on the policymakers and international community stop the bloodshed in syria. we are honored to present this award to the recipients.

[applause] >> thank you, so much. i nevered that pleasure of meeting your father, but we have a lot of friends in common. he told me what an absolute gentleman he was as well as being a much obliged correspondent in our business so i'm very honored to be sharing a platform with you this evening. we had a lot of help. i think on our last trip we spent three weeks hiding and three days filming, being taken in by syrians who were taking absolutely fearful risks in what was already a risky place. i did it with my producer with a medic.

i'd also like to thank the management of the bbc who had quite a scene on occasion making difficult decisions. i think we're only at the beginning. it's got a long way to go. at the bbc, we are committed to seeing that story through to the end, so we are honored and grateful for this award tonight. thank you, very much. >> and cbs washington bureau chief is accepting on behalf of clarissa ward. [applause]

>> thank you, very much. thank you very much, ladies. thank you to the association. clarissa is very disappointed she couldn't be here. i know she would be very disappointed she missed the rtca wine. she is on assignment in europe and asked me to convey her thanks to everyone here and of course to the people and many, many brafe syrian who risked their lives to get her in and out of the country so she could tell this story. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, bloom girls. [applause]

our next presenter has been a friend and a mentor of mine for the past 20 years or so. he's a hard-hitting, no-nonsense, ask no questions journalist for cbs news who will also travel out of his way for a superb bottle of wine. to present the next award, please welcome my friend and colleague, bill plant. [applause] >> did i ever tell you the law of stpwhine it holds that almost any wine is better than no wine at all. [applause] so thanks for the dinner wine. good evening. this award honors the memory of

joan barone. she started out as a researcher , and in less than 10 years, she became the executive producer of cbs' "face the nation." and that, at a time when women were nowhere near as represented at the top ends of our business as they are today. she was smart and tough and funny. and she left us too soon. joan had the kind of standards that the critics say, we don't have anymore. they don't exist anymore in the era of the 24-hour news cycle. but the winners of this honor year after year are proof that the standards do still exist. it is my honor to announce this year's winner of the joan award. for the "60 minutes" story of the insider trading, steve, of

cbs news. [applause] >>i want you to know the judges called his story a journalistically strong piece of work which shown the spotlight on the inequity lawmakers enjoyed to make stock trades based on non-public information. steve's story, the judges said, served as a catalyst to move the insider trading bill, it showed how journalism can make a difference in the lives of everyday americans, and said one, i think ms. barone would be proud. well, i think so, too. so colleague, ladies and gentlemen, steve cross. [applause] >> going back to the health care debate. you bought some insurance stock, did you make those trades based on non-public information? >> i do not do.

>> i'm asking do you think it's all right for a speak tore accept a very preferential and favorable stock deal? and put it in the i.p.o. and even if it is in the conflict of interest? >> no. that you're going to have -- elaborate on a false premise. it's not true, and that's that. [applause] >> thank you very much. i want to acknowledge gabrielle, chandra and tyra rosen who were the producers on this story. i want to thank peter for giving us an early look at some of the research that he had been doing. i want to thank chris eisen for

giving us new yorkers -- to do this story and nancy and jill for -- [applause] for showing us where to go when we got here. and helping us out and telling us which news conferences we could egoto and which ones we couldn't. it's quite an honor for somebody from "60 minutes" whose never lived a day in his life in washington, and i always somewhat regret that. to be among you tonight. and i also want to thank all of you, whether you work on the hill, whether you're a member of congress, whether you're speaker of the house, whether you're journalists, for keeping this story alive, and for showing that it is possible to rescue a neglected piece of very good legislation and

enlist supports from both sides and get it passed. thank you very much. [applause] >> cool. [laughter] this next award is a very personal award for myself and many people in this room. this award is new. it's meaningful, and it serves the journalism community well. i want to thank my colleagues on the rtca for approving this award. please welcome my friend and colleague, the second camera guy ever elected as chair of the rtca, john wallace. the rtca, john wallace. [applause]