>> well, you are certainly right that we have been overoptimistic about out your growth. -- out year growth. there are number of reasons for that. one reason, though, is that it appears, and i talked about this in a speech last year, it appears that as part of the aftermath of the financial crisis, at least temporarily, the potential growth rate of the economy has been slowed, perhaps because new businesses are not informed at the same rate and innovation might not be translated into new technologies at the same rate. investment is slower, etc. it appears, again, that the potential rate of growth of the economy has been slowed somewhat temporarily by the recession and the financial crisis and you can see that in the productivity figures. we have not anticipated that slowdown in productivity and that is one of the main reasons

why we have not anticipated the relatively slow growth. it's important to recognize that what monetary policy affects is not the potential rate of growth, long run. rather, the cyclical part, the deviation of output and employment from its normal level. in predicting the amount of slack in the economy, so to speak, we have done a little better. our predictions of unemployment, for example, have been better than our predictions of growth and, in particular, one thing has been quite striking is that unemployment -- we were too pessimistic on unemployment for this year. unemployment has fallen faster than we anticipated. in that respect, we were too pessimistic rather than

optimistic. we will continue to do the best we can. we are looking again to see confirmation of our broader scenario which basically is that we will continue to see progress in the labor market and growth will be sufficient to support that progress and inflation will move back toward target and that's what we've -- what will determine our policy decisions. in terms of press conferences, i think it's important to say there is an understanding on the committee that we have had, for a while, there are eight " real meetings" every year. every meeting is where any policy decision can be taken and should anything occur at a meeting without a scheduled press conference that requires additional explanation, we certainly could arrange public on the record conference call or some other way of answering the media questions.

>> you said that the committee would be unlikely to raise federal funds rates if inflation remains below target but your own projections have inflation below your two percent target through 2016. is that inconsistent with the lift off in the federal funds rate? is there a case to be made that your threshold should be supplemented with a lower inflation rate? >> on the latter part, you are seeing interest rate projections and inflation projections separately. you are not seeing them combined by individuals. i think you are right. we should be very reluctant to raise rates if inflation remains persistently below target. that is one of the reasons that i think we can be very patient in raising the federal funds

rate, since we have not seen any inflation pressure. i'm having an inflation floor, that would be in addition to the guidance. we are discussing how we might verify the guidance on the federal funds rate. that is certainly one possibility. an interesting question there is whether we need additional guidance on that given that we do have a target. of course, implicit in our policy -- strategy is to reach that target for inflation. an inflation floor is certainly something that could be a sensible modification or addition to the guidance. >> many investors were expecting the fed to move at least a little bit in pulling back the bond buying program today. given that you all decided not to do that, do you have any concerns that once again the fed is confusing investors and sending mixed signals?

>> i don't recall stating that we would do any particular thing in this meeting. what we are going to do is the right thing for the economy. our assessment of the data, since june, is that taken collectively, it did not quite meet the standard of satisfying or ratifying or confirming our basic outlook for increasing growth, improving labor markets, and inflation moving back towards target. we try our best to communicate to markets and will continue to do that. we cannot let market expectations dictate our policy actions. our policy actions have to be determined by our best assessment of what is needed by the economy. >> you mentioned fiscal issues in the statement today. are you concerned about the government shut down?

we hear more about that possibility. did that come up in your discussions at this meeting? what do you think would be the impact of a government shut down upon the economy and what could the -- would the fed be prepared -- respond to that healthy respond to that and help the economy with additional accommodation, for example, additional asset purchases? >> a factor that concerned us in our discussion was some upcoming fiscal policy decisions. i would include both the possibility of the government shutdown but also the debt limit issue. these are obviously part of a very complicated set of legislative decisions, strategies, battles, etc, which i won't get into but it is the case, i think, that a government shutdown and perhaps, more so, a failure to raise the debt limit could have very serious consequences for the financial

markets and the economy. the federal reserve's policy is to do whatever we can to keep the economy on course. if these actions lead the economy to slow, we would have to take that into account, surely. this is one of the risks we are looking at as we think about policy. that being said, our ability to offset these shocks is very limited, particularly a debt limit shock, and it is as true -- and is extruded nearly it is extraordinarily important to make sure the congress works with the government and the government pays its bills and we avoid any kind of event like 2011 which had, at least for a time, noticeable adverse effect on confidence in the economy.

>> this week marks five years since the financial crisis began. hank paulson, who you have worked closely with, said his biggest regret was he was not able to convince the american people that what was done, the bank bailouts, or not for wall street, they were for main street. what is your biggest regret on the five-year anniversary? do you believe the fed, the congress, and the white house has taken the steps to avoid a deep financial crisis? >> on regrets, as frank sinatra said, i have many. reasonably, the biggest regret i have is that we did not forestall the crisis. once the crisis got going, it was extremely hard to prevent. i think we did what we could

given the powers we had, and i would agree with hank that we were motivated entirely by the interest of the broader public, that our goal was to stabilize financial system so it would not bring the economy down and not create massive unemployment and economic hardship that was even that would have been even more severe by many times than what we actually saw. i agree with him on that. since you gave me the opportunity, i would mention that all the money that was used in those operations has been paid back with interest. it has not been a costly even from a fiscal point of view. as far as progress, i think we made a lot of progress. we had the dodd-frank law passed in 2010, and then we recently have come to agreement

internationally on a number of measures including basel iii and other agreements related to the shadow banking system and other aspects of the financial system. i think today our large financial firms, for example, are better capitalized by far than they were certainly during the crisis and before the crisis. supervision is tougher, we do stress testing to make sure that firms can withstand not only normal shocks but very large shocks them a similar to those experienced in 2008. very importantly, we now have a tool we did not have in 2008 which would have made a significant difference if we had it, which is the orderly liquidation authority that the dodd frank l gave to the fdic in

collaboration with the fed. under that authority, the fdic with other agencies has the ability to wind down a failing financial firm in a way that minimizes the direct impact on financial markets and the economy. i don't want to overstate the case. there is more work to be done. in the case of resolution regimes, for example, the united states has set a course internationally and other international bodies are setting up standards for resolution regimes which are similar to those in the united states which will make for better cooperation across borders. we are still some distance from being fully geared up to work with foreign counterparts to successfully wind down a multinational financial firm. we made progress in that direction but we need to do more, i think so there is more to be done. there is more to be done on derivatives, but much has been done to make things more transparent. it will probably be some time before all of this stuff that has been undertaken, all of these measures, are fully implemented and we can assess the ultimate impact on the

financial system. >> mr. chairman, a number of economists and some of your fed colleagues have argued that the effectiveness of quantitative easing has greatly diminished, if not disappeared. they point to the recent performance of the economy as proof of that. there have been a number of people who have argued that there are regulatory and other impediments to growth beyond the reach of monetary policy. to what extent are these valid arguments? and if the economy does not speed up, if it does not reach your objectives, how will you ever get out of quantitative easing? >> on the effectiveness of our asset purchases, it's difficult

to get a precise measure. there is a large academic literature on this subject and .hey have a range of results some suggest this is a powerful tool and some say it is less powerful. my own assessment it is has been affected.-- effective. if you look at the recovery, you see some of the strongest sectors like housing and autos have been enter -- sensitive sectors and these policies have been successful in strengthening financial conditions and lowering interest rates and thereby promoting recovery. i think they have been affected. you mentioned there has not been any progress. there has been a lot of progress as i said at the beginning. labor market indicators, while still not there we would like them to become are much better today than they were when we began this latest program one year ago. importantly, as referenced in our fomc statement, that happens notwithstanding a set of fiscal policies which the cbo said would cost 1.5 percentage points of real growth in hundreds of

thousands of jobs. the fact that we have maintained improvements in the labor market that are as good or after than the previous year, notwithstanding this fiscal drag, is some indication that there is at least a partial offset from monetary policy. as you say, there are many things in the economy that monetary policy cannot address. they include the effectiveness of regulation, fiscal policy, developments in the private sector. we do what we can do and where we can get help, we are delighted to get help from the policymakers in the private sector and we hope that will happen. the criterion for ending asset purchases is not some very high rate of growth. let me remind you, the criterion is a substantial improvement in the labor market and we have made significant improvement.

ultimately, we will reach that level of substantial improvement and at that point, we will be able to wind down the asset purchases. again, i think people don't fully appreciate that we have two tools -- we have asset purchases and we have rate policy and guidance about rates. it's our view that the rate policy is the stronger, more reliable tool. when we get to the point where we are close enough to full employment, that rate policy will be sufficient. i think we will still be able to provide a highly accommodative monetary background that will allow the economy to continue to grow and move towards full employment, despite asset purchases going away. >> the financial stability oversight council has already designated to non-bank firms and --

two non-bank firms and potentially a third one and others to follow. however, little has been set in terms of how specifically these firms will be regulated i the fed which has been getting criticism of the entire process. can you provide us any guidance in terms of how far along the fed is in terms of letting the banks know how they will be regulated besides tailoring the plan? >> the two firms that have been designated, aig and ge capital, actually have been regulate by the fed because both of them are savings and loan thrift holding companies, so we already have experience with those firms and a lot of contact with those firms. i want to use the word tailored because we want to design a regime that is appropriate for the business model of the particular firm. our other objective and what makes it is a nation by the fsoc -- a designation by the fsoc

noteworthy is that the primary goal of the consolidated supervision by the fed is to make sure that the firm does not in any way danger the stability of the broader financial system. we will be looking at not just the usual safety and soundness matters or supervision which both can be tailored to the types of assets and liabilities the firm has, but also we will want to focus on things like resolution authority, practices relating to derivatives and other exposures, interconnectedness, etc, to make sure the firm, in its structure and operations, does not pose a threat to the wider system. that is what will be distinctive to our oversight not only of these designated firms but also the large bank holding companies that we already oversee and which we are already subjecting to tougher supervision, higher

capital, stress tests, and all the rest. >> mr. chairman, one of my colleagues was remarking that we don't often get surprises from the federal reserve. this was a surprise. you talked about not telegraphing anything specifically, but you have seen the market reaction. were you intending a surprise today? did you get the intended result judging from the market reaction? by taking this action today, continuing the bond purchases, at what point to you believe you are starting to complicate the exit strategy simply by continuing to keep the feds for on the gas pedal, do you make life more complicated for the federal reserve down the road? >> it's our intention to try to set policy as appropriate for the economy, as i said earlier. we are somewhat concerned.

i will not overstate it but we want to see the effects of higher interest rates on the economy, particularly mortgage rates on housing. to the extent that our policy makes conditions -- our policy decision today makes conditions a little bit easier, that is desirable. we want to make sure that the economy has adequate support and, in particular, is less surprising the market -- it is avoiding a tightening until we can be comfortable that the economy is in fact growing the way we want it to be growing. this was a step -- it was a cautionary step, if you will. the intention is to wait a bit longer and try to get confirming evidence to whether or not the economy is in fact performing to the general outlook we have.

i don't think we are complicating anything for future fomc's. it is true the assets we have been buying add to the size of our balance sheet. but we have developed a variety of tools and we think we have numerous tools we can use to both manage interest rates and ultimately unwind the balance sheet when the time comes. i feel quite comfortable that we can raise interest rates at the appropriate time even if the balance sheet remains large for an extended period and that will be true for future fomc's as well. >> mr. chairman, do you think all the recent attention being paid to who will be your replacement has had any immediate effect on the fed and could have any lingering effect

-- your success or? successor? do you think the process has become too politicized or is it a healthy debate? >> i think the federal reserve has strong institutional credibility and it is a strong institution, highly competent. it is independent. nonpartisan. i'm not particularly concerned about the political environment for the federal reserve. i think the fed will be -- will continue to be an important institution to the united states and it will maintain its independence going forward. >> mr. chairman, was there a discussion among the committee today about changing the forward guidance, the 66.5% -- of the

6.5% jobless rate? >> the committee has regularly reviewed the forward guidance. there are a number of ways in which the forward guidance could be strengthened. for example, an inflation floor was mentioned and there are other steps we could take like providing information about you get the 6.5% in those sorts of things. to the extent that we can provide precise guidance, that would be desirable. it's very important that we not take any of these steps lightly and make sure that we understand the implications and we are comfortable that any modifications to the guidance will be credible to markets and the public. we continue to think about options. there are a number of options we have talked about but today, -- as of today, we did not choose

to make any changes to the guidance. >> as you may know, the census bureau reported yesterday that the poverty rate and the median household income saw no improvement last year. when you see the median income turning up and in light of the fact that people in the middle of the bottom have seen very little of the gains relative to higher income households, how would you assess the quantitative easing and fed policy? >> sure, that's certainly the case that there are too many people in poverty. there are many complex issues involved. there are complex measurement issues. i would have to mention that.

there are a lot of issues that are really long-term issues as well. for example, it might seem a puzzle that the u.s. economy gets richer and richer and yet there are more poor people. the explanation is our economy is becoming more unequal, more very rich people and more people in the lower half who are not doing well. there is a lot of reasons behind this trend which has been going on for decades. economists disagree about the relative importance of things like technology and international trade and unionization and other factors that have contributed. my first point is that these long term trends, it is important to address these trends, but the federal reserve does not have the tools to address these long-run distributional trends print they can only be addressed by congress and the administration. it's up to them, i think, to take those steps.

the federal reserve, we are doing our part to help the median family, the median american. one of our principal goals -- we have two principal goals -- one is maximum employment, jobs. the best way to help families is to create employment opportunities. we are still not satisfied, obviously, with where the labor market is. we will continue to provide support for that. the other goal is price stability, low inflation which helps make the economy work better for people in the middle and lower parts of the distribution. we use the tools we have. it would be better to have a mix of tools that work, not just monetary policy, but fiscal policy and other policies as well. but we only have a certain set of tools and those are the ones we use. our objectives of creating jobs and maintaining price stability

are quite consistent with helping the average american. but there is a limit to what we can do about long-run trends. i think those are very important issues that congress and the administration need to look at and decide what needs to be done there. >> hi, some emerging countries are blaming the fed for the financial distress they are experiencing. i want your take on that. also, how did you judge the way the markets reacted to your tapering announcement back in june? thank you very much. >> i talked a little about communication in june but let me talk about the emerging markets which is an important issue.

-- i talked a little about the tapering announcement in june but let me talk about the emerging markets which is an important issue. we spent a lot of time looking at emerging markets. i spent time talking to my colleagues about emerging markets and in emerging markets. the united states a part of the globally integrated economic and financial system and problems in emerging markets or any country, for that matter, can affect the united states as well. we are watching those developments very carefully. it is true that changes in longer-term interest rates in the united states but also in other advanced economies have some effect on emerging markets, particularly those who are trying to tag their exchange rates and can lead to some capital inflows or outflows but there are also other factors that affect inflows and outflows. that includes changes in risk preference by investors, changes in growth expectations, different perceptions of institutional strength within emerging markets across the different countries.

there are a lot of factors that are there playing a role and that's one reason why different emerging markets have different experiences. they have different institutional structures and different policies. to come to the bottom line, we think it is very important that emerging markets grow and are prosperous. we pay close attention to what is happening in those countries as it affects the united states. the main point i would end with is that what we are trying to do with our monetary policy here is trying to create a stronger u.s. economy. a stronger u.s. economy is one of the most important things that can happen to help the economies of emerging markets. again, i think my colleagues in many of the emerging markets appreciate some of the effects efforts toexperienced.

strengthen the u.s. economy also needs to the benefits of the broader economy, including emerging markets as well. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] later today, president obama will be meeting family members of the 12 victims killed at last week's shooting at the washington navy yard. he will also deliver remarks at the navy yard memorial service. you can watch live coverage on c-span beginning at 5 p.m. eastern. >> the subject of whistleblowers is a very important and sensitive subject.

depend on whistleblowers. we value their information. it is very important that they feel comfortable coming forward and saying, i have you need to protect my identity. we understand that. the statute requires us to extend protection. in practice, what we will do is to advise whistleblowers to say givee extent you can specific information that is much more helpful. it may be that an educated and may not be able to guess the identity. you need to be aware of that risk. >> more with phyllis fong

tonight at 8:00. on tuesday, jack lew talked about efforts in congress to fund the government after september 30. on friday the house passed a bill to continue funding the government through mid-december. the senate is expected to come up this week. ew's remarks were 50 minutes. >> thank you. we're very honored today to have as our special guest, jack lew. he has come to this job with more experience in government than anybody else was ever

served as secretary treasury. in the obama administration he started out as secretary secretary state of management resources come of them became director of the office management budget before coming secretary of treasury. in the clinton administration, he served as director of the office of management and budget. he also had experience in the legislative branch and served for eight years on capitol hill, working for tip o'neill. secretary also has extensive experience in the private sector. he was a lawyer who practice law in washington for a number of years before going into government. he is a graduate of harvard college, and georgetown law school. it is my pleasure to introduce the 76th secretary treasury, jack lew. [applause] >> thank you, david for that

kind introduction. thank you for having me here this morning. i want to begin by joining all americans in saying that our thoughts and prayers are with those who were affected by yesterday's tragedy at the washington navy yard. are those who lost a love one, i offer my he condolences and next in my gratitude to the local authorities. those who responded to the events as they unfolded yesterday. i would like to start by talking about current economic challenges and speak about what is at stake for our economy. five years ago this month, our financial system was in the throes of a debit sitting crisis. the crisis exposed fundamental weaknesses in our economy that had been building for some time and triggered the worst recession since the great

depression. in the months before present obama was sworn into office, the economy was shrinking and 8.3% annual rate. the president moved immediately to stop the recession and leah foundation for long-term economic growth. he took action to repair our aging roads, and invest in education. to lock in lower taxes for 90% of all americans. he took steps to make it easier for us to innovate, grow, and higher. air economy has been expanding. employers have added jobs over the last few months. manufacturing is expanding. it should continue to decline relative to gdp over the ten- year budget forecast. because of the resiliency of our people, our businesses, and our economy, we are in a stronger position today than many imagined just a few years ago. we are not yet where we want to be.

too many americans cannot find work. growth is not fast enough. the very definition of what it means to be middle-class is being undercut by trends in our economy that must be addressed. these trends, like the increase in income inequality, did not happen overnight. if some in washington create uncertainty about what our

political system can meet its basic responsibilities, and avoid creating self afflicted with the economy. from my conversations with business leaders, this is a concern for many of you. it is important for congress to replace sequestration with balance policies that reduce the deficit and strengthen our economy. it is why it is important that congress moves as soon as possible to raise the debt ceiling and nominate any uncertainty about america's uncertainty to pay its bills. we will soon be unable to finance the government if congress fails to raise the debt limit. it is their responsibility because congress and congress alone is in power to set the maximum amount the government can borrow to meet its financial obligations. is important to note that the debt limit has of the to do with new spending. it has to do with spending the congress has already approved. it would not make of these bills disappear. we reached the debt limit in

may. since that time, the treasury has used extraordinary measures to avoid default obligations and notify congress in august these measures would be exhausted by the middle of october. if congress fails to act and those measures are exhausted, we will have to use what cash balances we have on hand to fund the operations of the $4 trillion government. at that point, meeting our financial obligations including so security and medicare benefits, and contracts with private suppliers will be put at risk. some seem to think they can keep us from failing to pay our nations bills by raising the debt ceiling right before the moment our cash balance is depleted. this is misguided for several reasons. for one, it is not possible for the u.s. treasury to know with precision when the moment will be. outgoing payments and incoming receipts vary significantly from

day to day. operating on a small cash balance creates the danger on a day we anticipate having a positive cash balance we actually have a negative one. at the same time, we are relying on investors from all over the world to continue to hold u.s. bonds. every thursday we rollover approximately $100 billion in u.s. bills. u.s. bondholders decide they want to be repaid, rather than continuing to roll over their investments, we could dissipate our entire cash balance. the point is, trying to time a debt limit increase to the last minute could be dangerous. if congress does not act in the u.s. family cannot pay its bills, the repercussions could be serious. the impact on families and businesses could be significant. investors losing confidence in the faith and credit of united states could cause damage to our economy. failure to raise the debt limit

or even extended debate on the merits of doing so, likely experiencing 2011, if this up afflicted when that could do harm to our economy right at a moment when the economy is strengthened. no credible economist believes that defaulting is acceptable. consider the words of another treasury secretary. face of a threat to our nation's credit, he told congress a failure to pay was already do will cause certain serious harm to our credit and financial markets, and our citizens.

of course, failing to meet our financial obligations should be and i'm thinkable event. never in our history has the nine states defaulted on our obligations. congress has always lived up to its responsibilities to protect the nation's creditors. those that think default is an option claim paying the interest on our debt while stopping our payments on other legal payments. this prioritization proposals are unworkable and represent a retreat from a core american value. regardless of party, president and congress has always honored all of our commitments. we cannot afford for congress to gamble with the full faith and credit of the united states of america. how can the united states choose? as a matter of fact, congress typically raise the debt ceiling on a routine basis. the debt ceiling was raise 18

times under president reagan. it was race six times under president clinton, with the republican house of representatives. he was raise seven times under resident george w. bush. during that, the dilma increases were passed as standalone bills. there were a handful where the debt limit was embedded in congressional legislation. the threat of default was never a bargaining chip in those negotiations. that change two years ago when the issue of raising the debt ceiling turned into a high- stakes political drama.

we saw for the first time a debate take place over with united states should voluntarily default on its obligations. some actually argued that default was a viable outcome. they were in fact members of congress willing to default on our for all faith and credit rather than preach a compromise. america does not want to relive what happened in 2011. that dispute led to business uncertainty, a drop in consumer confidence, and the first-ever downgrade of our nations aaa credit rating. the resulting drop undercut economic growth for months, anxiety spread across the world as congress delayed action until the last moment. i want to be with the president has made clear. he will not negotiate over the debt ceiling. he will not exit measures that will tie debt limit increase to the funding for delaying of the affordable care act, which was passed by congress and upheld by the supreme court. the time to make policy is before, not after we have made commitments. this is a standing president must make clear that under no circumstance with united states

failed to pay our bills. the president is going to negotiate over the future debate a fiscal policy. that is what he proposed a budget he believes we to make of the country. included are reforms to the title assistance. he made it clear that he is ready to sit down with republicans and democrats to find common ground. elected leaders have a responsibility to make our economy stronger, not to create manufactured crises they create damage. the last thing we need is a fight over whether we raise the debt ceiling. not when we face challenges domestically and internationally that require our full attention. not when we know the damage that a financial and economic crisis can cause. the truth is, congress can get this done. the time to do it is now. thank you very much. i look for to the conversation.

[applause] >> you have served as deputy very secretary of state in this a ministrations. white house chief of staff, now secretary of treasury. why the head -- why have you had a hard time holding a job in this administration? >> my wife as teased me that if i would keep one job longer we could reduce unemployment in this country. he, too administration to serve in the role of the president that he believes you can make the most difference. i haven't developed the ability to say no when they asked me to serve. >> you've served two presidents and maybe a future president. you work for hillary clinton.

who were the smartest? [laughter] >> when you line up the smartest people i've ever known, choosing between one and another would be a full hearty proposition. >> on the debt limit, let's talk about this. you have said you have $50 billion of cash that will have around the middle of october. that is not enough to make the government function effectively. your matches -- your message today is to not wait to the end of the time when the extension is absolute necessary. let's resolve it now and away to the last minute. the obligations -- we have obligations.

are you engaged in negotiations now with the speaker and others? is the president and you: people to the white house to try to get negotiations going on? >> just to be clear, there is an extraordinary desire in washington. the debt limit is something that is intrinsically impossible to give that kind of information about. you are -- your expenditures fluctuate from day to day. if anything, watching the daily cash balances, things have moved in the wrong direction. not dramatically, but tomorrow they can move in the right direction. what you can't do is take the risk that you will not have the ability to pay our bills on a day when interest is due. which is why i have said it is an urgent time for congress to act by the middle of october. we have engage in discussions over fiscal policy, the white house on the congress, extensively over the last several years. the president has made clear

through his conversations over the years with the speaker, through his conversations he has had with the senators and congress, he is anxious to find a sensible middle ground. the problem is, we have yet to find republicans are willing to sit down and have the conversation about a balanced package with revenues, revenue reform, and entitlement reform. the debt limit is a different question. i do believe the world change in 2011. it cannot be an acceptable notion that you negotiate, where one side believes that default is an option. that was never the case before. you cannot let 50 to 100 members of one body introduced the idea the united states cannot pay its bills. you cannot entertain as a notion. future presidents cannot be in the position where they're compelled to accept policy year after year because there is a faction that thinks default is

an option. congress needs to act. >> they are not acting. you're the leader of the executive branch. what are you doing about it? are you corralling them? threatening them? what can you do to get something done? >> the reality is, it is not what i say that matters. it is what the facts are that matters. the facts are that in the middle of october, we are at risk of not being able to pay all of our bills on time trade as a burden congress bears and congress will step up and deal with that. i can't tell you that with the path is. it is not particularly helpful for any white house to dictate the steps conversation take. if you look at the conversations going on right now, it is clear

that there is concern about funding the government, and meeting our obligations to be able to pay our bills by stating the debt limit. the focus on the last minute has for a while given congress the idea had more time. i hope i have dispelled that notion. it is a dangerous notion. it raises the risk of unintended consequences. >> do you think the president should call the congressional leaders to the white house and just say we're not leaving until we get something done? >> the process of calling leader should white house something we spent a fair amount of time doing in 2011. i don't recall the it necessarily was the fastest path to a finish line. i think this is something that the leaders of congress are talking about. they have talked about the funding bill to keep the government operating after

october 1. if you look at the debate over the debt limit, there is a notion, and part of the house republican caucus that it can be used as a lever to force major policy change, like the delay of the affordable care act. that is not reality. they're going to have to deal in reality. >> you pointed out that under tip o'neill, when he was speaker, 16 times the debt limit was raised. you were involved in the negotiations. the giver say let's not extend the the deadline? >> now, it is almost romantically bipartisan. chris matthews, his new book on the relation between speaker o'neill and ronald reagan. it brought memories back.

one of the things about mr. o'neil's leadership was that he believes in letting the majority work its will. there were moments when democrats do not want him to give president reagan a chance to have a vote. things past, and mixture of republican votes, and about the moment the democratic leadership had lost control of the house. he believe the worst thing you could do was throw. into the system and cause the government to break. we're dealing with a different approach with some members of the house now. >> today, you would say we have to do with the debt limit. you are hoping something will break at some point. we'll have the negotiations. let's talk about the continuing resolution of spending.

on october 1, will run out of money. -- on october 1, we will run out of money. what you see is happening there? >> there are conversations going on, the president made clear that in the frame he is using, he has made clear that we cannot have a solution that fixes the problems that sequestration has caused in defense, but not nondefense. we cannot have a discussion that abandons our commitment to the better economic future. we have to give the leaders time to work through a solution here. i want to underscore something i said in my remarks. i think people need to understand, the president has always been open to finding the sensible middle ground and

negotiating or finding a path to an agreement on fiscal policy. it was not popular in the democratic caucus when you put a budget out the reiterated the offer he made to speaker banner last december. reiterated the offer he made to speaker banner last december. it was made to cause a conversation with a balanced approach. cuts to sequestration were never meant to be policy. it didn't work. now we have these across-the- board cuts. most economists think we have done more damage -- deficit reduction in these few years

than the economy. we don't have a sensible structure changes to put us on the right trajectory going for. the president put out a budget that would replace the across- the-board cuts with sensible, balanced approaches. i try to be an optimist. i probably have been more optimistic most. it is getting harder and harder to remain my traditional optimism. i am hopeful commonsense will roll out. i do think that the idea of reaching agreements on fiscal policy and is entirely different than the idea of using the debt limit as a lever to force another side into capitulating. >> when you were the head of omb, you were involved in negotiations that led to omb. you were the father of sequestration. i think some people have said it was your idea. would you clarify where that came from?

>> i don't claim authorship. the ring gauged in a very difficult set of negotiations. we were headed for fiscal crisis. there was a debt limit impending at the time. it was highly credible and believe i most in the world that there was a chance united states would go over that cliff. we tried every way to reach an agreement. first on a substantive basis. we made some process, but it didn't work. it was the necessary to figure out how do you bridge the gap?

some sort of enforcement mechanism that revenues and spending both at risk if congress failed to act. that was unacceptable to republicans. in a world where you can i have balance between revenues and spending, the only thing that has worked was making defense and nondefense equally exposed to risk. that was the formula. it was something that led to the budget agreement because people fear that kind of a cut so much that they camped out at andrews air force base and made the hard decision to reach an agreement. coming out of those conversations, that was the last option to avoid a disaster. it was put in place not to take effect, but that congress would have the incentive to act. there were a lot of ideas swirling around. that was republican budget proposal that incorporated the idea earlier in the year. it backed the matter is, no one should claim authorship over something that was described by

all parties as an unthinkably bad policy. >> let's make sure, are there any negotiations going on on the debt limit between the administration and congress? anything going on right now? >> there are none. >> no negotiations. >> the president has been clear in the debt limit. i have been discussing the dilemma with everyone on a regular basis. that is very different from negotiating. there is a need for clear understanding. everyone has to have acrid information about what the schedule and consequences are. the president made clear became a negotiating with the threat of default. on the spending bill, there's a normal conversation going on. unfortunately, they tend to come together until the last minute. i will leave it to my friend and

successor at the office of management to handle that. >> one story that is circulating in washington is that there is the discussion the house might propose a debt limit extension but attached to a defunding of obamacare. and they will send it to the senate and decide what they want to do. give any comment on that? what the president made clear, efforts to defund or delay the affordable care act are unacceptable. that is not a path towards something that will be signed into law. in terms of the procedures, what happened last week was a bit of revolt in the house. it was a way to send it over to the senate or the house gets to vote, and the syndicates to vote another way.

-- and the senate gets to vote in another way. what they have to keep in mind is that ultimately something has to pass the house, the senate, me signed by the president. you can i'm a minority in one house dictate to others the only path that is acceptable. i think the reality is one that is not going to happen. i have heard comments in the last few days that there is a growing awareness that you cannot control both houses of congress and the white house with 50 to 100 votes in the house. >> the people are watching what you say, they're depending on how our economy is faring, are you optimistic? >> i am anxious and cautious.

i take comfort from the fact that i don't believe there are any responsible leaders who think that default is an acceptable option. i am nervous by the desire to drive this to the last minute. glassman is unknowable -- the last minute is unknowable. i also worry about the time it takes for the congressional process to work these days. if you to march up the mountain three or four times before you can get to the top, she have to leave enough time to come up and down. we're getting close to these deadlines. i think there is a need to get going. >> some people say the treasury has ways to maneuver more than they say publicly. you see the deadline is the middle of october, but if you needed a couple of weeks, you could move things around.

>> once you hit the end of extraordinary measures, you are borrowing authority is gone. you are then left with cash. as any small business person knows, if you're up running your business rely on cash to pay your daily bills, if you revenue is not adequate on a given day, and you empty the cash box, you cannot pay all of your bills on the cash box is empty. i can't say with precision when that is. i can't refill the cash box once we start losing our ability to use extraordinary measures. that is going to happen in that october. in a $4 trillion enterprise, the $2 billion sounds like a lot of money. we have individual days when our net negative cash flow is $50 billion.

that is a matter of things are operating normally any have net positive days. if you cannot borrow to get from here to there, you are left with the inability to pay all of your bills. you run out of extraordinary measures at some point. >> let me get to tax reform. the chair of the ways and means committee were here not long ago talking but the need for tax reform. do you see any evidence tax a formal get done this year? >> i'm working on tax reform. the president tried to breathe new life into the tax reform debate by suggesting that we think about business tax reform first. the challenge in doing comprehensive tax reform is that

it is tied up with the whole fiscal policy debate. we do not believe you can do all of tax reform, individual and tax reform a must have an agreement on what you revenue level is a part of a fiscal frame. when you look at business tax reform, our goal is to reduce the tax rate on the corporate side so that we now have the highest statutory tax rates. we would like to have, for a host of reasons, to bring down the statutory tax rates. it is very hard to get that raise to 28%. there is a debate between folks who say get 25%. we have a structure to get to 28%. if we have a convergence of ideas about the importance of lowering the business tax rate, the importance of getting rid of the affect of special credit and deductions, emmie have a way of reaching across, same if you can

do. the first million dollars of business expenses, deducted, that the benefit. there is an awful lot that we have a convergence if not a total agreement on. tax reform has the effect of throwing off one-time savings. as you make changes, there is a bump in revenue. if you were to cut your tax rates forever, and the bump disappears, you're no longer revenue neutral. there's been a question about those savings. the president may suggestion, what a agree on the things we agree on,. if the structure need attention. there is agreement that we have problems in training and education that need attention. if we take a one-time savings to do something good for the

economy, good for business, lower tax rates for businesses, make it easier for business to invest, that would be a good accomplishment. i think there is ideas there where you still can see progress this year. >> you think you get corporate tax reform done? don't you to do both? >> the argument has and may that you should, not but you can. the president would be delighted if we can have an agreement on a fiscal frame so we can do tax reform on both sides. in the absence of a fiscal agreement, you cannot rewrite the tax code one time in a generation and leave related the discussion of how revenue fits

in. we are happy to do either. we're happy to do comprehensive tax reform. we are happy to work on business tax reform's that use one-time savings to help build a foundation for economic growth. that leaves you have's -- paths that are possible to cross. the chairman of the house ways and means committee, they're very determined to move forward this. we are providing technical support as all parties are thinking through this. there is multiple paths that we could make progress on. i'm hopeful we will. >> larry summers, has the president asked you for a recommendation? when will we have a decision from the present on the new chairman fed? >> have cap my advice on the fed long from the oval office. >> can you tell us we think maybe we will have a decision? >> i'm not going to add anything to do. >> we tell us how you got your signature? it has been commented. you have an unusual signature.

have change that on the new dollar bills/ >> i've been working my penmanship for 40 years. it is a lifelong undertaking. >> no change. ok. we up on the fifth anniversary of the financial crisis. as you pointed out, would you say that the chance for our going through another crisis like that has been removed by dodd frank, or do you think there is a chance something as severe as that happen again? >> as we all think about the third anniversary the financial crisis, and how far we have come, register by thinking how much we have done as an economy. a lot of healing has taken place. we have seen the growth i have described in my opening remarks. the of seen repair to our

financial system where we had better capitalize banks, better financial systems, large institutions have to have plans for how to resolve themselves and not turn to taxpayers for support. we are seeing movement to deal with some of the new and troublesome developments in the financial system, like shadow banking. we're not done yet. we have quite a bit of work to do this year. i have put an anonymous amount of my time into convening regulators and impressing on the net by the end of this year, the major components have to be completed. we will not know with 100% clarity whether we have done enough. i believe that we have taken the steps that we need to take an acting a law that says to -- we are in the process of taking the steps to implement that law. as i said on a number of occasions, when we're done, we

had to take stock and look of the world as it exists at the end of this year. then, each year after that, each month after that, on ongoing basis, is the financial system the same as it was? is it evolving? do we have the visibility? doing have the supervision? one of the problems is that there was not that ongoing vigilance asked, do we have the tools we need today? the system is much safer. i am a minute to being in a place where we can say we've ended too big to fail. i can't say they will not be bombs in the row. every economy have bumps in the robe grade can you manage it?

can you deal with it? can you protect the economy from having the kind of secondary and ongoing shocks the cause the kind of recession we saw in 2008? we have made great progress. >> top regulations were controversial at the time. will the federal government money on its investments? >> we have already turned the corner on the bank investments. it is a hugely important accomplishment. when that was enacted, people were saying there are hundreds of billions of dollars that will never be recovered. they have now been recovered. one of the challenges with the american people right now is that they're looking at the

damage of the economic crisis cause. a of the damage hasn't been healed. you people who can't find jobs, businesses that are nervous. we have work to do. to deal with the core problems in our economy. just these last few days, last week, a second muppet show that we have had a substantial growth in income as we have come out of the recession. it is highly concentrated and went to the top one percent. it went to the top 10% of the top one percent. american working families struggling to make it into the middle class are asking what are we doing to fix the economy so they can send their kids to schools and have jobs that are consolidate.

we need to get beyond these kinds of discussions like we were talking about in the first part of our conversation about economic ranks mentioned, and get on with the business that pulling the architecture for a strong economy. >> what are the differences and working styles? >> as you know from your experience in the white house, it is extraordinary to have the privilege of walking to the oval office and speak candidly to a highly informed, highly intelligent president who presses you to the limit of your knowledge and wants to make the right decision after taking account of all of the thinking that he can. no two people are wired the same. both president obama and president clinton our readers. it is daunting because they read more than i do.

you are always a little worried they read something you didn't read. i read a lot. there is that. it is interesting how i couldn't say more about how much intellect each brings to what they do. they have different styles of thinking. president clinton tends to grind with the details in a way that is extraordinary. his recall is extraordinary. president obama has a lot of that but he takes a step back and asks strategic questions to avoid getting you pulled into the level of detail where you might lose track of where the pieces fit together. it is an extra ordinary springs to work for two people who bring extraordinary capability to the oval office. >> when you become secretary- treasurer, i assume for secretary treasuries tell you do

this, don't do that. have you gotten wonderful advice? >> i do talk to my predecessors periodically. i think in many of these senior jobs in government, people do not understand the way decisions present themselves, and how you to think about them. he had been member for -- they have not been there before. i think there is a huge benefit to listening to people who have experience. i value the time they're willing to been with me. >> one of your predecessors tried to solve a dispute with dueling, alexander hamilton. that is not something you considered, right? >> it is safe to say i'm going to stay on the new york side of new jersey. >> we deal with foreign ministers of finance overseas, are they worried about our debt limit?

today call you and say what are you doing in washington? our economy is depending on what you're doing. >> i talk to finance ministers regularly. i think they reflect some of the views of the business community. nobody could do this again. nobody could go back to august 2011 and create the chaos we saw. as we become more anxious that congress is driving us to the edge, they will become more anxious. the world council on the united states -- the world council of the nine states to play a leadership role to shout democratic nations were. it would be destabilizing if we got there again. >> u.s. economy will probably grow our gdp?

>> i stay away from specific point estimates. i am bullish on the american economy. if you look at where we have come from, where we are, we ended this year with headwinds dying down. we have absorbed the end of the payroll tax cut. the impact of sequestration is negative but it is being absorbed. we in the year and going to next without those kinds of a driving put on the economy. would be growing without all that dry. looking the energy revolution we have had, the attractiveness of investing in the united states, there are a lot of things that are poised to do better. i believe you come to washington to make things better, not to commit self-inflicted wounds. we need to make sure washington

devastated the way of an economy that is poised to grow. >> are you worried about the european economy? >> i spend a lot of time looking at the european and chinese economy. the three largest economies in the world. a year ago, you could get through the first hour of a morning without getting an update on where the european economy was. there was an impending since the crisis in europe would pull down the united states economy and cause a recession. they made a lot of work. they need to reevaluate. they have work to do in their making system to say they're better capitalize. they seem to be turning the

corner in some places. i think that it is way too soon to say all is healed. it is better by a long shot than it was a year ago. china is fascinating. china when three long time of double-digit growth. there is going to be a decline to a more sustainable rate of growth. they have to make tough decisions internally in order to make sure that they level off at a level of growth that works for china's economy and china's stability. it has hurt their ability to have long-term growth they do or they wanted to be. they're going to face decisions in a few weeks where i think they are determined to make the decision to move in a constructive direction.

in the conversations with china, you have the since you're pushing on an open door. what we think is in their best interest, is in their best interest. then import discussions coming up. >> every treasury secretary is try to say or not say something about the dollar. what can you say but the dollar? is there anything you can say but the dollar? >> i'm going to stick to the policy of saying nothing. >> and tapering? >> i focus on the core economy. we're doing everything we can to make sure there is a core economic growth. >> why would somebody leave the chief of staff, where you the center of everything to be treasury secretary?

what was your thinking? >> very few people do it for probably the hardest job after being president. president asks you to serve in the position he thinks he can make the greatest contribution. it is pretty hard to say no. >> you have served in many these government positions. is there any government position you want to serve in or are you happy? citizen is the highest office we can all hope. >> i would like to thank you very much for giving us your insight and drawing attention to the deficit and debt problems we have to deal with. thank you very much. >> thank you.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> he will have more on the economy in just a moment.

down on the national mall, book tv is back. this is the second day of the national book festival. we will be airing this and talking with authors on the sidelines and taking your phone calls. -- can also check it on online. later today, president obama will be attending the memorial service for those killed at the washington navy yard. archives and video clipping capability art treasures. this is a great ability for you to share content anytime. go towww.c-span.org and the video library. go down to the most recent test.

clicked on what you want to watch and clicked pay. -- clicked play. you can find a person. go to their bio page and scroll down to their appearances. you can also share what you're watching and make it clinic. use the handle tools and then clicked share and send it by e- mail or google. searchable, easy and free. created by the cable tv industry and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. >> christine lagarde is the managing director of the international monetary fund. she spoke recently about the future of the global economy as well as the economic recovery in the u.s. and the impact she sees from budget cuts. she was speaking at the u.s. chamber of commerce for about 45 minutes.

>> good afternoon. i and the president and chief executive office of the united states chamber of commerce. i would like to welcome and thank you for coming today. today is the first time in 20 years that the managing director of the imf has addressed the chamber of commerce. it cannot be a better person than christine lagarde to do that. far too long a time, especially given the growing importance of the imf in stabilizing and strengthening the global economy. fund has years of experience in coming to the rescue of smaller emerging economies and regions. response -- the response has proven to be very valuable.

the imf impacts businesses from wall street to main street and across the globe. is important for the imf and meters to have regular conversations with members of the business community. that is why we're so pleased that christine lagarde is with us today. i haven't known her since -- i have known her since her days as a lawyer in chicago. we have followed her to the trade job in the finance ministry in france and we came back toshe the international monetary fund quickly rose through the ranks theer law firm to become first female chairman. 2005 she joined the and french governments. of foreign trade be

she came the first woman to hold the post of minister of finance. she was named to this important and present position. she has an extraordinary combination of skills and experiences that are needed to lead the bond through this very trying time. she is an excellent listener. she appreciates different perspectives. she is a diplomat. she is tolerance sometimes. she makes tough calls or whenever it is necessary. under her leadership she has helped save the euro. she has propped up struggling economies on every continent and provided stability and good judgment in turbulent times. powerful case not only for her extraordinary leadership but for the and force of the imf

the need for it to be appropriately funded. for a veryls important role in the future for the imf. this is an issue on which we pledge the support of the business community. question the major economies must provide valuable input to this organization into their decisions. we're going to provide input we have to provide support. the chamber will work with our colleagues in the coalition of the business federations, some of whom are here today, to advance our dialogue with the imf. , she is had tore deal with a major financial crisis. a global economic slowdown and countries drowning in debt, not

to mention a group of squabbling nations with very different agendas. how does one prepare for that? france'ser time on swimming team was the best training. think about it. being underwater, upside down and trying to coordinate complex movements with numerous teammates to produce a desired result. typical day ata the imf. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming christine lagarde. [applause] >> thank you. much.you so there's only one thing you forgot. you forgot all about holding your breath.

good afternoon to all of you. i would like to thank the chamber, in particular tom donohue, for hosting this today. it is easy to be impressed by at thein -- tom's time chamber and his steady hand membersi guiding new through the crisis. i am a big fan of tom. we go back a long way. we have quite a few issues that we are particularly keen about in common, one of which is certainly the perfection of intellectual property rights. you would expect that from a former lawyer. we would not expect is that we dislike ofa serious class action. this is an exquisite venue, by the way. i am most impressed by the flags.

i'm always impressed by the flags. the first day when i walked into the imf, thank you for being here, you are the executive director for united states american sitting on the border. the first thing you see when you walk into the imf is the flags. you must have 50 flags clearly. the represent the there were 187 flags. buildinglked into the and i see the flags, it reminds me of our responsibility and of the membership we serve. i believe the chamber and the imf have in common the duty to serve, duty to serve the community and the membership. the membership is the world.

188 members is short of the total community. we owe them that accountability. we also have similar objectives. commitment to expand economic growth, believe in human .otential this is certainly a purpose that , since our articles dictators to work precisely on economic and financial stability -- dictate us to work precisely on economic and financial stability. you have your finger on the

pulse of the economy. to a great extent, it is through your efforts that growth is created and the jobs are created. to learnsurprise you that american opportunity and enterprises have been a huge part of my life. i have spent 35 years of my professional life working as a chairman of and as bank of mckenzie. i was in touch with many of you general counsels, or your european general counsels when you were already global. through them and through you, i've been able to understand the dynamics of business, the imperatives of business. appointed aster chairman of the firm, and had to deal with the imperatives, challenges, and opportunities of

a leader in the industry at the time was clearly moving into the global arena, and trying to keep the lead. it is the interplay between the global economy and the united states economy that i would like to focus today. in a world of increasing inter- economic conditions, the challenges facing the u.s. and all of us are greater. so are the opportunities. the question is how we can best , business leaders, policymakers, other stakeholders . need tothe solutions we secure a lasting, balanced, and widely shared growth, which is a precondition for economic and financial stability. i would like to touch on three issues. i would like to touch on the global outlook.

second, the role of the u.s. economy in our interconnected matters d why they imf -- the imf matters. let me deal with the state of the world and the global economy. some of you have just returned from the g20, and so have i. were into the summit, many anticipating, and the media was certainly planning for a clear divide between the advanced economies, those that have conventionalin monetary policies, and the markets that has seen it outflow of capital's and volatility and uncertainty on their markets. the fate of the tapering of unp

is very much the center of the debate. andead of that divide hostility that was hoped for by , we saw constructive discussions. g 20 members recognized the need to ensure that exit from this should beolicy orderly and clearly communicated. there was a clear recognition that there were domestic issues that had to be addressed, and i were to be addressed by the emerging market authorities themselves. , andanced outcome certainly consideration to both sides by both sides. on the occasion of the st. petersburg meeting, i had an

opportunity to sit with the b20 representatives as well as the l20. "l" stands for labor. b" is for business. heads ofng with the state is a clear indication of how needed is the cooperation between business leaders, labor leaders, and policymakers. the summit took place in the context of a challenging and changing global economic environment. the imf will soon release its updated forecast. we will be doing that when we have our annual meetings two weeks from now. while we areat seeing some signs of recovery, global growth remained subdued.

the story is more complex. about six months ago, we were talking about a three spree -- speed recovery. it is getting more complex. there seem to be multiple speeds in multiple series of .ransitions we also know that the fruit of , true for the u.s. and many countries around the world, it leads to potential risks of instability. groups, on the various are in aced economies better place than they were six

months ago. we see that with growth picking up here in the u.s., a point i will come back to a little while . we also see that in the euro area, which is beginning to exit .rom recession we are also seeing that in japan, where with a mix of , the three arrows is turning in some results. in the emerging market economies, we have seen the most changes. six months ago, we said the emerging market economies were in the lead and driving growth. is still the case. they will continue to be the drivers of growth for a long

time to come. that growth movement has slowed down. the dynamics have been affected by the monetary policy or the fear of monetary policy, or the perception of fear of monetary policy exists. in that group, that is why i'm saying it is not necessarily a three speed group. some of the countries have fared better with that growth momentum, because their policies were stronger. all of that is vastly interconnected. talk about growth and interconnectedness. i came to appreciate that when i

was minister of trade in france. if there is one thing that struck me most since joining the strong and how fast those interconnectedness functions. just a few examples by way of numbers. some of you are familiar with that because you participate in the process. the volume of world trade has increased fivefold. world exports relative to output inw from 20% in 1995 to 30% 1998 -- 2008. the press also been a rapid acceleration of financial integration. -- fortime of the crisis the purpose of these comparisons, 2008 -- global

capital flows were more than triple their level in 1995. the imf recent spillover whatsis -- spillover is happens in other countries as a result of policies decided in one particular country. that study reinforces the importance of this interconnectedness. that if the world's five major economies were to work together to adopt a more rigorous, comprehensive, and compatible set of policies, it would increase global gdp by about 3% over the long run. we haul have a stake in these interconnections. -- all have a stake in these interconnections. it matters increasingly for the

united states. the converse is true. what happens here matters increasingly for the global economy. my second me to point, the role of the u.s. in the global economy. a critical role. the critical role of the american businesses, in particular. the recovery gaining strength here in this country is good news for the u.s. it's also good news for the rest of the world. u.s. growth will be a little bit more modest than what one would have hoped. still below 2%. so, it will accelerate in our view significantly next year by about numeral -- about one percentage point.

the fundamentals of the u.s. economy have been improving gradually. households are in better shape. they benefited from the recovery and house prices as well as in the performance of the stock markets. the housing sector is looking brighter, with still potential for instruction -- construction activity. the private sector is proving to be the primary engine of growth and job creation. the main reason for weak growth

is caused by the large ongoing fiscal adjustment, a theme i will come back to in a moment when i tell you what we think would help the u.s. economy picked up in the coming months. ingredientn is a key of any economic recovery, whether domestic or global. the latest u.s. jobs data presents a mixed picture. well the unemployment rate 7.3%, theo participation rate has continued to decline. the issue of jobs, even in this country where the numbers are pretty good compared with spain , the issue of growth is still very much on the table. growth,it is jobs or they are increasingly an important component of what the imf focuses on. we are not just about fiscal.

we are macroeconomists. we also focus on issues such as growth and jobs. i know that is very much on your mind here. business, including the people around those tables, you play a key role. no matter where you stand on the political chest -- chest plate plate, you play a key role. where jobs can be created, where can express. what should the u.s. policy makers do in the imf? let me give you three bullet points of what we think should be done. should fix itsy public finances.

quoted saying,en hasten slowly. that means, slowdown but hurry up. slow down because our analysis shows that the fiscal is excessive. hence, slowdown. don't put a break on this beginning of recovery. up, because now we have to take measures that deal with entitlement, with the entitlement programs that will weigh on the u.s. economy if nothing is done now. frontload, but make sure you put in place those

measures that will anchor the solid medium-term plan that will be credible for all. in addition, the uncertainty surrounding the budget, the debt ceiling is certainly not conducive to clarity, confidence, and stability. isnow this is a view that shared by the u.s. chamber of commerce. fix the public finance with that subtle approach of hastening slowly, and dealing with entitlement going forward, and higher revenue that will be needed as well. second, appropriately calibrate monetary policy. irrespective of what has been decided yesterday, opposition

has been that the exit from unconventional monetary policies that were needed and helpful for the recovery of the economy should be gradual, should be linked to progress in the recovery, duly documented by data, and it should be clearly .ommunicated in a dialogue third, finish reforming the financial sector. there has been lots of progress on that agenda. capitalple, the new lending liquidity requirements to banks under basel three. players are just getting bigger. policymakers need to turn their attention to the outstanding dangers, especially the shadow banking system, as that has grown over the last five years, and the derivatives, which need

to fall under appropriate supervision and regulation. the ultimate goal is clear, to have a financial system that is less prone to instability and better able to serve the real economy. financial and sector reform are not the exclusive responsibility of the united states of america. it concerns all countries. there has to be exchange of information and harmonized principles. a lot has been done. there is clearly progress. where ae still areas consistent and coordinated approach is needed.

that rings me to -- brings me to the point of global connections. the united states plays a critical role in the global economy. i am thinking of global trade, where the u.s. represents 11% of total trade. represents 20% of global manufacturing value 90 pref -- 95% of customers are outside the u.s. that is 95% in excess of whatever is available here. clients areobal even deeper when you look at the financial sector. foreign banks hold about $5.5 trillion of u.s. assets. american banks hold about $3 trillion of foreign claims.

close to half of the s&p 500's sales originate from foreign operations. some of you are exactly in that position. it is probably more than 50%. these connections have great benefit for the united states economy. we remember five years ago how the collapse of one u.s. bank ushered in a harsh new reality across sectors, countries, and the world. as those tensions traveled across the atlantic, they revealed the shortfalls and weaknesses and tensions in europe. , consideringurope that 20% of u.s. exports are to europe, and in more than half of europe,ets are held in everybody in this room would have a stake in the european recovery.

, i know that risks you are deeply aware of how much can be gained from engaging with the rest of the world. i'm going to quote president taft, who helped establish the chamber. says, i'm in favor of helping the prosperity of all countries because when we are all prosperous, the trade with each becomes more valuable to the other. when there is -- trade, there is good order. the purpose you are exploring is .hat court order -- good order what was true in his days, their

days, is even more true in today's more interconnected world. are two global economy sides of the same coin. come ines the imf, -- that picture? the imf is an important player. it is also an important player for the united states of america. the united states of america is my largest shareholder. the founding father of the imf. there were two men who started the initiative of the imf. i spoke at the beginning of my speech about the broad goals of the imf and the broad goals of the chamber and how we share a lot in that respect. we have something else in common.

in 1914, on the eve of world war presidentmber's first said the following. when our new day, methods are being reorganized, and the organized forces of labor and agriculture and washingtonet here in not for war, but for peace. in very much the same way, the imf was born out of the ashes of the great depression. not world war i, but world war ii. it was grounded in the principles of good global citizenship. if countries were together to serve a common purpose, everybody wins. who were the imf founders? john maynard keynes. .arry dexter white

they both had a plan and shared a vision. the other parties in britain would could argue that they participated. but you will see the those to -- two lee these exercise to the formation of the exercise to the formation of the imf. like a credit union for the world -- it was right after the second world war, and there was massive reconstruction needed on the ground. the imf member countries pool resources that can provide a lifeline to member countries in need. the first country that use the resources provided by the credit union was my own country, france.

it moved around the world. for those who believe the imf is ,nly for low income countries not at all. , ases around the globe economic crises go around the globe as well. it helped enormously the newly independent countries after decolonization. , thethe berlin wall fell funds supported efforts to transform from the centrally economicsonomy -- into market economics. in between, the imf has helped its members to overcome economic crisis in latin america in the 1980's, in asia in the 1990's, and most recently in the eurozone. arabo mention the countries in transition, where we are significantly involved and financially engaged under loan and program arrangements.

these actions might seem far removed from what happens to your business. but they have very real implications. advices, including core areas such as exchange rates or internal imbalances, has helped to prevent or to ease the hardship of crisis around the world. helped reduce the possible negative fallouts for the u.s. and all economies. of our member countries had changed over time, so have we. during this crisis, the one we have just gone through, this has meant a significant increase in our financial support. whether you support developing , the sizeg countries of the programs and lending programs that we have in place

are relatively small. when it's a question of helping countries that are significantly developed and whose gdp is large, the programs are much bigger. we are engaged financially in 50 countries around the world. the bulk of our exposure is to europe, and to pour europe -- poor europe. we have 300 billion loans in over 50 countries. we operate under different schemes. the crisis has changed us. we had to change our tools. byle we did not have much way of prevention tools, we had to invent instruments that actually operated not like as aance coverage, but credit line that is available, drawable from.

that is the case in mexico, colombia, and poland. that has helped them a great deal. all, in our research and analysis functions, we have answers.h great if anybody asks me, what is the area for development going forward, it is going to be that function that we have and that is clearly competitive edge of the imf. informationeep about 188 countries around the world. help significantly identifying the spillovers from various policies. clearly, to be efficient, we cannot just rely on the information that we have about these 188 countries. to be efficient, we need attraction. we need to be heard.

our advice needs to be relied upon and eventually followed by implementation. imf is only the case if the therefore, if the quota system, which is a little bit like the capital of these issued companies, the issued capitals, represent adequately the various countries that form the economy. we have the government reform in the way at the moment and it is the human members that need to ratify reform. i do hope that also -- all such members will ratify the reforms so that the imf can represent the world as intended. have tried to describe for you today is a bit of a journey, a journey that the have takenes and imf

hand-in-hand together. the united states is our leading shareholder, playing a key role for the global stability of shared prosperity. and can play a vital role i -- in this journey and i very the deepome relationship we have had and that both you and i want to , it can be of service to our membership. the new membership, imf membership, as i said, we share the same world. thank you very much. [applause] questions [inaudible] here.ill stay >> in the interest of time, i

have collected a few questions from the audience and i will try to aggregate them in a few themes. first of all, five years after the crisis, how do you suppose the global markets account for these shocks? is there still a reliance on wholesale short time finance? >> you know, five years down the road i think that the global economy is certainly less exposed than it was and there has been significant improvement in the financial sector. yes, we are not out of the woods. are not protected from uncertainties. that was clearly demonstrated over the last few weeks and months. and there are still a lot of hard reforms that need to be completed in order to restore better confidence. i have mentioned a few areas

where i think that progress is still needed. >> china will soon be the third- largest member of the imf. will it change china? will it change the imf? >> it has begun to change the imf already, one of my deputy managing directors is from china . one of my head of department is from china. happenedd not have five years ago. so, because it is the mission, the dna of the imf to represent the world and mirror the world, clearly emerging-market economies in general will impact whatmf, but i think that we should, but i should, and the imf should never lose sight of the gooderall purpose, of the higher global economy. the stability of the global economy.

the stability of the financial world. we are not up for grabs by one member or the other . we have to constantly observe the community. >> there are a number of questions about public that. debt.lic as the longevity for --roeconomic stability longevity risk for macroeconomic stability is a constant theme of their lives, what are the costs and benefits? is imf looking at the benefits of investment in their lives as a potential growth factor? >> the benefit of longer and healthier -- >> lv life. -- healthy life. >> clearly it is what many of the companies are working on.

they are well represented in the chamber. it is looking good, but in my view we have to move more which iscally into it, where the interests of the imf and the quality of its analysis into these sectors and the input the private sector can give us about the prospects of health care systems in general and the impact on the macroeconomic factors include. >> there are a number of questions about possible growth in the global economy. but it still comes down to basically one question, there seems to be a succession of fad. one year brinkman national has the growth story. next year, africa. money keeps flowing back and forth. how credible are the growth stories that we talk about?

where do you see growth actually coming from? >> as i said, we see growth pretty much everywhere at the moment. at the worldu look

, there are probably just a handful of countries that will be in recession in 2014. growth is certainly picking up and recovery is underway. at what speed? what is the momentum? clearly that is something that carries over time. we have no question that there is a significant percentage of growth of the global economy that will be generated by the emerging-market countries. does that mean that all investment should be directed to those countries? not necessarily. we have said that 80 % -- 80% of global growth will come out of those countries in years to come. sorry, i should qualify that. emerging and developing countries, becausewe have no que is a significant percentage of growth of the global economy that will be generated by the emerging-market countries. does that mean that all investment should be directed to those countries? not necessarily. we have said that 80 % -- 80% of global growth will come out of those countries in years to come. sorry, i should qualify that. emerging and developing countries, because clearly when you look at the map of the world, as i said, the highest growth percentages observed, , are the or next year emerging asian economies, as well as some of the new income developing countries. question.e last theynumber of imf papers have referenced the importance of financial inclusion. can you spell out what that means? why is that important? has two dimensions. financial inclusion clearly is the ability of all consumers in , ah,en country to access

banking relationships. to access financial means. very in particular innovative technologies to make sure that there is a level of inclusion with a financial dimension. that is one thing. clearly it is the case with some very, very innovative policies in india that have to do with the identification of people, the use of cell phones in many african countries, it is something that we support embracing and we believe it is extremely important. then you have the issue of inclusion itself. how inclusive is the company? how good is it for stable growth? we did publish certainly one important piece of research that seems to indicate that inclusive

growth is supportive of more sustainable growth. meaning access to the job market, access to the creation of values that apply across genders. we also recently published a paper on the axis of japanese women to the job market, clearly addressing some of the very, very serious issues that the japanese economy has been facing in terms of potential output. >> there are many more questions that you will doubtful receive. thank you so much. >> thank you. [applause] >> that was wonderful. we have called this the hall of flags. it is the history of the opening of the western world and the flags of the great explorers. i often think that there will be halls of flags all over the world as their economies open

great explorers, particularly on the economic side, help their development. so, i want to thank you for coming, thank you for a great presentation and for being our greatest explorer. >> thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] on the national mall, c-span is here for the second day of the national book festival. c-span roman to is airing we meetings from the history of biography on the mall, we are talking with authors on the

sidelines and taking your phone calls throughout the day underway now on our companion network, c-span two, if you want to check that out, and it is also available online at www.c- span.org, you can see all of our programming from the urgent annual national book festival. president obama will be at a memorial service today for those killed in the washington navy yard. we will be taking you there for his remarks live at 5:00 p.m. eastern time. the house passed the bill on friday funding the government to the middle of december and d funding the health care law. we will have that debate in a few minutes from the floor, but sunday ted cruz discussed what was next in the set -- next in the senate. claire mccaskill also responded to his remarks.

this, senate republicans have the tool that we always use when the majority leader is abusing his power, which is that we can deny , filibuster and say that we will not allow you to add the funding back for obamacare with just 61 votes. >> if i may, you say that this political power, others called it a procedural gimmick. 22, it hase rule been around for years. it allows for debate after cloture and you can pass an amendment by simple majority. that is the rule. >> what is good for the goose is good for the gander, you are right, that is one role, but

there is another that says it takes 60 votes to get cloture. that is the reason that on controversial votes the senate generally works out an agreement , because the minority rejig -- if the majority is going to run over the minority with the train, the minority has the ability to stop them. if harry reid says he is going passed by thebill house of representatives, ignore the will of the people, do this on a 51 vote threshold, for my mind it should be an easy decision for senate republicans to stand united and support house republicans and i will tell you, any vote for cloture, any vote to allow harry reid to add funding for obama care would a 51 vote threshold, i think that senate republicans are going to stand side-by-side with speaker boehner and house theblicans, listening to people and stopping this train wreck. >> it is not group lyrical force

, it is called the american people and elections. i do not think that in america when wed throw tantrums lose elections and threatened to shut down the government and refuse to pay the bills. the american people had a choice betweenember, a choice someone who wanted to repeal obamacare and president obama and not ronald reagan has a president elected twice by more the american people. in the senate every single democratic senator voted for obama care was reelected, most them by double digits. we did not lose seats in the senate, we picked up seats. even in the house the democrats got more raw votes. >> let me ask you, how do you think this is going to play out? that theyouble>> i cannot belie are going to throw a tantrum and throw the american people and economic recovery under the bus.

it is really going to hurt real people. this is just political point making. this is about running for president with 10 -- with ted cruz, not meaningful relationships. it is about compromising and running the government. let's get to the table to make obamacare better. let's negotiate lower spending in the federal government. hear more about conversation, and all of the sunday talk shows in their radio.y, on c-span now, some of last friday's debate before the house passed the bill to fund the government and defund the health care law. this portion of the debate is about one hour and 20 minutes.

>> madam speaker, the continuing resolution today will keep the government operating through the next year. the base is straightforward. it is clean. it is short term. incontinues reductions federal discretionary spending. most importantly, madam speaker, it will prevent a government shutdown. it adds the text of hr 2282, 807,d obamacare 2013, and

the full faith and credit act. it will fund the government 13,ugh december 15, 2000 providing approximately the same rate of funding as the current host sequestration level, with some minor adjustments. the base bill is extremely clean. in aions were only added limited number of cases where adjustments were needed to prevent catastrophic shortfalls tounintended disruptions critical programs or services. it certainly keeps the lights on in our government to provide for the safety, security, and well- being of all americans. i would like to remind my

colleagues, madam speaker, both in the house and the other body, that a government shutdown is a political game in which everyone loses. it shirks one of our most basic duties as members of congress and it puts our national security at stake. to be clear, if this legislation is not enacted and we embarked on a government shutdown, the consequences are severe. our brave men and women in uniform do not get paid. our recovering economy will take a huge hit. citizens,ulnerable including the veterans who rely on critical government programs and services will be left high and dry. , even thent shutdown illusion of the threat of the

shutdown says to the american people that this congress does not have their best interests at heart. resolution keeps this congress moving in the right direction. it gives us time to solve the urgent fiscal issues facing our balanced plang a that eliminates sequestration with careful reforms for discretionary and mandatory spending. it keeps the economy growing. it is my hope that the house will pass this bill today and that the senate will act in matterrder so that this will be wrapped up well before the deadline on the 30th. i urge my colleagues to do their house andmbers of the

vote yes on this bill today. the gentleman from new york is recognized. >> i yield myself such time as i may consume. i will oppose this continuing resolution. his statement noted, this bill is free of controversial writers and does not seek to change existing federal policy. how things have changed. unfortunately this new package will attach not one, but tw oh politically motivated, ill- conceived, ill provisioned that forces the president to pay certain debts, but not others,

in case house republicans are determined to default on america's obligations. the other would defund the affordable care act. d funding the affordable care act has far-reaching consequences for all americans. no funds could be used to administer payments calculated on the basis of provisions. hospitals,octors, medical suppliers and other health providers would all experience significant disruptions. many would have to be suspended, such as better coverage for preventative services, lower costs for drug benefits, stronger tools to combat health care fraud. and undermining

sound medical choices back to keepingrance companies, health insurance costs much too high. the house republican default lan is flawed as well. the majority proposes that if they force a default on federal debt, the u.s. should prioritize payments to treasury bond 47% are foreign owned. pay back china, the following americans would be pushed to the back of the line. 1.4 million active-duty troops. 780,000 troops in reserve. 3.4 million veterans who served their country with honor.

doctors and others who provide health care to seniors with medicare, 32 million children in schools that need payments to continue serving nutritious lunches. 44,000 national institutes of health grantees conducting life- saving medical research and providing an estimated 500,000 jobs. and we, my colleagues, should be focused on jobs. putting people to work. instead, the republicans want to play games of brinksmanship on the budget and the debt limit, even though the foreseeable consequence will be plummeting stock markets and businesses freezing their hiring. the republican budget plan is

budget plan its self shortchanges american jobs and infrastructure, results in education and defense layoffs, closes headstart and afterschool programs, and divests health research. and the sequester, cbo tells us, will cost the united its economy will cost the united states economy up to 1.6 million jobs over the next year. i hope at some point we are able to agree on a bipartisan cr that can be enacted. the one before us unfortunately consequence will be plummeting is not it. unfortunately, we will be back here again next week facing the same crisis. i yield back. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is

recognized. >> i yield two minutes to the chairman of the energy and water subcommittee on appropriations. >> the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. >> madam speaker, i think the i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in support of the resolution. i do so with no small amount of frustration since we worked on the energy and water bill. ours was a tough but balanced bill. we raised the cap set for the south wall funding our nation's critical priorities -- strong national defense, the work of

the army corps of engineers, the work of the department of energy. all of that work will be thrown away unless we deal with sequestration and get back to what we call regular order. coming up with an approach to manage or perhaps eliminate sequestration is going to take some time. as those decisions are being made, our nation must be kept open for business and the government must abide critical services. -- must provide critical services. if the government shuts down, many of those services will not be funded. military personnel will not be paid and their families will suffer. and this will be an breach of trust to our men and women in uniform under the jurisdiction of the energy and water bill -- many activities will grind to a halt and that includes the dredging of waterways critical to american jobs and businesses and work on

flood control structures such as levees. and in our national laboratories, critical and time sensitive work to maintain the reliability of our nuclear weapons would also slow down and that would be unconscionable and our work overseas doing short our nuclear weapons materials are kept out of the hands of those who would do our country harm would also be curtailed. colleagues, the continuing resolution before us is a limited, temporary measure which includes no objectionable provisions and ensures our government keeps its obligations to the american people. we encourage its passage so the senate can quickly begin its consideration of the measure. i thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized. >> i am very pleased to yield five minutes to the ranking member of the ways and means committee, mr. levin. >> the gentleman from michigan is recognized for five minutes. >> [indiscernible] >> without objection. >> this bill defunds still more than the affordable care act. it undermines medicare. it would end improvements in

prescription drug benefits. increases costs for those with medicare advantage. and it hurts children covered by chip, as well as the disabled. but this measure has still more peril for our country. we in the house are like two ships passing in the night. house republicans will pass this bill. it will sail off to the senate, surely to return, after the senate has stripped off the effort to defund the affordable care act. so, then it will be squarely up to the speaker of this house. will he act as the captain of the entire house of representatives, or remain a captive of his right wing republican mates?

will he, as he acts, worry mainly about the risk to his speakership, or the risk to our entire nation? house republicans taking the ship over the cliff would take the nation's economic well-being with it. this is the inevitable danger of the course being chosen today by house republicans. and only those blinded by rigid ideology can fail to see it. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madame speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman for homeland security

appropriations. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. this short-term cr would do just thatit would give us time to . finalize a broader budget deal, fund as through the fiscal year 14 appropriations bill, and get our fiscal house in order by getting the budget process back in regular order. our appropriation process matters. it matters for the oversight of the sprawling federal bureaucracy. it matters to control our government. it is a basic duty of the congress that is explicitly spelled out in the united states constitution. this is necessary. we must avoid the disastrous government shutdown that no one wants, especially our men and women in uniform. i urge the senate to pass this and the president to sign this into law as soon as possible to

avoid a devastating and avoidable government shutdown. this response to the will of the american people by defunding obamacare. it must be repealed. mr. chairman, i thank you for the leadership on this bill, and i thank you for your commitment to regular audit -- regular order in ensuring over the next few weeks, we wrap up the fy 14 process the right way. by accomplishing all 12 appropriation bills. i urge the house to pass the cr to keep the government running and avoid shutdown. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized.

>> i am pleased to reserve and yield to my good friend, chairman rogers. >> the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the military construction and veterans affairs appropriations subcommittee. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. >> madam speaker, today the constitutional conservatives in the house are keeping their word to our constituents and our nation to stand true to our principles, to protect from the most unpopular law in the history of the country, obamacare, that intrudes on their privacy, the most sacred right of americans to be left alone, and we have also kept our word in this continuing resolution to ensure that government will continue to operate while we negotiate in

good faith with the president and the senate to find a way forward. our short-term contain -- continuing resolution funds every aspect of the government and in fact, it is important to remember that the senate has had the military construction and veterans affairs bill for three months. they could have passed it a long time ago. the senate has had the defense appropriations bill since late july, so they could have passed that bill a long time ago. and put it on the president's desk. we could have been sure our military would be paid. the senate has had the department of homeland security bill since early june and has done nothing. the senate has had the energy and water bill since july 10 and done nothing. we have done our job, we in the house. the constitutional conservative majority have kept our word to our constituents and the nation to do our job, to fund the essential aspects of the

government and ensure we have done everything in our power to protect our constituents from the most unpopular piece of legislation ever passed in the history of the congress, obamacare, permanently and totally defunding it well protecting the core functions of the government. it is necessary to ensure we have the ability to defund the claims backlog, to ensure we have the resources for the military to build facilities around the world to ensure that our men and women have everything they need to protect this great nation. i urge the members to join me in supporting this continuing resolution. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> i am very pleased to yield five minutes to the outstanding ranking member of the defense subcommittee on appropriations. >> the gentleman from indiana is

recognized for five minutes. >> i appreciate the gentlewoman for yielding. at the beginning of my remarks, i want to acknowledge i have made a mistake and that i have been wrong for the nearly three decades i have served in the united states congress. i regret to have to admit that. this morning in anticipation of today's debate, i took a look at article i of the constitution and realized in article i, section nine, paragraph 7, i have been misreading it all these years as a member of the appropriations committee. the paragraph reads "no money shall be drawn from the treasury

but in consequence of a continuing resolution." the constitution says nothing about appropriations, apparently. because since fiscal year 2007, this chamber and the united states senate, congress could collectively -- congress collectively, should have acted, should have enacted,made discrete decisions, thought about legislation to read 84 appropriation bills. we have individually in acted nine. -- enacted 9. i am appalled that in late july, early august, every member i have talked to in this chamber on both sides of the aisle, senior and new, have said if we could only do a continuing resolution, we could prevent the shutdown of the united states government. today the united states congress, we consider it a success if all we do is pass a continuing resolution to do what

we did in fiscal year 13, what we did in fiscal year 12, what we did in fiscal year 11 and 10 and nine and eight and seven. we are governing this country by looking backwards. we have a responsibility to make decisions. i want to remind my colleagues just on the defense portion of this bill, some of the initiatives, the initiatives will not take place because of the continuing resolution. under the leadership of chairman young and the members of these of this subcommittee, one of our missions is to cut -- cut -- 100 $53.5 million for unjust cost

growth of the strike fighter. one of the initiatives we would like to enact and cannot under the continuing resolution. we want to cut $131.4 millionfor carryovers and cost scripts. what we would like you to do -- what we would like to do to legislate in this body is trim $104 million. imagine that. cutting by $104 million. funding that is not needed for the next coming year. the next-generation jammer, 90 $9.9 million. we would like to cut that. why? because of poor program execution and contract delays. we had a failed ballistic missile test. we would like to reduce that and cut it by $110 million,but let's

do a continuing resolution. let's not make a decision about how we should fund the national park service. what about the u.s. copyright office? what about the bureau of engraving and printing. there must be some catastrophic fight we are having because they are going to be under a continuing resolution. the national institutes of allergy and infectious diseases. i am concerned and what to make and want to make it clear that i profoundly appreciate the leadership of chairman rogersand the ranking member for trying to be responsible and get the job done. but if this continuing

resolution is passed as is until december 15, i have a profound fear that our colleagues will be so upset by lurching to another crisis that we will never go back to doing a governance of this country. i yield back my time. >> the gentleman from time is expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the financial services appropriations subcommittee. the gentleman from florida, mr. crenshaw. >> the gentleman from florida is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you very much, madam speaker. thank you for your time, chairman rogers. thank you for your leadership in

this very difficult appropriations process. i think everybody agrees the appropriations process is one of the most important functions of the congress, if not the most important. while we would all like to be here having finished all the appropriations bills, there just wasn't quite enough time. all we are asking today is for the members to adopt this continuing resolution. it will continue funding the government for the next three months at the same level it was funded last year. that will give us the time and as a body, to finish all the appropriations bill. some have passed these subcommittee and the full committee. some have passed the south. i know the subcommittee i chair, financial services, we had a number of hearings. members worked hard to set priorities, past the subcommittee, past the full committee, and ready to go before the house. there are some very important things in that bill. i think we have all heard stories about the iressa and how

about the irs and how they singled out individuals and groups raced on their political philosophy and subjected them to intimidation and bullying. we were all outraged. in our bill, we have resolutions to hold you accountable. we're going to use the power of the person asked you to come clean. no more of this. we actually conditioned some of the funding to the irs as to whether or not they put in place the safeguards that have been recommended to ensure they do not continue this outrageous behavior and also make sure it does not happen again. so, i think we should pass this continuing resolution, fund the government for this short time, put in place the spending bill that sets priorities that make the tough choices we have to make in these difficult times. i urge all my colleagues to vote yes on this continuing resolution. i yield back my time. alexa gentleman's time is expired.

the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> i yield to minutes to the gentleman from idaho. >> the gentleman from idaho is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, i appreciate that. i have to tell you, my good friend from indiana, i agree with him. most of the people sitting on the floor are on the appropriations committee. we have to get back to regular order. the chairman and our members have been trying to get back to regular order where we pass appropriations bills and get that done. so far we have not been able to do that. though it is necessary to do a short-term cr. i can tell you the last couple days i have heard a lot of talk about republicans trying to shut

down government. that is the last thing we want to do. if we wanted to do that, we would not be doing a short-term cr. the reason we are doing a short- term cr instead of a long-term cr is give the appropriations committees time to do their work and do our individual bills. that is what we are working on. we cannot fall into the abyss of a long-term cr. as many know, and i will give you an example -- as many of you know, the west has been on fire this summer. the chairman was reducing the number of fish in arizona. he saw the effects of the fires and flew out to the west. we were able to get 636 million allers -- $636 million to fund the for service and firefighting costs. we do the long-term cr, we lose that $636 million. we do short term, we will be able to keep them. we need to get to a long-term stay where we do individual appropriations will so we can have priorities met. some people think that doing a long-term cr reduces spending. i will tell you if you look at where we were last year with the bill we almost got done and then ended up with the long-term cr, the epa is spending about $75 million more this year than they would have with the bill we would have passed. if you think that is a way to save money, it is not. we need to do our job. talking about the forest

firefighting service, i have to tell you since i've got a minute how proud i am of the work that the forest service date, the -- that the forest service did,the hotshot crews across the country. i met with some of them from tennessee. i knew they were from tennessee because they spoke funny. but they did an amazing job. we should be proud of the work they do and we have to make sure they have the resources to fight these wildfires. >> the gentleman from time is the gentleman's time is expired. i met with some of them from tennessee. i knew they were from tennessee because they spoke funny. but they did an amazing job. we should be proud of the work they do and we have to make sure they have the resources to fight these wildfires. >> the gentleman from time is the gentleman's time is expired. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. the gentlewoman from new york reserves.

the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. poe. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. >> i thank the gentleman. madam speaker, i got this letter. "the affordable care act is affecting my family. i am a single mother. i have raised five boys on my own. i currently work two jobs to keep up with my monthly mortgage and utility bill. this is because my primary employer would not hire me to work more than 29 hours per week thanks to obama care. now i have to work seven days per week -- more than 20 i -- 28 hours a week thanks to a obamacare. now i have to work seven days per week. i had to make a tough decision i did not want to make. my son is now living with relatives in another city. i am depressed that obamacare has begun to tear my family apart

and has already put an unhealthy burden on me. madam speaker, real person, real tragedy. it is time to free americans from the shackles of obamacare. that is just the way it is. >> the gentleman from time is to gentleman's time is expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the state foreign office of appropriations. the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you for the hard work you have put into the bills in committee. i rise in support of the continuing resolution to keep the government operating through december 15.

we hope this resolution will give congress and the white house time to come together on a comprehensive budget agreement. i chair the state foreign operations subcommittee and funding the bill directly affect the u.s. national securitythe world has not been a more dangerous place and to cut back our diplomatic activities would be irresponsible. failure to get a cr enacted would affect key posts including egypt, israel, pakistan, iraq. this would mean dramatically reducing our presence in key regions like the u.s. and asia. this could affect jobs for -- this could also impact the u.s. jobs of the men and women producing american-made equipment. one year ago, terrorists attacked and killed americans in benghazi. failure to pass a cr could delay implementation of the benghazi accountability review board recommendations and jeopardize the safety of our diplomats who continue to serve abroad. it is important that we pass the cr today and the senate consider

it as quickly as possible. it is a basic risk function and responsibility of the congress to keep it open and working for the people who elected us. this will simply does that. i encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote yes and i yield back my time to the chairman. >> the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. >> we reserve as well. >> the gentleman from kentucky. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the hundreds of state committee on corporations.

the gentleman from virginia, mr. wolf. >> thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank chairman rogers for moving this bill. i rise today in strong support for h a rise 59, providing continuing appropriations for the continuing weeks of fiscal year 2014 through december 15. this bill is needed to keep vital government services and programs operating past the end of the current fiscal year on september 30. as a gentleman from kentucky has said, the committee on appropriations has made significant progress in moving the annual appropriation bills. additional time is needed to allow for the prompt completion of the fiscal 2014 appropriation work. this resolution continues for discretionary programs at the current post sequestration

level, inc. clued in critical programs on the jurisdiction of the cgs subcommittee. the operations of the federal prison system. you can shut down the federal prison system. the fbi counterterrorism act of it is, the fbi team is working with regard to benghazi as a former spokesman said. also working on counterterrorism. the weather forecast. we have seen major storms hit this nation. all the way in the past year. to shut that down, the warnings and the satellite programs that they depend upon and also for the continued development of nasa's space at the -- of nasa's space exploration programs. our nation is in serious financial trouble. it is well past the time that we put everything, everything on the table including entitlements and agree on long-term budget solution which includes the end of sequestration. hopefully the 76 days provided

in the resolution by the chairman will be enough time for an overall agreement to be reached and also to allow us to pass regular appropriation bills for fy 14. i urge my colleagues and all members of the congress to support the cr, avoid a devastating government shutdown and create a window of time for the congress to fulfill a basic constitutional duty, the appropriation of funds for government programs and services. thank you chairman. a yield back the balance of my time. >> he gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> we reserve it. >> to gentleman from new york reserves. he gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the agricultural subcommittee on appropriations. >> the gentleman from alabama, >> the german from alabama's recognized. two minutes. >> iq, chairman rogers, for he knew the opportunity to speak in support of the f y 14 continuing resolution. it is very obvious by the comments that the republicans have made on our side this morning that we do need to keep

the government open at its current sequester funding level and continue to provide the services that our constituents have grown to expect from the government and make sure that we don't have a government shutdown. as chairman rogers mentioned, i chair the appropriations subcommittee of agriculture and some may ask why is it so important that we keep the government open? can we just go with another year-long cr? i would like to provide some reasons why the fy 14 mag approached bill a -- why the fy 14g appropriations bill needs to continue. in the appropriations bill, we direct the states to be in full compliance with standards and we increase oversight of vendors to rein in costs. we require the da to report on strategies that have been implemented to help weed out

fraud. one thing that i hear a lot about is the new school milk regulation. we want to provide flexibility for school districts as they implement these new school regulations for meals for students. we require the come out -- her car the commodity future regulations to adopt cost analysis of several dodd frank provisions that are deemed duplicative and also very costly. we encourage the usda to finalize an inspection rule that is proven to decrease illness causing have to jens in poultry operations at a reduced federal cost. i can tell you, representing a district that grows a lot of

poultry and that produces a lot of poultry, that is very important. in closing, let me just say i fully support h whereas 59 and ask for my colleagues to do the same. >> the gentleman's time is expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> i yield two minutes to this distinguished gentleman from california. >> the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. >> madam speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this radical, right-wing effort to walk our economy off a cliff and cause a government shutdown. i invite my colleagues on the other side to wake up from this radical ideological wet dream and come back to reality. it is time for us to come to the

negotiating table, time for us to talk about what we can do to avoid a government shutdown. it takes health-care coverage away from millions of people are blocking funding for obama care. this is the 42nd attempt to do so and there is absolutely, as we all know, zero chance of it happening. it makes sure we pay china first before we pay people in this country should the right wing demand to continue defunding obamacare at all costs. we all know how this should end. there is a way to fund the government which would pass this chamber with votes from both sides of the aisle. i can only hope that the republican leadership will eventually listen to the pleas from the americans in my district and in the whole country and pursue this bipartisan effort varied until then, i urge all members to oppose this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman -- she gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker, i rise in support of this bill to continue

to fund government while also defunding the president's health care law and ensuring that this country does not default on its debt. while some might criticize his effort, this is not a republican idea. talk to union leaders. james hoffa says that the president's health care law is destroying the middle class family in the 40 hour workweek. the president himself has acknowledged that this law -- when the president said he was to delay components of the law only for the president -- only for the privilege class. this law is unworkable. it is killing jobs in america. it is causing people to lose good health care that they have today. in louisiana alone, our families are facing over 50% increases in their health-care premiums because of this law that is devastating our economy. it is not ready for prime time. the president has even acknowledged it air t has signed seven bills to defund or repeal

components of the law himself, it is time this house takes action and the senate takes its and the senate takes action as well. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> i am very pleased to reserve to yield two minutes. >> i appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy. i appreciate the hard work of the appropriations committee that has been placed in an impossible situation. we still have pending a t cut bill. if -- we would be having appropriation bills on the floor and we would be dealing with them.

we are not because the appropriations committee was given an impossible challenge. they were getting funding levels that the house, the house will never approve. that republicans in the house will never approve. we are sitting here with obama care as a sideline. it is going forward, everybody in this chamber knows that the president wouldn't sign it, it is not going to the senate, and that train has left the station. but what we need to be doing is getting down, i heard my friend from indiana talk about real things. the appropriations committee, if they were given real spending limits and time on the floor and regular order, these are accomplished distinguished people who care about the integrity of government. and they could work it out. the quickest way to do it is if the republican leadership would allow a conference committee on

the budget. this is what has handcuff the appropriations committee is they are operating under this unrealistic, ideological and we can get down to cases. it doesn't have to be this hard. stop thear order work, sideshow. >> the gentleman's time has expired. for what her this is the gentleman from kentucky seek recognition? >> i yield to minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. gardner.