generation, but we can help massive new tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. we cannot offer student loans because we have to protect them. it says, we cannot help young people trying to make it because we have to protect folks who already have made it. . governor romney likes to talk about the time as an investor. his economic plan makes clear he does not think your future is worth investing in. i do. that is the choice this november. [applause] we are going to make sure that america once again leads the world in educating our kids and training our workers. there are business owners across the country who say they cannot fill the skilled positions they have opened.

you have millions of people out there looking for work. i want to give two million more americans the chance to go to community colleges just like this one, to learn the skills that local businesses are hiring for right now. community colleges like truckee magic -- truckee meadows, educates our workforce. [applause] this is where young people and some cannot young people can come and get trained as nurses and firefighters and computer programmers. folks who manufacture clean energy. these are the vital pathways of the middle class. we should not weaken them. we should strengthen them. earlier this summer, harry reid and i fought to make sure the interest rate on federal student loans did not go up.

[applause] we won that fight. the republican plan in congress would have allowed those rates to double, costing more than 7 million students an extra $1,000 a year. with the help of harry reid, we set up a college tax credit some more magic -- middle-class families can save more than $10 thousand -- $10,000 on tuition. governor romney wants to repeal it. in 2008, promised we would reform the student loans system that was giving billions of taxpayer dollars book -- dollars to lobbyists instead of giving it to students. they were taking a cut out of the student loan program, even though they have the federal

government guaranteeing the loans. $60 billion worth. we said let's cut them out. let's give the money directly to students. [applause] we won that fight. that is what we used to double the grants for students who were in need. my opponent wants to return the system back to the way it was. he wants to go backwards, the policies where banks were taking out billions of dollars of -- from the student loans program. that is the choice in this election. i want to move forward. he wants to go backwards. we are not going to let him. that is what is at stake in this election. [applause]

you know, four years ago, i promised we would end the war and iraq -- in iraq. we promised we would go after al qaeda and bin laden. we promised we would start turning over security responsibilities to afghan so we could bring our troops home. we are keeping these promises because of the tremendous sacrifice of our men and women in uniform. [applause] all of our troops are out of iraq. we have to make sure we keep safe those folks who have fought for us. we made sure to keep the post-

9/11 -- strong. as long as i am commander in chief, this country will care for our veterans and serve them as well as they have served us. [applause] nobody who fights for this country should have to fight for a job, or fight for a college education, or fight for a roof over their head when they come home. that is part of what is at stake in this election. over the course of the next 2.5 months, the other side will not talk much about education. they do not really have a plan. they will not be talking about much, but they will spend more money than we have ever seen on ads that just try to repeat the

same thing over and over again. the economy is not doing well -- as well as it should and it is all obama's fault. it is like going to a concert and they keep playing the same song over and over again. [laughter] the reason they have to try to keep repeating that over and over again is because they know their economic plan is not popular. they know the american people will not buy another $5 trillion tax cut, most of which goes to wealthy americans and that will be paid for by you. they know gutting education to pay for tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires will not sell. if they cannot advertise their plan, they will back on the fact that you get discouraged, that

you get cynical, that you decide your vote does not matter. they are betting that each $10 million check from some of the donor drowns out millions of voices. they do not see that as a problem. that is their strategy. i am counting on something different. i am counting on you. [cheers and applause] part of what you taught me in 2008 is that when the american people join together, they cannot be stopped. when remember -- when we remember our parents, great grandparents, and all the sacrifices they made, we are reminded that this country has always risen and fallen together. when we remember that what makes us special is the idea that

everybody gets a fair scott -- shot, and everybody does their fair share, when that is our focus, you cannot be stopped. so here is what i will need from everybody. you have no excuse not to register to vote. we have staff and volunteers for you right here. they will grab you at the door. you will not be able to escape. this young lady right here, she will -- she is ready to register voters. if somehow we miss you or if you decide you want to help your friends and your neighbors and fellow students to get registered, you can do it online at gottaregister.com. gotta is spelled "g-o-t-t-a." [laughter]

you have to not just register. you have to grab some friends. you have to grab some neighbors. you have to take them to the polls. you have to vote. let's prove the cynics wrong one more time. let's show them your vote counts. let's prove your voice is more powerful than lobbyists and special interests. let's keep the promise of this country alive that no matter what you look like or where you come from, you can make it if you tried. -- try. we have come too far. we have more troops to bring home, more schools to rebuild, more good jobs to create, more homegrown energy to generate, more doors of opportunity to open for everybody who is

willing to work hard, and if you will stand with me like you did in 2008, if you are willing to do some work, and knock on doors and make phone calls, we will win nevada. we will win this election. we will finish what we have started and remind the world why the united states of america is the greatest nation on earth. god bless you. god bless america. [cheers and applause] audience: one more year! one more year! one more year! [music playing]

♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ >> woo! ♪

♪ >> woo! ♪

♪ ♪ only in america only in america

>> the road to the white house coverage tomorrow with vice- president biden will be live from renaissance high school in detroit here on c-span. >> i know there are those who criticize me for seeing complexities. i do. some issues just are not all that simple. saying there are more weapons of mass destruction in iraq does not make it sell -- so. proclaiming mission accomplished

certainly does not make it so. after september 11, i stood where americans died. workers in hard hats were shouting to me, "what ever it takes." othello and grabbed me by the arm and said, and do not let me down. since that day, i wake up every morning thinking about how to better protect our country. i will never relent in defending america, whatever it takes. >> c-span has aired every minute of every major party conventions since 1984. our countdown continues with a week ago to our live gavel-to- gavel -- gavel-to-gavel coverage. all starting next monday with the gop convention with new jersey governor chris christie. also, he senator john mccain, and former government -- former

governor of florida jeb bush. plus, first lady michelle obama and former president bill clinton. >> we are on the countdown to the conventions. in six days, gavel-to-gavel coverage, live here on c-span. coming up here on c-span, barry anderson talks about the nation's financial problems. then a meeting from tampa focusing on foreign policy and health care. then, president obama's remarks from that campaign rally in reno. on washington journal, -- "washington journal," the

managing editor for the "huffington post." washington -- "washington journal" 7:00 a.m. on c-span. barry anderson spoke to the american institute of certified public accountants about the so- called fiscal cliff. his remarks are just under an hour. >> we all set? good morning. my name is ron longo. i have the pleasure of introducing our next speaker, who barry anderson. barry is just a treat to hear. he previously was a senior

budget official at the organization for economic cooperation and development in paris and at the international monetary fund. for over 30 years, he has been active in budgeting for the united states as the deputy director and acting director of the congressional budget office, as the senior career official headcount at the white house office of finance and budget. please welcome barry anderson. [applause] >> thank you very much. i have had the opportunity to speak at a variety of different conferences before. i just wanted to mention my good friend paul. i am looking up to see who the next speak so i can defer all the really tough questions to him or her. i look forward to your questions after this. this is a good time to be

talking. i will be talking about the fiscal cliff. i did this speech a while ago, about a month of so ago, and that had a different view. i had a view at that time that we did not want to beat him in that blew behalf 58 thunderbird. now i think our leaders are trying to get a seat in the car. i will explain that to you in a minute. in the past month, things have changed here. i want to get to that. the way i look at our current budget situation, we seem to be following movie titles quite a bit. we have "the perfect storm." the fiscal cleft. what i fear is that we are going into the year of living dangerously. perhaps some of the statistics we have seen recently on growth

and unemployment and on investment indicate we may already in that because of the uncertainties because of the fiscal situation we have. what i'm going to talk about today is our fiscal future. i will try to talk about it from three different perspectives. the near-term, the perfect storm or the fiscal clef, and what we are facing over the next couple of months. the median term, the next year. but importantly, a long term. our major oil -- major fiscal problem is that the u.s. faces a problem of fiscal sustainability, not an immediate problem of borrowing money. quite the contrary, right now, the treasury may be lending money at-interest rates. people are wanting to lend us money and are willing to accept a very rigid very long returns.

-- very low returns. i would like to begin with talking about quotes. the first one i want to do is paul simon. a song from 30 or 40 years ago. when i think back of all the stuff i learned in high school, my lack of education has not heard one comp -- heard me but -- what i hope to do this morning is help you read the writing on the wall just a little bit. if you found it compute -- confusing before in terms of budgeting in general, do not be surprised. that was my intent. i have traveled all around the world. i have been to paris. our system may be the most transparent system in the world.

i believe is also perhaps the most complex. complexity trump's transparency every time. what i try to do is help you read the writing on the wall. my next famous " is, budgeting is the art of saying no. there is an art to it. it really takes some skill to determine why the governors decide what is the best thing to say. -- to say yes or no about. there is never enough of anything to satisfy all that want it. the first lesson of budgeting. i confess i am an old-time budgeteer. i want to spend one more moment on my background. you have already been told i have been in paris for five

years. i had 30 years doing the trifecta here in washington. the thing he did not mention is that while i was -- i was -- that i was a member who is not an accountant. i may be the only in the u.s. i think they learned quite a few things from me. paul mentioned some of them about the value of the balance sheet or what it can do and what it does not do. it did give me a perspective. when i went to paris, we had a meeting of budget and accounting people. of the meetings we ran in paris, that was by far the biggest attended. i am very proud to say the

budget people and accounting people stop physically attacking each other. mentally, they still did. they began to listen to each other a little bit. i hope we got some progress. one more thing about me, i am not a republican. i am an s.o.b. i can criticize both sides. sometimes at the same side. -- at the same time. as this picture indicates, it reflects my views, it seems to become -- seems to have become very lonely at the middle of the road now. the people on the right have gone further on the right and the people on the left have gone further on the left. people on the left and right are so far off the middle road, i am not sure they can see us or care about us. there are some trends in the u.s. i hope will repopulate "

the middle road. i think most of us who are independent and take a look at both sides can hopefully produce a better situation than going to one side or another. i am going to start at the back. i said i would do it short, medium, and long. let's start with the long-term situation. here are budget projections. , president -- they go out as you see until 200085. the reason i am doing this is because i believe doing these long-term projections is a very good thing. i have found in my experience that if you make a forecast that goes out 18 months, you will be held to what ever that forecast is. if you do one for 75 years, nobody will know. [laughter] that is not a major reason. if you go out 75 years, it

paints the picture of where you need to go, not exactly what amounts need to be, but where you need to go. this chart does it. it is not mine. it come from president obama's omb. if you can see, the nature of the problem we face is primarily in that line. medicaide. -- medicaid. the fact of the matter is, our long-term fiscal sustainability problems are because of social security, medicare, and medicaid. primarily, the health issues. as you can see, as a percent of gdp on these projections, that is what is driving those deficits. the deficits are what is driving the debt. the debt is what is driving the interest costs. the bottom-line gives a debt as

a percent of gdp and shows we are at a percent of 35% just 12 years ago. under the omb projections, there are other folks who might say these are optimistic, but under those projections will be the 70% -- 77% in 2020. a fellow who was a chief economist and an economist at the university of maryland did a study a year -- a year or so ago. what they try to do, is take a look at debt as a percent of gdp. and say, how big can it get or is there a relationship between the size of the debt as a percent of gdp and our economic growth? they did over many decades and

over many countries. a range. 60 or below is clearly good. countries who had debt at a percent of gdp at 60% or low -- or below professor than others. 90% or above was clearly bad. 90% or greater clearly had a worse economic growth than others. between 60% and 90%, it was more modeled -- muddled. this was a very good study. it gives us some benchmarks. in the sense that, maybe we do not want to go above 90%. maybe we want to get toward 60%. this chart here shows clearly what our direction is. it is what our problem is that we are facing, not borrowing money to finance the deficit today, but really the long-term

fiscal sustainability. with that, i want to move on to say, ok, now that we know what the problem is, what are the solutions? i did this start a few weeksago before congressman ryan was named as vice-presidential candidate. here are some numbers here from omb , congressman ryan's proposal. i am focusing on the long-term. look at what the final right- hand column says in 2015. it emphasizes that the nation -- the nature of our problem is medicaid. that drives up interest rates and pushes -- puts our debt at clearly unsustainable levels. what does president obama and congressman ryan propose to do about it? what president obama proposes to do is to hold medicaid and

medicare spending considerably below the 12% of gdp. can he do it? i am going to address that in a minute or two. let me leave that as a question mark. as you can see from congressman ryan's proposal, he is even lower than the president's budget. he does that through a premium support mechanism. i am trying to help you read the writing on the wall. that is a budget. it is the limited amount the federal government will contribute to medicaid and medicare programs. it is clearly a budget. number there is accurate in the sense that this is what he will spend. what does that mean for the consumer and how much he or she will have to suspend -- have to spend -- have to spend?

that is another matter. there is something truly under listed about congressman ryan's budget. you can see two dozen 50 has 4% gdp. defense right now is nearly 40% gdp. what happens to the rest of government? that may be a step too far for congressman ryan. i do not know that number is a realistic number. i am not trying to doris -- endorse the obama budget. i commented on the rhine budget being unrealistic numbers. let me talk a little bit about the obama budget. let's take a look at the u.s. relative to the rest of the world. this chart indicates that we spend far more than anybody else

in the world on health. but it also indicates that we do not necessarily get better results. the dot usa on the far right all by itself. you can see under one measure, life expectancy at birth, we are only at eight years. look at all the countries that spend considerably less and yet have higher life expectancies. life expectancy is not the only measure. it may not even be the best measure. but it is one legitimate measure. other measures such as infant mortality would indicate similar problems. the viability of certain cancellous after it had -- cancers after it has been detected, the united states would yield better results. the u.s. is not worse in every

case. but it is very very -- very, very clear that we spend a whole heck of a lot more than anybody else. the next chart, and i apologize for being 2007, but they have not updated it yet, to me is one of the most significant i have seen in my years in doing budgeting. it shows how much more we spend. we are spending 16% in 2007, of gdp. the next highest country, france, in which i lived for five years, and i had french health care while i was there, is at 11%. 5% difference. i got a lot with the french government when i was there. they are very concerned about the high level of spending they have. when looking at what we have,

they cannot understand how we can possibly be spending so much this was the nature of the problem a few years ago. it is still there. now we move to what president obama has been doing. this chart, which is done by the centers for medicaid and medicare services, that is the obama administration just a few months ago, indicates what the health care situation for the u.s. will look like over the next eight years. we are going from about 18% of gdp to merely 20%. let me state that another way. they're all kinds of benefits from the affordable care act. from the obama administration's own numbers and from the long- term sustainability issues, it has made the problem worse. if you will notice, i only have one column with numbers on here. i could not find another column

that said what would have been the growth and health expenditures in the absence of the affordable health care act. might of been hired. it may be that the obama administration actually helped save us money. i do not know. i cannot say that. i can put these numbers out. with respect to long-term sustainability, it made the problem worse. should that be a surprise? i do not think so. we added 30 million people to health care. when i was in paris, all three of my kids lost their jobs. all three of them found new jobs. during that time, you are looking at their health insurance. i was very happy to hear about where we are going here, personally with respect to our long-term sustainability problems, there is not any doubt with respect to health he is the major issue, and we have not addressed that issue through the

affordable care act. we need to do much more. that is the situation we are in. now i will jump back to the long-term where i hope i have laid out some of the issues we are facing. now to the medium term. i am frequently asked, what do you feel about continuing the tax cuts that came out of the bush administration? do you think we should continue them? i answer, it is the wrong question. i cannot answer the question because it is the wrong one. i can say this. i have heard concrete public announcements from both the administration, from the republicans, from the democrats, from virtually everybody, that our tax system is broken. it is inefficient, complicated, and it does not produce the right results. beenident obama has ha

.nstructed we need to have fundamental tax reform. that is the focus we have. lower the rates. if you take that as where we should be headed, this little chart might be worthwhile. with respect to tax reform, could we get agreement on this? one thing i like to point out is that, if you take a look at your taxes, you have income taxes and you have vica. your employer matches it. how many people who pay taxes have higher vica taxes than income taxes? when the start was done a number of years ago, as you can see,

four out of five households pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes. four out of five. yet you hear no discussion of payroll taxes at all. the lower incomes pay more than the higher incomes. yet we do not hear anybody talking about that at all. i will go into that a little bit more. this is just a chart that indicates in 2009, any pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes. i will go into this a little bit more. the top two levels are 33 and

35%. we go back to 36% and 39.6%. there have been a lot of criticisms. a lot of criticisms, whether we should go back to that. president obama has made that one of his signature moves and the congressional republicans are resisting that. the reason has to be in some sack -- in some sense what the -- it is the one who said there is a relationship between the tax rates you have and the amount of moneys to collect. i believe that. i will show that right here. here is what it looks like. at a certain tax rate, you will maximize the economic production of the economy and therefore maximize government revenues. this is one of the major themes -- major themes of four

republicans. i believe in the laffer curve. you see that point at the bottom left where it says zero. i believe in that point. while i have tried to do some research to try to identify where it was because of the incredible difference is we have between the republicans and democrats about what tax rates, and i have been able to find something. i have been able to find not just a theoretical presentation of the laffer curve, but what it really looks like. [laughter] it took a lot of research to find as. i think this will help to simplify the political debate we have here. i will go back just a little bit here going back, getting off

heavy laffer curve. critic getting off the -- getting off the laffer curve. when we are doing tax reform, it is good to take a look at what our tax rates and shares are now. i put this together here. as you can see, our system -- our income taxes system is very progressive. the highest 20% pay 94% of the share of income. the top 1% play almost 40% in 2009. i put this together and i had people say, you made a mistake. you have negative numbers there. you have the lowest people having an income rates of -3.8%. the bottom 40% of our taxpayers

get money back from the income tax. is that good or bad? i am not trying to make a comment. it is worthwhile knowing that the system we have is very progressive. you will notice that is -4 income, not for total. why the total is positive is payroll taxes. cable taxes are very regressive and the offset most of the progressivity. as to give you an idea of what the current test situation -- tax situation looks like. here are other aspects of it in terms of shares and what the incomes are for those. can i get to social insurgents tax rates. the regressivity.

this is a classic table to say we have a regressive system. of more poor you are, the more you pay. some will say that is because we tax security taxes and it changes every year. that is certainly part of it. many of the people in the highest incomes get their money's from capital gains. my reason for this is to highlight something i do not think a lot of people know and to say this should be part of the debate. we have covered that and we have covered the laffer curve. now i will go to the near-term and the fiscal clef. what is a fiscal cliff? i think there are nine different elements of it. there is the sequestered.

there is warn. i do not know what the acronym stands for. i know it means if you will lay off somebody or fire them, you have to give 60-day notice. at least. the question is, what happens on january 2. the sequester will cut the funding a lot of defense contractors and others will get. if you have to give 60-day notice, six days before january 2nd is november 2. that is an law right now. whether it applies or not, the department of labour does not have to issue blanket notices.

we have talked a dead about the expiration of the tax cuts. there are a whole series of those. it is not just the top rates. is the 10% bracket. if the tax cuts expire, every single one of you will pay more taxes. it does not mean just close at the very top of the income. we currently have the payroll tax holiday and extra unemployment benefits. 2% holiday we have had for two years running. that expires at the end of the year. the alternative minimum tax. i will talk about that. that does not expire on the 31st of september. that already has expired. i will talk to you about what that means to you in the public. that as another element of the fiscal cliff. medicare is the biggest health care program in the u.s.. it has been determined -- it is

determine the amounts paid to doctors. the amount paid to other providers will drop 30%. we knows -- we know these will happen. they are in dental law now. they cannot be changed. then there are some things we do not know the timing of. one is the continuing resolution. that applies to how long the funding for 2013 will be. that is the fiscal year that would against -- that begins on october 31. a welfare folk and -- a welfare program that last and reforms in the clinton administration. it's authorization has expired on saddam the 30th. on october 1, it was not reauthorize. -- reauthorized.

right now, it is one of the elements of the fiscal cliff. the current estimates are that the current debt limit, which is 16 trillion -- $16 trillion upheld. his secretary of treasury has certain abilities to extend that out for a month or two or three. the reality is that the debt limit is going to be with us. a month or so ago when i talked about this, i was saying, this is unprecedented. things are so bad, cover such a wide variety of folks, nobody will want to go off the fiscal cliff.

i put this little chart together. let's take a look at every one of the players here. does the president want to go off the fiscal cliff? no. he wants to continue the tax cuts. heavy affordable care act -- the affordable care act is a difficult law to implement. it may not be ready. he may be able to trade a delay of this for no sequester. he does not want the sequestered. he does not want to cut entitlements. he more than anybody else will want to increase the debt limit. republicans in congress? they do not want to have taxes go up, particularly for those -- not just for those below it to 250.

democrats like continuing backed supplemental unemployment system rigid assistance. everybody wants to patch the amt and do some tax reform. my friends came out a few months ago and said, if we do go off the fiscal cliff, it will produce a recession. how the first half of next year, we will have negative real growth. this is unprecedented. we will have an explicit no fiscal congressional action push us into a recession. we may have done it before inadvertently, but here, we know it will happen. we have been told. they said if we postpone it,

with some other kind of constraints to show we are serious to show long-term fiscal sustainability, then we can have real growth. that is the situation. this set of circumstances is so bad, covers so many people, that we are definitely not going off the fiscal cliff. then congress did a couple of things and now i think we are all writing in that thunderbird together. -- riding in that thunderbird together. [laughter] i started getting questions two weeks ago. let's say we actually did the sequester on january 2. does it all have to be taken on that day? do you have to cut all 10% of the second of january? the answer is no.

apportioned cuts later in the year. in other words, if you truly believe you can fix it later, you can go along spending at the full rate, not at 10% or less, and not have to take the cuts for the last -- until the last six months of the year. the department of labour has seconded to ignore them -- has said to ignore them. what about the tax cuts? he little known fact. the secretary of treasury has the ability to set your withholding rates. clots as some on january 1, the tax cuts expire. everyone of you owe more taxes. how does that work? i owe more taxes, i set up withholding, but no more money is coming.

all that mean i will have to pay a much higher rate or have a much greater liability on the 15th of april the year after that? yes. that is what it means. [laughter] can that happen? yes. it has been done before. it is a game of chicken. payroll tax holiday, i do not hear a response -- hear report for -- hear support for that anymore. the amt has already expired, but it can be retroactively extended. it could give them another year. amt will not hit us right away. the continued revolution. they are talking about six months to take us to april 1. in other words, we will pretend we can get through all these

problems and come back and the new congress will fix it somehow. we will go off the cliff. the debt limit, if you let the payroll tax holiday expire, that produces $10 billion a month. that might help us a little bit. $10 billion a month is not much -- is not much, but it may help a little bit. what i have heard in the last couple of weeks is an awful lot of people who say, let's fix it later. wow. i hope they are not right. i hope once the election is over, and i expect nothing before it, that markets basically come up and say, there is a dear to be had. -- deal to be had. here is a deal we almost had

last year. president obama and speaker cut this deal. have you ever bought a car, sit down with the salesman, decide on a price, shake hands. you have been through that, right? he says, i have to go check with the manager. hicks [laughter] -- [laughter] witha shook hands cloth ba boehner. they had a deal. revenues $800 billion. entitlements, help, $400 billion. remember my charts. that is where the major problem is. a good start.

chained

>> they are already paying at the higher rate. the amt will hit 94% of those, but only 51% of millionaires. this is a theoretical view. can i fix it? yes. up until about the first or second week of january. if they try to fix it after that, it will drive the system crazy. it is coming toward you very quickly. that is why i like the fiscal cliff analogy.

i will quit their. i was going to get into the night in paris. i think i will stop here and take questions. i wasover wine and now i would t end this quite as negatively as you would interpret. i spent some time in paris, but i would rather be here. we will start with a, accidents. a number of years ago my favored budget director was leon panetta, and we were supposed to go to japan to talk about long- term fiscal problems. good news was almost 20 years ago. and who -- this was almost 20

years ago. leon could not go because he got named chief of staff, and i was there with my japanese host, and japan has the longest lived people of the world. we were looking at our long term longevity and health problems, and i said to my japanese host, you have a problem in japan, and we have a problem in the u.s., and if we could and to the regions of both our problems, and he said, what is that? -- net if we which together both of our problems, and he said what is that? -our problem -- i said our problem is we have too much tobacco. one reason our life expectancy is as low as it is is because we do a good job of killing

ourselves. we do it not only by shooting ourselves and driving very fast but particularly by eating. i must say after five years in paris i got used to sizes of restaurants where you did not have to bring in a doggie bag or two to take it home. it was just a different way. between the french health system and our health system, quality versus care. think about the last time you went to a doctor here in the u.s. you go to the doctor's office and opened the door. give what you see? -- what do you see? i was just seeing a retina specialist. it turns out i have a freckle on my retina. i did not know such a thinning existed. they said, you have to have it

checked every year, so i go to a specialist. i saw six people, had served as vice six people before i saw a doctor. -- got service from six people before i saw a doctor. in france i had another problem. i go to make another appointment. i did it on mine and my french was lousy and my medical france was an -- i did it on line, and my french was lousy, and my medical french was nonexistent, so i made sure the doctor spoke english. i go, and there is nobody else there. i do not know what to do. i stood there 20 seconds, 30 seconds. all of a sudden the door opens up. out comes the guy in a white coat.

he says, i have been waiting for you. come on in. i go and have the procedure. after the procedure, he says that will be 25 euros. you pay the doctor in cash. i said, you do this all yourself? he said, i have an assistant. she comes in twice a week. what is shocking is the single payer nature of the system. they are no. 2 in the world, and they are very upset about it, but the single payer and nature makes it very different. no matter where you get your service, administratively, it is so much better.

i will say this. my wife is there. my wife's be very good french, -- my wife speaks in very good friends, but i was afraid of her medical french, so she goes to a friend and says, can you recommend a doctor who speaks english, and my friend says, i am amazed you would say that. my wife says, why? he said, the think i would recommend a french doctor who had not been trained in the u.s.? a lot of their best doctors have been trained here. our fee-for-service aspects, and now our administrative aspects, are malpractice insurance, product liability, another thing i used to say was how you compare them.

i said there is only one thing wrong with it, far too many lawyers. the medical system is so high because we keep of high legal protection on it, but my point is france is not in good shape. fees for services of a big concern -- is a big concern of medical malpractice is, too. freezing annual social security for a five-year period. social security is an issue the reagan going bankrupt from a trust fund perspective. good -- social security is an issue. it is going bankrupt from a trust fund perspective. did you guys know it is not a

trust fund. it is an inner generational transfer. in the 1930's, we have some were old people. how do we lift them -- we have some poor old people. but how do we help them to? it was very easy. if you tax a little bit of money from those working and give it to those people, you lift them out of poverty. you have all these people working. the original rate was 1.2% or something like that. you take 1.2%, a transfer from this generation to this generation, and what did it do? it worked? in the 1930's 1940's, the number of old people in poverty significantly improved. paid toese people who

the old folks retired, then you take from the next generation to pay them. that seemed to be working, too, except along came me and all of the 65 million other members of the card carrying a baby boomers. it was like this. you had piles of people entering the workforce, paying far more than the basic level, so what did you do? increase the benefits for those retired, so you increase the .axes oreganos does that work?

yes, it worked until the next generation came along, and this went from instead of like this to this. you had this amount of old people paying taxes to this amount of retired. i said the problem with gen xers is for some reason they did not like sex. i did not understand that, but for some reason they did not. i was corrected by a young person awhile back who said that is not a problem. good we just knew how to control ourselves. good from an economic perspective, you are facing this, and it is just going to get worse. i am fortunate i live with my 9- year-old granddaughter, so she and i have breakfast, and i look at her and say, have you got a

job? you have got to go to work. we are facing this situation, and it will be such that those following me will have to pay either higher taxes, or they are going to have to cut back. we are facing that situation right now -- how to do it. extending our retirement ages. we did it to all of you and to meet. my parents were able to retire at 65. a lot of you and will not be able to get to 67. i mention the rate we used to increase benefits. we now increase based on wages.

this is not very well known. the difference between wages and prices? a lot of our recent history, our employees become more productive. that increase in productivity has resulted in higher wages. those are used to increase the benefits of those who are already retired. should better productivity of those working now increase the wages of those already retired? is set up. but if we went from maintaining purchasing power -- what if we went from maintaining purchasing power? it seems logical to me. i can tell you when that has been floated in the past, it has been opposed by a variety --

virtually all of the groups that try to protect the interests of the elderly, but those things can be done. i think it is better than any type of holiday with respect to increases in cost of living for current recipients, because there is an awful lot of people who count on social security and now for their retirement or a big part of it. -- who count on social security for their retirement or a big part of it. you may know "forbes"magazine, and steve forbes was very into the flat tax. flat tax. have tone

russia and lot villa and a couple of others who went for this. they went -- and latvia and a couple of others with for this. my point is this is a flat tax. if we do not do anything, virtually everyone is going to be paying 28%. it will probably take 10 or 20 years, but everyone will be paying, and there is clearly our relationship -- a relationship between the current tax system and aot. one reason the numbers are so great is because they assumed a lower tax rates -- they assume a

lower tax rate. if we let them expire and fix it for one year, that means tax hits go up commoand it will fewer people. uncomplicated, yes. what economic results those in produce -- does it produce it? a flood of uncertainty and confusion. there may have been reason for amt one it was established, but it has not been affected -- in effect except for a small amount of people, and if we allow it to go into effect it will have a tremendous impact on upper income or lower income folks.

is there a relationship between the two? yes. does that mean we need to address it? absolutely. let's set up a system that is logical, simple, take a look of the tax expenditures, see which ones are most appropriate and should be retained, but the broaden the base and lower the rates. i think that is my time here. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> more on the countdown to the conventions. in six days, gavel-to-gavel coverage of the republican convention in tampa. your front row seat to the convention. the republican platform meetings

focusing on policy and health care. and president obama's remarks in reno, nevada. later, harry anderson talks about the country's financial problems. new -- gary anderson talks about the country's financial problems. >> -- barry anderson talks about the country's financial problems triggered >> we will talk about the business experience of u.s. presidents. "washington journal" begins live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. wednesday the congressional budget office releases its report. they will take questions from reporters. you can see that live at 11:00

a.m. eastern on c-span. >> sometimes i watch the proceedings of the house and the senate floor and interviews with people, and i have the c-span app so i can check the schedule. if the timing is right, i can get a live feed from the floor of the house or senate and have them watch out for five or 10 minutes for some conversation. davis watches c- span. brought to you as a service by your cable provider. >> the republican national convention begins august 27. the platform committee met for a second day to drive its position on topics such as foreign policy, health care, and

education. this focuses on health and education issues. >> i hope the chocolate hit the spot, and glad you are back. we have one last section on how the families, education, and crime -- on healthy families, education, and crime. >> you got your chocolate, and now we are ready to rock and roll and get through this last section and delivered to the american people the best gop platform they have ever seen. on's go to the section healthy families, great schools, safe neighborhoods. i just love talking about health and being healthy and thinking about a healthy america with

healthy people. i am pleased that we talk about appealing obamacare and making certain we reform health care. good one of the things we have heard across the country is at the american people -- is that the american people want to start over with a fresh slate. they want to see if more choices. they want to see lower costs. they want to make certain we restore medicare, and they want to make certain we focus on health care tax free, and we have done some great work on this section. i have really been pleased with the focus on health care common safe neighborhoods, creating that environment where we want to grow up. give we were led in this committee by general owens out

of georgia, and mr. mclarty -- ms. mcclardy out of oklahoma, and i am going to recognize mr. lewin on -- mr. luna to give a brief summary. you are recognized. >> i think this is one example of true the saving the best for last, because i think the work is stellar. i want to thank our co-chair and the members of our committee for the thoughtful work in preparing this document. doug we have over 50 amendments. we had spirited debate, but we agreed to forward this document you have before you. we believe the american family is the foundation of our society and has been since the birth of

our country. we affirm the belize government can never replace our family. that -- the belief that government can never replace our family. good we recognize and honor the courageous efforts of those who bear the many burdens of parenting alone, even as we believe in marriage must be upheld as a national standard. we believe taking care of one's health is an individual responsibility, and consumer choice is a powerful fact berlin -- factor in form. we state that obamacare is about power. give we enthusiastically embrace mitt romney's commitment that on his first day in office he will use his authority under the law to halt its progress and sign its repeal.

then the american people through its representatives can advance affordable and responsible health care reform that truly meets the needs of patients and providers. we state clearly parents are primarily responsible for the education of their children and the parents are far better at determining the educational needs of their children than any bureaucrat. understanding that without choice or education we will never truly have accountability. we support homeschooling, charter schools, a virtual schools, career and technical ed programs and tax credits, and we implore the efforts to kill and the scholarship for disadvantaged students in order to placate the leaders of the teachers' union. we believe a child ability to achieve in school must be based on god-given talent and

motivation, not zip code or economic status. we believe education is primarily a state and local issue and that federal overreach is a hindrance to improvement in student achievement. we support innovative education reform occurring across the country in many states, and we support the efforts across the country to expand the use of technology to better teach and engage twentieth century learners and insure all children have equal access and opportunity. we applaud america's great teachers and believe that teachers are not a problem. they are the solution. studies have shown once a student enters the school, the most important factor in educational success is the quality of the teacher. it is not how much you spend or the number of students. those are important, but the most important factor is quality of the teacher.

we believe every child must have of highly effective teacher every year in every classroom, so we call on removing the barriers to reward teachers through merit pay and for performance. we want to remove the last hired first fired policy. we recognize education beyond high school is essential, but a cost of federal aid is on an unacceptable trajectory, and i student loan exceeds credit-card debt, and considering recent college graduates are unemployed or underemployed, we call on transparency needed to address these challenges. we states that as americans we will never be fully free to pursue the american dream without first being free from fear and intimidation from

crimes in our neighborhoods. madame chair, i suspect please submit our report and ask for the full support of this and body. >> i thank the gentleman for that summation, and it is my understanding you are speaking for the three of them directly, so i thank each co-chair for the contribution to the committee. at this time the section on healthy families is open for amendment. and we are on page one, line one through line eight. now the initial statement, i have one amendment to this section. it is by mr. barton of texas.

is everyone holding that amendment? you are recognized for 60 seconds. >> are recognize the family. i really like what they say about the foundation of the family is the first level of self-government, but i am unclear what it means for the school and democracy. every kid i know, it does not matter how the kids vote. now the parents win. i am not sure what the school of democracy means for the family. good thwacks the motion has been heard, and it has been seconded, and it is open for discussion. is there any -- >> the motion has been heard, and it has been seconded, and it is open for discussion. >> this country is a republican form of government, not a

democracy, so i would like to affirm mr. barton's comments and say we should be a school of republicanism. >> i thank you for those comments. i would remind everyone when you are recognized to please identify yourself by name and states when you begin to speak. the language in mr. barton's amendment is reflected on the screen. it is striking the word school of democracy. is there any further discussion? a gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. all in favor? >> aye. >> we are now on the amendment. the amendment, page one, line four.

is there any further discussion? all in favor, say aye. all opposed? the amendment is agreed to d. we now move to amendment no. 11. we are going to close this first session. is there any further discussion or amendment to this section? no further amendments or discussion. this will reflect that help the schools unsafe neighborhoods has been close. we now move to the paragraph about marriage, lines 9 through 21. i have two amendments for this. mr. barton hazmat of first amendment. it is how the men and number of -- mr. barton has the first amendment.

it is health amendment no. 11. you are recognized for 60 seconds on your amendment. >> i need to apologize because i do not know the scope, but in the clause talking about the benefits for children, we use the same introductory phrase three times, so i would like to delete two of those. the freeze will now read that those children are less likely to use -- the phrase will read of those children are less likely to use drugs or alcohol or have children out of marriage. >> the amendment has been seconded. it is highlighted on your screen. is there any discussion? the question has been called. all those in favor? oppose the we are on a house amendment no. 11.

-- opposed? we are on health amendment no. 11. the amendment has been adopted. does everyone have health amendment no. 8? mr. kirby, you are recognized for your amendment, the section on marriage. 60 seconds. >> thank you, madame chairwoman. i really like -- i have one --ded every on commended everyone for how much we appreciate the family and marriage, but continuing the discussion i believe republicans should promote everyone is treated equally under the law, i would like to strike the sentence and promote laws governing marriage.

>> the amendment that i have, yes, there is a difference in the language reflected in the written amendment as opposed to the language. >> at a comma, and delete the line promote through marriage laws. good >> as reflected on the screen your amendment is correct? >> i would take out nand, but yu do not have to. that is correct. >> there is a punctuation errors. did you do not need commas around and. is there a second? >> second. >> the amendment has been read and seconded.

is there a discussion on the amendment? you are recognized. >> tony perkins from louisiana. the language specifically relating to the lot is a recognition of the federal defense of language act, which currently leadership is asking for an absence for the president that will defend the law. we have had 30 states that have passed constitutional amendments defining marriage and their own states as the union of a man and woman. those state constitutional amendments which most states have would fall, so i am seeking an opposition to this amendment. >> and opposition to the amendment. you are recognized. >> i am opposed to this amendment because laws governing marriage also involved divorce,

and we are seeing nationally the crisis we are facing with divorce leaving mothers and children destitute, so i read this as also including the we need to encourage and promote laws governing marriage to encompassed divorce laws, so i rise in opposition to this amendment. >> you are recognized for 60 seconds. but there are a plethora of laws that govern marriage, both a religious institution and a civil law institution, and if we stand for marriage as between a man and woman, we have to reflect that, and it would be meaningless if we said it just stands in the abstract but we do not want to put it in our law. >> is there a second? the question has been called. all those in favor say aye.

the question has been called. the question is about the deletion of the language and to promote through laws governing marriage. good all those in favor will say aye. the amendment is not agreed to here again we have no other amendments on that section. the section on marriage, the record will reflect we have close that. we now move to families and poverty. that is on 22, page one. are there any amendments to this section? i do not have those. i am holding no amendments to the section, so we will let the

record reflect that we considered a section. there were no further amendments, and the session was approved at 3:44 p.m. moving to page 2, line four through line 9, i have no further amendments for that section. any further discussion? we will let it show that we close the section for consideration. we go to line 10 of pages two. foster care down to 15. i have no amendments for this section. we will let the record reflect it was considered and closed at 3:45 p.m. moving to line 16 of page two,

families and the internet, this goes to line 25 of page 2. i have no call for amendments to this section. is there any further discussion? the record will reflect a 3:45 we considered and close this section. moving to line 26, advancing americans with disabilities. i have no amendments to this section. we will let the record reflect that at 3:45 we have considered and close this section. give we now move to page three, line 5, obamacare, and i have three amendments to this section. we are on page three, line five, the position of obamacare.

of first amendment isn' line three. you are recognized. >> i simply want to add after the phrase "over one sixth of our economy" -- actually, i soon start from the beginning. >> -- i should start from the beginning. >> it is no. 9. >> from the start is about power. the expansion of government control to one sixth of our economy and a further erosion of our constitution by requiring all u.s. citizens purchase health insurance. that is the admission i would watch to that line -- the i addition i would want to that to add the phrase, a

further erosion of our constitution -- >> the language is on the screen. the amendment is submitted. is there a discussion? >> i do not think this is grammatically correct. i think if we add it after the and, resulted in, it should read, and resulted in to further erosion, it would be grammatically correct, so i would like to make that secondary amendment. >> the you consider -- do you consider? >> i understand, and when you pull the microphone, it has

wires, so grab the base, please. >> the language ms. kennedy except is a friendly amendment would be -- accepts is requiring that all u.s. citizens have health insurance. mr. owen? by a technical point. we won on that issue on the commerce clause, and i wonder if it is a threat rather than further erosion, because they actually won on that point and the commerce clause cannot be used on that issue, and if people look at further erosion, it gives the impression that we lost on it, but we won on its

so it is technical. >> would you accept that as a technical correction? one ofs correct sethat the opening rounds on accepting demand it -- the mandate, we won on. it is requiring them to purchase health insurance, so it is an accurate reflection of the decision of this court, which is to uphold the provision, which we believe is further erosion of our constitution. >> thank you, i agree with a gentle man argument. >> which gentleman? -- i agree with the gentleman's

argument. by switching gentleman? >> you are agreeing? >> yes, i have had many discussions about obamacare, particularly friends who are democrats. >> mr. burton? >> we need to take care of that motion. i would suggest we take more active approach. it is not an erosion. it is an attack on our constitution. >> i would agree to that as well. >> now we are in the posture and

resulted in an attack on our constitution, so we would need to do this as a second-degree anddment, which would bee resulted on an attack to our constitution by requiring all u.s. citizens purchase health insurance. the origin nation -- the origin. the language is offered by mr. darden -- barton. is there a second to his language? all those in favor of excepting the language to amend ms. kennedy's language. >> aye.

>> is there further comment on the amended amendment? >> madame chair, i am not troubled by the idea of the concept of the amendment. is it accurate to say it requires all citizens to purchase health insurance to? if somebody could clarify for me. but it does not require all citizens. it requires the vast majority of citizens. there is a set of them that are explicitly excluded where the government gives them entitlement, so i did not word my first comment well, but it is there.

>> i really want to encourage people to please the accept the wording, the amendment to the amendments. i understand this is a grassroots document. i appreciate, but sometimes we have to stand by what the american people are telling us. eventually, it will force everyone to please stand with us. we could take it to death. -- pick it to death. >> you are recognized. >> i understand all people will not be required to purchase health insurance, but people's economic change through their life, and if that is the case, most people who are u.s. citizens will be required to

purchase health insurance, so i would like my wording to stand as it is. >> what happened is obamacare was an attack on our constitution. the attack was successful. it resulted in an erosion of our rights, and it allowed the government to require all citizens to purchase health insurance. i think there is a way to stage is that is accurate and does exactly what she likes, but i think we would need to take five minutes and somebody work with her to make sure it is correct. >> i think if we took out a word all, i think we can agree we do not want anyone to be forced to buy health insurance, so if we take out the word all it is accurate and still makes a profound statement.

>> would you accept the amendment? >> in the effort to move on, i would. >> it would be an amendment to the amendment as presented by ms. joslyn, which would be striking the word all. all in favor of the amendment to strike the word all. >> aye. >> the word would be struck. good you are recognized. good -- you are recognized. the question has been called on miss kennedy's ammended ammendment. the question has been called. we are now on health amendment no. 9. and ms. kennedy, page three, line eight, all in favor say aye. the amendment has been adopted.

we now move to number 18. mr. henderson, you are recognized for 60 seconds on your amendment. good >> i agree we need to get rid of obamacare. we read, american people, we would like to strike the representatives and add the phrase through the free market, and i want to do that because the people in my district, they want to let the free market work, and as we know the free market is the best system and we kept going for. >> is there a second to his amendment? the amendment has been read and seconded. we are now on discussion, page

three, line 18, after the word through, you would insert the free market. the language is highlighted and on the screen in front of you. is there a discussion on the amendment? you are recognized. >> i would like to back up the amendment. what i hear in my area is they want a free market to govern health care. this is a good move, and i urge the body to accept this amendment. >> i believe this sentence was referring to a legislative reform, and that is why we refer to the representatives there. >> further discussion? see no further discussion, is

there a call for the question there was so moved. all those in favor of calling the question, say aye. opposed? we are now on page 3, 18, all in favor, say aye. all opposed? all those in favor, please raise your hands.

all of those opposed? five hands up please -- >> hands up please. >> the amendment is agreed to. the amendment is adopted.

we now go to line 19 of page 3. >> point of error, higher votes -- i read that we counted 44 on the nay side. >> 45 on the aye side. we are now moving to 19. you are recognized for 60 seconds. you.hank i was on this particular committee. i did not offer this in committee. we ultimately decided if it better here. i am the mother of six daughters -- we ultimately

decided it fit better here. i am the mother of six daughters. i am told because i am pro-life i am excluded from being a pro- woman. our republican party is pro woman because we are pro-life. i encourage you to support it. >> is there a second to the amendment? >> second. >> it has been seconded. is there a discussion? >> i support this amendment. we need to recognize there are studies that abortion endangers the health and well-being of women, so i support this amendment. >> i would urge to support this amendment. there were several studies, all of which documented when unharmed from abortions, so the results would be the same

corner five decades -- would be the same for five decades, so there is plenty of evidence. >> the motion is before you. is there further discussion? the question has been called. there is the second to calling the question. all those in favor to calling the question, say aye. >> aye. >> opposed? we are on the agreement. the languages on the screen in front of you. although a, in favors -- all of those in favor, say aye. the amendment has been agreed to. i have no further amendments to the obamacare section. >> i am from arizona, and i want to thank so much. i served on the subcommittee. ll those who helped drafte it,

and all of those who had a powerful language in helping to repeal obamacare. i went in for an mri, and within an hour they diagnosed me with a legion on my brain. they wondered if it had spread. i had surgery within 24 hours of being diagnosed, and i know it is because of the great quality health care we have in the united states that they preserve my life. [applause] vice we thank the gentle lady for those comments, and i think we can let the record reflect that out four-o'clocks 3:00 p.m. -- at 4:04 pm, we agree we want to repeal obamacare.

we now move to line 20 of page three, building a health-care system of higher quality and lower cost. i have no amendments to this section. it goes through line 14 of page four. is there any amendment to this section? the record will reflect the four-o'clock 4:00 p.m. we close this section for consideration. -- at 4:04 pm, we closed this section for consideration. we now move on to page 4, line 15 through 28. but i have no amendment to this section. there are no amendments to this section. the record will reflect of four- welock 5 -- at 4:05 considered this.

line 29 of page 4 through the end of the page, line 38. i have three amendments to this section. mr. cochrane from vermont, you are recognized for health amendment no. 20. does everyone have health amendment no. 20? the language is on the screen. you are recognized, mr. cochrane. >> rick cochrane from vermont. i have spent 30 years around delivery systems. i think one of the things obamacare does is it really undercut its development -- undercuts development, looking at better and cost-effective systems. that is one of the main changes. i applaud the committee on what they have done in terms of supporting federal investment, but my recommendation is we also

began that statement by supporting investment into delivery systems, creating other systems, innovation means to high-quality health care, and continued by saying, we also. thank you so much. >> second. >> the amendment has been read and seconded. the language is being put on your screen. it has been highlighted. is there a discussion? you are recognized. am general counsel for a company that provides community health service, and i can tell you in the 20 years of having represented that country, i have come to recognize one of the weaknesses in our health-care systemis on the deliverey that currently exists. i think it is the right way to proceed and the right way for americans to eventually have a

health-care system that is cost- effective, high-quality, and innovative, and i support docum. >> is there further discussion? the question has been called. all in favor, say aye. all opposed? there is no opposition. the question is called. we are on the amendment. the languages on the screen in front of you. it would read we support federal investment in health care delivery systems and solutions creating innovative means to provide greater, more cost- effective access to high-quality health care. then, we also support federal investment in continuing to the paragraph that is previously stated. is that it correctly, mr. cochran? but that is correct.

thank you. >> all in favor of his amendment will say aye. all opposed? the amendment is agreed to. you are recognized for help amendment no. 1. -- health amendment no. 1. you are on page four, 38. >> in 2000, the fda approve the abortion pill. -- in europe and the next state. distraught and drugs like them should not be -- should not -- this drug and just like them should ninth get approval. this amendment does the oppose approval of drugs that -- the creator has given man certain rights. the right to life, liberty, and to pursue happiness.

the creator gave his rights to all people. our foundational principles of america. if we want to remain free, we cannot stand by while our government aids the assault on this most fundamental of inherent rights in the name of reproductive freedom. this party was born out of a belief that every human life is precious. with this amendment, we state it once again by opposing approval of drugs that terminate them -- and as a human life after conception. >> the gentle lady yield back. is there a second to her amendment? the amendment had and seconded. is there a discussion? -- the amendment has been candid. is there a discussion? next i have a question -- >> does this language include the morning after pill?

>> if it includes any drug that terminate team in life after conception. -- terminates human life after conception. >> you are recognized for your follow-up. >> in light of the recent comments by congressman todd aiken to reaffirm to the american people the sensitivity on the subject of rape, i believe we should not support an amendment that we did that opposes approval of a method that has been proven an effective in preventing the pregnancy of rape victims. i wish we could narrow that word in to take out the plan b. >> is there further comment? you are recognized. >> in just for clarification.

the morning after pill is not considered an abortion pill because it is only given it conception has not occurred. i would assume it would not be part of this amendment. >> madam chairman, i like to call the pashtun. >> the question has been called. -- >> i would like to call the question. >> the question has been called. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the question has been called. all in favor of the amendment will say aye. all opposed? the ayes have it. let's see. now we have no further -- okay.

governor, you are recognized. >> i had a parliamentary inquiry. we have health 21. this is identical to what we have already included in the constitution section. page six, line 31 of the constitution section. i guess -- is there a reason we need it added here? it is the same language. >> i withdraw the amendment given that it is in the constitution section. i did not call back and see it there. -- i did not go back and see if there. >> are there any further additions to this section, federal research -- federal health care research and amendment? >> a couple of clarifications. line 32, parkinson's -- it would

be parkinson's disease. then on 38, because it is to put it -- it is duplicated, they were going to take out "should be restored." then up on line 5, abortion is spelled incoorectly. >> i thank the detriment of the technical corrections. ribble direct goes to staff -- i thank the gentleman for the technical corrections. we will direct those to staff. >> optimism is not a disease. it is a disorder. -- autism is not a disease.

it is a disorder. i would like to get a technical amendment to suggest that. i am sorry i did not do it sooner. >> what i will do is leave this section open and move on and allow you the moment to make the corrections. >> it will be a pre amendment. >> that section will stay open. now we will move to page five, line one. we have two amendments to this section. we are going to be lines 1-9. protecting individual conscience in health care. you will first have health amendment no. 2. you are recognized on your amendment. >> this amendment and corporate and lot of the language in the current draft. -- encorporates a lot of the language in the current draft. with two exceptions. a patient can request the

withdrawal of food and water and antibiotics under certain terminal conditions. it varies from state to state in terms of the conditions. this poses -- the freedom of conscience to refuse to participate in abortion has been a longstanding law in this country but with the enactment of the new health care problems of attorney and living wills, there is a new ethical dilemma for the health care professionals. for many professionals hastening death, it is in violation of their conscience and we must stand shoulder to spill -- shoulder to shoulder with these individuals and supports their right to refuse to participate. a new phenomenon is occurring in

madison murdoch is are refusing to provide -- in medicine where doctors are refusing to provide -- >> please wrap up your comments. >> we are going to allow doctors to refuse to withdraw care in violation and conscious but this does not mean we should allow health care professionals to withdraw treatment in the event because they believe that life is not worth living. >> she has read and explained her amendment. we are seeking to get it on the screen. is there a second? >> yes, a second. madame chairman. i speak in support of this amendment. this is becoming an increasing problem with the medical literature increasingly reflecting the view that

patients who according to the subjective view of some have a poor quality of life, are not deserving of life sustaining care and should not be provided care or even food and water. the attitude that some lives are not worthy to be lived is one that we need to oppose. sometimes it is in direct contravention of the expressed desire of the patient or the patient's family that life sustaining care is discontinued. for an institution or a professional to use conscious as the basis for causing the death of a patient should be opposed by this body. >> i thank the gentleman. ms. lehman, you are recognized. >> i stand in favor of this

amendment. i have received many calls from family members that did not want their family member to lose the ability to have basic needs like food and water abnnd they were over-written against their will by the medical group. i think it is very important we stand in favor of this amendment. >> further discussion? >> i have a question. andrea baker , louisiana. if you have a grandfather who is terminally ill and in extreme pain -- >> that is not directed toward -- >> no, but i need to know. does it include families to wish to have it withdrawn so they can

proceed? >> would you respond to this? >> yes, it does. >> i could not hear what she was saying. the question has been called. all in favor of calling the question? all opposed? the question has been called. we are going to scroll through the amendment to you can see what has been deleted. colobus on your paper as to where -- follow this on your paper. after the word for, you are striking everything down through communities. then you go to the word "withold or refer" -- this is especially

true of the religious organizations which deliver a major portion of america's health care, and service rooted in faith communities. we do not believe, however, that health care providers should be allowed to withhold services because the health care provider believes the patient's life is not worth living. is this correctly reflected on the screen? >> yes, madam madame chairman. i added a few words. >> we are not able to have discussion at this point. i am making certain that what we have in front of us is correct. >> yes, madame chair. >> it is correct. we are calling for the boat. all in favor say "aye." all opposed?

we will have a division show of hands. all in favor, raise your hands. it is passed. there are 57 votes. the amendment is agreed to. we now move to line five. lapage 5.

help amendment no. 3. you are recognized -- on page 5. health amendment no. 3. are recognized. >> i am sorry, madam chairman. i am hurrying. this is a parental rights issue for me. parental rights are the brick and mortar of the wall that protect the family from government intrusion. many state laws are now denying parents a right to consent to all sorts of medical treatment for their children to read this amendment says be opposed those sorts of laws and parents, not the government know what is best for the well-being of their children. >> the update. she has presented and explained her amendment. is there a second? the amendment has been seconded. is there a discussion? you are recognized.

>> i am a practicing physician. support of the rights of parents. but let me tell you what it is like in the trenches. in 16 and 17-year-olds come into their office with a std, hawaii and other states allow us to treat it without parental consent because patients will not come in and would suffer a difficult health care issues if they are not there in a timely fashion. some teenagers have to have a privilege of confidentiality with positions to deal with these kinds of problems. i only have 60 seconds so i cannot go into a litany. >> is there further discussion?

>> jr from the mexico. i would like to echo what the doctor was saying. with regard to those individuals. in a healthy environment, i agree with this but there are a lot on help the environment out there. such as a piece of family situation, whether drug or alcohol-related or physical abuse. these individuals would not come into the emergency room or seek medical help. there are sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancy, and test, all of these situations happen. -- incest, all of these situations happen. i have a concern. >> i thank and gentlemen. ms. joslyn. >> i am the mother of three

daughters and abbot like to think that in this country, things are not so bad debt -- and i would like to think that things are not so bad debt that help the parents or the rule, not the exception. you need to error on the side of trusting parents for know what it's going on in their children's lives and give approval for it. >> i like to speak in favor of this amendment. we already have laws in place that in life-threatening situations can terat children without the consent of parents. that is not what this amendment is about. these are not life-threatening situations where children get treatment without their parent'' consent. i find the notion that my daughter could go in and receive contraception and things like that without my ever knowing about it to be appalling. that is why i am in favor of this amendment. >> for the discussion?

>> i am supportive of this. it is time for parents to be in the driver's seat. not only in the health care decisions of their children but also education. while i respect the opinion of the two good doctors assert on the committee with me, i do support parents being able to make these decisions. >> the gentleman from california is recognized. a question has been called and seconded. allah in favor, aye. all opposed? -- all in favor say aye. all opposed? we will have a division. we would ask for a show of hands. those that are fighting -- voting aye, raise their hands.

47 ayes. the nays --

the amendment is adopted. that is the last amendment that i have to protecting individual conscious in health care. any further amendment? we will let the record reflect that at 4:28, we closed consideration on this section of the platform. we will now return to page four, line 31. for the federal health care research and development protection. he asked for clarity and the opportunity to redefine and insert language. you are recognized on your amendment. you are going to see this on the screen. >> as i mentioned before, i wanted to recognize what is commonly seen throughout the country for those who deal with the office of spectrum. often it's not just another disease.

it is classified as a disorder. that is important to the millions of families around the country affected by this every day. i just added the term or disorders as an amendment to this part right here. >> the amendment has been read, displayed and seconded. is there further discussion? hearing no further discussion, is there a call for the question? question has been called. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the question has been called. we are on mr. ward's amendment, no. 22. page four, line 31. inserts' the word "disorder." all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the amendment is agreed to. any further amendments to this section? the record will reflect that at -- at 4:30, we have closed the

federal health care research and development section. we now move to page 5, line 10. reforming the fda. i have one amendment. it is helped amendment no. 19, mr. henderson from north dakota. you are recognized for 60 seconds. >> after line 22, i want to put a new sentence in there stating that we oppose the fda's attempts to small farmers. i am an abuser of raw milk. [laughter] it is produced on my farm. i purchase it from my two sons. i am tired of all the regulations. i would ask that we let the free market work in this situation. i yield back my time. thank you. >> i thank the gentlemen.

his amendment has been stated. is there a second? the amendment has been seconded. mr. witt from kentucky, you are recognized. >> thank you very much, madame chair. i understand mr. henderson's sentiments about the government being overzealous in many areas. particularly in energy as well as in other areas. we had a discussion about this amendment when we took up the agriculture part of this platform. i think all of us recognize we are very fortunate to live in a country that we probably have the safest food supply in the world because of the fda. i believe this amendment is a rather vague in its attempt to target raw milk producers, cheesemakers and small farmers. at the does have the

responsibility to ensure that our -- fda does have the responsibility to ensure that our food chain is healthy in all respects. for that reason, i would respectfully oppose mr. henderson's amendment because i think the negatives of it would outweigh any benefits that it might receive. thank you. >> i thank mr. whitlfielf for the explanation. the testament from d.c is recognized. -- the gentlemand from d.c. is also recognized. -- the gentleman from d.c. is recognized. >> i would like to point out that we are talking more about the non-commercial field of raw milk.

>> point of order. i called to question. it was seconded. >> yes. >> ok. mr. baker. you were asking something. i called to question and it was seconded. >> i am sorry. i did not hear you call to a question. sari. the question has been called. tickets for the clarification. -- sorry. the question has been called. thank you for the clarification. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? gavel, ifgot the

you are for it, it is yes. if you are against it, it is no. the question has been called. >> point of order. i believe that to call to question takes a two-thirds majority. is that not correct? >> it does. from the way it sounded if everybody had their chocolate, and we will do it by division if that is the will of the group. all in favor say "aye." -- raise your hands.

there are 59 per call into question. the questi will be called. we are now on mr. henderson's amendment. page five, line 22. >> madame chairman? a two-thirds majority still might not be achieved at 59 votes. i think we are there but all sorts -- all votes for no, raise your hands. two thirds present and voting.

59 to 18. 2/3rds. we are on the amendment as presented. health amendment no. 19. all in favor will say aye. all opposed? we will do this by division again. hands for it. please raise your hand.

there are 29 hands. hands down. all those opposed, hands up. the amendment is not agreed to. i have no further amendments to

the section on reforming the fda. is there further discussion? if not, the record will reflect at 4:38, that we closed that section for consideration. we are now on the section beginning on line 23. i have one amendment. mr. damron, you are recognized on your amendment, health amendment no. 5. does everybody have it? the amendment is already on the screen. you are recognized for 60 seconds on your amendment. >> thank you, madame chairman. this sentence has to do with rule america. work-force shortages and access to care. we are talking about high-risk individuals here in rural areas.

we've already talked about surgeons. take outend we i up"hig "high risk" so that it widens. >> the amendment has been read and seconded. is there a discussion? the elimination of the term "high risk". doctor, you are recognized. >> it is the high risk, the trauma surgeons, anesthesiologists, who are sued the most. they are most likely to leave their practices or rural areas. i oppose that amendment. >> you are recognized.

>> thank you. as someone who lives in the most litigious areas in a lawyer known for its very high jury verdicts, we particularly lost our neurologists. i still stand in favor of the amendment and i hope it would be supported. >> further comment on your amendment? >> correction. this should be lined 28, not mine 26. -- line 28, not line 26. >> okay. so it would read a rural america has heard especially hardest on obstetricians, surgeons and other health care providers moving to urban settings. i am reading that correctly? >> correct. >> mr. barton?

>> that was part of my question. two references to high risk. do we need them both out? >> be removed the one referring to providers. --we remove the one referring to providers. >> call to question. >> the question has been called and seconded. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the question has been calls. we are on the amendment by mr. damron, no. 5. page five, line 28. for clarification, the leading the word high risk. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the amendment carries and has been adopted. there are no further amendments that i have to this section. in a further discussion? the record will reflect that work was completed on this section at 4:42 and the section

is now closed. we go to line 32, education, a choice for every child. this section goes through page 6, line 11. i have no amendments to this section. the record will reflect that the section was considered and was closed for consideration at 4:42 p.m.. we move into attending academic excellence for all come on line 12. and going through the and the page seven, line 39. i have two amendments, three amendments to this section. 6 amendments to this section. ok. we will begin with health 7. ms. kailey from kansas, you are

recognized for your health amendment, no. 7. it is on page 6 at line 23. >> i believe to ensure a strong republican generations to come, it is important to and still national pride in this great and free nation. students need to learn about the sacrifices and character of the founding fathers through a study of their own words in the original document. that is why i am asking for a focus on the constitution and the writings of the founding fathers and an accurate account of american history that celebrates the birth of this great nation. >> second. >> the amendment has been seconded. the language is reflected on your screen. i think it is actually line 25. where your amendment comes in,

instead of line 23. it is shown on the screen. is there a discussion of the amendment? >> madame chairman, we discussed this similar amendment in our committee. it was not successful. i do believe there is another amendment coming before us right after this one that i think if the senator --submitter of this will look at, it is an acceptable way to address her concerns, the amendment no. 14. our committee look at similar language to this and it did not get approved, however, in a moment he will see an amendment that i think we can support. that addresses this same concern. >> madam chairman, i still wish

to go with my amendment and calling to the committee. >> mr. burton, you are recognized. >> i speak in favor of this aversion over the subsequent version. this is the renewed interest of the united states constitution. congress passed a law requiring every public school on constitution day to spend a full day study of the constitution. 90% do not. freedom laws set aside an entire week to study the constitution, bill of rights, declaration, at said the -- etc. >> thank you. >> as a public-school teacher, i have a problem with this. we are getting very specific. we already have history. this is mentioned in this platform. if we get this specific, i worry about an accurate account of american history. we are some in our history teachers are not teaching that.

i would not in a situation in a time where public school teachers feel they are under attack from the republican party, i would not put this language in their because it assumes our teachers are not doing what they're supposed to be doing. >> any further discussion? the question has been called and seconded. >> point of order. this sentence is already eight lines long. it looked like a bomb on sentence -- it looks like a run on sentence. >> we are on the calling the question at this point. all in favor of calling the question? aye. all opposed? the question will be calls. the amendment degette online 25 lapage 6 -- the amendment begins on line 25, page 6.

an accurate account of american history that celebrates the birth of this great nation. all in favor of the amendment? all opposed? the ayes have it. the amendment is adopted. we now are on page 6. after line 36. that is the next one i have. health 14. we will go to amendment 14, by mrs. peyton of utah. -- dayton of utah.

you are recognized for 60 seconds. >> madame chair thank you madam. -- thank you, madame chair. i was anxious we include something about that in our document. i would prefer this amendment to the one we just passed but since the past one, i will withdraw mine and appreciate the fact we are having a focus on our history. >> she withdraws her amendment. we will now move to line 38 at the bottom of the page. this will be held -- helth. -- health. page 6, line 38. mr. walker, you are recognized under amendment. >> i withdraw my amendment. >> this amendment has been withdrawn. we now go to page 7, same

section. attending academic excellence for all. page seven, line 3. you have an amendment. >> i have it moved, madame chair. thank you for recognizing me for this amendment. this sentence i am seeking to amend lists the options we support for learning. children are different at -- and each child is different. each child can vary in the context in which they can be most successfully educated.

there are many of those options available through charter schools, open a moment, virtual schools, etc. once the list of those options, we then say that they are " especially important for but not limited to families with children's trapped in failing schools." i think the emphasis there is wrong. every child could benefit from having those options available. when i recognize that we should note especially children in failing schools. my amendment is to strike the word "especially important for but not limited to", changing the emphasis to say important for all children, especially for families in failing schools. >> second. correct the amendment has been seconded. the language is highlighted and

reflected on your screen. further discussion? mr. page, you are recognized. >> as someone who worked diligently to expand to school choice options in south carolina, i am pleased to support the amendment and would call to a question. >> the question has been called and seconded. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? we will call the questions. . the amendment is on page seven, line three. all in favor will say aye. all opposed? the amendment is adopted. the next one i have is health number 10. it is on line 11 og page 7.

-- of page 7. we are going to mr. barton of texas. does everyone have the amendment? everyone's digging they have the amendment. mr. parton, you are recognized for 60 seconds. >> we know from every other form of education that we are educating kids with better results for less money. in texas and other states, we try to do -- 65 cents out of every dollar spent in the classroom. it was opposed and defeated by teachers. there is a 50/50 ratio. the proposal i would make is to remove the equivocation, enormous amounts of money are being spent for k-12 public education with results that do not justify the spending. >> second. >> the amendment has been read,

explained and seconded. we are waiting for it to get on the screen. simplification of this -- as you are working through, we would strike the word "which" which follows "result." strike which and strike "seem to." it would change to overall results that do not justify the spending. so it is a rewrite of that first portion. . which -- we strike which and seem to so it reads "overall results that do not justify the spending." in my state in that correctly? is there further discussion? -- am i stating that correctly? is there further discussion? question has been fault -- called.

all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the qusetion has been called. we are now on the health amendment no. 10. of texas.oton amendment on page seven, line 11. is it reflected appropriately on the screen? it is appropriate and proper. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the amendment is a great too. >> just for clarification, we need to leave the "which" in. [inaudible]

because it would just go. ok. thank you, sir. >> help amendment no. 4. >> madame chairman? >> hold on the moment, please. help amendment no. 4 -- health amendment no. 4. page seven, line 25. you are recognized for 60 seconds. >> this language strengthens our commitment. it is identical language we had in the 2004 and 2008 platform. i moved it's adoption. >> the amendment has been read and moved. the language is going on your screen at this point. is there a discussion on the amendment? the gentle lady from alabama. >> i appreciate and respect the

views of the delegates from north carolina but i disagree with this amendment. the reality is a large majority of our teenagers are having sex before marriage. it is our responsibility to educate our teenagers about contraception and std prevention malta is a large prevent -- large emphasis on abstinence. the orders of american support comprehensive sex education policy and i encourage everyone to support the current language on this subject that was adopted by the subcommittee yesterday morning. >> is there further discussion? ms. kennedy? >> i too support the comments just made. >> mr. luna, in a comment from the subcommittee? >> i will tell you we had discussions similar to this in our committee and it did not come out of the committee.

that is the committee's work but there was extensive discussion. i am speaking for the committee, not necessarily myself and i assume that is what you're asking. >> yet. -- yes. >> i was also on that committee. i withdrew it. after extensive debate. i wanted to make sure that had been clarified. i do support the amendment. >> i thank the gentle lady. the question has been called. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the question has been called. all of those -- health amendment no. 4, page seven, line 25. the language is reflected on your screen. those in favor will say aye.

those opposed will say no. we have a division. show of hands for those that say aye. those opposed?

nd at a time. 41, 35. the amendment passes. we now move to -30, health amendment no. 13. do you have that one? all right. mr. perkins, you are recognized for page seven, line 30. health amendment 13. 60 seconds. >> thank you. insert the language at the bottom, language in the platform

in 2004 and 2008. state this -- we oppose school based clinics that provide referrals, counseling and related services for abortion and contraception. it should be noted that under obamacare, it would be $150 million earmarked for these controversial school based clinics. recently cbs reported a planned parenthood clinic set up shot -- shop in a los angeles high school, the same planned parenthood under a cloud of suspicion over criminal and unethical activity. we should restore this language back into the platform that was in the platform in 2004 and 2008 carried erect the amendment has been presented, explained and seconded. -- and 200. 8. >> the amendment has been presented, explained and seconded. >> i would like to speak on

behalf of this amendment. i remind the group that this opportunity for health clinics in the school was introduced as far back as the early days of note to all that behind. its debt and repeated and hidden in pieces of legislation 7 -- several times since. it is important we include this as our platform. i would be supportive of this. >> are there further comments and discussions? >> i also support this wholeheartedly. thank you. >> the question has been called. is there a second? seconded. we are on the call of the question. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the question has been called. we are now on the amendment. health amendment no. 13, presented by mr. perkins of louisiana.

page seven, line 30. the insertion of the words that are reflected on your screen. all in favor say "aye." all opposed? the amendment is adopted. i have no other amendments to this section. attending academic excellence for all. -- attaining academic excellence for all. at 5:00 02 p.m., we completed in clothes that section. -- at 5:02 pm, we completed and closed that section. no call for amendments. we will have the record reflect that at 5:03 that we closed this sectino. we move to line 13, addressing rising college costs. no amendments on this section. we will have the record reflect

that at 5:03 pm, we considered and closed this section. the move to 934 -- we move to line 34. safe neighborhoods. this goes through the end of this section. this is the last amendment we will have. we have two amendments proposed, health 6 and what is the second one? health 15. okay,. . we will begin on page 9, line 2. the gentle lady from the mexico is recognized for health amendment no. 6. >> thank you, madame chairman. as the wife of a retired new

mexico state police officer and because our law enforcement officers are fighting wars on american soil, it is imperative we support efforts to make sure they are well trained not only for our safety and well-being but for theirs as well. therefore i am asking that online 2, page nine, we add "well trained law enforcement officers." >> is there a second? the amendment has been read, i explained, and seconded. you will see it reflected on your screen. it is highlighted. the insertion of the word "we ll trained." question has been called. all in favor will say aye. all opposed, no. we are now on the amendment. page nine, line two, answered in the words "well trained." all in favor say "aye."

all opposed? the amendment is agreed to. we now go to line 8 lapage 9. does everybody have this? health amendment 15. we will move forward with the amendment. you are recognized for your health amendment 15. page 9, line 8. you're recognized for 60 seconds. >> thank you, madame chairman. i would like to change federal to national registry. i did this kind of quickly. the rationale for this is several years ago my niece and nephew were murdered, three and five-years old in a duet -- indiana. the murderer will be released in september to a neighborhood across the street from an

elementary school. he will be living with his mother. it has been verified. very close to this school. there is no national registry for child murderers. there is a national registry for sex offenders. i ask that you please pass this so that the neighbors of this person would lead to be advised that they will have, and there is no indication dispersion has been rehabilitated, will have a child murderer as their neighbor. thank you. >> if there is second? the amendment has been seconded. it has been read and explained. the language is on the screen. is there a discussion? the question has been called.

all of those in favor, say aye. all opposed? the question is called. we are on the amendment has been agreed to. i have no further amendments to the section. any further amendments? p.m., wew that 5:07 can -- completed the section. i call on you for closing comments. >> madam chairman, thank you for the good work that this committee does. we brought you a document that i think is better than the original. we thank those who brought forth the amendments from the discussion. i would move that we would accept the document that has been submitted as amended.

>> there is a motion on the floor to accept the movement as amended. >> seconded. >> all in favor, say aye. all opposed, say no. the section is adopted it 5:08 p.m.. [applause] >> countdown to conventions -- gavel-to-gavel coverage of the republican convention from tampa. coming up on c-span, president obama talks about education funding at a campaign rally in reno, nevada. gary anderson talks about the country's current financial problems. later, the republican platform committee discusses foreign policy issues.

vice president biden will be in michigan for a campaign rally on wednesday. we'll be live from renaissance has school in detroit, starting at 3:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> i know there are those who criticize me for seeing complexities. and i do. some issues are just not all that simple. saying there are weapons of mass destruction in i iraq does not make it so. saying you can fight a war on the cheap does not make it so. proclaiming mission accomplished certainly does not make it so. [applause] >> three days after september 11, i stood where americans died in the ruins of the twin towers. workers in hard hats were shouting to me, whatever it takes. a fellow grabbed me on the arm

and said, do not let me down. since that day, i wake up every morning thinking about how to better protect our country. i will never relent in defending america, whatever it takes. [applause] >> c-span has aired every minute of every major party conventions since 1984. our countdown continues, with one week to go until our live coverage of the republican and democratic national conventions, live on c-span, c-span radio, c- span.org and streamed online. . starting with the republican convention. with governor chris christie, senator john mccain, and former governor jeb bush. democratic speakers include julian castro, first lady michelle obama, and former president bill clinton. >> on tomorrow's "washington journal," we talked to robert

rector about welfare's work to the business experience about -- of presidents, and the publishing editor for "of the huffington post." >> wednesday, the 2012 hispanic public policy agenda. hispanic leaders will reduce -- released their quadrennial blueprint for the the community. we will be live from the national press club on a c-span 2. >> president obama is on a two- day campaign trip, with stops in no -- ohio and nevada. he held a rally at a community college in reno. his main topic was education financing. he criticized republican

presidential candidate mitt romney for suggesting students should borrow from their parents for education. this is a half-hour. ♪ >> hello, reno. [applause] hello. it is good to be back in nevada. well, first of all, could everybody give her a great round of applause? she was outstanding. i also want to a knowledge a dear friend, a great friend of working people, not just here in nevada but all across the country -- your senator, harry reid, is in the house. [applause] there he is.

it is good to see all of you. let me point out, every time i come here, the weather is really good. you guys have a pretty good deal here. it is beautiful. we flew over tahoe, which, well, i would like to pretend that there is a big campaign of and there. but i cannot really pretend that that is the case. but it is wonderful to be in the state. it is great to be at truckee meadows community college. i came here today to talk about what students are doing here every single day -- your education is the single most important investment you can

make in your future. that is true for every single student here. it is true, whether you are talking about a community college or a four-year college or university. i am proud of all of you who are doing what it takes to make that investment. not just the money, but also the long hours in the library, because i hope you are spending long hours in the library, in the lab, in the classroom -- it has never been more important. if the degrees students learn from this college -- that is the surest path he will have to a good job and to higher earnings. it is the best tool that you have got to achieve that basic american promise, that simple

idea that, if you work hard in this country, you will be rewarded. the basic bargain that says, if you work hard, if you are willing to put in the effort, you can do well enough to raise a family, own your home, put away a little for retirement. you will not have to worry about being bankrupt if you get sick. maybe you can take a vacation once in awhile. most importantly, you know you will be able to pass on to your kids more opportunity and the possibility that they can do things you could not even dream of. that is what america is all about. [applause] making sure that those doors of opportunity are open to everybody -- that is the reason i ran for president. that is what my presidency has been about. that is why i am running for a second term as president of the united states.

[applause] >> four more years. >> here is the thing. your education is not just important to you. it is important to america's success. when we invest in your future, we are investing in america's future. the fact is, countries that out educate us today will out compete us tomorrow. we cannot afford to lose that race to make sure we have the most highly educated, most skilled work force in the world. when companies and businesses are looking to locate, that is what they are looking for. i do not want them looking any farther than reno, nevada, the state of nevada, the united

states of america -- we have the best workers in the world, and i want to keep it that way. [applause] your education is getting more important. i am not telling you anything you do not know. more than half of new jobs over the next decade will require some form of higher education. i do not think this is any news to you -- higher education is getting harder and harder to afford. it is tough for a lot of folks. over the past 20 years, tuition and fees at american colleges and universities have more than doubled. the average student who borrows to pay for college now graduates with about $26,000 in student loan debt. living with that kind of debt

means you have to make tough choices, is especially when you are for starting out. it may mean putting off starting a family or buying a home. it may mean you do not have enough savings to try to start that new business idea that you have got. when a big chunk of each paycheck goes just towards servicing your loan debt, that is not just talk for middle- class families trying to make it, it is also not good for the economy. it means you are not spending that money with local businesses. i want you to understand -- i speak from experience here. michele and i know about this firsthand. we did not come from wealthy families. my mom was a single mom. collare's dad was a blue- worker. her mom was a secretary. her parents never went to

college. both of us graduated from college and law school with a mountain of debt. when we got married, we pulled our liability, not our assets. [laughter] we got poorer, not richer. we paid more on our student loans and our mortgage each month and were finally able to buy a condo. now we are supposed to be saving for college education, but we are still paying off for our college education. we landed good jobs, steady incomes, but even with that we only finished paying off our student loans about eight years ago. think about that. i became president, three and a half years ago --i was a u.s. senator about seven years ago.

i had been working, michelle had been working, for over a decade before we got all our loans paid off. here is the thing -- i am only standing here before you today because the chance that that education gave me. i can speak with some experience and say, making higher education more affordable for young people is something i have a personal stake in. it is not something i believe in abstractly. it is something michelle has a personal stake in. we believe in it because we have been in your shoes. we know what it is like. [applause] we understand that, unless you provide those runs on the

ladder of opportunity, young people, many of whom are more talented and michele and i, may not get a shot. that is why i have made this one of the top priorities. it is part of what is at stake in this election. when all of you walk into that voting booth in november, you are going to have a choice -- part of it is the choice of how we treat education in this country. i say this because putting a college's education in reach for working families does not seem to be a priority that my opponent shares. look, a few months ago, governor romney told a crowd of young people just like you that, if you want to be successful, you want to go to college or start a business, you can adjust, and i am quoting "borrow money, if you have to, from your parents." [boos]

did your parents have a whole bunch of money to lend you? my parents did not have a lot of money to lend me. i bet a bunch of your parents do not have a lot of money to lend you. it is not because they do not want to -- they do not have it. when a high-school student asked governor romney what he would do to make college more affordable for families, governor romney did not say anything about loan programs that help millions of students earn a college education. he did not say anything about work study programs or college tuition. he did not say a single word about community colleges or how important higher education is to the future. here is what he said -- "the best thing i can do for you is to tell you to shop around." to shop around -- this is his plan. that is his answer to a person hoping to go to college -- shop

around and borrow money from your parents if you have to. that is not an answer. not only is it not a good answer, it is not even an answer. there is nothing in parent wants to do more than to give their kids opportunity that we never had. [applause] there are very few things more painful than a parent not being able to do it. we are still fighting back from the worst economic crisis in our lifetimes. a lot of parents out there are working really hard, still struggling to make ends meet. i do not accept the notion that we should deny their children the opportunity of higher education and a brighter future just because their families were hit by a recession. think about all of the

discovery, all the businesses, all the breakthroughs that we would not have had if we told every american that wanted to go to college, tough luck, too bad, you are on your own, shop around. this country has always made a commitment to put a good education in the reach of all who want to work for it. that is part of what made us an economic superpower. [applause] that is what kept us at the forefront of science, technology, medicine -- this is not just a new commitment we have made. my grandfather had the chance to go to college because, after fighting on behalf of america in world war ii, he came back to a country that decided, you know what, we will make sure that every veteran should be able to afford college.

[applause] my mother was able to raise me and my sister by herself and go to college because she was able to get grants and worker wicker school. michelle worked her way through school. michele and i would not be here without the help of grants and student loans. we're only here because the chance of the chance that education gave us. i want everyone to have that chance. parents have to parent, young people have to stay disciplined and focused, but if you are willing to work hard, a college education in the 21st century should be available to everybody, not just the wealthy few. [applause] whether it is a four-year

education, a two-year program, higher education is not a luxury. it is a necessity. every american family should be able to afford it. that is what is at stake in this election. that is a reason i'm running for president. i want you to understand -- i am not just talking the talk, making promises. since i took office, we have helped over 3 million more students afford a college education with grants that do not make it difficult. -- a that go farther than they did before. [applause] unfortunately, the economic plan of governor romney cut education by about 20%. the grants that we have used, that many of you may be taking

advantage of -- those grants could be cut so deeply that 1 million students who have been helped would no longer get scholarships. it would cut financial aid to nearly 10 million students a year. here is the worst part -- they are not making these cuts to reduce the deficit. they are not making these cuts to create more jobs. they are doing it to pay for a new, $5 trillion a tax cut weighted towards the wealthiest americans. does that sound like a better plan for a future for you? it is a plan that says we cannot afford to help the next generation, but we can help massive new tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. we cannot offer student loans because we have to protect them. it says, we cannot help young

people trying to make it because we have to protect folks who already have made it. that is not a vision that we have to accept. we have to protect corporate tax loopholes. we cannot help young people who are trying to make it because we have to protect folks who already have made it. that is not a vision we have to accept. governor romney likes to talk about the time as an investor. his economic plan makes clear he does not think your future is worth investing in. i do. that is the choice this november. [applause] we are going to make sure that america once again leads the world in educating our kids and training our workers. there are business owners across the country who say they cannot fill the skilled positions they have opened. you have millions of people out there looking for work. i want to give two million more americans the chance to go to

community colleges just like this one, to learn the skills that local businesses are hiring for right now. community colleges like truckee meadows educates our workforce. [applause] this is where young people and some not young people can come and get trained as nurses and firefighters and computer programmers. folks who manufacture clean energy. these are the vital pathways of the middle class. we should not weaken them. we should strengthen them. earlier this summer, harry reid and i fought to make sure the interest rate on federal student loans did not go up. [applause] we won that fight.

the republican plan in congress would have allowed those rates to double, costing more than 7 million students an extra $1,000 a year. with the help of harry reid, we set up a college tax credit so more middle-class families can save more than $10,000 on tuition. governor romney wants to repeal it. in 2008, promised we would reform the student loans system that was giving billions of taxpayer dollars to lobbyists instead of giving it to students. they were taking a cut out of the student loan program, even though they have the federal government guaranteeing the loans. $60 billion worth. we said let's cut them out. let's give the money directly to students. [applause]

we won that fight. that is what we used to double the grants for students who were in need. my opponent wants to return the system back to the way it was. he wants to go backwards, the policies where banks were taking out billions of dollars from the student loans program. that is the choice in this election. i want to move forward. he wants to go backwards. we are not going to let him. that is what is at stake in this election. [applause] you know, four years ago, i promised we would end the war in iraq.

we promised we would go after al qaeda and bin laden. we promised we would start turning over security responsibilities to afghan so we could bring our troops home. we are keeping these promises because of the tremendous sacrifice of our men and women in uniform. [applause] all of our troops are out of iraq. we have to make sure we keep safe those folks who have fought for us. we made sure to keep the post- 9/11 -- strong. as long as i am commander in chief, this country will care for our veterans and serve them as well as they have served us.

[applause] nobody who fights for this country should have to fight for a job, or fight for a college education, or fight for a roof over their head when they come home. that is part of what is at stake in this election. over the course of the next 2.5 months, the other side will not talk much about education. they do not really have a plan. they will not be talking about much, but they will spend more money than we have ever seen on ads that just try to repeat the same thing over and over again. the economy is not doing as well as it should and it is all obama's fault. it is like going to a concert

and they keep playing the same song over and over again. [laughter] the reason they have to try to keep repeating that over and over again is because they know their economic plan is not popular. they know the american people will not buy another $5 trillion tax cut, most of which goes to wealthy americans and that will be paid for by you. they know gutting education to pay for tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires will not sell. if they cannot advertise their plan, they will fall back on the fact that you get discouraged, that you get cynical, that you decide your vote does not matter. they are betting that each $10 million check from some donor drowns out millions of voices.

they do not see that as a problem. that is their strategy. i am counting on something different. i am counting on you. [cheers and applause] part of what you taught me in 2008 is that when the american people join together, they cannot be stopped. when we remember our parents, great grandparents, and all the sacrifices they made, we are reminded that this country has always risen and fallen together. when we remember that what makes us special is the idea that everybody gets a fair shot, and everybody does their fair share, when that is our focus, you cannot be stopped.

so here is what i will need from everybody. you have no excuse not to register to vote. we have staff and volunteers for you right here. they will grab you at the door. you will not be able to escape. this young lady right here, she is ready to register voters. if somehow we miss you or if you decide you want to help your friends and your neighbors and fellow students to get registered, you can do it online at gottaregister.com. gotta is spelled "g-o-t-t-a." [laughter] you have to not just register. you have to grab some friends. you have to grab some neighbors.

you have to take them to the polls. you have to vote. let's prove the cynics wrong one more time. let's show them your vote counts. let's prove your voice is more powerful than lobbyists and special interests. let's keep the promise of this country alive that no matter what you look like or where you come from, you can make it if you try. we have come too far. we have more troops to bring home, more schools to rebuild, more good jobs to create, more homegrown energy to generate, more doors of opportunity to open for everybody who is willing to work hard, and if you will stand with me like you did in 2008, if you are willing to do some work, and knock on doors and make phone calls, we

will win nevada. we will win this election. we will finish what we have started and remind the world why the united states of america is the greatest nation on earth. god bless you. god bless america. [cheers and applause] >> four more years. ♪

♪ [inaudible conversation] ♪

♪

♪

♪ ♪

♪

>> and tamara's "washington journal," we talk to the heritage foundation's robert rector about welfare work requirements. "vanity fair" -- the editor, on at the business experience of presidents, and the managing editor of the "huffington post." >> the countdown to the conventions -- in six days, gavel-to-gavel coverage of the republican convention, from tampa. your front-row seat to the expect -- convention, live on c- span. coming up next, a former congressional budget office director barry anderson talks about the country's current financial problems. then, the republican platform

committee discusses the platform's use on foreign policy issues. later, a scholar from georgetown university talks about the economy and the relationship between the job market and college education. now, a discussion on the tax and budget fight on capitol hill. former congressional budget office director barry anderson spoke to the american institute of certified public accountants about the so-called fiscal cliff. his remarks are just under one hour. bodman >> we all set? good morning. my name is ron longo. i have the pleasure of introducing our next speaker, who is barry anderson. barry is just a treat to hear. he previously was a senior

budget official at the organization for economic cooperation and development in paris and at the international monetary fund. for over 30 years, he has been active in budgeting for the united states as the deputy director and acting director of the congressional budget office, as the senior career official at the white house office of finance and budget. please welcome barry anderson. [applause] >> thank you very much. i have had the opportunity to speak at a variety of different conferences before. i just wanted to mention my good friend paul. i am looking up to see who will next speak so i can defer all the really tough questions to him or her. i look forward to your questions after this.

this is a good time to be talking. i will be talking about the fiscal cliff. i did this speech a while ago, about a month or so ago, and that had a different view. i had a view at that time that we did not want to be in that blue '58 thunderbird. now i think our leaders are trying to get a seat in the car. i will explain that to you in a minute. in the past month, things have changed here. i want to get to that. the way i look at our current budget situation, we seem to be following movie titles quite a bit. we have "the perfect storm." the fiscal cliff. what i fear is that we are going into the year of living dangerously. perhaps some of the statistics we have seen recently on growth

and unemployment and on investment indicate we may already be in that because of the uncertainties because of the fiscal situation we have. what i'm going to talk about today is our fiscal future. i will try to talk about it from three different perspectives. the near-term, the perfect storm or the fiscal cliff, and what we are facing over the next couple of months. the median-term, the next year. but importantly, the long-term. our major fiscal problem is that the u.s. faces a problem of fiscal sustainability, not an immediate problem of borrowing money. quite the contrary. right now, the treasury may be lending money at interest rates. people are wanting to lend us money and are willing to accept a very rigid very long returns. -- [to accept] very low returns.

i would like to begin with talking about quotes. the first one i want to do is paul simon. a song from 30 or 40 years ago. when i think back on all the stuff i learned in high school, my lack of education has not hurt me none. what i hope to do this morning is help you read the writing on the wall just a little bit. if you found it confusing before in terms of budgeting in general, do not be surprised. that was my intent. i have traveled all around the world. i have been to paris. our system may be the most

transparent system in the world. i believe it is also perhaps the most complex. complexity trumps transparency every time. what i try to do is help you read the writing on the wall. my next famous quote is, budgeting is the art of saying no. there is an art to it. it really takes some skill to determine why the governors decide what to say yes or no about. there is never enough of anything to satisfy all that want it. the first lesson of budgeting. i confess i am an old-time budgeteer. i want to spend one more moment on my background. you have already been told i have been in paris for five

years. i had 30 years doing the trifecta here in washington. the thing he did not mention is that i was a member who is not an accountant. i may be the only in the u.s. i think they learned quite a few things from me. paul mentioned some of them about the value of the balance sheet or what it can do and what it does not do. it did give me a perspective. when i went to paris, we had a meeting of budget and accounting people. of the meetings we ran in paris, that was by far the biggest attended. i am very proud to say the

budget people and accounting people stopped physically attacking each other. mentally, they still did. they began to listen to each other a little bit. i hope we got some progress. one more thing about me, i am not a republican. i am an s.o.b. i can criticize both sides. sometimes at the same time. as this picture indicates, it reflects my views, it seems to have become very lonely at the middle of the road now. the people on the right have gone further on the right and the people on the left have gone further on the left. people on the left and right are so far off the middle road, i am not sure they can see us or care about us. there are some trends in the

u.s. i hope will repopulate the middle road. i think most of us who are independent and take a look at both sides can hopefully produce a better situation than going to one side or another. i am going to start at the back. i said i would do it short, medium, and long. let's start with the long-term situation. here are budget projections. they go out as you see until 2085. the reason i am doing this is because i believe doing these long-term projections is a very good thing. i have found in my experience that if you make a forecast that goes out 18 months, you will be held to whatever that forecast is. if you do one for 75 years, nobody will know. [laughter] that is not a major reason.

if you go out 75 years, it paints the picture of where you need to go, not exactly what amounts need to be, but where you need to go. this chart does it. it is not mine. it comes from president obama's omb. if you can see, the nature of the problem we face is primarily in that line. medicaid. the fact of the matter is, our long-term fiscal sustainability problems are because of social security, medicare, and medicaid. primarily, the health issues. as you can see, as a percent of gdp on these projections, that is what is driving those deficits. the deficits are what is driving the debt. the debt is what is driving the

interest costs. the bottom-line gives a debt as a percent of gdp and shows we are at a percent of 35% just 12 years ago. under the omb projections, there are other folks who might say these are optimistic, but under those projections will be the 77% in 2020. a fellow who was a chief economist and an economist at the university of maryland did a study a year or so ago. what they tried to do is take a look at debt as a percent of gdp. and say, how big can it get or is there a relationship between the size of the debt as a percent of gdp and our economic growth? they did over many decades and over many countries.

a range. 60 or below is clearly good. countries who had debt at a percent of gdp at 60% or or below grew faster than others. 90% or above was clearly bad. 90% or greater clearly had a worse economic growth than others. between 60% and 90%, it was more muddled. this was a very good study. it gives us some benchmarks. in the sense that, maybe we do not want to go above 90%. maybe we want to get toward 60%. this chart here shows clearly what our direction is. it is what our problem is that we are facing, not borrowing money to finance the deficit

today, but really the long-term fiscal sustainability. with that, i want to move on to say, ok, now that we know what the problem is, what are the solutions? i did this chart a few weeks ago before congressman ryan was named as vice-presidential candidate. here are some numbers here from omb, congressman ryan's proposal. i am focusing on the long-term. look at what the final right- hand column says in 2015. it emphasizes that the nation -- the nature of our problem is medicaid. that drives up interest rates and pushes -- puts our debt at clearly unsustainable levels. what does president obama and congressman ryan propose to do about it? what president obama proposes to

do is to hold medicaid and medicare spending considerably below the 12% of gdp. can he do it? i am going to address that in a minute or two. let me leave that as a question mark. as you can see from congressman ryan's proposal, he is even lower than the president's budget. he does that through a premium support mechanism. i am trying to help you read the writing on the wall. that is a budget. it is the limited amount the federal government will contribute to medicaid and medicare programs. it is clearly a budget. ryan's number there is accurate in the sense that this is what he will spend. what does that mean for the consumer and how much he or she will have to spend?

that is another matter. there is something truly under listed about congressman ryan's budget. you can see two dozen 50 has 40% gdp. defense right now is nearly 40% gdp. what happens to the rest of government? that may be a step too far for congressman ryan. i do not know that number is a realistic number. i am not trying to endorse the obama budget. i commented on the ryan budget being unrealistic numbers. let me talk a little bit about the obama budget. let's take a look at the u.s. relative to the rest of the world. this chart indicates that we

spend far more than anybody else in the world on health. but it also indicates that we do not necessarily get better results. the dot usa on the far right all by itself. you can see under one measure, life expectancy at birth, we are only at eight years. look at all the countries that spend considerably less and yet have higher life expectancies. life expectancy is not the only measure. it may not even be the best measure. but it is one legitimate measure. other measures such as infant mortality would indicate similar problems. the viability of certain cancers after it has been detected, the united states would yield better results. the u.s. is not worse in every case.

but it is very, very clear that we spend a whole heck of a lot more than anybody else. the next chart, and i apologize for being 2007, but they have not updated it yet, to me is one of the most significant i have seen in my years in doing budgeting. it shows how much more we spend. we are spending 16% in 2007, of gdp. the next highest country, france, in which i lived for five years, and i had french health care while i was there, is at 11%. 5% difference. i got a lot with the french government when i was there. they are very concerned about the high level of spending they have.

when looking at what we have, they cannot understand how we can possibly be spending so much this was the nature of the problem a few years ago. it is still there. now we move to what president obama has been doing. this chart, which is done by the centers for medicaid and medicare services, that is the obama administration just a few months ago, indicates what the health care situation for the u.s. will look like over the next eight years. we are going from about 18% of gdp to merely 20%. let me state that another way. they're all kinds of benefits from the affordable care act. from the obama administration's own numbers and from the long- term sustainability issues, it has made the problem worse. if you will notice, i only have one column with numbers on here. i could not find another column

that said what would have been the growth and health expenditures in the absence of the affordable care act. might have been hired. it may be that the obama administration actually helped save us money. i do not know. i cannot say that. i can put these numbers out. with respect to long-term sustainability, it made the problem worse. should that be a surprise? i do not think so. we added 30 million people to health care. when i was in paris, all three of my kids lost their jobs. all three of them found new jobs. during that time, you are looking at their health insurance. i was very happy to hear about where we are going here, personally with respect to our long-term sustainability problems, there is not any doubt with respect to health he is the major issue, and we have not addressed that issue through the affordable care act.

we need to do much more. that is the situation we are in. now i will jump back to the long-term where i hope i have laid out some of the issues we are facing. now to the medium-term. i am frequently asked, what do you feel about continuing the tax cuts that came out of the bush administration? do you think we should continue them? i answer, it is the wrong question. i cannot answer the question because it is the wrong one. i can say this. i have heard concrete public announcements from both the administration, from the republicans, from the democrats, from virtually everybody, that our tax system is broken. it is inefficient, complicated, and it does not produce the right results. president obama has been instructed.

we need to have fundamental tax reform. that is the focus we have. lower the rates. if you take that as where we should be headed, this little chart might be worthwhile. with respect to tax reform, could we get agreement on this? one thing i like to point out is that, if you take a look at your taxes, you have income taxes and you have fica. your employer matches it. how many people who pay taxes have higher fica taxes than income taxes? when the start was done a

number of years ago, as you can see, four out of five households pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes. four out of five. yet you hear no discussion of payroll taxes at all. the lower incomes pay more than the higher incomes. yet we do not hear anybody talking about that at all. i will go into that a little bit more. this is just a chart that indicates in 2009, any pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes. i will go into this a little bit more. the top two levels are 33% and 35%.

we go back to 36% and 39.6%. there have been a lot of criticisms. on whether we should go back to that. president obama has made that one of his signature moves and the congressional republicans are resisting that. the reason why has to do with the curve. laugher -- laffer is one who said there was a relationship between the tax rates you have and the amount of money you collect. i believe that and i will show that right here. here is what the curve looks like. he says at a certain tax rate, you will maximize the economic production of the economy and therefore maximize government revenue. this is one of the major

theories on the part of the republicans and i want to state my biases. i believe in the curve. specifically i believe in three points in the curve. you see that point on the bottom left where it says the zero tax rate. i believe in that point. you see that point on the right side? 100% tax rate. i believe in that point. and there is some point in between that i believe is there. i've tried to do some research to identify where it was because of the incredible difference is we have between the republicans and democrats about what tax rates are, i have been able to find something saar with share. not just this theoretical presentation of the curve but what it looks like. it took a lot of research to find this but this will help simplify the political debate we have here. i'm going to go back a little

bit. going back to not getting off the curve, taking a look at tax rates in shares. we should be doing in there has been both sides been talking about we should be doing tax reform. what we're doing tax reform it is a good idea to take a look at what they tax rates and shares are. i put this together here. using cbo data. as you can see, how our system -- our income tax system is very progressive. the highest 20% pay 94% of the share of income. the top 4% pay almost 40% in two dozen 9. i had some people think you made a mistake. you have some negative numbers there. you have the lowest people having an income rate of -9.2%. did you make a mistake? i did not.

the reason that is-is because of their earned income tax is that good or bad? i am not trying to make the income but it is worthwhile knowing that the system is progressive. that is a-number for income, not for total. the difference between those numbers and why the total is positive is what i mentioned before, payroll taxes. payroll taxes are regressive and much of the progress of any of the income tax. this is to give you an idea of what the current tax situation looks like. it was not to make a judgment about how it should look in the past. in terms of shares and with the incomes are. and with incomes are for that. and i get to social insurance

tax rates, the regressivity. we are a progressive system. the poor you are the more you pay. some of you might say that is because we cap social security tax and it changes every year. that is part of it. if we took the cap of social security tax it would still be regressive. many of the people in the highest incomes get their money from capital gains. things that are not covered by a payroll tax. my reason for this is to highlight something i do not think a lot of people know and to say this should be part of the debate. ok. we have covered that and the laffer curve. now to the near term and the fiscal cliff. i think there are nine different elements of it. they are rarely talked about. i will mention what they are.

there is this, worker adjustment and prenotification, something like that. i need to know what it means. if you are laying off somebody or fire them we have to give 60 days' notice at least. some states is more. the question is what happens on january 2? the sequester is going to cut the funding that a lot of defense contractors and others are going to get. if you have to give 60 days' notice, 60 days before january 2 is november 2. that is a law right now. whether it applies not, the department of labor says you do not need to issue blanket notices as one defense contractor did.

warn act notices are part of the fiscal cliff. they may be more visible before the election. we talked about the expiration of the tax cuts. there's a series of this. it is not just the top rates. it is also the 10% bracket. if the tax cuts expire, every single one of you like -- will pay more taxes. it does not mean just those at the top of the income. we currently have the payroll tax holiday and extra unemployment benefits, 2% holiday we have had for two years running. that expires at the end of the year. the amt, the alternative minimum tax. i will talk about that. that does not expire on december 31. that is already expired and i will talk to you a bit about what that means to you and to the public but that is another element of the fiscal cliff. we have something called the docca fix -- doc fix.

the department of hhs determines the amount to pay for doctors. there is a law that says as of january 1, the amount paid for doctors and other providers will drop by 30% on january 1. we know these are going to happen. they are in long now. they cannot be changed unless there is fundamental laws to change them. there are some things we do not know the timing of. one is the continuing resolution and that applies to how long the funding for fiscal year 2013 is going to be. that is the fiscal year that begins october 1. the other one is temporary assistance for needy families. that is a welfare program that was was drastically reformed in the clinton administration. is authorization expires on some timber 30.

on october 1 if it is not reauthorize, over 4 million people will not receive welfare benefits. it could be extended but right now it is one of the elements of the fiscal cliff. and finally, there is the debt limit. i think you know something about that. the current estimates are that the current debt limit which is $16 trillion $394 billion -- 16 trillion dollars, and -- they had certain abilities to extend that out. the reality is that the debt limit is going to put -- be with us in the car as we go off the fiscal cliff, too. all right. a month or so ago when i talked about this i was saying, this is unprecedented. things they're so bad -- things are so bad, cover such a wide

variety of folks, nobody will want to go off the fiscal cliff. i put this little chart together. let's take a look at every one of the players here. does the president want to go off the fiscal cliff? no. he wants to continue the tax cuts. the affordable care act is a difficult law to implement. it may not be ready. he may be able to trade a delay of this for no sequester. he does not want the sequester. he does not want to cut entitlements. he more than anybody else will want to increase the debt limit. republicans in congress? they do not want to have taxes go up, not just for those below 250. democrats like continuing backed supplemental unemployment

assistance. everybody wants to patch the amt and do some tax reform. my friends came out a few months ago and said, if we do go off the fiscal cliff, it will produce a recession. how the first half of next year, we will have negative real growth. this is unprecedented. we will have an explicit no fiscal congressional action push us into a recession. we may have done it before inadvertently, but here, we know it will happen. we have been told. they said if we postpone it, with some other kind of constraints to show we are serious to show long-term fiscal sustainability, then we can have real growth. that is the situation.

this set of circumstances is so bad, covers so many people, that we are definitely not going off the fiscal cliff. then congress did a couple of things and now i think we are all riding in that thunderbird together. [laughter] i started getting questions two weeks ago. let's say we actually did the sequester on january 2. does it all have to be taken on that day? do you have to cut all 10% of

the second of january? the answer is no. it can apportion the cuts later in the year. in other words, if you truly believe you can fix it later, you can go along spending at the full rate, not at 10% or less, and not have to take the cuts until the last six months or three months of the year. what about notices? the department of labor has said to ignore them. what about the expiration of the tax cuts? little known fact. the secretary of treasury has the ability to set your withholding rates. so let's just assume on january 1, the tax cuts expire. every one of you owe more taxes. with a minute. you may say.

how does that work? i owe more taxes, i set up withholding, but no more money is coming. will that mean i will have to pay a much higher rate or have a much greater liability on the 15th of april the year after that? yes. that is what it means. [laughter] can that happen? yes. it still can. it has been done before. it is a game of chicken. payroll tax holiday, i do not hear hear support for that anymore. the amt has already expired, but it can be retroactively extended. if they do that, it could give them another year. we're going off the cliff. amt will not hit us right away. we can fix that letter. the continued resolution. have you heard about this? they are talking about six months to take us to april 1.

in other words, we will pretend we can get through all these problems and come back and the new congress will fix it somehow. we will go off the cliff. the debt limit, if you let the payroll tax holiday expire, that produces $10 billion a month. that might help us a little bit. $10 billion a month is not much, but it may help a little bit. what i have heard in the last couple of weeks is an awful lot of people who say, let's fix it later. wow. i hope they are not right. i hope once the election is over, and i expect nothing before it, that markets basically come up and say, there is a deal to be had. here is a deal we almost had last year. president obama and speaker

boehner cut this deal. did you ever buy a car, sit down with the salesman, decide on a price, shake hands? you have been through that, right? he says, i have to go check with the manager. [laughter] obama shook hands with boehner last july. the deal fell apart. i am not trying to say why. they had a deal. revenues $800 billion. entitlements, health, $400 billion. remember my charts. that is where the major problem is. a good start.

chained cpi, the way we index federal programs. $800 billion in entitlements. these are very approximate numbers. these are the deals they settled on. this sequester accomplishes that. the other stuff fell apart. why do i point this out? they had a deal. they shook hands. it is not impossible for us to get a deal. at least to put the process down for a deal. let's not give up hope. so what would a deal look like. kick the can down the road another year. they could use the budget resolution and reconciliation rules to put a restraint on a future congress of about a $3 trillion along the lines of the obama deal.

lower rates and broaden the base will, could, maybe have an impact on the economy. could things we have heard help? yes. hopefully it is to put about some credibility so the markets do not go bonkers and we see drops in equity markets like crazy. that is my situation on the medium-term, here.

i will talk about the amt. if you do not know what that is, let me say, right now, today, you owe it. but you do not know it. i am fairly sure i am speaking to everyone in this audience. you all will be subject to the amt. you start off with exemptions. then you take your income. then you go to schedule a. then you come out after that. right? that is what you do at the amt.

you start all over. you start with your exemptions. then income. then schedule a. you come to that thing on taxes. that is the simple way to do it. then you calculate it. that is the simple way of doing it. it multiplied times 20%if you owe more without the reductions, then you pay more. what does this mean? the amt is going to hit "married with children" in states where they pay high amount of income sales and/or property taxes. with those figures on this table. married with children will be six times more likely to pay the

empty than single folks. 45% with incomes between $75,000.100000 dollars will pay the empty. up from 0.4% last year. in addition, at&t does not hit the high earners because they're paying at a higher rate. they are already paying at the higher rate. the amt will hit 94% of those, but only 51% of millionaires. this is a theoretical view. can i fix it? yes. up until about the first or second week of january. if they try to fix it after that, it will drive the system crazy. it is coming toward you very quickly. that is why i like the fiscal cliff analogy.

i will quit their. i was going to get into the night in paris. i think i will stop here and take questions. i was going to do comparisons of why i do not want to end this talk as negatively as you might interpret. i spent the last five years in paris. i think i would still rather be here than anyplace else. i will take some questions, first. a number of years ago my favorite budget director was leon panetta. we were supposed to go to japan to talk about long-term fiscal problems. this is almost 20 years ago now.

leon could not go because by the time he made the commitment he got named chief of staff. so i went and i was there with my japanese hosts and japan has the longest [unintelligible] we're looking at our long term longevity and health problems and i said you know, the did not know my sense of humor. you have a problem in japan and we have a problem in the u.s. and put hours together, we can sell each other's problems. he said, really? what is that. you have a problem with a generous social security system and the longest lived people in the world. our problem is we have to much tobacco. he did not appreciate the joke and i have not been invited back. life expectancy is low because

we do a good job of killing ourselves. we kill ourselves not only by shooting ourselves, by driving fast, but particularly by eating. i must say after five years in paris, i got used to sizes at restaurants that you did not have to bring a dog back or to adjust to to get home. was different way. ok. between the french health system and our system, quality versus care. i with -- i like to use anecdotes. think about the last time you went to a doctor. here in the u.s. trade to go to the doctor's office and you make an appointment and open the door. what do you see? i was just in a redness and shall list. finding out i have a freckle on my retina. i did not know such things existed. anyway, they looked at it and

said it is not bad, you have to have it checked every year. i go in to the specialist and i open the door. i saw six people talk to and had service provided by six people before i saw a doctor. in france i have a problem. i go to make an appointment and they did it on line and i did it and my french was a lousy and my medical french was basically nonexistent. i made sure it had a doctor who spoke english ago to the doctor and open up a door, there is a small waiting room. two or three people sitting there, obviously patients. there's nobody else there. i did not know what to do. i stood there and a door opens up and out comes a guy in a

white coat. i have been waiting for you. come in. i have my procedure and he said there will be 25 euros. i knew this was coming. there is a copayment. you pay the doctor in cash. i said i am in budgeting. i am used to a system where there is assistance. you do this on yourself and he said, i have an assistant, she comes in twice a week. the single payer nature of the french system. they are number two in the world but that makes a world of difference. no matter who your assurances or we'll get your service. it is so much easier.

they're different malpractice things. my wife was there and my wife speaks very good french but she, like i, was afraid of her medical french so she goes to a good friend of ours and says, can you recommend a doctor? can you recommend a doctor who speaks english and my friend who was a good friend looks at her and says, i am amazed to would say that. my wife says why? do you think i would recommend to you a french doctor who has not been trained in the u.s.? a lot of their better doctors are trained here, too. it is not that we have a bad system here. our fee-for-service aspect of it are administrative aspects of it coming our malpractice insurance product liability things, another thing i used to say when i compared my home in bethesda with my home in france which was near the eiffel tower, how do you compare the two?

my neighbor is not bad in bethesda. there is only one thing wrong. there are too many lawyers tread the medical system is high because we keep a legal profession on it. we're so much worse for ready of others. fee-for-service is the biggest aspect. administrative costs and malpractice insurance are there too. ok. freezing annual something of social security for a five-year period. social security is an issue. it is going bankrupt from the accounting sense. let me explain social security very quickly. it is called the sisson charity

-- social security trust fund. it is an intergenerational transfer. and a successful one. in the 1930's, we had some very poor old people. how to help them left out of poverty, the had not set aside money and how to prevent this in the future. it was easy. it had old people -- you have old people. if you taxed money from those working and give it to the old, you lift them out of poverty so you have these people working. the original rate was 1.2%. it take 1.2%, a transfer from this generation working to this generation retired and what did it do? it worked. in the 1930's and 1940's, the number of old people in poverty significantly improved because of social security.

ok. how do you continue to do this? it is the same deal. it is an intergenerational transfer so when these people who paid, you take a little bit out of the next generation and pay them. that seemed to be working, to but along came the and all they 65 million others who are card- carrying members of the baby boom. when they started looking at these relationships, they saw that as said like this or like this, it was like this. you had piles of people entering the work force paying far more than what was needed to keep the basic level that was set up as social security. what did you do? increased the benefits to those retired. you increased the taxes. the taxes got up to 12.4%. 6.2 for the employee, 6.2% for

the employer. did that work? it worked until the next generation came along and then this intergenerational transfer went from this to this. that is, you have this amount of old people paying taxes to this amount of retired. i said the problem with the gen and -- they did not like sex. i was corrected by a young person in the audience say that was not the problem. we know how to control ourselves, that is all. in any case from an economic perspective, you are still facing this and it is going to get worse. i am fortunate. i live with my 9-year-old granddaughter and we have

breakfast any -- every morning and i look at her and say, you got a job yet? i am about to retire and you -- we need the money. we're facing the situation here and it will be such that in order to keep the benefits for which i so justly deserve, those following me will have to pay either higher taxes or they're going to have to cut benefits. we're facing that situation now. how to do it? extending their retirement ages. in 1983 we did it to you and me. my parents were able to retire at 65 with full benefits. i can i get full benefits until 66. countries are facing this and it may be one of the things. i mentioned the rate at which we used to increase benefits.

we now increased benefits on the rate based on wages. not prices. this is something not very well known. what is the difference between wages and prices? a lot of our recent history, our employees become more productive. that increase has resulted in not a perfect correlation, resulted in higher wages. those higher wages are used to increase the benefits of those who are retired. huh? why should better productivity increase the wages of those retired? what if we went to maintaining purchasing power and went to as opposed to increasing it based on wages, we increase on prices. it sounds logical to me. that is what the chain cpi

reference is. it has been imposed by the interest groups to try to protect the interests of the elderly. those kinds of interest can be done. it is better than a holiday with respect to increases in the cost of living for currently -- recipients because there is an awful lot of people who count on social security as their only retirement or a big part of it. ok. on the amt. this has to do with the relationship between the ante in the bush tax cuts. you may know of forbes magazine. and the publisher. he was re big into the flat tax. to heck with this progressive tax rate or whatever it is. let's have one flat tax and some

eastern european countries, russia, latvia, and a couple of others went to a flat tax. they went to a flat tax because they had tax evasion, excessive amounts and the flat tax help them address that issue. my point is that the amt is flat tax. we do not do anything in terms of passing the empty. virtually everybody is going to be paying 28%. and it might take 10 or 20 years, something like that but everybody will be paying. there is clearly our relationship between the current tax system whether it is under the bush system or allowing the tax cut to expire and the empty. one of the reasons why the numbers are so great that i put up on this chart is because they assume the lower tax rates that

are in effect now. the lower the tax rates, the more of the empty heads. if we let the tax tricks expire and fix the empty for one year, the tax -- normal tax rates -- the mts stays the same. it will hit fewer people. complicated, yes. it produces uncertainty, confusion, i do not see that there is any + to it at all. there may have been a reason for the empty when it was originally established in the 1960's. it has not really been in effect except for relatively small number of people for any of the years after that. if we allow it to go into effect now it will be -- have a tremendous impact on a very large number of basically a middle and upper middle income folks in relatively high tax

rates that are married with children. is there a relationship between the two? yes. when we go - but for tax reform issue, we ought to address it? absolutely. that set up a system that is logical, simple, take a look at those tax expenditures which are more than $1 trillion the year. see which ones are most appropriate and should be retained, but broaden the base and lower their rates. ok. i think that is my time here. thank you very much. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> in six days, gavel-to-gavel coverage of the republican convention from tampa. you're front-row seat to the conventions. coming up, the republican platform committee discusses the

party's views on foreign policy issues. and the economy and the relationship between the job market and a college education. later, barry anderson talks about the country's current financial problems. the congressional budget office releases its report. the director will take questions from reporters. it can see that life at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> from time to time i watch the proceedings of the house and the senate floor and interviews with people, and i have the c-span app so i can check the schedule on my ipod. i can see when there is good stuff on. sometimes if the timing is

right, i can get a live feed from the floor of the house and senate and have them watch that for five or 10 minutes and provokes some conversation. >> burnie davis watches c-span on comcast. c-span, created by america's cable companies in 1979. brought to you by public service by your television provider. >> tomorrow, will talk to the heritage foundation's robert rector and todd purdham on the business experience of u.s. presidents and the politics managing editor. "washington journal" becomes -- begins live at 7:00 a.m. on c- span. >> the republican national convention begins august 27. the platform committee met for a

second day to drive -- draft its position on topics such as foreign policy, health care, and education. this hour and 40 minute segment focuses on health and education issues. >> i hope the chocolate hit the spot. glad you're back. we have one last section on healthy families, education, and crime and i will turn it over to the congresswoman for the last section. >> all right. you got your chocolate, and now we're ready to rock and roll. and get through this last section and deliver to the american people the best gop platform they have ever gotten. thank you. all right. let's go to the section on healthy families. great schools, safe neighborhoods, i just love

talking about health and being healthy and thinking about a healthy america with healthy people. i am pleased that we talk about appealing obamacare and making certain we reform health care. good one of the things we have heard across the country is at the american people -- is that the american people want to start over with a fresh slate. they want to see if more choices. they want to see lower costs. they want to make certain we restore medicare, and they want to make certain we focus on health care tax free, and we have done some great work on this section. i have really been pleased with the focus on health care common safe neighborhoods, creating that environment where we want to grow up.

give we were led in this committee by general owens out of georgia, and mr. mclarty -- ms. mcclardy out of oklahoma, and i am going to recognize mr. lewin on -- mr. luna to give a brief summary. you are recognized. >> i think this is one example of true the saving the best for last, because i think the work is stellar. i want to thank our co-chair and the members of our committee for the thoughtful work in preparing this document. doug we have over 50 amendments. we had spirited debate, but we agreed to forward this document you have before you. we believe the american family

is the foundation of our society and has been since the birth of our country. we affirm the belize government can never replace our family. that -- the belief that government can never replace our family. good we recognize and honor the courageous efforts of those who bear the many burdens of parenting alone, even as we believe in marriage must be upheld as a national standard. we believe taking care of one's health is an individual responsibility, and consumer choice is a powerful fact berlin -- factor in form. we state that obamacare is about power. give we enthusiastically embrace mitt romney's commitment that on his first day in office he will use his authority under the law to halt its progress and sign its repeal.

then the american people through its representatives can advance affordable and responsible health care reform that truly meets the needs of patients and providers. we state clearly parents are primarily responsible for the education of their children and the parents are far better at determining the educational needs of their children than any bureaucrat. understanding that without choice or education we will never truly have accountability. we support homeschooling, charter schools, a virtual schools, career and technical ed programs and tax credits, and we implore the efforts to kill and the scholarship for disadvantaged students in order to placate the leaders of the

teachers' union. we believe a child ability to achieve in school must be based on god-given talent and motivation, not zip code or economic status. we believe education is primarily a state and local issue and that federal overreach is a hindrance to improvement in student achievement. we support innovative education reform occurring across the country in many states, and we support the efforts across the country to expand the use of technology to better teach and engage twentieth century learners and insure all children have equal access and opportunity. we applaud america's great teachers and believe that teachers are not a problem. they are the solution. studies have shown once a student enters the school, the most important factor in

educational success is the quality of the teacher. it is not how much you spend or the number of students. those are important, but the most important factor is quality of the teacher. we believe every child must have of highly effective teacher every year in every classroom, so we call on removing the barriers to reward teachers through merit pay and for performance. we want to remove the last hired first fired policy. we recognize education beyond high school is essential, but a cost of federal aid is on an unacceptable trajectory, and i student loan exceeds credit-card debt, and considering recent college graduates are unemployed or underemployed, we call on transparency needed to address these challenges. we states that as americans we will never be fully free to

pursue the american dream without first being free from fear and intimidation from crimes in our neighborhoods. madame chair, i suspect please submit our report and ask for the full support of this and body. >> i thank the gentleman for that summation, and it is my understanding you are speaking for the three of them directly, so i thank each co-chair for the contribution to the committee. at this time the section on healthy families is open for amendment. and we are on page one, line one through line eight.

now the initial statement, i have one amendment to this section. it is by mr. barton of texas. is everyone holding that amendment? you are recognized for 60 seconds. >> are recognize the family. i really like what they say about the foundation of the family is the first level of self-government, but i am unclear what it means for the school and democracy. every kid i know, it does not matter how the kids vote. now the parents win. i am not sure what the school of democracy means for the family. good thwacks the motion has been heard, and it has been seconded, and it is open for

discussion. is there any -- >> the motion has been heard, and it has been seconded, and it is open for discussion. >> this country is a republican form of government, not a democracy, so i would like to affirm mr. barton's comments and say we should be a school of republicanism. >> i thank you for those comments. i would remind everyone when you are recognized to please identify yourself by name and states when you begin to speak. the language in mr. barton's amendment is reflected on the screen. it is striking the word school of democracy. is there any further discussion? a gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. all in favor? >> aye. >> we are now on the amendment. the amendment, page one, line

four. is there any further discussion? all in favor, say aye. all opposed? the amendment is agreed to. we now move to amendment no. 11. we are going to close this first session. is there any further discussion or amendment to this section? no further amendments or discussion. this will reflect that help the schools unsafe neighborhoods has been close. we now move to the paragraph about marriage, lines 9 through 21. i have two amendments for this. mr. barton hazmat of first

amendment. it is how the men and number of -- mr. barton has the first amendment. it is health amendment no. 11. you are recognized for 60 seconds on your amendment. >> i need to apologize because i do not know the scope, but in the clause talking about the benefits for children, we use the same introductory phrase three times, so i would like to delete two of those. the freeze will now read that those children are less likely to use -- the phrase will read of those children are less likely to use drugs or alcohol or have children out of marriage. >> the amendment has been seconded. it is highlighted on your screen. is there any discussion? the question has been called.

all those in favor? oppose the we are on a house amendment no. 11. -- opposed? we are on health amendment no. 11. the amendment has been adopted. does everyone have health amendment no. 8? mr. kirby, you are recognized for your amendment, the section on marriage. 60 seconds. >> thank you, madame chairwoman. i really like -- i have commanded everyone -- commended everyone for how much we appreciate the family and marriage, but continuing the discussion i believe republicans should promote

everyone is treated equally under the law, i would like to strike the sentence and promote laws governing marriage. >> the amendment that i have, yes, there is a difference in the language reflected in the written amendment as opposed to the language. >> at a comma, and delete the line promote through marriage laws. good >> as reflected on the screen your amendment is correct? >> i would take out and, but you do not have to. that is correct. >> there is a punctuation errors. did you do not need commas around and. is there a second? >> second. >> the amendment has been read

and seconded. is there a discussion on the amendment? you are recognized. >> tony perkins from louisiana. the language specifically relating to the lot is a recognition of the federal defense of language act, which currently leadership is asking for an absence for the president that will defend the law. we have had 30 states that have passed constitutional amendments defining marriage and their own states as the union of a man and woman. those state constitutional amendments which most states have would fall, so i am seeking an opposition to this amendment. >> and opposition to the amendment. you are recognized. >> i am opposed to this amendment because laws governing marriage also involved divorce, and we are seeing

nationally the crisis we are facing with divorce leaving mothers and children destitute, so i read this as also including the we need to encourage and promote laws governing marriage to encompassed divorce laws, so i rise in opposition to this amendment. >> you are recognized for 60 seconds. but there are a plethora of laws that govern marriage, both a religious institution and a civil law institution, and if we stand for marriage as between a man and woman, we have to reflect that, and it would be meaningless if we said it just stands in the abstract but we do not want to put it in our law.

>> is there a second? the question has been called. all those in favor say aye. the question has been called. the question is about the deletion of the language and to promote through laws governing marriage. good all those in favor will say aye. the amendment is not agreed to here again we have no other amendments on that section. the section on marriage, the record will reflect we have close that. we now move to families and poverty. that is on 22, page one. are there any amendments to this section? i do not have those.

i am holding no amendments to the section, so we will let the record reflect that we considered a section. there were no further amendments, and the session was approved at 3:44 p.m. moving to page 2, line four through line 9, i have no further amendments for that section. any further discussion? we will let it show that we close the section for consideration. we go to line 10 of pages two. foster care down to 15. i have no amendments for this section. we will let the record reflect it was considered and closed at 3:45 p.m.

moving to line 16 of page two, families and the internet, this goes to line 25 of page 2. i have no call for amendments to this section. is there any further discussion? the record will reflect a 3:45 we considered and close this section. moving to line 26, advancing americans with disabilities. i have no amendments to this section. we will let the record reflect that at 3:45 we have considered and close this section. give we now move to page three, line 5, obamacare, and i have three amendments to this

section. we are on page three, line five, the position of obamacare. of first amendment is line three. you are recognized. >> i simply want to add after the phrase "over one sixth of our economy" -- actually, i soon start from the beginning. >> -- i should start from the beginning. >> it is no. 9. >> from the start is about power. the expansion of government control to one sixth of our economy and a further erosion of our constitution by requiring all u.s. citizens purchase health insurance. would watch to that line -- the i

addition i would want to that line, to add the phrase, a further erosion of our constitution -- >> the language is on the screen. the amendment is submitted. is there a discussion? >> i do not think this is grammatically correct. i think if we add it after the and, resulted in, it should read, and resulted in to further erosion, it would be grammatically correct, so i would like to make that secondary amendment. >> the you consider -- do you consider? consider?