he said he would not support it. he would reject the deal. the support goes across all the political spectrum. the only republicans who are not on board are the ones here in washington. paul jump on board with the rhine plan. this throws a monkey wrench into the relationship with rover if you really think it through. the report shows that the ryan plan would actually raise taxes on middle-class americans and receive a lot. the rhine plan would pay with the $10 trillion by getting rid

of loopholes. how many times of we heard that? the trouble is that many of these so-called loopholes are actually popular dedications -- i'm sorry, deductions and credits that benefit the middle class. the help families save for retirement and purchase homes. paul ryan and mitt romney would actually raise taxes on the middle-class white family making $1 million a year would see their taxes drop by almost $300,000 under the from the plan. a family making $50,000 would see their taxes go up by more than $1,300. republicans you're enthralled by norquist's pledge, doesn't the romney/ryan the scheme by lead the pledge? he is on capitol hill today. i hope someone will ask him that question and ask about mitt romney, who wants to come here

and work things out, when he would not go for a deal. that is grover's demand. that is what is happening. >> there has been a lot of meetings and have dealt with a lot of republicans. with very few exceptions, there are a couple who of all told me that the biggest single problem is the pledge signed to grover norquist. he has the pledges claimed on the wall of the office. padauk if anybody crosses him, -- if anybody crosses them, none of us have taken a pledge to anything other than the constitution when it comes to serving the senate and the house. those who think that grover norquist is equal to that pledge have lost sight of the notion of public service. if we are going to get serious about ending this recession, if

the house republicans, particularly the t parties, are going to wait for grover norquist. we have a serious issues facing this country right now. it means that both sides have to be willing to give. these iron-clad pledges make it possible. >> well, we know one thing. you cannot solve our fiscal problems, and you cannot avoid the fiscal cliff if you sign grover norquist's pledge. in solving our fiscal problems are opposite poles. today, he is making house calls around capitol hill. in an hour or so he will be in the office building to offer tutorials to house republicans

on what his tax pledge means for the negotiations later this year. the bullets he is doing is a sign of weakness. his relevance has been openly question for the first time lately. he is in full damage control mode. more and more republicans are beginning to decide that they do not care what he thinks. more and more republicans are realizing that to solve our nation's fiscal problems, they cannot be part of grover norquist's army. a couple of weeks ago, lindsey gramm said he had crossed the rubicon on the need for revenues and a deficit deal. he urged his fellow republicans to join him in putting the needs for a grand bargain ahead of the pledge. never one to shy away from a flight with norquist said the well to do our ok paying some more taxes as long as they're

going to pay down the debt, not going to grow the government. and those strong words, he said that kind of talk monopolies grover norquist, but colbern doesn't care. other republicans are deciding they don't care about him either. jeb bush, as respected a figure as exists right now in the modern republican party decided to take him on in a very high profile way. this was a big deal. he is a heavy weight on the side of those republicans who want reform, who want fiscal responsibility. he may run for president in four years. many wanted him to run this time. he dismissed the norquist pledge and basically declared grover norquist to be a net four other republicans to brush away.

joe scarborough said in a fight that jeb bush's republican party, one that values compromise over conflict is the party of the future. we are already seeing glimpses of that future on the republican side. and thank god. among republicans in that room, there is talk of tax pledges and shared desire to solve our nation's big challenge. the republican house is still far from getting its act together. about to pass a major farm bill. this is the latest breakthrough. with each of these accomplishments, we are building up a reserve of trust and goodwill that will help during

the big picture of negotiations at the end of the year. grover norquist is the problem around here and bipartisanship in the senate is the solution. >> we have witnessed bipartisan agreement is possible. i'm joining senator mclean shortly -- senator mccain shortly to see that all aspects of sequestration -- it calls for an amendment not only to the defense department, but the painful cuts to education and food safety and many of the programs that middle-class families and the most vulnerable americans depend on. i think this is a strong sign that both sides understand the pain that sequestration would inflation. both sides agree it is a

terrible way to cut spending. my hope is that it will show both sides that we can and must work together to reach a bipartisan deal required to replace the automatic cuts responsibly and fairly. but where there are glimmers of hope and clear signs of bipartisanship here in the senate, there is this more of the same in the house. in fact, instead of working on passing a transportation jobs that passed the senate, or taking a bipartisan legislation to protect vulnerable women, or working with us to signify support on the job creating a farm bill, the house republicans went with none of the above. instead, they decided to create a partisan political theater. house republicans are retreating even further into their corner.

apparently, it is time for them to talk it over with their coach. grover norquist is working -- is working to renew the pledge. he is watching and special interests come first. i really hope the republicans in the house have the strength to stand up to these heavy-handed tactics. to realize this is a bipartisan problem that requires a bipartisan solution. we have seen evidence today that there are those in the senate who understand that fact. i hope that message reaches over to the house and even into the room with mr. norquist. >> will someone be kind enough to let me know what is going on in the floor? >> can you give us an update on the transportation bill? i understand there has been crossed -- progress made in the

negotiation, but time is short. will you need a short extension? >> i hope not. i cannot guarantee anyone here we're going to get a highway bill, but we are in much better shape than we were 24 hours ago. but said a lot when we had a vote out of the floor last night. they wanted a deal by tomorrow. but has spoken several times today. there is significant progress being made. we hope we can get this over the finish line. >> will president obama nominee and new commerce secretary? >> that is an unfortunate thing that he got sick. he was so anxious to have the job because of the republicans

were holding him up. i would hope that the president to get a consensus nominee forward and we could get it done. the should not do that some leading an important nation. >> what can you tell us about the issue. >> i know this is very unlike us, but with the highway bill, we have great hope we can get that done. we have had meetings over the last 48 hours. there, i think we can get something done. your current republican leaders say that one will get done. it is easy to say that. at this stage it appears that they are compromising just as we are. >> one of the possible scenarios is that there will

strike down the mandate, which is the part of the act that is not popular. the other stuff is really popular. if that happens, house democrats justify the policy of leaving pre-existing conditions and not all the goodies that people like on the table if the mandate goes? how you justify leaving a good step in place if the bad stuff goes? >> is a matter of opinion whether i think it is bad. the reason we have that in there is a people can have the same insurance that i have. i'm not going to sit here for stand here and speculate as to what will happen if the supreme court does that. we are waiting for an opinion. we're waiting for them to make a decision. but we're not going to speculate as it would be unfair to the supreme court.

pardon me? i think we will get that done. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> on the news makers, jon klein, chairman of the education and work force committee. he looked at the division in commerce -- in congress. newsmakers, today at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> when did clean energy become a dirty word? what is wrong with clean energy? you can believe what you want about our existing energy sources, but why couldn't you also believe there's an opportunity for clean energy? >> we need to create demand the next five to 10 years to offset

all the advantages that fossil fuels have had. i think it is clearly happening on a state-by-state basis. >> roughly to the below times as much energy is consumed in mobility as it is heating our homes and offices. again, north america is the only continent where we do not have widespread vehicles off of the assembly line. there is still a ton of people out there who honestly believe cars or trucks are more likely to burst into flames in a trucker crashed. >> this was all part of a next- generation energy forum. watch their conversations online at the c-span video library. >> also on thursday, president obama called on congress again to extend a low interest rates on student loans. current rates are set to