the meeting that we may have in this case in the context, as part of the agenda is creating enforcement for the community. the point that it's important to we will continue to wil meet with the leaders of state. the offices of state to disclose the specific priorities in the case of the immigration, health, education. that is where we have these kinds of conversations. >> could you talk a little bit about their role you expect young latinos to play, 18-24 or 25, what factors you think will affect the turnout at the election, and what are you doing to affect the turnout? >> some of you may have seen their recent hispanic pugh study that just came out earlier this week.

it is specifically addressing that of the growth rate of the young adult rate 16-24. that just supports the whole has been like rate population being the largest are ready minority group as it grows, and will continue. simply emphasizing the importance of the agenda, both parties and president of the united states in reaching the education goals. it ends the importance of the hispanic vote. many of us have smaltz program and we're emphasizing spanish with them. the language will continue to grow. it will be more and more important for politicians and for companies, all sectors. >> erica rodriguez. i will only do this in english. the latino vote is huge.

half a million every year. it will be huge. the issue that affects them is voter suppression issues. there are lots of mobility taking place, whether we're talking about foreclosure or unemployment. there is lots of movement. registration is key. there are a number of organizations that have voter registration drives. this will be crucial to the accountability questions that have been raised. we know there has been lots of energy among latino voters and those that are about to turn of age. they are paying attention to a lot of different issues whether it is the dream at four other issues. it is a key time for us to be

engaged as we possibly can be. >> a number of the members are part of the latino table, the national table and which recorded eight of the county level with border protection. we have a message. [inaudible] civic participation as down. we need to vote in record numbers. we need to remember it is not just about numbers. it is very important to participate. >> are you disappointed with president obama as immigration

reform, and disappointed with the way he has handled immigration enforcement? >> ok. [laughter] >> we have been very aggressive>> yes, yes. >> and we have been very public on the issue. we were very disappointed the promised immigration reform did not come true. this is very well documented. i think it was almost one year with administration and we say there is still something we can do. the answer was we need to wait for republicans. we say we can do something to

stop the deportation immediately. today the great work and passion is a good step in the right direction. >> i would say certainly there some levels. if you look at what has happened of the past year, it has been very positive. the preferred action plan. the end of the 287g programs, and the fact of the justice department has gone involved with arizona. there have been steps in the right direction. think of we -- we've been asking for certainly i think it is a mixed bag. certainly happier with the way

the administration has moved on immigration of the past year. >> [speaking spanish] >> that is pretty much it. we will take one more question. then maybe if some of you want to take questions aside with some of the voices we have in the room. one more question. this sunday we will head to the republican national convention, and after that we will go to

the democratic national convention. we're here to collaborate. on sunday when we meet with the republicans, we would ask them to get credentials to the republican party and why there was no help. and this is just the beginning of a more instant collaboration. we're here to answer any questions that you may have. [applause] >> a program update. tomorrow general john allen creeps' reporters at the pentagon about the ongoing military operations in afghanistan. -- john allen briefs reporters at the pentagon. in four days, gavel-to-gavel coverage from tampa life here on c-span. on c-span today, the latest economic forecast from the congressional budget office. this is followed by today's washington journal.

later, the national education policy center looks at alternatives to traditional public schools. >> this weekend, beginning sunday at 4:00 eastern, from his 2010 interview with ron williams, and it wrongly from his book. >> strong defender of american values and human rights. democracy, free trade, free enterprise. those words of apology in the statement have emboldened those who find us as a weekend enemy. >> later, co-author and boston globe reporter. part of our book to be weekends on c-span to. >> according to the congressional budget office

latest report, the federal deficit will be over trillion dollars. the cbo want a recession could happen if they do not reverse several fiscal policies by the end of the year. it also states are not with it is expected to rise to 9% of the second half of the year. we talk about the forecast with a capitol hill reporting to cover the briefing. >> erik wasson from "the hill." thanks for the update. we have a link to the cbo outlook. what is the latest news? >> the big news today is about the dire warning the cbo has issued on the fiscal cliff. this refers to a series of automatic spending cuts and tax increases that are set to take effect in january. cbo is now estimated this will cause a significant recession in next year. they are predicting 0.5%

negative growth. a lay they had warned of a negative growth in the first half of next year. now looking at 3% contraction of the economy if congress fails to act on the fiscal cliff. >> what action might lawmakers take to address the forecast when returning in the fall, and what can they get done before the election and in a post- election lame-duck? to go the cbo director said just a few minutes ago that congress should act in september when it comes back, and acting sooner is better than later, because already the economy is the anticipating a fiscal cliff and growth is being stunted. unfortunately, the press releases from either side of the aisle right after the report, there remains a stalemate in congress.

the automatic spending cuts that are set to take place are due in put in place because the debt super committee failed to come up with a bipartisan deal. just last month senator patty murray warned that perhaps democrats would allow the fiscal quick to take effect in order to pressure republicans to agree to what she said is the balance field that includes tax increases. republicans refuse to do this and what passed a measure that would avoid the fiscal cliff or least avoid the spending cuts by cutting social programs. >> the cbo director discuss alternative scenarios. what would -- what were they and how would the effect the economy? >> one is current law, and one as current policy. it looked at what congress has done in the past, and typically they have extended the bush era tax cuts.

they have avoided this year -- severe drop in medicare payments that was scheduled to take effect, and they catch the alternative minimum tax. otherwise this tax would bite into the middle class. we would seek tepid one place 7% growth. the deficit will continue on are really unsustainable path. we would be at a trillion dollar deficit next year. over 10 years, 10 trillion dollars in deficits compared to the current law, about three trillion. >> here is the language, it will lead to economic conditions in 2013. we uncover this of it before. is that out of the norm for press conferences? >> it is this exact language that they do not declare, more of an agency decision.

sometimes they have to be two quarters of consecutive negative growth, and perhaps this recession would take place with one very deep quarter. basically he is saying in the press conference and elsewhere that this looks like a recession. >> is production on unemployment was not so rosy either. to go that is right. the unemployment would rise from 8.2% to 9.1% next year. even without that happening, still looking at 8% unemployment next year. of course republicans are all of the president today saying he is to blame for this. >> erik wasson from "the hill." thanks for the update. we have a link to the cbo outlook.

it is available on our website. now to the news concord -- the news conference with the congressional budget office projected a $1.1 billion deficit for this year, third year of a row. the briefing from earlier today is about 45 minutes. >> we will take you live to capitol hill. doug elmendorf briefing reporters on his outlook. just getting under way and live here on c-span. we estimate that the federal government budget deficit this year will be 1.1 trillion dollars, which equals>> 7.3% of the economic output, down from about 10% in 2009. this is the force year in which

the deficit has exceeded $1 trillion. federal debt will reach 73% of gdp by the end of this fiscal year, the highest level since 1950, and about twice since 2007. we are prepared baseline projections that reflect the assumption that current laws remain unchanged. they are designed to serve as a benchmark in considering changes. substantial changes to tax and spending policies are scheduled to take effect at the end of this year under current law. whether lawmakers will allow those changes to unfold will play a crucial role in determining the path of the

federal budget and the economy. we have prepared projections under an alternative fiscal scenario. many policies will be this is down from 10% in 2009. this is the fourth year in a row in which the deficit has exceeded one trillion dollars. federal debt held by the public will reach 7% by the end of this fiscal year, the highest level since 1950 and about twice this year that measured at the end of 2007 before the financial crisis and recession. as always, we have prepared projections to reflect the consumption that general laws generally remained unchanged. those are designed to serve as a benchmark for lawmakers to use in considering changes. however, substantial changes to tax and spending policies are schedule to take effect at the end of this year under current law. whether lawmakers allow those changes to a cold, or alter them will play a crucial role in determining the path of the buckled budget and the economy.

therefore, we also prepared projections under an alternative fiscal scenario, which embodies the fact that many policies will be continued. i will talk about the base line first continuing. i will talk about the baseline first and then turned to the alternative scenarios. among the policy changes due to occur under current law, the ones with the largest impact on tax relief enacted since 2001 are set to expire. provisions to end emt expired last year. automatic enforcement procedures specified by the budget control act to restrain spending are set to go into effect. extensions of unemployment benefits and a reduction in the payroll tax to social security are scheduled to expire. those sharp reductions in taxes and federal spending and increases in taxes will lead to a dramatic reduction in the federal deficit, trimming it by almost $500 billion next year. that would probably lead to a recession early next year. our forecast shows continued modest growth in the economy for the rest of 2012 but a drop of output of nearly 3%. we anticipate output will expand and beyond. the unemployment rate will rise to about 9% in the second half of next year in our forecast under current law. those spending reductions will also lead to small deficits throughout the coming decade and a declining path of debt relative to gdp. our baseline budget projections remain unchanged show deficits close to 1% of gdp.

the small deficits falls from 73% of gdp to 58% of gdp in 2022. that's what we think will happen during the baseline. projections under an alternative fiscal scenario that incorporates the following assumptions. all expiring tax provisions except the current payroll tax reduction are extended indefinitely. the index for inflation after 2011.

medicare's payment rates are held constant at their current levels. the original caps on discretionary appropriations are assumed to remain in place. the alternative policies would lead to budgetary and economic outcomes that would differ in the near-term and in later years from those in our baseline. the deficit would exceed $1 trillion for 2013. deficits would remain at large the route the coming decade. revenues would be about 18% of gdp.

higher, about 23% of gdp. the increase in outlays compares to a historical experience relative to gdp for social security and the major health care programs. it is partly offset for all other federal benefits and services taken together. with such large deficits, debt would climb to 90% of gdp, higher than any time that shortly after world war ii. the economy would be stronger in 2013 and 2014. economic growth would be modest

and we would not anticipate a recession. slowly down rather than up. escalating federal debt would increase the chance for a crisis. the government will lose its ability to borrow at affordable rates. rising debt would hinder savings, reducing income relative to what would occur with smaller deficits. the policies assumed a path of federal debt that would be unsustainable. therefore, the key issue facing policy makers is not whether to reduce budget deficits relative to those that would occur under current policies but when and how. if lawmakers do not reduce the deficit, they will need to reduce that later.

at some point we will need to adopt policies that require people to pay more in taxes, except less in government benefits and services or both. in closing, i want to acknowledge the more than 120 people at cbo involved in the production of this report. the staff of the joint committee on taxation provided the able assistance. i appreciate to those people for their talents and dedication. thank you. we're happy to answer your questions. >> if the fiscal cliff is weak. why is that?

>> the evidence suggests that the following financial crises, economies tend to have more severe slumps and more gradual recovery. then is the case following recessions do not follow financial crises. in the united states today, think demands for goods and services is being held back by a number of factors. the building of our housing stock leading to the financial crisis. there are a large number of unoccupied houses today, quite a bit fewer than a few years ago because it housing construction has been so weak. assault with good credit have been able to borrow for mortgages and a good rates. there is weaker demand for housing construction then normally coming out of

recessions in the united states. another factor holding down economic growth has been restraint in spending in hiring by state and local governments. normally hiring is a factor boosting the economy and has not been the case this time. there has been a tremendous loss of household wealth in the stock market and the value of homes that people own. despite these factors, we and predict the nature of this recovery. there have been a number of developments that i think outside this country that have mattered as well.

the situation in europe is of great deal of concern. that is a risk that would highlight and their problems have been a drag on this economy and have the potential to be a larger dragon. we do not entirely understand what is going on in the economy. we're in the process of producing a report on the slow recovery, work that has come out of dark forecasting worked that we are trying to explain to people what we do see going on and we hope to have that report out shortly. >> projections of going over the fiscal cliff seemed the worst than they were. why is that? >> relative to the report that we released in may, we have lowered our projection of

economic growth for next year. that is primarily due to a reassessment of the underlying strength of the economy. the economy has been growing at a modest pace for the past few years. we have pushed down a little bit in how strong we think growth would be in the absence of fiscal tightening. fairly small shops can matter and large shocks can matter a large amount. -- fairly small shocks can matter. a large amount of fiscal tightening. that is a large shock, negative shock pushed the economy into a significant recession. yes. >> you mentioned the threat that we would lose our ability to

borrow cheaply. when is the magic tipping point coming or the bond rates are going to spike up? bond rates continue to fall. >> interest rates depend on a number of factors. one is the amount of treasury debt. other factors are important, as well. rates are low right now despite the level of debt for a few reasons. the weakest of the u.s. economy. the preference by many investors to hold -- the rates

are low because they reviewed as safer than many of the alternatives in the u.s. financial system. a second factor is the views of investors of our assets relative to assets in other countries. serious banking and fiscal problems in europe. people are moving out of european markets and into ours. so, between the situation in the u.s. economy and the situation in foreign economies, it is not too surprising that rates are low.

in our projection, rates increased gradually. they do not rise very much because we have a recession in response to fiscal tightening. we think the federal reserve would undergo further action to stimulate the economy and that would hold down short-term rates and longer term rates. by the end of the decade, the rate in our production is back up to 5%, which is closer to a more typical level. it is possible for rates on our debt to spike upwards at some point. when investors have lost confidence in the government's ability, they can start selling the securities rapidly and push up rates very fast.

talked about. it is difficult to know whether there is a particular tipping point or what it might be. and also on conditions in the international financial system. and also on investors' expectations for policy-making. i think countries with high levels of debt have much less risk of fiscal crisis than countries with may be somewhat lower levels of debt or people believe it is rising. expectation about policy and confidence in the ability of a government to manage policy are

important and that is a hard thing to quantify in some way. >> congress is coming back in september. what should congress do? >> we do not make recommendations. our responsibility to the congress is to offer them our best assessment on what will happen under current law and what might happen under alternative policies that congress is considering. they need to make the decisions themselves. we talk about different choices that the congress has. it will look in this report at current law base line and the alternative scenarios. that is not an either-or choice for congress. people who have worried about the short-term economic consequences of this sharp fiscal tightening have proposed extending some of the expiring policies and letting certain policies expire as written into current law.

and then more hiring by businesses. we did in long report last fall laying out a collection of fiscal policy options, doing our best to assess the bang for the buck, how strong the economy would be for every dollar and every criteria can matter in the resources as well. we have offered to the congress different possibilities, but the them.

we think that economic growth right now is being held back by the anticipation of this fiscal tightening. both in terms of the possibility of a sharp downturn but also uncertainty about what will happen. it is the expectation of a weak economy and the uncertainty of what might turn up. the sooner that is resolved, then the stronger we think the, it would be in the second half of this year and next year. we said it was being held down by about half a percentage point from the expectation of fiscal tightening. that remains our view and is consistent with views of forecasters.

hard to know for sure because lots of factors effect the economy. >> your revenue estimate for 2012 is $133 billion less than the government collected. can you relate that to this chart that you have. these extraordinary numbers where you have historically high levels of people being unemployed for 27 weeks or more. this is the new normal with these high levels of long-term

unemployment? >> we show a picture on page 31 of the report of long-term unemployment which is on extraordinarily high in this country. we do not expect long-term unemployment to remain at that level indefinitely. we do think that unemployment will remain higher than it would lingering effects of the recession and recovery. people who lose jobs sometimes find jobs fairly quickly but sometimes not. when they do not, it has longer- term consequences for their jobs and for their employability. people lose skills or don't keep up with processes and sometimes employers might not be as good and that could be an employer's decision about hiring them. we expect the employment rate to be a little higher than it would have been in the absence of

this recession and slow recovery. that does hold down output and incomes and tax revenue. in addition to the loss of labor input in the economy, there will be less physical capital because investments have been low in the recession and recovery. it is rising rapidly by it is that low level. we think that productivity will be a little lower than it would have been. there is a box in chapter two that talks about the lasting a fax of the recent recession and the ensuing economic weakness. we think the level of output at the end of the decade will be about 1.5% lower than it would have been. that corresponds to a reduction in revenue of about 1.5%. other things affect the

forecast. the recession and the slow recovery matter for our future economic capacity. but that's not the principal factor leading to wide deficit under current policies. if we had economic growth that was a lot stronger, we would still end up with large deficits by the end of the decade under current policies. >> i wanted to clarify the magnitude of the fiscal tightening. would it be -- the largest

reduction in spending or -- >> the largest reduction as a share of gdp in any single year since 1969. >> 9 to 69 would of been the vietnam drawdown -- 1969 would have been the vietnam drawdown? >> i do not know. the deficit will fall by 3.3% of gdp. the reduction in 1969 was slightly larger than that. >> so it would be bigger than any intentional round of deficits since we started to reduce the deficit 30 years ago. >> i'm not sure what is intentional. the biggest one-year reduction as a share of gdp. >> in the alternative, can you give any indication of which

ones have degraded or have the least impact of economic growth? >> we have not tried to break down the pieces of fiscal tightening. most of the narrowing of the deficit comes from increases in tax revenues. the much smaller share comes from reductions in spending. just by the amount of dollars

being moved, the increases in taxes probably have a larger economic effect than the reductions in spending. the effects depend on the policies. we do these analyses, we have different things for different policies. i do not know dollar for dollar. the alternative fiscal scenario has deficits that are much larger. changes in tax policy and changes on the spending side. >> getting back to the take away for congress. would you say this raises the stakes for them to act? >> i think the stakes of fiscal policy are high right now. i didn't know anybody who disagrees.

we have very serious budget challenges and serious economic challenges in this country. on the decision that congress makes about policy, that can budget and the near term and longer term economic output. the fiscal policy decisions that will have to make shortly. >> can you talk about a change in the entitlement programs and costs for revenue? >> we have in this production spending. medicare spending has, and lowered the we expected this year. that has been true for several years running. over the past three years, we have marked down our projection

in medicare spending for 2019 by about $100 billion for tactical reasons -- for technical reasons. for the program specific factors come we marked down medicare. the slower growth in medicare spending is consistent with slower growth of health-care cost more generally in the economy. in our projections for from march for the cost of the coverage provisions of the affordable care act, private premiums have been growing more slowly than they had been before. that was one factor that causes us to mark down our projections. we had seemed slower growth in

medicaid as well. what is going on in federal health programs is not entirely clear. presumably the weak state of the economy is a factor. given the magnitude of the slowdown in national health spending and the timing of the slowdown, which seems to have started before the recession, we think there are structural factors at work as well. the structural factors that are probably happening includes slower growth of spending on prescription drugs, patent expirations and q word new blockbuster drugs. part of it is restructuring the way health care is delivered.

what is causing that is also not completely clear. this could be due to changes of the way providers are getting paid. it could be due to more households paying out of their own pockets and deductibles for cost sharing when they're getting health care services. obviously if you talk to people and health care system, they understand the imperative of finding ways to do their work more efficiently. but, how to connect up the set of activities going on what specific changes and the number is very hard. we do not know to what extent the slowdown we've seen in the federal health programs or spending in the last several

years will persist or not. >> so your revenue of fiscal year 2007 was greater than the revenue for fiscal year 2012. has there been a five-year time like that where you have revenue not recovering we it had been? is that spoke causing you to change the way you look up forecast for the next 10 years. revenue has been a smaller share of gdp than have been in the past 10 years. much of that is the natural consequence of the weakness of the economy.

taxes fall more than proportionately because we have an aggressive tax code. another big piece of what has happened in revenue it is the policies that have been enacted. for example, 2% -- two percentage reduction in the petrol tax rate under social security has cost the government money. part of what is going on is a great weakness of corporate profits. the especially the financial sector, but not just in the financial sector. beyond that, we are surprised by how weak tax revenues are. we do not know what is going on there. the detailed tax return data that we and other analysts use to parse out factors leading to certain levels of revenue, out to some like it.

so although we could see the total amount of revenue being collected, we do not have the data we need to figure out more precisely why. what expectation is the unexpected blow part of tax receipts, fees over time. the tax receipts come back up towards normal relationship with the economy conditioned on the actual tax policy that will be affected. if we are wrong about that, then tax revenue could remain lower than we think. one particular issue we talked about in this report is e share of national income. there is the picture and chapter two on page 43 that shows labor income as a share of gross domestic income, which is roughly equal to gross domestic product. you can see here it there is a gradual downward trend in labor

income as a share of gross domestic income, but one that has been quite sharp in the downturn. we anticipate labor income will come back a little bit as a share of total income, given the weakness of the labor market, the very large number of people out of work, it is not too surprising that growth has been restrained in labor income has been low, but lower than what we would of expected. we anticipate it will rebound to something closer to the average of the past few decades. that might turn out to be incorrect. in general, we try hard to have projections be in the middle of the range of possible outcomes. for all of the members here, we think there are significant risks of the actual economy performing worse or better than we ever in down.

-- that we have written down. >> police at omb mid-that should review is potential for rapid recovery is possible. just before you were talking about page 41. you have a box on the left. does this agree with that? could you explain why? to go i have not read what they've written, so i cannot speak exactly to that. we talk in our report about one of the upside risk to our economic forecasts being stronger housing investment. although, an unusually large number of large homes. we have had very low level of construction for the past several years. we have extremely low mortgage interest rates. it is not at all impossible that home building will come back more strongly than we think.

we mentioned another upside risk being stronger rebound of business confidence and business investment and hiring. businesses are sitting on a lot of liquid assets, cash people say. if they felt more optimistic about the future economic path and chose to do more investment and hiring, that could also jump-start a favorable feedback loop in which the additional investment hiring would lead to more income investment by households and for their investment and hiring. we think of these as being related to an economy currently under performing, but i do not know beyond that what they of said. >> i wanted to get back to the difference between now look for next year why it has got worse.

how much of this is due to the fiscal cliff being steeper than you thought and how much is just the general worsening of the external economy? >> berlitz it to the budget in january and relative fiscal outlook, the fiscal cliff is now steeper because congress enacted an extension of the petrol tax reduction until the end of calendar year 2012 and extension of unemployment benefits, that cut the deficit larger and 2012 and going into 2013. it keeps the economy stronger, but by boosting the economy in 2012 without boosting the economy in 2013, it has led to a larger falloff. that is an important reason why

we're looking for a more negative affect, more negative outcome for the economy next year that we expected in january. also true since the january forecast we have word by a little bit our assessment of the underlying growth of the economy. i have not tried to person those out exactly. those factors are at work here. the magnitude of the slowdown in economic activity we are discussing for next year is significant. with this very sharp tightening of fiscal policy, we are looking to start at a production in gdp at an annual rate of 3% in the first half of next year that would represent a significant recession.

we're looking for the unemployment rate to rise to just over 9 percent by the end of next year. the contrast is quite stark. we do not have that kind of recession. the unemployment rate is about 8% by next year. under the alternative scenario, the total number of jobs would be about 2 million larger by the end of next year than it will be under current law. >> are you saying that we would -- >> 2 million were jobs by the end of next year than we would have under current law, according to the forecast. the difference in macro economic outlook is very start. at the same time, the difference in but the outcomes beyond the next year is very stark as well.

under this scenario runs of debt by about one trillion dollars a year over the next decade, an unsustainable path that will do harm to the economy by the end of the decade. term and later in the decade, the current law baseline and the alternative fiscal policies have very different effects on the budget in the economy. >> can you drill down how you get to 2 million under the alternative? how do you get to 2 million jobs? >> the difference in the production of of what rate is 1.1%. the labor force is about 150 million people,, 155 million people. 1.1% of 155 million. still not quite 2 million.

another factor is when the economy is stronger, more people coming to the labor force. something that happens is the stronger economy draws people into the labor force that would be true under current law based on projections. those extra people are employed. that factor holds up the unemployment rate a little bit higher. i think those pieces together add up to nearly 2 million. >> nancy of national journal. you were talking about how and when we deal with the deficit a problem with the economy? >> well, " we do not know how

long this can go on for. the large deficits have a number of negative consequences for the economy. one is they tend to reduce savings and investments. the second is the lead to largest interest payments that makes it harder to achieve certain level of outcomes. this reduces the room for maneuver on part of the government. people sometimes talk about fiscal capacity, the ability of our country to run up that it needs to. as i said when i started, the dutch representative, 35 percent of gdp before the recession is now twice as large a share. if that stays at the current 73%

of gdp or rises further, and the country were to encounter some of further and lead due to domestic problems to spend more and borrow more, we would have less capacity to do that. a larger debt means a larger risk of fiscal crisis for a lot of people. when any of the factors will end up finding it some way courses of action is not clear. what is clear from international experience is waiting to make decisions until action is forced turned out badly. that having to address a large imbalance between spending and taxes at a point when a country really cannot borrow any more ends up requiring very drastic changes. i think there is no doubt that

earlier policy action is better than later. how quickly one implement a set of policies is more complicated because faster policies are implemented to reduce deficits and the last time people have to plan for current economic conditions and a greater risk of locking the slowly growing economy off track. there is a real trade off, a difficult tradeoff and how quickly one implement policies to reduce deficit. agreeing on what the policy changes will be is better to happen sooner. other questions? >> this is your last one and don't you worry of next year. >> that is right. we released the new outcome --

outlook and jewelry at each year. -- outlook in january of each year. we anticipate a very interesting and of the year. okay? think you all very much for coming. goodbye. >> this morning on c-span, a look at alternatives to traditional public schools, including charter schools, online education, and home schooling. live coverage of the national education policy center begins at 10:00 eastern. and on c-span2, general john allen holds a news briefing by a satellite from kabul live at 9:00 eastern. beginning in 45 minutes on the "washington journal" nela richardson. then,