busy. and i don't have any more time for this. you have to be the busiest person in the world. if and when they come up with a new idea, why don't we just call you back into the room. because he has tried so hard to listen to accommodate to be respectful of their points of view. no. i do not think this is why we didn't reach a grand bargain. i think we didn't reach a grand bargain because the speaker of the house walked away from an agreement that he and the president had arrived at probably because he couldn't sell it to his own >> paul ryan has been reaching out on how we get to our plans to balance the budget over 10 years. they are still concealing to make beads weeks-- the twe

aks. i will sit when you do. we went through month campaign style events over the country. i did have a conversation with the president about it last friday. it was interesting. this week we have gone up 180. now it's going to sit down and talk to members. i think it is a hopeful sign. i am hopeful something will come out of it. but the president continues to insist on tax hikes we will not get very far. if he does not believe we have a spending problem, i do not know if you get very far. i am an optimist. >> are you hopeful that they can do we were not able to?

>> the more members that we engage in this process the better off we are. for a couple of reasons. there are a lot of people with a ideas around this congress both in the house and senate. if you're ever going to pass a major bill that will begin to address our spending problems, we will have to grow this support. if you have to be an organic process. and think it is a hopeful sign. maybe something will come up. -- i think it is a hopeful sign. maybe something will come up. >> joining us this sander levin. we have about half an

hour. >> thank you for being here today. democrats continue to talk about the balanced approach to deficit reduction, comparing tax revenues and spending cuts. is this battle for new revenue a losing battle for democrats? >> not at all. i was thinking the last few days and democrats to the same position as republicans that we already had $1.50 trillion in cuts plus the sequester, that means $2.50 trillion at the sequester continues, that we have had enough guts and it is only revenues. where would we be? you have republicans saying only spending cuts, no more revenues.

that has to change. there has to be balanced. the republican leadership has made a mistake by cementing themselves and say we will not touch revenue. there have to be revenues in order to address this problem. >> how do you the republicans to crack on that when they're not showing any willingness to do that? all democrats what that that how you get republicans to buy into it? >> i was a thing over clips from the county i represent. about 8000 employees will get notices that they will be reduced 20% in income. 30,000 meals from seniors are going to be eliminated. and people understand what the consequences are of their

absolutely determined position do not have one dime of revenue. that is not workable. the imbalance we have had, up one. dollars trillion in cuts or $2.50 trillion and six and a billion dollars in revenue. you have to have some kind of balance. it is going to have to change. the president is looking for some kind of pull of common sense. i hope but is out there. >> who want to ask about the present coming up to capitol hill next week. paul ryan is releasing his budget. democrats are going to follow with their budget. how do we make sense of these competing budget proposals that we're going to see in the president reaching out to capitol hill more?

is that link the groundwork for some kind of budget deal? >> i think you have lots to write about. when i came to the congress four years later i joined the ways and means committee. it was quite different. there is much camaraderie. we knew each other better. the republicans on the ways and means committee were not radicalized like is true today among so many republicans. to be able to sit down and talk about health issues and tax issues, at tax reform record in 1986 in part because you had an ability of both sides to have some give. it is is going to be very difficult when the republicans essentially say "when it comes to revenues there is no give, it

is only spending cuts." it is hard to know how that will be resolved. by having more severity it goes forward. the republicans are going to have to move off of the dead center. i am worried. we said the sequester was going to be horrendous. now he is saying let it roll. i am concerned. i'm a bit more optimistic. i think it is good we're talking to each other. there is total inflexibility on one side and makes it difficult. >> republicans would argue slightly different. they would say the democrats have been inflexible on entitlement changes. the house democrats during the fiscal cliff deal were uncomfortable with some the things that president obama put

on the table in cuts in medicare and medicaid and changed cpi. if there is a budget deal, are those things that the president put on the table things the house democrats could get behind? >> we're willing to talk about it. the president has put some proposals on the table. some are not on the table in terms of his budget. raising the age for medicare. i think that is very troublesome. when you look at it, what is planned to happen to the people who will no longer be covered. -- what is going to happen to the people will no longer be covered? have a people retire before 65 today. even more retire before the age of 67. the president has put some ideas and we are unwilling to

talk about entitlements. the problems with what republicans are republican, it is kind of the same thing. this cannot happen. the public does not want it. in terms of medicaid, i do not know it is understood how much of medicaid provides long-term care for people. to simply say take all of this money and ship it to the states under cut an important part of the purpose of medicaid. i heard paul ryan said we had to repeal obamacare. that is part of his budget. it would be a bad idea. we're already seeing the benefits of health care reform

throughout the country. the notion of repealing it now is a non-starter. >> this is something that was suggested that the president put on the table during the fiscal cliff negotiations that upset a lot of house democrats. is that something that you could support as part of a broader package of t? >> we need to look at it there are problems. the people who are mostly hurt by the change our older seniors. that means more women than men. the president has always said we will have to modify its some way if we go forth. it is not easy to modify. we need to sit down and have a broader discretion. i think we will discuss entitlements. the part ofity is

the problem we face. what is happening with health care costs is interesting. when republicans talk about what is happening with the medicare, you have reported on it, the cost increase today for health care has been going down. the same issue of medicare. -- the same is true of medicare. if it is maintained, then i think we will have a better chance to the control of health- care costs. it is really interesting. paul ryan this morning said we need to get rid of this board that would have some powers to recommend. we need to move away from the fee-for-service reimbursement system. we are moving in that direction. we are now going to essentially end health care reform?

i think that is a good example of how i hope we can sit down and talk but taking extreme positions and cementing yourself unto them is not a good way to start. >> tax reform has been getting a lot of discussion. i am curious your conversations with the new treasury secretary jack lew. do you have any indications from him as to take this new post what he's thinking of the likelihood of tax reform? i am curious his thoughts on the way multinational companies should pay taxes. should we keep our worldwide system? what are you hearing from the administration on this? >> it is just beginning. he does not -- he has been

spelled out exactly where they're coming from. for people may shed down their televisions for a second if they hear too much. it is an important issue. what do you do about profits of corporations doing business overseas. today we tax them but we differ the taxation. now to say if you go over three territorial system if you will not tax them at all or very little, the problem is that it might encourage corporations to move their operations overseas. all these proposals for a territorial system, tried to have some provisions to discourage companies from moving overseas. it is a good example of balance.

there is no one role won wide -- coral worldwide puritan o. need to encourage companies to do business in the united states. i come from michigan. it is the secret. we're seeing a resurgence of the automobile industry. it has had some very clear spillover. we want to be sure that as we look at tax reform that we encourage businesses in a globalized economy to focus their activities race here in the u.s. we have a real jobs needs. >> on a setback for a minute. -- let me step back for a minute. tax reform is something everyone wants to talk about. do you see a tax reform be enacted in 2013?

>> it will not be easy. we have set up working groups, 11 of them. at long last we will sit down democrats and republicans and really take apart the present system and see what is all about. years and years ago a republican i spent two days at a seminar on international taxes. we really took apart our present system and came up with some ideas as to how we would improve it. be imposed resident -- resolutions in the past. >> tax reform this year is possible? >> it is possible but we need to get away from the slogans. for example, the motion a 25% tax on individuals.

it has never been said how we would get there. in order to get there we would have to have a dramatic changes in our deductions. we need to have some serious discussion. i have taken the lead in saying let's look at the impact of these various deductions. he cannot just say "for them aside." is veryty's i represent middle income. the interest deduction was the key component in creating private home ownership. we need to look at that. it is interesting that the republicans seem to be saying they want to get tax loopholes. will we bring them up they do not like the proposals. -- when we bring them up they do

not like the proposals. only press them about loopholes they start to talk about deductions. the chair till contribution deduction is not a loophole. and our policies -- the charitable contributecontributin deduction is not a loophole. it should encourage the communities having a net income of their own to do the work. >> republicans would say when democrats propose these loopholes to get revenue that it is something that should happen as part of tax reform or a fiscal cliff plan or anything else. >> how are you going to address the sequester? you have asked them that. there's a good question whether they really want to.

some of the republicans have said this is terrific. it is a home run. the problem with the sequester, i was just looking at some of the clips from back home. almost an thousand people and the defense industry in our area are going to have their work week down from five to 4 days. needles for seniors will be eliminated in a month or so. if i might say so, we need to ask the tough questions. when you say something like "loopholes," what do you mean? give us an example. do not call itemized deductions loopholes. they are policies. ask them about my proposal on a carried interest.

people in best other people's money and instead of paying regular ordinary income tax they pay capital gains taxes. we have been trying for how many years to get rid of that? that is a loophole. >> on the question of the sequester, it seems like there is not a lot of appetite to into the sequester. immediately it seems like the parties cannot agree on how to use the spending cuts. what is the end came? to think it'll stay in place? we do you think it'll stay in place? >> i am not sure. i think appetite may increase will see the consequences. when we see the defense impact. when we see the impact on education. let me give you an example in terms of health research.

our family has been involved, my late wife at nih, for 20 something years. she ran a peer review group. in the earlier days when 100 grant applications came in, this was in child mental health, now it is two or three out of 100. there is his regular similar pattern in terms of straight medical research. we all depend on it. it the sequester begins to hit nih, i think there will be a realization that just letting it happen, it is not a home run. as we see the consequences. my answer to you is how it looks in march made the difference in

april or may. >> he mentioned in the 11 working groups that you established on tax reform in february. we are now saying that they will release a draft a bill this week on small business tax reform even though they are a small business working group. are these working groups actually going to produce something? is is something of a sham that they are not going to produce anything a substance? >> i talked to chairman camp about that. we will see what happens is coming week. i think the working groups can be real and be useful if we can sit down and tear apart our present code, understand how it

works and does not work well. on an example with international taxation, we need to do the same thing in all of the working groups and not come up with proposals but to understand what the present law office and the problems where there are problems with it. i think if we stick to the purpose that they can be a useful basis for further discussion. i am hopeful. >> do you have any sense about what will come out of the small business draft? >> i think there were some discussions on a staff level on friday. i am hopeful there will be more on a member level monday and tuesday. >> when we talk about tax reform, republicans often talk about revenue neutral tax reform, tax reform that does not

bring in any more revenue to the current system today. democrats got about a tax reform that raises revenue. -- talk about the tax reform their raises revenue. how do you see that working out? do you think you and your colleagues will be able to go along with a tax reform that does not raise revenue like $1 trillion? >> it goes back to the question you started with. we really need to have balance. we really need to look at further cuts. they have to be wise to cut. if they have to get the deficit under control. we have to look at medicare and health care costs and the steps we've taken in health care reform to get a hold of them. we also do not have to look at revenues. the level of discretionary

programs, and you know this, all the public should understand that these are programs, health, education, nutrition. we are now headed toward the lowest percentage of gdp in decades. these have impacts on education and health. we have to really understand the past we are on. this is simply to say let these cuts go into effect. let this pattern continued of a diminished part of gdp going to education and health and food is less nutrition programs.

the president is very firm on this and so are democrats. >> you mentioned the mortgage interest deduction. a lot of people watching are very concerned about that. should something like that the off the table? >> no. the president proposed a limit issue, no. we need to look at those. we need to do it carefully and intelligently. to simply eliminate the mortgage interest deduction i think would have a real impact to go too far and too fast in charitable contributions. a lot of these deductions relate to health and education. i am in favor of putting them on the table. look at the purposes, they are not loopholes. they are policies. they have been in place for a

long time. they have had an important positive impact. some people disagree. my experience if you go door to door, knock on those doors and ask them how it happened at middle income families in this country have a very substantial increase in home ownership? i think that everybody ducks but a lot of people would say -- deducts, but a lot of people would say that we have had a middle-class income and we needed that deduction in order to have our home. retirement programs are involved. no. i do not think they should be off the table. we have to be careful as we place them on the table. no one listening to this should the there is going to be some new approach at least as long as i have a say.

>> where do you find the money to raise revenue if some of these, all we have talked about are the most expensive things, in some way to streamline the tax code -- carried interest would be a loophole that big banks take advantage of. that is not bring in money. where do you find new money? >> is 28% of the total. we did some of that in our last effort when we build the so- called peace amendment back in the tax code which results to deductions. the 28th% proposal would raise about $500 billion over 10- years. that is a lot of money. this proposal goes beyond

itemized deductions. i think he will have a lot to report if we do our work. and if we sit down and talk about how we raise revenues and cut programs of a balanced way. i am somewhat optimistic that those who hang in balance will have to move. >> you think there is enough base for tax reform in 2013- 2014? we have all these ongoing budget battles. there is an ongoing issue there. the president was to do immigration reform. there are these pieces of legislation that the countries do not have an appetite for. do you feel like tax reform fit in with that? >> we have to continue to pursue it. i think that immigration reform

is going to happen. i am convinced of it. i think the last election brought some interest on the republican side. i think some already were interested like senator mccain. and gun violence i think connecticut changed the picture i hope. my hope is that it will continue. there's a lot going on. we need to get a hold of the budget issues. i think we should not let sequester just continued unabated. how does tax reform fit into all of this? it will fit only people are willing to sit down and really put on the table and say "let's try to find a balance on the

table." you know what happens when tables are not balanced? everything falls off. >> is tax reform something that your leadership is interested in? something nancy pelosi is interested and? >> we talk about this all the time. not every day. but in many meetings surely. >> your brother just announce retirement. >> he was to focus on these next two years instead of running for reelection. he feels passionately about the defense issues. and also about a special investigation committee.

it did in boston tax policy issue. -- involved some tax policy issue. he thinks there are some terrible loopholes and some people are taking advantage of them. we do have in come in the quality issues. you look at what has happened over the last 10 years. most of the income went to a small percentage of the public. more of it went to the top 1%. >> has this made you think that all about your own future plans are possible retirement? you to are very close. his younger brother? >> he is. >> has made to think about your own retirement? i plan on running for

reelection. if that is all right. i will be out there campaigning for you. >> do you have any thoughts on who might be a good successor? >> i think it is too early. i think there will be a contest. i think the 2012 election really raises these issues. i think there is momentum in the state for a democrat to succeed. i sure hope so. i will be working in that direction. we had tried to expand the base of the democratic party. i am more optimistic that we will hold that seat. >> i want to look ahead a little bit to the debt ceiling. the summer of 2011 was a pivotal

moment. it seemed like the country could potentially d. fox. the republicans and democrats were locked in a lot of negotiations. they have not resolved a lot of these issues. do you see the debt ceiling this summer and the fight game just as contentious as the was 2 years of the? >> it depends what we do or the next couple of months. we really need to buckle down and see if we can avoid going from crisis to crisis. we really need to do that. we will see. as i listen to paul ryan this morning, i am concerned. i think the republicans need to understand that there was an election. a lot of their proposals were part of this election.

i think the public said something that was meaningful. i hope everybody will listen. >> we say thanks to our guests on newsmakers this morning. thank you for your time. >> it is my pleasure as always. i love to come here. i will not say how many of these cuts i have. -- cups i have. sometime at the ice cream in there when i'm not supposed to. >> will make sure you get some more. thanks to our guests. thanks a lot. >> thank you for doing this. i will see monday probably. >> thinks so much. -- and thanks so much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> coming up, a look at u.s. policy toward >> coming up, a look at u.s.