and do something about it? that is how i spend most of my time. the climate reality project will 24 hoursthird annual of reality and we had 18 million viewers last year and we are launching a number of new websites. saido work, as david earlier, in private equity. sustainable capitalism. although i did not have the occasion to talk about that, i know your corporate purpose initiative is really in the same and we would love to work with you on that. anyone who wants to help on the climate issue, go to climatereality.org and we would love to have your help. elaine, thank you again for inviting me here today. would please be

seated while the vice president leaves. on behalf of brookings, and myself, thank you so much for coming by. >> thank you. congratulations. [applause] president, house and senate leadership, and remarks about funding the government passed september 30. first, president obama speaks to reporters in the briefing room followed by remarks from senate minority leader mitch mcconnell and majority leader harry reid. then, members comment to send the senate will funding the government back to the house. first from senate democratic leaders then republican senators ted cruz, marco rubio, and mike lee. the senate today voted along party lines to remove the language from the house passed to fund the government

through november 15. after the vote, president obama and saidreporters plans to delay the healthcare law would not happen. the president begins by announcing he spoke on the phone with the iranian president. this is about 15 minutes. >> good afternoon, everybody. before i discuss the situation in congress, let me say something about opportunities in our foreign policy. just now i spoke on the phone with president rouhani of iran. the two of us discussed our ongoing efforts to reach an agreement over iran's nuclear program. i reiterated what i said in new york. while there will surely be important obstacles to moving forward and success is not guaranteed, i believe we can reach a conference of solution.

i have directed secretary kerry to pursue this effort with the iranian government. we have constructed discussions yesterday with our partners, the european union, united kingdom, france, germany, russia, china, together with the iranian foreign minister, and going forward president rouhani and i will direct our teams to working expeditiously in cooperation with the p5 plus one to pursue an agreement. throughout this process we will stay in close touch with our friends and allies in the region, including israel. we are mindful of all the challenges ahead. the very fact that this was the first communication between an american and iranian president since 1979 underscores the deep distrust between our countries, but indicates the process of moving beyond that difficult history.

i believe there is a basis for a resolution. iran's supreme leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons. i have made clear that we respect the right of the iranian people to access peaceful nuclear energy in the context of iran meeting its obligations. the test will be meaningful, transparent, and verifiable actions, which can also bring relief from the conference of international sanctions that are currently in place. resolving this issue would also serve as a major step forward in a new relationship between united states and the islamic republic of iran. this is based on mutual interests and respect. it will facilitate a better relationship between iran and the international community as well as others in the region, one that would help the iranian people fulfill their potential, but also help us address other

concerns that could bring greater peace and stability to the middle east. a path to a meaningful agreement will be difficult, and at this point both sides have significant concerns that will have to be overcome. i believe we have a responsibility to pursue diplomacy, and we have a unique opportunity to make progress with the new leadership in tehran. i communicated to president rouhani my respect for the iranian people. this comes on a same day as we can possibly come to a diplomatic resolution on syria, when they security council votes. this binding resolution will ensure that the assad regime must keep its commitments or face consequences. we will have to be vigilant about following through, but this could be a civilian victory

for the international community and demonstrate how strong diplomacy can allow us to secure our country and pursue a better world. now, america's security and leadership do not just depend on our military strength or diplomacy. first and foremost, america's strength depends on its strong economy, where the middle class is growing and everyone who works hard has a chance to get ahead. let me speak about the situation that has developed over the past few weeks on capitol hill. here at home the united states congress has two pressing responsibilities -- pass a budget on time and pay our bills on time. if congress chooses not to pass a budget on monday, the end of the fiscal year, they will shut down the government along with many vital services that the american people depend on. the good news is within the past couple hours, the united states senate acted responsibly by voting to keep our government open and delivering the services

the american people expect. now it is up to house republicans to do the same. i say that because obviously democrats have a great interest in making sure that these vital services continue to help the american people. so far, republicans in the house have refused to move forward. there is the thing. unlike the last time they threatened this course of action, this debate is not really about deficits. our deficits are falling at the fastest pace that they have in 60 years. by the end of this year we will have cut our deficit by more than half since i took office. that is not what this is about. if you have been following the discussion, the republicans in the house do not make a pretense that that is what this is about. instead, house republicans are

so concerned with appeasing the tea party that they have threatened a government shutdown or worse unless i gut or repeal the affordable care act. i said this yesterday, let me repeat it. that is not going to happen. more than 100 million americans currently already have new benefits and protections under the law. on tuesday, about 40 million more americans will be able to finally buy quality affordable health care, just like anybody else. those marketplaces will be open for business on tuesday, no matter what, even if there is a government shutdown. that is a done deal. as i said before, if republicans have specific ideas on how to genuinely improve the law, rather than cut it, rather than delay it, rather than repeal it, and i am happy to work with them on that, through the normal democratic processes.

but that will not happen under the threat of a shutdown. so over the next three days, house republicans will have to decide whether to join the senate and keep the government open or shut it down, because they cannot get their way on an issue that has nothing to do with the deficit. i realize a lot of what is taking place now is political grandstanding, but this grandstanding has real effects on real people. if the government shuts down on tuesday, military personnel, including those risking their lives overseas for us right now, will not get paid on time. veterans, loans for rural communities and small business owners, families buying a home will be frozen. i'm starting to get letters from people worried about that this

will have an impact on them directly. critical research into life- saving discoveries will be immediately halted. federal government has a large role across the country and touches the lives of millions of people, and those people will be harmed. even the threat of a shutdown already is probably having a dampening effect on our economy. we saw that the last time these kinds of shenanigans were happening up on capitol hill. any republican in congress who is currently watching, i encourage you to think about who you are hurting. there are probably young people in your office right now looking to work for you without much pay because they believed that public service was notable. you are preparing to send them home without a paycheck.

you have families with kids back in your district who serve their country in the federal government, and now they might have to plan how they will get by if you shut the government down. past shutdowns have disrupted the economy, and this shutdown would as well. it would throw a wrench into the gears of our economy at a time when those gears have gained some traction. that is why many republicans senators and many republican governors have urged republicans to knock it off, pass a budget, and move on. let's get this done. this brings me to congress' second responsibility. once they vote to keep the government open, they have to vote within the next couple of weeks to allow the treasury to pay the bills for the money that congress has already spent. i want to repeat -- raising the debt ceiling is simply authorizing the treasury to pay for what congress has already authorized. failure to meet this responsibility would be far more dangerous than a government shutdown. it would effectively be an

economic shutdown with impacts not just here, but around the world. we do not fully understand what might happen, the dangers involved, because no congress has ever actually threatened default. but we know it would have a profound destabilizing effect on the entire economy, on the world economy, because america is the bedrock of world investment. the dollar is the reserve currency. the debt that is issued by the treasury is the foundation for our capital markets. that is why you do not fool with it. some republicans have suggested unless i agreed to an even longer list of demands, rolling back pet projects they would like to see, we would push the button, turn america into default for the first time in

history, and risk throwing us back into a recession. i am willing to work with anybody who wants to have a serious conversation about our fiscal future. i have demonstrated that, putting forward serious reforms that would bring down our long- term deficits. i have said in the past and i will consider say i'm willing to make a whole bunch of tough decisions and ones that may not the entirely welcomed by my own party, but we are not going to this under the threat of lowing up the entire economy. i will not negotiate over congress' responsibility to pay the bills that have already been racked up. voting for the treasury to pay

america's bills is not a concession to me. that is not doing me a favor. that is simply carrying out the solemn responsibilities that come with holding office up there. i do not know how i can be more clear about this. nobody gets to threaten the full faith and credit of the united states just to extract political concessions. no one gets to hurt our economy when millions of innocent people, just because there are a couple of laws you do not like. it has not been done in the

past. we are not going to start doing it now. i am not going to start setting a precedent, not just for me, but for future presidents, where one chamber in congress can basically say each time there needs to be a vote to make sure that the treasury pays its bills, we will not sign it unless our particular hobbyhorse gets advanced. imagine if you had a republican speaker and a democratic speaker, and the speaker said we will not pass a debt ceiling unless we raise corporate taxes by 40%, or unless we pass background checks on guns, or whatever other list of agenda items democrats were interested in. does anybody actually think that we would be hearing from republicans that that was acceptable behavior?

that is not how our constitutional system is designed. we are not going to do it. the american people have worked too hard to recover from a bunch of crises, several of them now over the last couple of years inflicted by the same folks in congress we are talking about now, to see extremists in congress cause another crisis. keep in mind this whole thing has to do with keeping government open for a few months. the continuing resolution, the bill that is designed to avert a government shutdown, basically just funds the government for a couple of months so we could be doing this all over again. i'm sure the american people are thrilled about that. that is why we have to break this cycle. my message to congress is this do not shut down the government, do not shut down the economy, pass a budget on time, they our bills on time. refocus on the everyday concerns of the american people.

there will be differences between democrats and republicans. we can have all kinds of conversations about how to resolve those efforts is. there will be areas where we can work together and where we can disagree. but do not threaten to burn the house down simply because you have not gotten 100% of your way. that is not hardwired democracy is supposed to work. every day that this goes on is another day that we are not focused on doing what we need to be focused on, which is rebuilding this great country as our so our middle class is growing and everybody has opportunity if they are willing to work hard. that is what i am focused on. that is what congress should be focused on as well. thank you very much, everybody. >> house speaker john boehner's

office released a statement that the president's remark. the house go schedule to gavel back in at 10:00 a.m. eastern tomorrow. and take up legislative business at noon. a weeks worth of debate on the continuing resolution to temporarily fund a government and remove money from the mitch mcconnell and harry reid spoke on the floor before they voted. comments 120 minutes and following, the chamber voted to both remove the language defunding the healthcare law and shorten the length of the continuing resolution to november 15. >> i'm not sure if you have a

fax machine at home. not many americans do anymore. neither do a lot of small businesses. it seems a bit odd to tell small businesses their need to fax in -- tax and enrollment forms for obamacare. the 1980's called and they want their health care policy back. to be fair, snail mail is also an option and it looks like the president people will try to have the issue fixed soon despite passing along more than three years ago. then again, this is the same president who told us that obamacare is working the way it's supposed to, president obama said and those already have health care will not see many changes under the law. the same guy who promised us his healthcare ideas would make american premiums lower and that they would be able to keep the

plans they liked. being a littleor bit skeptical given how these other rosy scenarios have played out. i'm not the only skeptic out there. just ask the people who've already been laid off or seen their hours cut. ask you graduate you cannot find anything but part-time work. ask the twentysomething who's going to lose her employer over inlan and pay more the exchanges. the reality simply does not match up with the rhetoric. the president's remarks yesterday over in maryland. widespreadre is no evidence that obamacare is hurting jobs. that's actually what he said. no widespread evidence. we all know the president was hanging around with bill clinton the other day. what we did not know was that he on syntax. pointers it makes you wonder what would constitute widespread evidence of job loss in this president's

mind. just yesterday, his press secretary dismissed reports of a company dropping health insurance for 55,000 employees as just "an anecdote." how things look from the south lawn but it looks a lot different to be just lost her health care plan that you liked and you wanted to keep. senator moynihan used to tell us --t data is the pearl laurel plural of anecdote. there are just too many stories about the impact of obamacare far too many to be discussed --h the wave of the hand dismissed. ironically, the same day he was painting more rosy scenarios, the administration announced yet another delay and the law's implementation. that's about the time we found out about the fax machines and all that follows the revelation of yet more exchange problems.

this time we would exchange here in the district of columbia. you might be able to take any of these obamacare problems in isolation and explain it away and say it does not matter, just call it an anecdote, but what we're getting here is a constant drip paired with the effects of seeing what is happening to our jobs and our healthcare and the economy. it all adds up to just one thing. in trouble. a law that needs to be repealed. that is the goal of every member of the republican conference the in the senate united on need to repeal obamacare. we want to replace it with sensible bipartisan reforms that will actually work and in a few minutes, each and every one of us will vote against funding obamacare. the american people want this long repealed. republicans want it repealed. i would not be surprised if a

number of our democratic colleagues secretly want it repealed as well. the problem here is we cannot get that done unless some of our friends on the other side are prepared to step up and work with us on the issue because there are 54 of them and 46 of us. it does not mean we will give up the fight if they don't. we won't. there are a lot of things we could do in the meantime. couldstance am a we follow the administration's lead in offering an obamacare delay. doesn't the middle-class deserve the same treatment? republicans think so. i think we should be able to convince enough democrats to join us in on that to help us provide fairness, fairness to the middle-class. yesterday, one democratic senator already signaled his willingness to delay some of the worst aspects of the law as well. delay for the

american people very reasonable and sensible. he posed a question -- don't you think that would be fair? the answer, that would be fair. that's the question for our democratic colleagues to respond to in many of them know how badly this law is hurting their constituents. isn't that just the fair thing to do? of course it is. i'm calling on democratic senators to put the middle class ahead of the president's pride in calling for them to help us past the delay for everyone. we party filed legislation that would do just that and a bipartisan majority of the house already supports it. let's work together to actually do it. once we get that done, let's keep working to replace this law with real reforms, not with ideas from the 1980's but with common sense step-by-step reforms that will actually lower the cost for the american people from thisthem terrible law. mr. president, i yield the floor.

>> under the previous order, the time until 12:30 p.m. is reserved for the two leaders with the final 10 minutes reserved for the majority leader. >> during my time in washington i have had the opportunity to work with many reasonable, thoughtful republicans including those serving in this body today . those reasonable republicans value this institution, the united states senate and they respect the government of which it is a part. but today, the republican party has been infected by a small but destructive faction that would .ather tear down the house these extremists are more interested in putting on a show than in legislating. that is why they prevented the senate to take action from

shutting down the government last night put on a show today. the same vocal minority is determined to waste the dwindling hours before a government shutdown. one day, basically. every minute that passes puts us closer to a shutdown that would shatter our economy yet they continue to obstruct and delay. but you see, mr. president, a bad day for government is a good day for the anarchists among us. those who believe in no government -- that is their , modern-day anarchists, the tea party, they believe in no government. they are backed by a very wealthy group of people who financed this effort to destroy our government. it's important to note that these tea party obstructionists

do not represent mainstream republicans either in this party or in mainstream republicans in our country. on thenately, their grip republican party is very firm. the last few years, these radicals in the house and senate have driven america from crisis to crisis. we lurch from crisis to crisis leaving our trail of economic destruction behind and now they've taken united states government hostage and demanded an impossible answer. if the democrats repeal the law of this land known as obamacare. the affordable care act has been the law of the land for four years. united states supreme court has declared a constitutional. help 25 to 35 million people currently living without health insurance and it will allow them to get access to life-saving care they need and

deserve. president, i don't know if people really know what it means to not have health insurance. to not have the ability to go to the doctor or hospital when you are sick or hurt. president.do, mr. some of us understand how tens of millions of people in america today cannot go to the hospital when they are sick or hurt. mr. president, i don't know how old i was, 10 or 11 but i was so, so sick. i can still remember how sick i was. time sick for quite a long in the little house that we lived in. doctors theree was not a doctor for 50 miles. i was really sick.

doctors.t go to it was obvious that i was really ill. and so one of my older brothers came to visit and they were with with my and that friend , they agreed to take me to the hospital. to the hospital and i still have the scar, mr. president. from my large intestine, my intestine -- i would have died had i not gone to the hospital. like not to bes able to go to the hospital when you are sick.

we had nothing much there but once i remembered a wagon came through and they said they would do x-rays of somebody's chest. my dad would not go. my mother had her chest x-rayed. mr. president, the results came back on a little card in the mail that she had tuberculosis. she was positive for tuberculosis. what did we do? what did she do? nothing. as a boy, carrying about my mother, i worried so much about that.

i cannot imagine even to this day how she must've felt. hindsight, mr. president, it looks like it was a false positive but that did not take away the concern that i had for a long time. i have some view of what it's like not to be able to go to the doctor or hospital when you are sick or hurt. president, my little brother was on a bicycle and he slid and he was hurt. he was crying. old or he was 10 years something like that. no one was home.

i went and found my mother. he never went to the doctor and he had a broken leg. he laid on that bed and he could not touch the bed it hurt so much. and it was 10 days later. these people who just nonchalantly don't focus on the positive. millions of americans have no health insurance. away from st walk this. he health care law that we have, mr. president, is important.

republica long and hardught and they lost. it was a fair fight. they made their case against obama directly as the american in november last. and they lost again. obama won by 5 million votes. in that the main issue campaign? health care. the american people the helmingly re-elected president. one reason they did is because care.lth colleague you are ours john mc cain spoke about this. law he opposes. what he said: people

spoke they spoke much to my dismay but they spoke and reelected the president of the united states. that doesn't mean we try to obamacare but elections have consequences. the majority of the american the president d of the united states and renewed stewardship of the country. i don't know like it, he said, the ll of us must reflect out come of elections which is he will of the people, kwoesed quo -- closed quote. this? d and a proven fighter in war public service. who held the party's nomination of an american ates, patriot and the history books will talk about that in generations to come. heard his cans

message for which the senate and should be grateful. o, mr. president, the this fall, closing of the fiscal who respect f us our founders and the rule of law and the elections reflect the the of the people will face test. economically an shutdown? us mr. president, one newspaper, not lots of newspapers, one newspaper, look at the headlines. government shutdown would entail costs.

shutdown could carry pay risk even for employees on the job. newspaper? agencies prepare to furlough partial n face of shutdown.al governor christie quote, a failure, ld be irresponsible. shut down could carry a pay risk for employees kept on the job. entailent shutdown would costs. shutdown delays some colorado flood relief. people are nder concerned? someone by the woman who works for the park ervice said to me, i've been through this before. i'm not going to get paid for my work. so the question is, can we

anarchists. ern day >> in just a few minutes the a first step.ke i'm confident, maybe my vote ican colleagues will with us, to allow the government to perform its basic duties and message to radical republicans that we'll not allow he law of the land to be used as a hostage, a law that's been in place for four years. that so many of my senate republican colleagues seem to understand the stakes of debate. the economic health of the still struggling nation and still struggling families. urge the house of representatives to follow our lead, to follow the lead of here, let the er house democrats vote. a majority.ake it

that serve, embers let them vote. overt a ean bill to the anarchi defy anarchis anarchists. president, i ask that the be given back t vote. t we begin the >> following the 54-44 vote to federal government, democratic leaders spoke to reporters and called on house vote on the bill. speakers include majority leader and reid and senators their remarks were about 20 minutes. >> the government will shut down

in three days, five hours and nine seconds. e've done it with bipartisan cooperation. on assed the only bill monday night. i said this on the floor and say it again, this is it. gone.has our rules are different. bill would pass the house, the bill we just passed would house overwhelmingly. courage to had the bring to t to the floor and let 435 members of the house of vote.entatives i think they should think very their next step. any bill that continues to play political games will force a shutdown. they need to accept what we just passed. be absolutely clear, we are

nothing that t relates to obamacare. there is a time and place for not that and this is time or place. e're willing to debate and we're willing to do that on any issue. a calm, o do it in rational atmosphere and we a non calm and non rational at tpos moss fear. if people want to work with us to improve obamacare we've done not in some slam bang way to do it. we're not going to be distorted. the country's not going to be distorted. we're not doing it with a gun to our heads. we're not going to allow the saeurbgs giy, give us what we want or the economy is going to close. that.about there is no way to govern and it

end.o over.for games is people, not surprisingly, expect their to act like ials reasonable adults, not adolescence who are desperate attention they can find. this one group, party anarchists, think about how they look to the around apeople sitting kitchen table worrying about a job. impact.tremendous i read on the senate floor today headlines from one newspaper oday, one newspaper, 12 different headlines about how bad things are if the government shuts down. editorials, they were headlines.

the middle class working men and this country are tones who were elected to serve, that's who we should be thinking they're the ones who will pay the price if these republicans the government shutdown. families all over america do their very, very best very day to make ends meet and provide for their families. when they turn on they see elected officials trying to core cheap political points to satisfy a very small number of people in america. today, they lier republicans around the senate but in the they have had the ability to doing ly stop us from

anything. do you think they feel? here's a president who less than election by 5 an votes, 5 million votes. obamacare has been the law for years, why don't they get a life and talk about something else? people deserve better, so i say my republican come leaglleague an end to this hostage taking because to go further you should accept our house go.t the whole i say that to the speaker. time is winding down. ten hours and 15

seconds. america deserves better than hat they have tried to do to our country. mccullsky. >> the senate has acted esponsibly and says to the keep of representatives to the government open until ovember 15th and continue enable us to and lay the groundwork for longer and funding for look like and cancel sequester by reducing public debt. reacted and acted responsibly.

we got over 75 votes. we got a assage majority. the s now the time is for house to act. understand that only pinks litics and does not get to the bottom line. get into the to real issue what is fiscal 14 going to look like and how can public debt by do it inion a year and a balanced way and be able to keep our economy going and our functioning and at work.people failure to pass the cr will lead shutdown. a shutdown is not an idle exercise.

will mean that only very of mal essential services this government will be won. t's not turning out the lights on the washington monument or national park. it means programs applying for social security offices, or e offices will be closed reduced hours and the backlog longer y get longer and and longer. get a s to buy a home or student loan will be delayed. apparatus of the government screeches to a halt. their selves cing in the line of fire. afghanistan in out er it's our fbi agents there now making sure there is not another terrorist attack or sexual predators

orther it's a d.e. a. agents food safety inspectors, they'll have a job. but while they're on a job take i.o.d.'s government.wn we owe them. act responsibilitily. so i call upon the house of accept this es solution that the senate has sent so that the canident can sign it and we get on to solving the real problems of the united states in effective, s affordable and means something the people that we represent. consider what we witness this

week. underway a have been 21 hour speech on the floor of the united states senate. the efforts of the most groups ofve tea party america putting pressure on the nited states senate and all sorts of efforts to persuade, con joel and threaten the the votes you just witnessed. what happened? 44 republican senators were there today. senators voted not to shut the government down but move forward. i hope speaker looks at this honesty. party roach, the tea approach was rejected by the today,cans in the senate 25-19 after all that effort, threats, after all he things being run against republican senators right now to shut the t

government down. 25 out of 44. for those who have given up on congress look at what happened the floor of the senate. what happened was a repudiation of this dooms day scenario one scene after another. we should take that message the rotunda to speaker bane inner's caucus. stood as one. it came to this issue, bipartisan support of the republican senators. majority of those on the original vote and then the on a budget vote on point of order. hat to me says there's still hope. for the american people reward those who stood up with us today open.ep this government

acknowledge them on both sides of the aisle and make sure those sides of the th rotunda understand they're of problems with america, problems with the ervices we provide and the economy. >> thank you and i want to thank colleagues here in the senate. avertjust taken action to shutdown. there were as senator mentioned hartening votes. we thought we would really have a -- we thought it would be on the motion to budget act. hey all realized a government

shutdown is bad for them and for party and the country. senator mcconnell stepped aside. he let the process play out and ainstream republicans help helped the cr to avoid the shutdown. never e said this will happen. we're now three days and nine hours away. lower if you haven't noticed and we're closer every second. this could well happen. week ago is le a very possible today. why? ecause the republican house caucus is tied in a knot. they have say many different things. but they're saying right now they won't take up bill to avoid

government shutdown and instead they pull out a new idea every day for some republican attach to it. they're tying themselves in all of knots but the solution in the face.em pass the senate bipartisan bill, simple.d we're saying to speaker baner, that old quote from field listen to the voices telling you to pass this bill, pain.our put this bill on the floor and it will pass. move on to the next issu issue. risk of one the person, senator cruiz, no matte what he puts in the bill, let

cruz delay things long enough so we're past monday night and into tuesday and the shuts down. the 're making the plea to rational and mainstream republicans don't shut the government down. if you shut it down, you're people. what our republican colleagues n the house want to do is hold hospital hostage the middle class. tens of thousands of construction workers who are on federal highway projects, all of these are the ent people and yet say unless they get their way, the whole way, every bit of their way, they'll hold hese people hostage and hurt them even though they had nothing do with the crisis.

so, put our bill on the floor, aside, let members vote their conscience and the government will stay open morning because we are confident there are more than pass the senate bill. the tactic of waiting until the to deals haso come been used a lot in recent years. and in the past it's worked out at the very last minute. hope that happens again, but if speaker attaches anything likelihood of that happening becomes smaller and smaller. >> the senate has passed a clean short term funding bill and the that can cause a completely unnecessary down is another tea party tantrum in the house. house republicans have got to games aying political

with our families and our the senate pass shutdown prevention bill and to join together at the table and work towards a long term balance and bipartisan budget deal that the american people expect and deserve. across the country are sick and tired of these constant challenges ll the that we have this one should be easy to solve. absolute bear minimum we should be able to do in congress our government open. to deliver to is our constituents and not actively sabotage our economic recovery. has done the responsible thing today to prevent a shutdown. now it is up to speaker baner if the tea party or do the right thing for the american people.

active here any negotiations -- is there any between you and the house? >> no. the four of us -- the five of it's clear that the only way to solve this is just accept what we have done, just accept it. they are interested in shutting the government and we some of these people over there who want to government down, they've said so pubically. radio something on the where one person said debt eiling doesn't matter. going to speculate on

what they're going to do. let them send us whatever and re going to send us we'll sent it right back to them stripped of all the craziness have. we've made it clear. the only way to keep the overnment open is to do the right thing. you know, american people are out there, there are 435 members of congress. why can't they vote? that's what they were elected to do. why won't the speaker let them vote. overwhelmingly. you all know about using leverage when you have it. devil's lay the advocate why wouldn't the house of republicans put something lse, one of their other priorities on this spending bill and send it back to you and try shutdown?you for the >> because it's obvious that that would shutdown the government. why wouldn't it be your fault then? using a weird cauc

--cus > a handful voted for your amendment to this and -- >> what was that? >> handful? they all did. saying a handful. politically be unpopular for them next year. what do you say to them because of defending used obamacare? hat do you say to those members? debate.d that in obama spent tens of millions of dollars and they had debate the american nd people said, romney you're wrong. we don't accept your ridiculous american people now. accept them this is a law. declared old

constitutional. let them find something else to about. d 2012 every democratic incumbent was attacked for obamacare. you know how many lost? none. >> you said you won't accept that ng on obamacare does suite?the entire >> yes. thanks everybody. senators ted cruise, marco rubio and mark lee also temporary spending bill to avoid a government shutdown. they called on the house to continue their push to defund the president's health care law. this is about 15 minutes. >> we now move on to the next stage of this battle.

senate democrats stood united in refusing to listen to the american people. obamacare is the biggest job killer in this country. millions of americans are hurting. they are seeing their health care threatened, and yet sadly today senate democrats stood together and refused to listen to the american people. now we move to the house. the house last week showed remarkable courage, standing up and fighting to defund obamacare. the house listened to the american people, and i am hopeful, confident that the house will continue to stand its ground, continue to listen to the american people, and step up to respond and to stop this train wreck, this nightmare that is obamacare. when that happens, the bill will

come back here, and it will be an opportunity for senate republicans to come together, for senate republicans to come home. i very much hope when the house bill comes back up all 46 republicans stand together, stand united, and i hope that some of the democrats who today decided not to listen to their constituents hear the voices of the millions of americans who are hurting and do the right thing and stand up and stop this train wreck, the nightmare of a law. "train wreck" and "nightmare" are not my terms, they are the term by the lead democratic offer of obamacare and one of the leading union leaders in the country. it is the truth that millions of americans are suffering because the law is not working. >> thank you. thank you for being here today and thank you for the work you have put into this effort. it sounds like the democrats in

washington are obsessed to shutting down the government. i do not know of anyone who wants to shut down the government. the only thing we want to shut down is obamacare is because of the harm it is doing to the middle class, to hard-working people who are working hard just to get ahead. our lives we have been told this is a country where if you work hard and you sacrificed you can achieve a better life. those of us in elected office should be against anything that is an impediment to that dream. obamacare stands in the wake of that. that is why we are so passionate. today we had the opportunity to do that. democrats come from states where people who do not support obamacare, decided it was more important to the hard-working men and women of our country. this only gets worse from here for the middle class and for people trying to get ahead. i hope we will have an

opportunity to do it again. we will take advantage of every opportunity we have to fight on behalf of the men and women of this country who want a chance to achieve a better life for themselves for them and their families. thank you. >> we all know government will be funded. the question is whether it is funded with or without obamacare. the house republicans last week, listening to the voice of the american people, opted for the latter, to keep government funded while protecting people from the harmful effects of obamacare. today the senate took the step of bringing up that legislation, not as is, never presenting the senate with the opportunity to vote on the measure as it exists.

they chose not to have an open amendment process. they chose to use a device that allows the majority leader to bring up one amendment, an amendment that gutted the house- passed continuing resolution, and prohibit everyone else from introducing amendments. this is unfortunate. the american people continue to be alarmed why this law, a law that has never enjoyed the majority of -- a law that has never had the support of the majority of the american people and a law that becomes less popular as time goes on and with good reason. i ask the same question -- how many more americans will have to lose their jobs, have to be told that their hours are being cut or their wages are being diminished or they are losing their health care plans? 20,000 home depot employees were informed last week as a result of this job.

our job is to protect the american people any way we can from the harmful effects of this law and we continue to explore every opportunity to do that. >> there seems to be some disarray within the republican party. there was an open split on the senate floor yesterday. is the disunity among republicans -- does that argue against your fight? >> it is unfortunate senate republicans were not united this time around, but i am encouraged that house republicans have been united, that last week when they voted they stood together to defund obamacare. i hope and believe that when the house takes the this up again, house republicans will continue to stand together on the side of the american people. and i am

also hopeful when the house sends the bill back it will be an opportunity for every senate republican tuesday for the principles we all share, to stand with the american people. >> is there an orthodoxy you expect out of republicans leading to debate on the floor, as with senator corker yesterday? >> every republican has been outspoken in eloquence against obamacare. when the house stands up and does the right thing, i think it will present the opportunity for every senate republican to stand arm in arm with the house republicans. and then it will present an opportunity for senate democrats. senate democrats did not listen to the american people, to all the young people coming out of school who are not able to find a job. they did not listen to all the

single moms waiting tables who were finding themselves working 29 hours a week. they did not listen to all the union workers who are seeing their health insurance coverage trend to be taken away. as james hoffa said, millions of americans are seeing their health care destroyed, and "destroyed" was the language he used, and today senate democrats do not listen to those millions of americans, but this is a process that will go back and forth between the house and the senate. the house was always in the position where it was going to lead, and from my perspective, we look forward to helping and supporting the house standing up and doing the right thing and fighting for the american people. >> will there be another real filibuster -- [indiscernible] >> again, the government will be funded. the question is whether we fund it with obamacare or without.

the house passed a continuing resolution. they found a way to keep the government funded while protecting the people from the harmful effects of obamacare. the senate has chosen to strip out that language from this measure which is now in the process of being passed by the senate. that was unfortunate. this is not about calling for a shutdown. we are calling to fund the government but defund obamacare. >> what do you want to do the house to do in the next steps? >> i want the house to stand with the american people against obamacare, in favor of keeping government funded while defunding obamacare. >> how will that happen? >> a variation of this. what form that takes will be up to the members of the house, and to their leadership, i am confident they will do the right thing. >> there are some members of the

house who have said what they could pass might be something that could pass for both parties here, maybe a delay in obamacare for a shorter time or even a repeal of the medical device act. would you guys hold that up with a filibuster or would you let them take a vote on that? >> it does not make sense to speculate on possible bills the house might pass. we should see what the house passes. in my view what is critical is that the house passes a measure that protects the american people from the harms that obamacare is causing them -- the jobs that are being lost, from being forced into part-time work, from skyrocketing premiums, from losing your health insurance. that is what i am confident the house will do. >> [indiscernible]

>> we have had numerous conversations with members of the house, but at the end of the day, all 435 members are elected by the people in the districts, and each member of the house has responsibility to listen to their constituents. i'm confident if the house the since the people as it did last week it will continue to step forward and respond to the suffering that is coming from obamacare. it was sad to see senate democrats together turn a blind ear to all the people suffering under obamacare during the extended filibuster that we debated in, we read letters from people who are losing their health care. a few weeks ago ups sent a letter to employees saying they

were going to lose their health care. people are hurting, and if the house continues to listen, they will act decisively to prevent the harms that are flowing. >> [indiscernible] >> i have said for a long time i do not intend to vote for any continuing resolution that funds obamacare. i think obamacare is a train wreck, a disaster, a nightmare, to use the words of mr. hoffa. it is time we see more leaders in washington listening to the american people and helping stop this nightmare. >> [indiscernible] putting dents in obamacare-- >> i am not going to speculate on any possible continuing

resolution that will come. on the vitter amendment, one of the things that frustrates the people so much is the hypocrisy in washington. obama has granted exemptions for big business, for members of congress, but hard-working american families are told there will be no exemption for you. if you do not happen to have high-paid lobbyists, if you do not walk the corridors of power, then the senate is apparently not listening to you and not interested in treating you as well as members of congress and big buisness. that is fundamentally wrong. the idea that washington should operate under principles that are good for them but not for me is why people are so frustrated with washington. the ruling class is treated differently from hard-working american families. the people hurting the most are young people, single moms, hispanics, african-americans,

people who are being forced into part-time work, facing skyrocketing premiums, and who are losing their health insurance. i hope both houses of congress step forward, listen to the people, and stop obamacare, the biggest job killer in this country. thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> house members are talking about gaveling back in tomorrow. new jersey congressman frank pallone tweets, in case you missed it, called on the gop to stop holding the affordable care act hostage and threatening to shepherd -- shut down the government. someone else we did that obama care makes health insurance unaffordable. onthe fiscal year ends monday, september 30.

the senate today passed a bill that would fund the government through november 15. the house gavels in tomorrow at 10:00 eastern for speeches. live coverage here on c-span. the house is scheduled to week through the weekend, gaveling back in at 10:00 a.m. and then working through noon eastern to work on funding the government. next, nancy pelosi talks. she is followed by the democratic caucus calling on americans to vote on the clean funding act. department'sfense plans for possible government shutdown. house democratic leader nancy pelosi talks about

avoiding the government shutdown and the republicanat re law. this is half an hour. >> good morning. in just four days, the american people will see the affordable care act come into effect. on october 1, the health insurance marketplaces will open for enrollment, offering american families more competition, more choices, and most importantly, affordable quality health care. a new study this week shows that 95% of uninsured americans will see insurance premiums that cost much less than expected. the average american consumer will be able to choose from 53 different plans offered by insurance companies who they know and hopefully can trust. premiums are even lower for

workers and families who qualify for the tax credit. an openly competitive marketplace is just one way millions of americans are seeing lower costs and higher coverage thanks to the affordable care act. nearly 13 million americans receive $1.1 billion in rebates from insurance companies last summer. that is because in our bill we had it show that the insurance companies must spend their money insuring people and not on advertising and the rest. 6.3 million seniors have already saved $6.1 billion on prescription drug medication. that is because of closing the doughnut hole. 105 million americans have received lifesaving preventative health care services for free. as you all know, being adults

yourself, for those who need to be on their parents' policy, they can do that until age 26. that is in effect. children are not subjected to discrimination already because of pre-existing medical conditions. so much is already in effect, but so much more will happen january 1, and people can begin enrolling on october 1. it is transformational. it is about a healthier life, liberty to pursue your happiness, whether you want to be a photographer, a writer, start your business and be self- employed, change jobs, you're not job-locked. you can follow your passion, not policy. it is entrepreneurial, as the president said yesterday in his great speech on the subject. it is entrepreneurial and frees people up to start their own

businesses and not stay where they are because of health insurance. so i think it is very exciting. i mean, can you imagine being there when social security first came into effect or medicare when it became the law of the land? people began to enjoy the benefit of the legislation. that ideas, compromise is made, translated into legislation that become public policy that will improve the lives of american people. it is very exciting. on the other hand, in a matter of days, four days until the enrollment of the affordable care act, and just three days that we will see the question as to whether our government will be shut down. we must do everything we can to avoid that. but over and over again we find ourselves with the same question why are we at the brink again? that is the question people ask

us as i travel throughout the country. just to put it in context chronologically -- you know i love temporal markers. where we are today and how we got here. on march 1, you will recall the president called the four leaders to the oval office to talk about how we would proceed with the legislative agenda that included the project. the republican leadership, mr. boehner -- speaker boehner and leader mcconnell said that they wanted to proceed under the regular order. that was their mantra. for those outside of the beltway, regular order means you pass a bill in the house, you pass a bill in the senate, and then you send it to conference to negotiate, to reconcile your differences. of course, we have always done regular order, so we welcomed that. we welcomed back the order of conference committees.

i think that transparency goes to the process of the american people. so the regular order is was going to be. house passed the bill. senate passed the bill. and that was the end of the call to regular order. after the house passed its bill, you remember -- you remember, right? the republicans were saying no budget, no pay, as far as the senate was concerned. when are they going to pass the bill? well, only a matter of weeks. nonetheless, both houses passed the legislation. then we said, ok, regular order. we now go to negotiate at a conference table. for around six months, nearly six months, republicans have refused to negotiate. they have refused to negotiate. and they say it is the president. the president was following the path of the regular order that they suggested. so by doing that, by turning their backs on what they said they wanted, and we certainly

do, too, regular order, the republicans sowed the seeds of this dangerous partisan path we find ourselves in today. it is impossible for democrats to negotiate with house republicans because they cannot even negotiate with themselves. instead of legislating responsibly, they want to live dangerously, and that is not good for the american people. and now, with only three days left, republicans are threatening a shutdown that will hurt our economy, threaten jobs and job creation and believe our families with less security, and leave our country with less security and our economy with less stability. this is the most irresponsible way to negotiate a budget. it is not negotiating. especially when democrats have been ready and willing to work with republicans to pass a responsible bipartisan bill. you know that our ranking member on budget committee, chris van hollen, has proposed presenting

a budget that would end the devastating across-the-board sequester cuts. reduce the deficit in a responsible way, keep the government open and working for the american people. we have asked over and over and over again for a vote on that budget. and republicans do not bring it to the floor because it makes so much sense. if the american people saw the alternative, i think the clarity and distinction would be made. and what mr. van hollen is suggesting is in keeping with what the chairman of the republican appropriations committee, chairman rogers -- he said the house, senate, and white house must come together as soon as possible on a comprehensive compromise that repeals sequestration, takes the nation off this lurching path from fiscal crisis to fiscal

crisis, reduces our deficits and debt, and provides a realistic path line, discretionary spending level to fund the government in a responsible and attainable way. chairman rogers, chairman of the republican appropriations committee. the committee has always been a bipartisan committee, but even their chairman is proposing a path that we fully subscribed to. the number is too low for government to function in a responsible way for the american people. and it is not anything that the republican majority in the house seemed inclined to follow. if that were not enough, that were not enough, the house republicans are astonishing disregard for the stability of our economy goes well beyond their threats to shut down other basic services for the american people.

they are holding the entire economy hostage, and their tea party ran some demands significant costs for economic security. if they succeed, you can expect higher interest rates for your mortgage, car payment, credit cards, and student loans. higher interest rates on your business loans that you used to pay employees and expand your businesses. the loans that grow a business. and significant blows to your 401(k), we went through this, when the stock market reacts. house democrats agree with the president. this is nonnegotiable. you can have any conversation you want, but threats and willingness to default, the discussion of a lowered our credit rating two years ago. the ideology of the republicans is a luxury the american people cannot afford, especially when it comes to putting in doubt the

full faith and credit of the united states of america. that is why house democrats and the leadership of deputy whip peter welsh are calling for a clean increase in our debt limit. 186 democrats have signed on to prevent another gop-manufactured crisis. regular order -- oh, nevermind. uncertainty within their own caucus, we do not know what they will vote for from one minute to the next. i do not think they know. and the threat to the full faith and credit of the united states of america. it is beneath the dignity of the first branch of government, the legislative branch. we have a responsibility to come here to represent our districts, to advocate our points of view, and to come to terms with what compromise will work for the american people. any questions? yes, ma'am? >> do you have any comments to

speaker boehner? >> i will see the speaker and speak with him about this. i have a great deal of respect for him and the office he holds. he is my friend. i have not received any -- i am trying to think, i do not know, i speak to him if i see him or we speak by phone. in other words, we have had a number of conversations. i just say do not expect this to be helpful when it comes to the debt ceiling, because we do not think that is negotiable. but let's see what we can do, working together for the cr. the path that they are on is one that gets farther and farther away from any compromise -- you know what, let's see what they send. in all fairness, and, again, i respect the speaker and his role and the confidentiality of our conversation, only to say we

stand ready to help on one but not to take down the full faith and credit of the united states of america. i do not know that they even know what they are doing, so it is impossible to say how we might react to something that they do not even know yet what they are going to suggest. >> democrats have done a very good job of holding fast and being disciplined on such things as the farm bill and other things, not helping them out, i guess. is this a different scenario? >> it is about helping the american people. >> is this a different moment in the cr fight? you going to help them out? our members allowed to come back, and will you allow democratic members to sort of bail them out of this? >> members will vote the way members will vote. nobody can say what will happen until we see what they are going to propose. we had hoped that the republicans in the senate, that the tail would not be wagging

the dog to the point that they cannot bring up the bill last night. but the tail did wag the dog. the bill will not come to the floor for another couple hours. after that we will see how republicans will react to that. people make judgments. nobody can tell you how the vote will go unless they know what it is they are voting on. but i do think -- i do not think there will be any support. 186 members signed the letter. many who do not sign letters are there on the debt limit. that is nonnegotiable. >> is this more likely now than a few days ago, a shutdown? >> i hope not. i am always optimistic. everyday is a new day. this leadership on the republican side has brought bills to the floor but does not have the majority there.

fewer than 40 of them voted for sandy aid, for example. fewer than 40. on one amendment, a powerful amendment that really mattered. on any sandy aid, fewer than 50. that is like 20% of the caucus that voted for sandy aid, not anywhere near 51%. a majority of them in a strong way voted against the violence against women act. yet, they had to bring it to the floor. 600 days after the authority expired and 90 days after sandy. very late and overdue. nonetheless, they all largely voted against both of those measures. you know, the fiscal cliff vote, another budget bill and what happened there.

in any case, it appears that there is a solution. it is bipartisan, and everybody has made their point. again, beyond that, they are a luxury the country cannot afford. >> how important is it for house democrats to have even just a short term crv above sequestration levels? and if it comes to it, do you think a shutdown would make a debt ceiling fight less likely? >> i just cannot buy into a government shutdown. again, i would not be able to sustain the energy level, the intellectual challenges all the time if i thought we were on the path that it looks like we are on, but how do we get off it? let's hope that sanity will reign. everyone has made their point, and then we can make progress for the american people.

we would love to split the difference on what we all agreed to in the budget control act in a bipartisan way, the 1.57 figure versus the 988. mr. hoyer would like to see that happen, as would i, and he would like to see that eliminate our sequestration altogether. we'd like to go to a place like that, but i do not know if the republicans are likely to compromise. >> do you think it is important, even for one month or two months, to hold out on that? there is some debate about that, even in the short term. >> we will see what the senate since back to us. we're talking about a matter of hours. what we would love to see is the senate send a bill back. they have made their point, and

they feel confident about fighting the fight and reaching their goal of putting your medical decisions in the hands of insurance companies, back into the hands of insurance companies, so that is what this is all about. now let's go forward. i mean, something happens, you make your attempt, it does not work. how long do you just bang your head against the wall at the expense of our country? so let's just see what they send. as i said to yesterday and the day before, it is really hard to talk about and speculate on where members will be and how we will work together and build that consensus when we do not know what the republicans will send us. >> what is the functional effect in terms of getting an eventual agreement if what transpires over this weekend is a much shorter-term cr that brings the process closer to the debt limit

and those things become a little more congealed, i will say, closer together? what is the functional effect of that? >> well, in fact, they were closer together. they were on the same path. they were in tandem, and then republicans realized that they could not get the debt ceiling raised no matter how much baggage they attached to that engine. the full faith and credit of the united states of america is not something that should be tied to closing down government. the closer it gets, the more unreasonable it gets, the more

irresponsible it gets. i would hope that the scenario described is not one that we come to, because it is two different subjects. yes, they are all about budget, but one is the full faith and credit of the united states of america and the other is a priority debate on spending and saving and growth. we all should be about growth. everything the republicans are talking about, whether it is not lifting the debt ceiling or making the cuts they want to make without making the investments that we should be making, it is about slowing growth and we are losing a million jobs as it is with that sequester number. we will lose a million jobs. some say 1.6 million. i will be my usual conservative self and say one million on that subject, most defensible subject. this is silly. maybe, maybe they did not get some orientation on how serious the work is that we do here.

clearly, they are a manifestation of what president washington cautioned against when he left office, which were political parties at war with their own government. and that is what we have, wagging the dog -- the tail wagging the dog of the republican party now. >> there have been in some of these legislative cul-de-sacs. the other point made a moment ago, are you surprised that we are this late in the game and there is not back-and-forth that the white house? meetings at the white house, back channel talks between the chiefs of staff and the chief of staff on boehner's side. none of that is happening. that seems very strange. >> it is very strange in light of the fact that on march 1 in

the oval office, the republican leaders said they wanted regular order. regular order is house passes a bill, senate passes a bill, and we go to the table. seeing what happened there, we were very pleased. because regular order is what we come here to do. it is a term that is fraught with meaning. so you abandon it and it becomes confusing to people. >> [inaudible] >> because it will not go to conference. they will not go to conference. they will not negotiate. and typical of them, they say we will not go to conference to negotiate to reconcile the difference between the house and senate bills, which are quite different. then they say the president will not negotiate. the president is always negotiating. bravo for him for declaring that the full faith of the united states is not negotiable. but everything else is a normal

discussion that you have. i think you see what is happening here. they cannot even come forward - what they say in the morning does not exist in the evening. they cannot even negotiate with themselves much less anyone outside because there's not a talking point. really, let's clear the air with this. we have a responsibility to pay our bills. a large part of the deficit that is being subjected to the debt limit increase was amassed during the bush years. find me, please, one statement that any of these people made about the deficit and its rapid growth under the bush administration and the change from when president clinton was president, four or five of his last budgets were in balance or in surplus.

president bush comes in with his failed economic policies, grows the deficit, two unpaid for wars, a prescription drug bill that gives away the store to the pharmaceutical industry, and tax breaks to the wealthiest people in our country that do not create jobs. we support middle-income tax cuts, we all do. at the high end, it does nothing. did you hear these endangered species budget hawks saying boo- hoo or anything else that they said at that time? they simply did not. then president obama comes in and the deficit is coming down at a very rapid rate, it will be in half by the end of this year of what it was when he became president. he said it would be cut in half in four years.

it happens in five largely because they has the job creation initiatives. nonetheless, that is the path we are on. the debt is coming down because the slowing down of the rapid increase of medical costs to our economy. people are working on this. people care about the debt. when president bush became president, in just a few years , he had the biggest fiscal swing in the history of our country. a path of $5.6 trillion of surplus to $5.6 trillion deficit. $11 trillion cost change. we all care about the deficit, and how we reduce it is by growth. more revenue coming in, more people are working and better jobs, more opportunity. how we reduce it is to take a look at our tax code and see where we can have savings. why should we giving $38 billion

in tax breaks to big oil as an incentive to drill and make $1 trillion in profit, and then say we want to cut education. that is part of their policy. then we have to make -- put everything to the scrutiny of -- does this work? does the money, investments they are making -- let's reevaluate our priorities, their effectiveness, and cut cost where we can. that is what you go to the budget table to do. that is where they refuse to go. why do they refuse to go? because they are afraid of the contrast that the transparency of a conference committee will reveal. the differentiation between our statement of values about how to grow our economy, reduce our deficit, and make our future

better, investing in the future versus the republican budget with a litany of bad things that it does. confusion is their friend. they like the confusion rather than the clarity of going to conference. they took that step after saying that is the path they wanted to go down. as soon as those steps were taken, they made an about-face, one that is harmful to growth and can have serious consequences for our economy. i hope it does not happen. we will see. to end on a happier note -- how can i resist another chance to talk about oracle team usa for their victory in san

francisco? it made history, the catamaran. 19 races over 15 days, the longest number of days on record, the most race days. the first winner-take-all final race that it came down to the last race in 30 years. after trailing 1-8, our team usa surged ahead to win an unprecedented eight straight races to hold the america's cup high above their head. it is a beautiful sight. we were there cheering them, but not on days when it made a difference. a huge crowd amassed there as the races brought us to victory. that was what was exciting about it. i have to thank larry ellison

for his vision to democratize the race. most americans -- it was always at sea, you went on your yacht or sailboat to see it. anyone who could see san francisco bay could see the race. it went from whitecaps to blue collar. it was pretty exciting. our former mayor gathered people who worked locally to make it a success. we are proud of all of them. something pretty exciting going from 8-1 to 9-8, don't you think? a pretty big comeback in sports history. >> you are dying not to come back miraculously?

>> we have in every other year program. [laughter] maybe three of the five. >> niners won last night. >> thank god. quite a time getting it here. just go to abc, but not here, or cbs, but it was not on here. in any event, more on sports later. thank you all very much. >> thank you. >> house minority whip lawyer of maryland called on his colleagues to pass a bill. here is a look. >> ladies and gentlemen of this house. that have435 of us

been asked by our fellow citizens to come to washington dc to have the extraordinary privilege of sitting on this making, they hope, responsible decisions for their country. house is not the full at this point in time. i have a reputation for working across the aisle. i cherish that reputation because i believe that all of us have been given an honor and each of that -- each of us ought to respect that. >> the house will come to order. >> ladies and gentlemen's of this house, we are days away from shutting down the government. we are a few more days from defaulting on the credit of the united states of america.

i believe there are a small number of this house who are holding us captive. they are rendering this house apparently unable to reach costs --r -- reach out from eyes reach compromise. opinion, mr.y speaker, it working majority in this house. i choose to believe that, i do believe it, and i pray it is the case. i ask my colleagues to come together on the behalf of the american people and our great country to act responsibly. i yield back the balance of my time. >> house democrats hobby or becerra, joe crowley, and chris thehollen also called on

house republicans to vote on the clean bill. they spoke for about half an hour. >> i look forward to seeing you this weekend. no one is laughing, ok. let's start. hobby or becerra, chairman of the caucus. xavier bacerra, chairman of caucus. we held a pretty extensive caucus this friday afternoon, even though republicans have completed voting for the week. we do not have a budget in place for our government. we are ready to work. we wish we weren't watching this

brinksmanship and fiscal cliff resurface again. it was a bad movie when we saw the first time. it doesn't look any better as a re-run. democrats believe we should be focusing on elected representatives of the people on strengthening the middle class. helping our economy grow more jobs. if we don't have a strong middle class, we may as well turn off the lights. we're not going to create those jobs. we're not going to continue to be a leader in the world if we don't focus like a laser beam on creating middle-class jobs and helping grow the middle class so that they can buy that home, they can send their kids to college. for the life of me, i don't think any of us understand how shutting down our government and stopping services to the middle class to that soldier's family, to that veteran who has come home, to that senior who relies on that meals on wheels lunch,

how shutting the doors of government will help in any way strengthen the middle class. this is where we see ourselves. we would urge our republican colleagues to put country before party, to stop with this discussion that what governs in the house of representatives are party rules, not the rules of the house of representatives, not the rules provided to us by our statutes or constitution, but a political role, a so- called hastert rule that is a republican party rule that says, don't you dare let anything go on the floor of the house unless it has the support of a majority of republicans. not that he -- not the majority of americans that were elected to serve the country, but eight majority of republicans. if you're going to put party before country, we will end up

seeing these folks shut down government. we urge our colleagues in the house republican party to please think of putting country before party. the american people have witnessed enough. no small business in america would run the way the house of representatives is being run today. if no small business on main street would run this way and expect to survive, certainly largest economy in the world should not be run this way. we think it's time to get to work, to strengthen the middle class. we have a lot pending. we still have to deal with making sure that we don't let our country for the first time in its history default on its past obligations, to make it clear that we believe in the full faith and credit of the united states of america. we still have to finish fixing a broken immigration system arid

the house is showing the obstruction and dysfunction that makes it clear that we are not helping the middle class. there are any number of things that we can do. the last thing we need to do is watch as a very dedicated group of tea party members tell america they are ready to shut down government. we are ready to work and we hope our republican colleagues are willing to join us. let me yield to the vice chairman of the democratic caucus, the gentleman from new york, mr. joe crowley. >> thank you. here we are again on the fiscal cliff. the american people once again put on edge artificially. there's enough calamity, both man-made and naturally occurring out there in the world today.

we have seen it with the flooding in mexico, the floods in colorado. we have unrest in the middle east and syria. we have had 13 individuals last week killed less than a mile from here. the response of the republican congress is not to find a solution and let americans know everything is ok with their government, that government will go on. instead, it's to create an artificial crisis. the american people do want more crises and they certainly don't want artificial crises. they want the republican congress to get its act together. that is now the full responsibility of the speaker, to get his caucus together and come up with solutions. the american people want solutions to the problems they are facing. no more man-made crises. we are here, prepared to work throughout the weekend to ensure that government does not shut down.

our question is, are our republican colleagues committed to ensuring the government does not shut down? that is a question for the speaker and his conference. we democrats stand ready to ensure the government will continue to operate. with that, i will give you our lead man on the budget, the gentleman from the great state of maryland, chris van hollen. >> thank you, joe and javier. it's great to have all of you here today. we don't know how much longer we will be here as the republicans try to figure out what they will do next. one thing we do know is that all signs point to the fact that they are hell-bent on trying to shut down the government in order to implement the tea party extreme agenda. we don't yet know what the speaker intends to do, other than what appears to be the

plan, to put another amendment on the continuing resolution unrelated to keeping the government operating and focused on trying to dismantle or derail the affordable care act. if that's what they do, that will be a sure sign that they are focused on shutting down the government rather than doing the business of government and trying to do what we can to support the middle class. it's also troubling to hear they're going to double down on the strategy in the coming weeks with respect to the so-called debt ceiling, which simply means the government should be paying its bills on time. their position once again is there going to prevent the u.s. government from paying its bills on time, jeopardize the full faith and credit of the u.s. government if they cannot enact their extreme agenda. we have seen reports they are

essentially taking every tea party idea and throwing that into a package and telling the country that if we don't enact that extreme agenda, they're not going to allow the country to pay its bills on time. as everybody in the country realizes, if the government doesn't pay its bills on time, the middle class gets hurt first, as the chairman as indicated. it is irresponsible and reckless. we stand ready to work with them to try to resolve this. that is the last point i want to make. we have been trying to bring our republican colleagues to the negotiating table on the budget for months and months. the law says that we should have committed -- completed a conference committee on april 15. the house passed a budget, the senate passed a budget, but the

speaker of the house refused to appoint negotiators. in the senate, the public and senators blocked henry reed -- harry reid for appointing them. it is insane, but they did. what they clearly intended for all along is to create these artificial crises. if you threaten to shut down the government or threatened that we will no longer pay our bills on time, under those pressing circumstances, they will get their extreme agenda put into place. it does not work that way. it is not going to happen. >> chris, thank you much . boehner were to break with that and to end up adding something to the cr that was unrelated to obamacare,

send that back to senate? >> we are interested in keeping our government operatuing. we all pay our taxes. if we want to collect our social security check, we expect the doors to be opened. if we pay for the government to issue a passport so we can go dyingan ailing or parent, we want to be able to do that. we should focus our efforts on this budget discussion on issues that relate to the budget for our colleagues on the republican side insist on including things that have nothing to do with with with all to do their republican extreme social agenda. we hope for things that simply have nothing to do with the budget so the republican people

can extort the american people? i don't think so. i think the president has made it very clear. we want eight clean budget vote -- a clean budget vote o. all the far right social agendas are off the table. members of congress will continue to come to work. but if the republicans shut down the government, there are a whole lot of americans that will not get to go to work and other americans that they will not be serviceseceive the they pay for. a vote on budget and only on budget. you want to debate your social agenda? you can vote that up or at a later time. do not hold hostage the american economy and the american people so you can get your social agenda. it is too important to the middle class and two important during this time of economic

recovery to not weaken the pillars of recovery that will allow the middle class to get back on its feet. i don't think democrats are going to engage in the shenanigans. [speaking spanish] [speaking spanish]

what we have said all along,

we're about amending and fixing. i don't think we should use this process as a legislative fix for the issues they're concerned about. we have other ways of doing that, bringing the bill up, debating on the floor. and building scone us is among democrats and republicans. that's not happening right now. there's no consensus building going on. they get their way or they shut down government. that's not how it's supposed to work. it's up to them to -- in the house of representatives, we like to be in the majority. hope to be back there some day. the ball is in their court, the deadline is coming. three days away. the ball is in their court to move something here to keep the government open that is not continuing to promote the agenda other than repealing the global care act. it's not going to happen. 43 times, 44 times, 45 times, it

will not be repealed and not this way, and quite frankly it will never have repealed. if they have the ability to have both houses, the bill will not be repealed. the american people won't stand for it. >> you said you would not support a sequester. >> i'll support a clean budget bill. i will not support my colleagues on the republican side trying to inject their social agenda into a budget bill when we're on the brink of shutting the doors to our government. when services are essential. we're waiting to see our colleagues to provide a clean vote on a clean budget bill so we can keep the doors of government open and we have yet to see that -- our republican colleagues have made it clear it

is their intention to put in their social agenda regardless of what the american people are saying. so what we're seeing is a fight among republicans. they can't decide among themselves what they want to do. while they're out there brawling, the american people are watching. in pretty soon we'll be impacted in major ways if they let the government close its doors unnecessarily. so we wish it would stop their fighting, internal fighting and decide what they want to do. hopefully what they decide to do is give the american people a chance to let the representatives vote up or down on a clean bill to fund the government so we can provide the services that americans pay for with their taxpayer dollars. >> what happens if the senate gets it to november -- have to do it all over again. do you have any idea that a budget conference can have in

the interim or another bill in the interim or any sign at the end of what i believe is the next 45 days it would be different than what is happening right now. >> i'm glad you asked that. we can only hope. unfortunately hope hasn't gotten us there in the last three our four months. as we said earlier, we've been trying to go to an negotiation on the budget for months now. the law requires it. we'd be completed -- we'd complete the conference by april 15. but we're well over that. you can't have a conference if our republican colleagues refuse to appoint their negotiators. i would hope, but it's only a hope, that between now and november 15, our republican colleagues will be willing to come to the table and truly negotiate. i think i should point out that we have tried eight times now in the house of representatives to simply get a vote on our plan

that would replace the sequester. the sequester is eating away at important investments around the country. it's eating away at important investments in the infrastructure and transportation, it's eating away at scientific research. and the congressional budget office just told us yesterday in the hearing before the committee that if we don't replace the sequest sequester, it would be 1.2 million fewer jobs in this country this time next year. that is another self-inflicted wound, which is why we're going be working very hard between now and november 15 to eliminate that drag on the economy, which would effectively wipe out -- wipe out the last three months of job growth. that's outrageous. that's a self-inflicted wound

that we can't afford in this country. so i can only hope that in the next couple of months our republican colleagues will do what they've refused to do for the previous four months which is to try negotiate on these issues. let me just close -- again, this is a calculated strategy on the part of the republicans. they didn't negotiate for four months in the normal course because they thought that by threatening to shut down the government and threatening they wouldn't pay our bills, they would force the country and the president to accept their extreme id logical agenda. they knew they couldn't get it at the negotiating table at the normal course, that requires compromise. so they're trying to force an uncompromising agenda by threatening to shut down the government. we hope that sanity will finally come to the house republican party in the coming months. >> final question? >> how much frustration is there in the caucus for having a vote

if it comes to that even a short term measure that would provide sequester levels that many people oppose? >> aisle start. we're three days away from watching republicans shut down the government. and as of this moment, we don't know what the house republicans will put on the floor of the house for a vote. that's -- that's the lunacy of where we've gone where the greatest democracy in the world is being governed here in congress by folks who haven't decided what they want to do to fund the government with an annual budget bill with less than three days to go before the government shuts down. so what do democrats want do? democrats want to stop the game playing. democrats would like to have a

clean bill. democrats are ready to make tough choices and hard decisions on how we continue to reduce the size of the deficit and how we get americans back to work and how we strengthen the middle class. we're ready to do all of these things. it's tough right now friday afternoon three short days before the government is going to shut down, our republican colleagues haven't told us what we're going to do in terms of a government to make sure we don't shut the doors of government. it's crazy. 85% of american people, 75% of the republicans in this country say it's not appropriate to play with the american economy and our government services in this budget fight. and so, i think there are folks here in congress not listening to their own constituents if 80% of the american people are saying stop this game playing. democrats have said from the very beginning, got the clean bill, you've got votes.

even if there's tough choices we have to make. not once in this process and our ranking member mr. van hollen can attest to that. not once have the republicans reached out the the house of representatives, 231 voting democrats, not once have we had our republican colleagues reach out to democrats and say let's put together a budget bill so we can all vote on it. it's been a totally republican process and it should surprise no one that democrats are prepared to go against any republican bill which tries to inject ex-train yous matters that have to do with a social agenda in what should be purely a budget bill three days before the republicans shut down the government. >> i would just add what frustrates our caucaus is the fact that the republican caucus is not focused on finding solutions. we want to find solutions to the problems we have right now.

but throwing out hypotheticals three days before the deadline is not the time to do that. a month ago, two months ago, four months ago, five months ago. that's the time for hypotheticals. now it's crunch time. what steps will the republican caucus take to make sure the government doesn't shut down. it frustrates all of you, the american people, and the democratic caucus. we don't know their intention, what their plan is to keep government open and operating right now. it's all hypothetical. in the end, what i know is there are hundreds of thousands of federal employees. this is real for them. this is not hypothetical. they don't know whether or not they'll be going to work after october 1. and what impact they will have on their families and on their lives. we don't know what impact, though we can suggest it will be negative, what impact the shutdown of the government will have on our economy, the job loss that will not be recovered because of that. these are not inconsequential

events. we understand that. it's frustrating to us that we once again at the 11th hour as opposed to doing this in an orderly way, in a fashion that again does not create man-made brinksmanship. this is all man made. this is all done by republican caucus. because they are so bent on their ideology and to repeal the affordable care act, they are blinded by everything else. and they are blinded to the consequences of what they're playing with. and i think the american people are beginning to understand this all too well. >> well, we've been frustrated we've been denied eight times a vote on our plan to replace the sequester. again, the sequester, all of you

know, these are the immediate tax cuts that are having an impact around the country. overall, the nonpartisan congressional budget tells us that we'll result in up to 1.2 million fewer jobs this year and the best estimate is 800,000 fewer american jobs this time next year. are we frustrated that we've not had an opportunity to even have a vote on our plan to save 800,000 jobs? absolutely. and we're going to keep fighting for an opportunity to replace that sequester. it's not good for the country. and we can achieve the same amount of deficit reduction, in fact, even more deficit reduction without the job loss under the plan that we've proposed as a democratic caucus here in the house. and in the people's house, we think that the american people deserve a vote on that. the speaker wants to vote no. he wants to vote to have 800,000 fewer jobs in this country at this time next year, that's his

prerogative. but we think in the people's house, the american people are entitled to have a vote on the proposal we put forward. >> we're hoping you'll hear some news, we'll hear some news that our republican colleagues have decided to drop the obsession with the party platform and putting that -- jamming that into a budget bill three days before they move to close the goth. -- government. we're ready to move forward with them on a clean vote, on a budget bill. we have been for quite sometime. it would be helpful if they would show they want to extend a hand of 231 representatives of the american people. it's time that the american people saw us doing some stuff together. and if 80% of the american public will think stop jamming the process on the budget to get your social agenda, we agree with them. we're ready to work with our

republican colleagues, there's a middle ground. there's common ground. we should start looking for it before we shut the doors of government. we thank you all for being here. we'll be in touch. >> arkansas representative rick crawford and other house republicans spoke outside the capitol of the impact of the health care law of americans on the economy. the news conference ended after a protester accused the republicans of wanting to deny health care to millions of people. this is 15 minutes. >> ready? okay. great. well, i want to thank y'all for coming it today. we came out to provide a little perspective here. some of the things that aren't being talked about with regard to the cr and obama care being at the center of the debate. number one, we know america is

up to our eyeballs and debt. we don't think it's time to rush forward with trillions in new entitlement spending so what i'm doing is introducing a resolution that will ask that question. and members can say yes or no. my question is, does it make sense to move ahead with $1.3 trillion in new entitlement spending when we're in the middle of a debt crisis. we're going to put that question to all of the members. our answer is no. we hope that our ceilings across the aisle and across the capitol would see that as an opportunity to say no, it doesn't make sense. and then we might be able to take appropriate action. that's our resolution -- call on members to explain why they think it's a good idea to rush forward with $1.3 trillion in new entitlement spending when we're in the middle of a debt crisis. so that said, we want to thank the members that have come out today. i appreciate it. we know they're all busy and got things to be doing. i appreciate them coming out and being here today. if there are any questions, i'd

be happy to answer them. going to let dr. fleming speak. he's a medical doctor and can comment with some detail on this. thank y'all for coming out. i'm dr. fleming, small business opener. the president quoted a congressman saying that congressman said obama care is the worst piece of legislation ever. well, ladies and gentlemen, that congressman was me. and i fully stand behind that statement. as you just heard congressman crawford say, for heaven's sake, in a period when we have entitlement programs that america can ill afford, we're now launching even a new entitlement program that will be a massive transfer of income from one class of people to

another. destroying our income. destroying jobs. and really perversely removing people from the health care rolls they're already on. now why in the world would we want to do that. so in the final analysis, what obama care represents for the american people, it's a loss of the insurance they have, but a steep rise of the cost of the health care of their insurance and the loss of their jobs or reduction of that job down to part time because we know that since the beginning of the year, 77% of all new jobs are part time jobs. that's because companies all across america are rapidly moving their employees from fulltime to part-time jobs. so they're losing not only their health care in some cases but they're losing their jobs, their income, and certainly their standard of living. so i certainly stand behind this

measure. i think we should remind those devoted for obama care all of them democrats, not a single republican ever voted for this deal, we should remind them and have them remind their constituents time and time again of the fact that this is a whole new entitlement program that's destructive for america. thank you, i yield back. >> thank you, dr. fleming. i've got an e-mail from a constituent this morning that works at one of the largest hospitals in my district. they had a meeting, administration rolled out the news that their health care costs were going up. and as a result, their retirement benefits were going down. and these are just some of the symptoms that we're seeing already manifesting themselves with the implementation of this law that's ill conceived. so my point is this -- we want senator reid to answer the question -- does it make sense to speed forward with $1.3 trillion in new entitlement spending in the middle of a debt crisis. and if there's anybody else who

wants to weigh in, i'll give them the opportunity. if not, i'll take a few questions. >> i wonder if you see an alternative sort of fall-back position if defunding is not achieved? >> you know, again, we don't know what to expect from the senate. we haven't seen anything there. we don't know what they'll do. this is not anything other than the fact that we need to make sure that the folks back home knows where their senator stands, where their member of congress stands. and we want to get them on record. three years since the law was signed and i think people need a reaffirmation of whether or not their senator should continue to spend rennicklessly, we think i not. >> when talking about the comments, you brought up the fugitive slave act that that would be a worse -- >> yeah, that was in reference to i believe a state rep from some other state who had made a

reference to that. i didn't specify any legislation in the past, obama care takes over, under the government rule, 1/6 of the entire economy, the most important part of our economy. health care, what could be more intimate for each individual american than their health care? not only do americans now have to be accountable for their finances to the irs, now they have to be accountable to the irs for their health care. so if you add that to the loss of jobs and actually the loss of health care and the costs of health care, insurance, i just -- i think it's incomparable. >> you're saying moderate history. the democrats are going to come back with the stuff from the 1850s. you want to clarify what you're

talking about? >> i think what i said is very clear. >> i'm going to yield to my colleague from kentucky, mr. andy bahr. >> thank you, rick. i appreciate you putting this together. andy bahr, sixth congressional district. i think this is important because it points out obama care threatens to further undermine the solvency of health care plans in place. in my district, we had a number of seniors like every other district dependent on medicare. you're already seeing the fiscal pressures that obama care has placed on medicare. the medicare trustees are saying now that the hospital insurance trust fund is set to go bankrupt in the year 2026. a whole new entitlement program that cbo projects the costs of $2 trillion will put further

pressure on medicare. remember, obama care razed medicare to the tune of $216 billion. rural hospitals all over kentucky that are seeing their reimbursements slashed as a result of obama care. obama care victimizes medicare. the independent payment advisory board, which is a financing mechanism for obama care, is threatening to ration health care services for our seniors. so this resolution makes a point. and that is that obama care threatens an already fiscally insolvent safety net in our country. we need to focus on saving medicare. we need to focus on forcing the government to keep the promises it's made. obama care makes that impossible. that's another important dimension to this discussion. >> thank you, andy. i want to add another thing. i heard from one of the seniors

in my district recently. and just simply put the question to me -- am i going to have to choose between medicare, social security, and obama care? and i can't answer that question. and i don't know if anybody can today, that they can say for certainty that no, you won't have to choose -- all three of them will be there. but as andy indicated and as dr. fleming indicated, this presents a major challenge to the solvency of those programs that we've promised to our seniors and that we intend to deliver. and so, again, i would just ask that senator reid answer the simple question, does it make sense to speed ahead with $1.3 trillion in the middle of a debt crisis. and for the folks in my district, that answer is no. and for me, the answer is no. it doesn't make sense. so we need to slow this down a little bit and give the american people a little new perspective. interesting fact, this seems a

little backwards, but in 2008, the national debt was $10 trillion. four years later, it's up to $16 trillion. and interesting fact here is while that debt has increased by 60%, the annual interest percent on it has decreased, going from $451 billion in 2008 to $360 billion in 2012? why do i make that point? that's because interest rates are being artificially suppressed. when they normalize -- i say when because they will normalize, that will put further pressure on our budget. that means that probably the interest on our debt becomes the single biggest line item in the federal budget. as we see obama care continuing to put further pressure on programs like medicare and as andy indicated, he had a lot of critical access hospitals in his rural district, so do i. they're all asking me, what can we do to fix this problem. i know what the wrong answer is, that's speeding forward with $1.3 trillion in additional

entitlement spending in a debt crisis. having said that, if there are further questions or if anybody else wants to make a comment, i would be happy to yield to them. but any other questions? i know congressman king was planning on being here. i don't see him. if there are no further questions. >> i want to ask the question, one of your republican colleagues said there's a political risk of republicans for a shutdown. all of you may represent safe districts. but anyone who doesn't think is a high risk isn't playing with a full deck. why do you not think this is a problem? >> first off, the point of this message has nothing do with the government shutdown. and i can't speak to the political dynamics of other members' districtings. i can tell you that i'm the first republicans since 1873. so i would hardly consider my district to be a safe republican district. and i certainly am not a proponent of shutting down the

government. this is a measure that would force members of congress and senators to say yes, it makes sense or no, it doesn't. to spend $1.3 trillion in additional entitlement spending in the middle of a debt crisis. it has nothing to do with shutting down the government. it's a clarification so that folks back home know where their member of congress stands, where their senator stands with regard to our spending problem in this town. i think we need to reassess and reaffirm and give senators an opportunity to speak to their folks back home through voting yes or no on this resolution. >> how can you call yourself christians and deny health care to 30 million people in america. how can you call yourselves children of god. >> i think that's a good time on that to end this -- >> because you call yourself christi christians. you call yourselves christians, these are killers.

they're worse than the guy that had the navy yard incident. these people are demons. we are here today to call in on the pope to exorcise them, pray for them. they need god's power to be relieved from these demons that are possessing them. you see, they broke up the press conference when we talked about god. they do not represent children of god. they are not -- they are not children of god. >> they are not -- >> they pray for their souls. >> we are praying for their souls. we are praying for their souls. but we need to do something about it. we need to vote them out of office. they are destroying our congress. i just asked him a question. that's all. or what? i asked him a question? this is a free country. i asked him a question. he refused to answer because he is a demon. these are demons, maxine waters

of congress said these are demons! these are demons. >> you are not christ-like understanding. you're not christ like in yourself. >> i am doing christ work. he stood up to the demons when he was here. my name is rocky -- and i'm part of the prayer at the pump movement. we're here today, going to have an exorcism here in the front of the capitol steps. we're going to pray for these demons that are destroying our nation. we need to -- we need to pray for them. i have a young man here who is homeless. he needs health care. and he can't get health care. they want to hold up the budget, shut down the federal government, just because they don't want 30 million people to have health care. that is the demon iic spirit an

we're going to pray and pray and pray that god will deliver these demons from capitol hill. these are demons. i repeat. if maxine waters said this out in california -- i believe it. we have been fighting them. they are worse than the guy that did the shooting at the navy yards. their policies are killing -- they're killing millions of americans. my name is rocky twyman. r-o-c-k-y t-w-y-m-a-n. i'm the founder of this movement and we invite you over here as we pray away these demons. >> on the next "washington

journal," talk about what's next for legislation in the u.s. house to fund the government as they prepare to work through the weekend. we're joined by "washington times" political columnist, charles heard. fall loyed by an update of the shooting earlier this month at the navy yard at washington with rear admiral john kirby. a discussion on the u.s. postal service following two hearings in the senate, what legislation is in congress, and how the agency could be impacted by a federal shutdown. federal times senior writer shawn riley is our guest. washington journal live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. the fiscal year ends on monday, september 30. the senate today passed a bill funding the government through november 15. the house gavels back in tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern for general speechls and noon to debate funding the government past september 30 and other legislative business. live coverage here on c-span.

as congress debates a budget to fund the government, outlining the defense department's contingency plan. he spoke to reporters about employee furloughs and military activities that would continue under a shutdown. it's about half an hour. >> i think you know who i am. good afternoon. that's probably the high point of this discussion. so i want to start with a few words and then aisle turn to your questions. let me start by saying that the administration firmly believes a shutdown due to a lapse of appropriation should not occur. the administration is working with congress to try to prevent

a lapse. we have to be ready for a lapse of appropriations. what is involve in the planning? as i answer this question and everything i say today, i'm going to focus on the department of defense, solely on d.o.d., but other federal agencies are definitely affectled. i don't know lots about them. so i'll focus on d.o.d. first, d.o.d. appropriations lapsed, we can only conduct limited activity specifically authorized by law. the lapse could lead to civilian furloughs, it will, in fact, but the furloughs are different than the sequester furloughs that occurred this summer. the sequester furloughs sought to reduce cost. we had the authority to design them to reduce cost and reflect policies like minimizing the effects on readiness.

in the case of appropriations, law governs, not policy. the law says in the event of a lapse of appropriations, d.o.d. could only conduct activities designed to protect safety of life and property and carry out a few other activities. administration lawyers interpret this to mean that d.o.d. can support specific military operations of the secretary of defense has approved, afghanistan, for example, and a number of others. we can also maintain emergency services, police, fire, emergency medical. we label the activities that can continue as accepted activities. and you will hear me use that word repeatedly in the next couple of minutes. what would happen under a lapse of appropriations. first, government employees would be significantly affected. in the event of a lapse, all of our military personnel would be directed to remain on normal duty status. their military status means they can't be placed in a nonpay status so we would direct them to continue in normal duty

status. civilian workers who support these accepted activity, again, afghanistan, emergency activities, they -- they would be directed to continue to work. but all civilian workers who do not primarily support accepted activities would be placed in a nonduty, nonpay status on an emergency no notice basis on the time the lapse occurs. on planning in 2011, we expect roughly half of our civilian personnel to go into this status, a nonpay furlough status. pay of government employees could be seriously affected if the lapse continues for a period of time. during a lapse, d.o.d. cannot pay military personnel and civilian personnel, even if they have been directed to work. military and those civilians directed to work would be paid retroactively once the lapse of appropriation ends. civilians on emergency furloughs and those for primarily doing

nonaccepted activities would be paid retroactively only if a law is enacted, providing the authority to pay them. training and travel of military and and civilian employees would be disrupted unless connected with activities, training and travel would have to stop. stop before it starts or if it's going on at the time the lapse occurs, folks on tdy on nonaccepted travel would have to pack up and come home, although they could do that in an orderly fashion. we would require to do some other bad things to our people. we couldn't immediately pay death gratuities to those who die on active duty during the lapse, we would have to close stateside commissaries, personnel activities would be disrupted, probably would have to be stopped, and a number of other actions. d.o.d. vendors would be affected, especially if the lapse continues for a substantial period of time. vendors working on contracts

with funds obligated prior to the lapse, the fiscal '13 or earlier funds, could continue to work. assuming government personnel are available to provide any needed supervision. and it could be paid for that work. but during the period of the lapse, we can't sign new contracts or extend old ones unless they're directly in support of accepted activities. so if i haven't already confused you, let me try to sum up by saying all of these confusing actions affect the d.o.d. mission. we can and will continue to support key military operations. we're allowed to do that by law. but the law would force us to disrupt many of our support activities. we couldn't do most training, couldn't enter into most new contracts, routine maintenance would have to stop. we couldn't continue efforts to have contracting or financial management. even worse, the lapse of appropriation causes civilian

furloughs and that's one more blow to the morale of our civilian workforce. that morale is already low and i think it would get lower and that adversely affects productivity and costs taxpayers' money. even if the lapse never occurs, the planning itself is disruptive. people are worrying right now about whether their paychecks are going to be delayed rather than focusing on their mission. and while i can't quantify the time being spent to plan, it has or will consume a lot of senior management attention, probably thousands of hours of employee time better spent on supporting national security. for all these reasons, i very much hope that congress acts to avert a lapse of appropriations. and it will sound contradictory, i hope you'll understand when i say that i hope that we're all wasting our time planning for this lapse. but then i'll stop and i'll be glad to answer your questions. i'm going to get george here.

>> since everyone went through the furloughs recently, can you explain a little bit in detail the difference between the civilians who were furloughed under that and the fact that there are fewer numbers being furloughed now. could you get maybe an example, it would help for the people to understand what -- how that difference is and i just have a second -- one of the second questions. i know contractors is a hard thing to get your arms around, but is there any way to talk about the number of contractors as in people that could be affected by this? >> first, on the furloughs, the ones we did in the summer are called administrative furloughs. long notification process that we needed to go through that were designed to save money. so therefore, as i mentioned, we had the authority to design them based on criteria like readiness and cost savings. these are specified by law. anybody who is not -- any civilian not primarily working

on an accepted activity has to be placed on furloughs. trying to think of good examples for you. well, here's one -- most of our working capital fund employees are going to not be furloughed immediately because the working capital funds have a cash balance based on funds obligated before the lapse. so if you have the funds and they don't have to be furloughed right away. that would have to be gradually some of them if we run out of cash. whereas most of our working capital fund employees were furloughed in the summer because we wanted to reduce costs. but as far as the contractors, briefly, all of the ones that are working on contracts as i said obligated with money before the lapse would continue if supervision was available. in the early stages of a llamas, that would be the majority of the contractors, most of them will be working on contracts by definition of funded before, if the lapse continues, that number

will fall. but i don't have specific numbers. >> trying to clarify on the -- on the difference between the contractors -- if i'm not mistaken, there are 650,000 that were affected over the summer. now it's about 400,000. so a difference of a couple hundred thousand seems to be a lot. >> and again it's -- the numb we weres are roughly right. i don't know exactly how many. probably around half. it will be close to that. and, again, working capital funds alone, 100,000, 150,000 of people who will keep this time and there are many others. they're just totally different animals. just because once driven by law, one's driven by policy to save money, one is driven by law -- accepted and nonaccepted activities. >> they weren't contractors, correct? >> yeah. no. i'm talking government employees now. contractors, most of them are going to be able to work if supervision is available because most of them would have numbers. most of them would be funded by contracts already funded with

fiscal '13 or earlier money. >> looking toward that october 15 paycheck, can you give them a sense of how long the government shutdown might be able to go before their paycheck was definitely delayed? i mean, if congress reached an agreement on the -- >> the earliest we'd start having trouble would be october 7. that's not a hard date. we'll push it as far as we can. at some point, we have to run the payroll. i'm in triage mode, i'm trying to coordinate getting the department ready to shut down. i haven't focussed on the problems that will occur like that one if the lapse occurs we'll put it on the financing service. we'll put it off as long as we can. if the lapse extends to october 15, there won't be a question. there may be sometime prior to that when we would be faced with trying to take a chance and run the payroll and be ready. or delay it. but we've got -- we've got a

while. >> can you talk about what happens to the ships at sea in the mediterranean. and whether operations -- the operations could be launched like special operations forces or even a hypothetical strike in syria. >> it would depend on whether there was a military operation. in the case you mentionled, it would be. it would therefore -- if we were hypothetically, the president twor authorize some action against syria, it would be a military operation approved by the secretary and it would be an accepted activity. yes, we could go forward with it. >> the ships at sea. >> yes, the issue is are they in direct support of accepted activities? they will be. they will be accepted. the great majority of the people on there are military. and they're going to remain at work. so we don't think many of them will be disrupted. but these are the gray-area decisions that our managers and commanders are making right now

as they identify accepted and nonaccepted. but i think most of the ships at sea would stay there. if there were some in training and weren't accepted, they could stand down if they had to and make more adjustment. >> it often involves trains on training mission, refueling, purchasing, can those activities continue? >> i don't want to sound like a stuck record. but it will depend on whether the judgment is if the judgment is directly related to an accepted activity. it would be harder if they're training off of newport or norfolk. the civilians involved, can you go ahead and do it with the military which these are things that are delegated.

the managers and commanders are considering those issues right now. >> the memo talks about limiting movement from accepted areas. i wonder if it could affect the drawdown for afghanistan? >> afghanistan is accepted. so the pca is -- we can move to an accepted area. the troops going over to afghanistan, okay. from an accepted area if the commander judges there would be problems created if the move is not carried out. that's a judgment general doneford and his staff will have to make. not sure where they are. i'm sounding like a stuck record but i don't have all of these details. that's what we passed out the the commanders, managers, and asked them to make these judgments. >> accepted activity. so my lawyer here, sounds like -- sounds like we should be able to go ahead with that.

>> can you think back -- i don't know if you were comptroller in '95 or '96. >> i was the air force comptroller. >> okay. i know in one of the shutdowns congress had passed an appropriations for a d.o.d. but i can't remember which one. can you compare, you know, the two -- the scenarios and why that would be -- >> shutdown in '95 if my memory serves me right for about a week in d.o.d., it was longer in the nondefense agencies. so they passed -- i guess it was the c.r., i can't remember whether it was a full appropriations bill earlier for defense. i mean, there was a lot of similarity. we went through all of these -- these match -- machinations to engage in right now to decide what to do at that time and, of course, executed that plan. i distinctly remember it was a horrendous blow to the

civilians. there was months after that that i was hearing from them. we used the phrase that we have stopped using because it was wrong of essential and nonessential back then. it's not right. it's not whether you're essential, it's if the law says you're doing an accepted activity. there are a lot of essential items to keep the military going that don't deal directly with accepted activities. we stopped that, but not too much coming on the heels of the summer furloughs, i am very concerned about the effect it will have on the civilian workforce. >> the plans in 2011 versus what you're having to come up with now, are there differences in operations now that make a shutdown plan if not a complete blueprint. >> not many differences. we made a few exceptions based on recent events, for example, because of the potential flaws to our security system.

we exempted the navy yard investigation, obviously, in 2011. that wasn't an issue. but now they were pretty minor. i would say the vast majority of the guidance is the same. >> debt benefits would be delayed? can you provide more information on that. >> if the debt is ghoulish, but it's the law, not policy, remember that. if the death occurred after the lapse took place, then the money would be obligated after the lapse took place and we would have no authority to pay based on that money until the lapse ended. in that case, it could be delayed. if the death occurred prior to the lapse, and i a suming we had enough people to process the payment, i think it wouldn't be delayed. >> if the government doesn't shut down, you're still going to be stuck with a cr come next tuesday and the past you've communicated for congress the provisions you'd like to see in the cr, the programs like

shipbuilding wouldn't be hampered. have you done anything like that? >> yes, we always do, through the office of management and budget. there are few of them in the cr passed by the house and just passed by the senate. it's fairly short. the senate will go through november 15. so we can probably hold our breath for a while. but we would certainly appreciate it that we would have liked more flexibility for new starts, for example, rate increases. and a variety of other activities that we won't be able to carry out under the cr. but, yes, we did ask, we always ask. >> also, if you do get funding, you face sequestration again, right? how -- have you thought about how you will affect? >> yes, potentially. i mean the cr will go through -- if it's passed, the senate version, through november 15. and if it were extended through

the whole year in that form, yes, it would generate a sequestration in january probably around 4%. we could be facing it. just in general, i think, where a year ago, we said -- i think i might have sat at this podium and said we're not going to sequester ourselves. we thought it would be resolved. i think this time we'll operate at a somewhat lower level than the certain -- certainly than the president's request. the cr itself cuts the d.o.d. budget or would result in a cut of around $30 billion. the sequester would take out $20 billion or so. so we'll start below the president's budget to conserve resources until we get a better sense of where we're actually headed. >> just one quick question. so october 1, all paychecks will go out october 1. right? >> there's a payday today for the civil ycivilians is not affected. and for the military, not affected because it's all for time before the lapse would

occur. the reserves are trickier. they're paid at various times. we're already struggling with some of that. but i'm hoping we can minimize or avoid any disruptions there too. >> one of the things that's listed as accepted, and i guess this is under the -- this is under the law, this number that we have, it's activities necessary to continue recruiting. are we talking air shows and -- >> no, we're talking about recruiting offices, the military entrance examination senators, the things more directly related to it. >> i know this is a different question like on a three dimensional problem here. but i mean why is it that there's money that was available if something were to happen and there was a need to send the force to let's say serious topic of the day, but to syria but there's not money available somewhere to pay people. is there a good reason for that?

>> yeah, it's the difference between obligations and our ability to disburse. the law says that the lapse of appropriations, we can obligate money, we can enter into a contract and legally commit the government, we can obligate money for items related to safety, life preservation, or property. that's all military operations but we can't disburse anything, send a check, until we get an appropriation. so we can go ahead with the operation, we'd be committing the government but they're not going to get paid or the personnel, at least, are not going to get paid until we get an appropriation. does that make sense? >> yeah. >> okay. thank you. >> are there specific upcoming multinational training exercises that have to be cancelled if there's a shutdown? >> i don't know. i guess is -- i don't know as i say.

>> well, i mean, we will -- we have plans -- some of them based on accommodating $87 billion ten-year cut we took in the prior budgets. some of those would be announced. the ones associated with these cuts takes a while to form late these. it takes a period of time. not sure when. you'll see some reductions of force over the coming months and some in separations of military as part of any drawdown. >> any rough number, potential number? >> i don't want to give you a number. we're not far enough along to be specific in the headline stuff. i prefer not to. >> how will arlington burials be

affected? >> paying to the army. and i believe it will stay open. but i kind of like to check that. we have decided based on that and i hope other reasons, to accept funerals and dignified transfers so the people supporting those will be accepted and they will continue. >> and just the civilians who are expected to work but no guarantee of pay, is that -- is that unless the -- unless something is passing -- >> this comes in two flavors. the ones that are associated with accepted activities. they'll be directed to work. they will be paid retroactively as soon as we get an appropriations. and that will be automatic. the ones put on furlough will have an act of congress to pay them. >> are there significant

differences between guidance and disguidance? >> no. i gave you the one example of the navy yard investigation. maybe a couple others but they're very modest. unfortunately, we're getting good at this. >> can you update us on how that budget is going in 2014 and all of the time you have for a shutdown taking awith a from that. >> taking away from everything we do. people related to budget, yes, it's slowing it down. we have to press forward. it's a particularly demanding task this year because we feel we have to plan for a range of outcomes. we don't know where we're going end up, the decision that the president will ultimately make in december is the size of the 15 budget and the plan beyond. so we're planning for a wide range of spending.

>> have the services given you what you need for that. >> they're submitting the detailed data right now. >> yes, mentioned to find new contracts in the event of the government shutdown. the guidance mentions it will be allowed or the contracting will endanger national security. the programs and vehicles and things, how would you be able to define what the latest danger -- >> the new contracts and extend old ones if they're in direct support of accepted activities. i think it would be a stretch for a major acquisition to qualify there. it's extremely important if it's difference between accepted and nonaccepted and essential and nonessential. we need the weapons but hard to reality them to the operation. the beginning of the year, you don't tend to have a lot of the

decisions facing you early on. and those that you have, you could delay. if a lapse occurs, i hope it doesn't. but the severity of the effects grow quickly if it turns out to be long. short, less so. if it's long, increasingly so. you'll have more issues like that. >> talk some more about the extent of what military personnel would be performing the duties of furloughed civilians in the normal day jobs. the same question for the contractors that would be able to stick around. >> on the military side, they have their normal jobs and they continue that. there could be circumstances, for example, if there was an important contract funded with money before the lapse, and supervision was needed and the civilian was furloughed, maybe the person had the capability of doing that, i could see them

doing it. but for the most part, they're doing the same jobs. same with the contractors in general. they'll be doing the jobs that were assigned. they can't -- the contractors would never be allowed, furlough shutdown or not to do inherently governmental work. there could be some circumstances and add minute who's a contractor answering phones because a person -- a civilian was furloughed. could be some of that. but for the most part, they're going to go ahead and do the jobs they're assigned to. >> on the next washington journal, what's next for legislation in the u.s. house to fund the government as they prepare to work through the weekend. we're joined by "washington times" political columnist, charles hurd, followed by an

investigation of the shooting earlier this month at the navy yard in washington with rear admiral john kirby. then a discussion on the u.s. postal service following two hearings in the senate, what legislation is in congress and how the agency could be impacted by a government shutdown. federal times senior writer shawn riley is our guest. washington journal live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. the senate passed a bill funding the governor through november 15. the house gavels back in tomorrow at noon to fund the pass of september 30 and other legislative business. live coverage here on c-span. former vice president al gore also commented on the plan to

defund the health care law. he spoke for about an hour and 15 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. welcome to brookings. welcome to our c-span audience and to our web cast audience. please note that the hash tags of this event is cepm. i'm a senior fellow here at brookings and i'm pleased to be announcing the opening of brookings' newest center, the center for effective public management. so allow me for a moment to talk about our vision for the center. i don't need to tell you that things aren't going so well in washington these days.

indeed, we opened the center on the eve of a government shutdown, how fitting. if you're out and about on the streets of washington today, you may notice people seem a little unusually depressed or anxious. in fact, if i owned the bar, i would call in extra help for tonight. that's because agency issued their shutdown instructions to the staff and some 1 million people were told that they were nonessential employees. as you can imagine, that's quite a blow to ones ego, all in all, a pretty tough message to get. so let me tell you briefly what i hope we can accomplish at this center. when washington works, it works because politicians and their appointees bring new energy and new ideas to town. when it works, it works because they confront the experienced members of the permanent government, the civil servants,

who know a thing or two about how to make the place work. the result is a dynamic tension between change and stability. this has been the hallmark of our government and, in fact, it's the hallmark of all successful modern democracies. but these are troubled times for america's leaders, political as well as civil servants. when washington doesn't work, the politicians can't manage to put their country above their interests and their ideologies. as everything gets politicized, the civil servants move into a defensive crouch. afraid to stick their heads up. lest they get shot off. as we've seen, progress stops on all fronts, from big picture items like the need for immigration reform, or the need to cope with climate change for the need for technical amendments for the affordable care act, something that in more normal times would have been

passed without notice and that in these polarized times can't even be introduced to the congress. at this center, we will deal with both politics and government, making it a little different from undertakings in the past with similar names. we will focus on political reforms that can help create more effective leadership by getting to the roots of our political dysfunction. we will look at the future of federalism in the united states and ask maybe if the states shouldn't come back to their rightful place as laboratories of democracy. we will try to understand what happens to regulation, in an government, in an era where the change is so rapid and technological and scientific change is so rapid. we will try to foster a spirit of innovation and government through our new blog, fixedgov and look at the current system of capitalism and ask if perhaps

it could be structured in a more sustainable way, through our corporate purpose project. all of this is geared towards making both parts of the government the political and the career more able to engage in what my friend and former colleague, leon first, has called anticipatory governance. in today's government, about the only thing we can anticipate is grid lock. certainly the most prosperous and powerful nation in the world can do better. i'd like now to introduce an old friend, david rubenstein he's co-founder and chief executive of the carlisle group. prior to forming the firm in 1987, david practiced law in washington, d.c. i got to know him when from 1997 to 1981 in the carter administration, he was deputy assistant to the president for

domestic policy. before in a, chief council for the judiciary committee's -- subcommittee on constitutional amendments. before that, he practiced law in new york city. david is a magna cum laud graduate and he attended the university of chicago law school. he's the chairman of the john f. kennedy center for the performing arts, a regent of the smithsonian institution, president of the economic club of washington. and on the board of trustees of duke university and vice chair here at the brookings institution. and vice chair of the foreign relations. i find another example of david's generosity. one of the buildings from the kennedy school at harvard where i came from is the dave rubenstein building and last

week we had a birthday party for my grandson vincent at the zoo. there turns out that the panda pavilion exists because of the courtesy of, you got it, david rubenstein. if i were one of your children, i would be very concerned about this tendency of yours to give money away. david was famous for long hours in the white house and eating dinner from the vending machines in the basement of the white house. i had the dubious distinction of writing the 19 0 democratic party platform, and so some years ago, i spent long hours at the white house with david and alice who was later to become his wife. david, had i known then how much money you had to give away, i would have cookled youla zag in a and brought it to the white house. i would like to remind the

audience the hash tag for the event is there for the virtual audience and the audience in the room. and also there are note cards on each seat for your questions for vice president gore as he's speaking. our staff members will be coming around to collect them so we can take some q&a at the end of the vice president's presentation. ed the thank you for being with us. david? [ applause ] >> thank you, elaine. it was nearly 100 years ago that robe robert brookings decided that government could be managed more effectively than it was being managed. he put up some money. by today's standards certainly modest to put together some institutions to study how government could be made more effective. these came together as the brookings institution.

it's all together fitting as we get close to celebrating the 100th anniversary of brookings, we are returning to our roots by creating a center because this center will help us study more intense lip than we do today, how we can make the government work much better. it's all together fitting the person who's going kick off the center with the speech today is al gore who among other things whether he feels vice president of the united states, 45th vice president, he led the reinventing of the government project. that effort did many things to make our government more effective and efficient and i wish today that the government was as effective and efficient as we would like it to be. but many of the things that al gore put into place and recommended to president clinton did come to be. and are now some of the things that we're fortunate to have with us. it was years ago that another group of people began to think about reinventing government. it was last week, 226 years ago, that a number of individuals, 55 of them, came together in

philadelphia and said, let's reinvent the government we have. they took the articles of confederation government and tore it up and came up with an incredible document called the u.s. constitution. wasn't a perfect document and didn't create a perfect government, but it did more than any other government in history to come together in a democratic forum and a government that's lasted for some 200 years. think about that. over 200 years ago, people came together, they spent about three months working on how a government should be structured and they came up with a system that wasn't perfect and as we are reminded by elaine and we know today, we see the imperfections of our system every day now on capitol hill. however, with the exception of some amendments we had to make it better, we have, in effect, put together a government as effective as any in the world's history. it's a government that i think has its imperfections but it can be improved upon, it should be

improved upon. had he been around 260 years ago or so, and been of age, i think our guests today would have been a founding father. because he no doubt would have been invited to the constitutional convention. he had the intelligence, he had the drive. he had the commitment to make the world a better place. and he had the ability to work with other people. it is to our great regret he was not a founding father. one of the reasons for that is no doubt he would have been fresh yent enough had he been involved in those days to recommend as part of the government, we might have direct election of the president. [ applause ]

but he wasn't around then. now we can study if direct election would be more effective. our country owes al gore two favors. he was born much too late to be a founding father, there's two things i want to cite as to why i think our country is in his debt. which enthat famous election happen in the year 2000, it was a complicated situation for our country. not clear that other individuals or governments would have acted the same way. i know had i been in the situation that al gore faced himself, i wouldn't have handled myself nearly as well as he did. he recognized that the most important thing in this country is the rule of law. while the system may not have been perfect and maybe the government that was invented by the founding fathers didn't work as well as we would like, it was important that everyone recognize the rule of law prevails. so al gore did what i think every great citizen should do recognized that the rule of law is more important than anybody's

individual ambitions or plans and he said, i think the system should work. it isn't working as well as i think it should, but we should let the system work. and he, in effect, left town, let his successor do what he wanted to do. and he basically did not disrupt that government. aned think that's a very important thing. while we may have disagreements with what happened in that administration, there's no doubt that allowing the rule of law to prevail is an important thing and a lesson for people all over the world. for that, letting the rule of law prevail, that's an important thing that al gore did for our country. he left washington to return to the native tennessee, what did he do? he reinvented himself. he decided to pursue what i consider the highest calling of man kind, private equity. much more successfully than many people left government, he returned to the private sector

and showed that after government service, you can do useful things in the private sector. he's done an incredible job of building a number of companies that are successful. he did one other thing that i think puts us all in his debt, it's this and may be more significant than anything that we've done. he made it clear to people that we have problem with the way the globe is working. he said, no, we have to recognize that the world is warming up and there has to be something done about it. and while we might not be able in our lifetime to really have dramatic effects on climate change, we have to begin now. although he was criticized by many, he did a great deal for

humanity. when history is written, they'll say who changed the world most in the lifetime we all live. many people will be given that honor but nobody is likely to receive that honor more than al gore because al gore stepped up and said the world has to do something about the global problem, not just a national problem, but a global problem. and every government has to reinvent itself to make sure it's doing something to conquer and challenge the problems of global change -- global warming -- global climate change. i hope very much that people recognize when they hear al gore today, they did a man not only great for our country to recognize the rule of law, but he's done something great for the world to say we have to attack the most important problem, global climate change. and therefore we're all very honored that he's come here today to kick off the center and we're all very honored that he's done the things that he's done in his life and he's reinvented himself and helped to reinvent

our government and now i hope he can help reinvent brookings. thank you very much. thank you, david, i appreciate that. thank you very much. thank you very much. thank you, ladies and gentlemen. i really -- i appreciate the warm welcome. thank you for that over the top introduction. i cannot remember who deserves credit for first using this old line i'm sure you all heard it. my father would have enjoyed that. my mother would have believed it. your comments about the election. my attitude is, you win some, you lose some. that little known third category.

as for how to react to it, i did study the work of the founding fathers in some detail in those days and i confirmed to my worries that actually in our system, there is no intermediate step between a final supreme court decision and violent revolution. and the given those options, i -- i basically did only what the american people are credited for doing famously by winston churchill. they do the right thing after first exhausting every available alternative. we are here today in a moment when we are exhausting a lot of alternatives to keeping the government running.

but, david, thank you for your kindness and for your generosity and leadership and so many spheres of our life together. i want to acknowledge darryl west, vice president here at brookings and get to elaine in a moment and talk about the important new center. but i also want to acknowledge one of the -- one of the board members here at brookings, my friend and long-time business partner joel hyatt who has some of you heard me say on many occasions absolutely the best partner anybody could ever have.

i want to acknowledge the u.s. pension guarantee corporation hea hea head. so now to elaine. i have known elaine for 20 years. almost exactly 20 years. and i want to acknowledge her husband, tino, who also was in a previous lifetime a public servant running the x.m. bank. and their daughter-in-law, christie, who is here. and elaine's sister, joanne shula. and elaine is by all odds one of the most talented people that i have ever worked with.

and whether it's in the sphere of governance or in politics, she is truly outstanding and everybody who worked with her knows that. and to the powers that be here in brookings, congratulations in wooing her away from being a professor at harvard and establishing this important center. i'm going to talk in a moment about why i think it's unusually significant and important. it truly is. it's hard work. but there is literally no one in the world who understands it better or more thoroughly than elaine. that's literally the truth. there are slightly more than 7 billion people in the world. and and only one elaine k-mart.

so that's pretty special. it's all true. in any case, i'm glad you're here. i'm glad you picked a slow news day to launch this new center. the most important news of the day other than this launch is not the pending shutdown of the government or pending -- i do want to talk about that briefly. but it is the release in stockholm of the fifth assessment of the intergovernmental panel on climate change.

you may have seen it in the news. if you haven't, i urge you to talk to it. it's not the topic that brings us here today. we have a set of challenges that we must now confront that are very different in kind and difficulty compared to any issues we ever had to face. the ability to do it confidently is absolutely crucial to the success of what we're undertaking. but, you know, where the report from stockholm is concerned -- they used to be certain only to a degree somewhere between 90% and 100%. now they're certain to a degree somewhere between 95% and 100%.

i'm sure that will make all of the difference to those who are wondering how serious this is. but joking aside, we're still putting 90 million tons of global warming solution into the atmosphere every 24 hours. as if the atmosphere is an open sewer. and the cumulative amount of man made global warming pollution now trapped there is trapping as much heat every day as would be released by 400,000 hiroshima atomic bombs going off every single day. it's a big planet. but that's a lot of energy. that is disrupting the water cycle essential to life on earth. disrupting the stable pattern of climate and weather systems that's been in place since the first cities were built 9,000

years ago. melting the ice, raising sea level. drying out the land surfaces in important regions, including our own southwest and soon in our own midwest. southern europe, southern africa, central america, the amazon, the list goes on, causing all of the extra water vapor to evaporate from the oceans to warmer skies that hold much more, creating much larger downpours that trigger the kind of flooding that we saw in boulder, colorado over the last few weeks. in nashville, my hometown three years ago. in pakistan in the year that 20 million people were displaced from their homes further destabilizing the nuclear armed fragile country.

and that list goes on. creating more fires. we saw them in the west. we saw them in russia a few years ago, leading to the removal of all grains from world markets by russia, ukraine, and kazakhstan, leading to the highest food price spike in world history. at that moment, a food vendor in tunisia set himself on fire. and although there were many other factors that contributed to that individual tragedy and the events that son there after unfolded, food riots had crop failures in recent events related to climate disruption. governments remain stable but those regions where the government is already on a knife edge. there are now the -- there is

now the growing threat of more postnational entities and the problems that come from it. we have to address this. we have to put a price on carbon in the economy. we have to put a price on denial in the political system. i will have much more to say about this on other occasions. because it was released just hours before we got here, i would not have felt right about not at dressing it. the potential for a shutdown here in a moment. but the phrase that comes to mind is political terrorism. nice global economy you have there. a shame we have to destroy it. we have a list of demands, if you don't meet them all by our

deadline, we'll blow up the global economy? really? where are the american people in this? why does partisanship have anything to do with such a despicable and dishonorable threat to the integrity of the united states of america? it cannot be allowed. but it can only be stopped if people in both parties and independence as well say, look, i might not agree with everything that is in the affordable care act. but it did pass. it was upheld by the supreme court. it is the law of the land. you didn't succeed in the constitutional process by which

this is considered. and now you want to threaten to not only shut down our government, but to blow up the world economy unless we go back and undo what we did in the process of democracy? how dare you? how dare you? but it doesn't matter what i feel. a or what you feel unless americans feel it and express it. i disagree with bob corker on all kinds of things, most things, i guess, i appreciated the spirit and sentiment he manifested there. in any case, one of the reasons why there has been too much tolerance of trifling with the

shutdown of the government and the forcing of the default on payments that are owed is that the hostility to the very idea of government, which is, in part, something that goes way back to the days of king george. but has been fed by too many instances of poor management, problems that were allowed to linger, incompetence, bureaucracies that seize up and don't function well. so the work of this center in bringing to bear the best minds available, the best scholarship available under the leadership of the best leader of this center you could possibly have, this work is really important

far beyond what many might think of when they see the name plate on the door. or read the short description of what it does. this is really about the hard work and fresh think iing that now essential in order to redeem the promise of self-governance. we are still in lincoln's phrase -- the last best hope. and the u.s. constitution is still having been changed and made better over the last 2 1/4 centuries, the finest document on governance ever devised. but as we implement that

document and administer the programs of government, we have do it well. and we all know when we go to a business or a store, that clearly gets it, and has incorporated the finest lessons of high quality management and serves its customers extremely well and the costs are surprisingly low compared to what we might have thought when we walked in. and everything clicks. and we recognize such businesses. and we patronize them. and the reasons why they operate so well. and the same principles that have led to their success can be applied to the public sector. so it was 20 years ago this month that i went out on the south lawn of the white house

and presented president clinton with the first report of the national performance review. also known as reinventing government and popular parlance we call it rigo, which was gore spelled sideways, for reinventing government. we held this event in front of two enormous forklifts piled high with government documents, intended to serve as symbols of the excessive bureaucracy and frustration that most americans associated with the government. we worked at reinventing government and rego for the entire two terms that we were privileged to be in office. and i'm proud to say that a great many of the ideas and practices that we knew back then are standard operating procedure

in the federal government today. and looking back, the reinventing government movement started actually three revolutions in government. and i'm going to list them one-by-one. all three of the revolutions have not only survived in one form or another in the federal system. many of them have moved, all three of the revolutions have moved to state and local governments and they have been emulated in countries around the world. in the wake of the initiative, the united states sponsored a series of global conferences to take these ideas and spread them to other countries and these meetings to continue to this day. public policy students study 15 years ago with a team of change

agents in the reinventing government movement. now i don't often refer to myself as a recovering politician, david, on about step nine. and the longer i go without a -- without a relapse, the more confidence i have that i'll not get back into it. but after 20 years, i like to think that i have earned the right to do a little bragging not as a politician, but someone who was very lucky to be able to work with hundreds of determined reformers. men and women, many of whom still work for the federal government, who accomplished great things.

who answered the call and performed in an outstanding way. i'm extremely proud of what they have done and continue to do. these three revolutions. the first revolutions, the performance revolution required a cultural transformation for many agencies because it entails a new way of thinking. and a new way of doing business. unlike prior attempts that were measured and abandoned, this one has now lasted for two decades. president george w. bush expanded on the idea by creating an innovation known as part -- the program assessment rating tool. and president obama appointed the federal government's first chief performance officer and

signed into law amendments to the gpra, the performance in the counting act that embedded some of the best innovations that evolved since that original law was enacted in the wake of the reinventing government report in 1993. this new idea to set goals and measure government performance against those goals can now be found in the government and in the city and state governments. i'm very proud we were there at the beginning of the performance revolution. the second revolution we launched was the customer revolution. now, the word customer created some controversy when we used the phrase, customer revolution. in some corners, people objected to the people we were referring to were, in fact, owners of the government.

nevertheless, there was no other word other than customers that so accurately convey to our workforce how we wanted our citizens to be treated. so we stwuk th -- stuck with th. and to this day, federal agencies who deal with the public measure their performance in the quality they bring to serving their customers. one quick example that stuck with me from those years -- we went out and studied the rather isolated examples of governmental units that had actually pioneered some of the things that we instituted in the federal government. and we went and spent time with the private corporations that were known for efficiencies. i never forget spending two days shadowing herb kelliher at the southwest airlines. what a kick that was. but i learned a lot from herb

and from several of the others -- other ceos that i met with. but i'm learning from the example that one of the state -- the department of motor vehicles. of course, the dmv is kind of a symbol for many people from many people who can go wrong. this particular dmv decided they had to reform. and they just assumed that they needed to pull out all of the stops to reduce the waiting period and the length of the line. and so they went through their -- their work and before they pulled the trigger and implemented the reforms, they decided, well, maybe we ought to ask the people who we're trying to help here what they think about it. it's a clever idea. they did that.

they were shockled. the biggest complaint that these folks waiting in line wanted fixed was not the line. you know what it was? it was the picture. they stood -- they stood in line once every two or three years and they look md at that picture quite a few times a week. so they reengineered the system to give them choices and so forth. and it didn't add that much extra time. and people responded to it. they also shortened the lines. there are many similar examples of wisdom that is impossible to gain access to unless you engage in a dialogue with the people to whom you are trying to deliver the services of government. the third revolution was the

innovation revolution. 20 years ago when i entered the white house, there were 50 sites on the worldwide web. five-zero. there were one or two other geek wannabes like me who used it, but there was no such thing as a government website. the word website is you kind of looked at on the surface of mars. let alone the inability to conduct government transactions on-line. but a few years after we launched this initiative, we published a book entitled access america, reengineering through information, technology. and in an age when less than 25% of the public was on-line, we actually released this four

years later, it was 97. less than even then, less than 25% were on-line. this report sum rises what was to come. the internet used to bring information on the public on its terms. it's possible to begin the benefits transfer program to integrate information and inn the criminal justice community and provide simplified reporter tax filing and reporting. it began the information through the creation of firstgov.gov. the federal government's first comprehensive web portal launched in 2000. today it's called usa.gov. but the purpose is the same. to offer citizens one-stop access to government information. this innovation also was quickly spread to state governments and

local governments and governments and countries and regions and municipalities throughout the world. so i'm proud of what our team did from that as well. i like to think we left the government in better shape than we found it. and i believe that is still true today, especially for the career people who keep this thing going. in spice of sequesters, shutdowns, and, of course, nonstop criticism, the federal workers land our planes safely in ever crowded airports. they track down the bacteria that sickens people. in sun safe food and -- food chains or grocery stores. they get the retirement checks out on time. they protect americans here and abroad. so the federal workers are not the problem. the political class is the

problem. and just as we began our reinventing government work by saying that they were -- the federal workers were good people trap in a bad system. and what needed to change was the system, our political class is trapped in a bad system. many of them are very good people. very dedicated. some of them here. but the system has been degraded. mr. manu and mr. orn seen were fresh yent when you wrote "it's worse than you think." it is. and maybe even worse than you thought. but thank you for that wonderful book. i know you and norm took a lot of heat for it.

but ladies and gentlemen, american democracy has been hacked. that's a computer word, as you know, which means -- which refers to somebody taking over the operating system of a computer and making it do things that the owner of the computer doesn't want it to do. our democracy has been hacked. the operating system has been taken over by special interests. by using big money. and lobbyists and taking advantage of a very sick political culture that has grown worse very rapidly in the last couple of decades. it needs to be fixed like many

other citizens i've been dismaid by what's going on in washington, d.c. and in the political decision making process. the level of partisanship and vitriol is growing, of course, that, too, is connected to the influence of big money. anonymous contributors, corporations pretending to be people pursuing business plans in the guise of politics and encouraging many politicians to say things and do things that would not have been seen in the best interest of the public in years past. i grew up in a political family. and my father was in the congress for ten years before i was born. and did not leave the senate,

defeated in 1970 because of the opposition to the vietnam war and the support of the voting rights act and so forth until i was out of college. i saw it all of my life. and so some seven, eight years after that, i went to the house of representatives. but the varied experiences i had in my lifetime had given me a -- an idiosyncratic view of the arc of the american democracy over the last six decades. but it changed quite a bit. most of our elected officials now are forced by this system. it's been five hours a day on

the telephone raising money or going to a cocktail parties and events to raise money from special interests. it's a kabuki routine that both sides, the askers and the givers understand. it spiraled downward, the crassness with which the quid pro quo at the heart of the equation are made openly visible. that crassness has grown as well. and over time, those who are drawn to participate in such a culture have changed. many men and women who i wish were in politics are not in politics now. why would they be? and some that i surely wish were not in politics are -- are speaking for a long stretches of time.

but the point is, not to make it an ad homonym discourse, but to focus on the changes in the system that have led to these problems and the influence of money is number one on the list. david, you were generous and kind in your comments about the founding fathers. back in those days, in the birth of our country, thomas paine was able to walk out of the door in philadelphia and find a dozen low cost print shops within ten square blocks. he was a pen aniless immigrant. he has the gift of clear thinking and discussion. he's become the hard by potter

and helped to inspire the american revolution. and individuals could use ideas as a way to counterbalance power and money. as the decades rolled by and we entered the 20th century by mid century, by the 60s, 1960s, anyway, television eclipsed the printing press. and today is completely dominant, although the internet will soon be powerful enough to bring another dominant medium. but today thomas pain could walk out his front door in philadelphia with his newly created video called common

sense and walk down to the nearest tv station and say this is really important. i need to get it before the public's mind. when do i go on the air? well, you know the answer -- unless he has several million dollars to pay the gatekeeper, he doesn't have access to the public's mind over the medium that now dominates our democracy. who does have access? the same special interest that holds the fundraisers here in washington and elsewhere. and their messages prevail. the politicians who have to beg them for enough money to put their 30-second tv ads on, end up paying the piper even more so. and it has got on the the point

now where vibrant intelligent discourse, included spirited disagreements, that's how when he come to the right decisions. it doesn't take place anymore. facts don't appear to matter. preconceived ideas are simply repeated over and over and over with greater force and more loudness as if that makes them tru true. now, once again. power and wealth is pushing ideas and political discourse back out of the system. now, the internet is beginning to change this -- individual bloggers can change the discourse now.

television still dominant. they go up every year, even in the age of the internet. but we're at a tipping point. that's why this initiative at brookings comes at an ideal time. the potential for a shutdown that is going to unfold before us this weekend really reminds me how could it not, of the shutdown that we went through when elaine k mark was working with me on reinventing government. and she told the story this morning leaving out some important details on what's your blog -- fix-gov. during the last shutdown, they've had occurred not that long after the oklahoma city bombing and the destruction of the murrah building, a

fantastic, horrible tragedy. president clinton was about to make his state of the union address, and i went to elaine kmark and i said, i want you to talk with our reinventing government team. and i want you to find me somebody. this was after the government had shut down. that's right. i said i want you to find me a man or a woman that qualifies according to three criteria. number one -- this person must have been inside the murrah building when the bomb went off. number two, this person must have been a hero in the aftermath of that tragedy. many were. number three, this person must have been relocated to another temporary government building which was itself shut down by

the -- by the congressionally mandated shutdown. so she went to work on him and got help from one of our teams, susan valseskovic and they came up with an incredible guy named richard dean. he was in the murrah building. he went back into that burning building and saved three people by himself and brought the pollbody of a deceased co-worker out. he went to a temporary building and when congress forced to shut down, he was told to go home. i told president clinton this, would be great for your state of the union. we could put richard dean right next to the first lady. well now his speech writers who were great speech writers by the way. this was a temporary lapse of judgment, said no. that's a terrible idea.

we have three runners who carried the olympic torch. we're going have the olympics. this will be inspiring. we want them next to the first lady. i said, please, please, you don't understand. this needs to be done. no, no, no, no. well, after they all left, president clinton and i had a pretty good way of talking to one another and he said, okay, al. so the day of the speech comes and i'm sitting up on the dais will there. somebody could write a book about the things that happened up on that dais. like the time earlier when president clinton -- i was sitting up there. vp, everybody was standing. i don't know how many standing ovations. he goes to look at the teleprompter, he smiled and he turns around and looks at me and he says, al, they have the wrong

speech on the teleprompter. ducked off of the podium, went down, george stephanopoulos, now, george, we have the wrong speech. from my vantage point, i could see when they were frantically scrolling trying to find the right file in the teleprompter and completely unflapably president clinton ex-temp orized the best eight minutes of the speech, and then finally the text stablized and he seemlessly got into the rest of the speech. but anyway, that's another book. this time he goes through the presentation of richard dean. a genuinely inspired story as i noted. i'm sitting there to my left is the speaker of the house, newt gingrich. and he said all of the -- all of the heroic things richard dean had done and triggered a standing ovation.

we're standing there and clapping and i look over at newt and i said, newt, wait for it. we sat down and the president said -- unfortunately, that's not the only time that richard dean was forced out of the office. and we did it on behalf of richard dean and all of the other heroic bodies, let us pledge that we will never shut down this government again. i'll leap to my feet and i looked over and said, i told you to wait for it. anyway -- nothing particularly funny about what's going on now. but here's what those who are threatening the shutdown and the resolve should understand. in situations like this, the president of our country has as he or she should have, an

inherent advantage in speaking for the whole country. and when the congress can't even -- when the minority can't even get its act together to pass its own substitute version of what happened, that further illustrates the fact that the president is speaking for the country leading the country, is going to win this confrontation. but it's not a game. it's not just a political contest. but they ought to understand that. don't put our economy through this. in any case, i'm excited a at-bat future of these efforts to make government work so well that when the average citizen hears some threat to the continued operation of the government, they will think about the high quality service they've just been delivered. they will think about the

individuals working hard to redeem the promise of american self-government. they will say, no. this is our government. and we need to make it work well. and with the challenges that are coming up now, we have got to take the lessons that elaine and her team will be exploring and presenting here. and make sure that they are spread far and wide. i'll close where i began. i truly believe the launching of this senate is far more than an ordinary or routine new center announced by a pre-eminent institution like brookings. this one is going to make an even larger difference than normal. this one really is at the heart of what we need do to make the

united states of america what our founders intended and what our people deserve. so we found out when we were doing work of reinventing government that it doesn't always get head looinls. informs it seldom got headlines except when i went on david letterman to break an ashtray and things like that.

president. we've got a great deal of questions from the audience and we have time for a couple. we've got a great question from tony smith of the french- american foundation, who has asked a pretty big question. in light of our persistent

inability to get anything done in washington, is it time to think of abandoning the separation of powers in order to reduce more responsive government? i told it was a big one. >> no. [laughter] but let me add just a bit to that. i am surprised by the question. i'm not surprised by the level of frustration that leads to the question. the essential genius of our asnders is as relevant today it was when they wrote the constitution, arguably even more so. there is in human nature a power -- a powerulse seeking impulse. many have expressed in different ways they thought that in lord acton's words, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts

absolutely, but the essential genius of our founders was the understanding that this is a key aspect of human nature and is not tethered to any particular ideology or set of political viewpoints. is put in a position isexercising too much power vulnerable to wanting more power . contain thatto threat to freedom is to create balancingse by different centers of power against one another to create a space in between where can be relatively invulnerable to the abuse of power by anyone center because

it will trigger a countervailing force from one of the other .enters there is so much more to say, that is an insight that we've got to protect. >> another one from stephanie a massage. . them stephanieassage contrast about europeans seem to be much more aware of this issue, what is the difference ? >> >> part of it is what i was describing earlier when i mentioned television and big money in politics. there has been an extremely well-funded campaign of and it was modeled

very consciously on the campaign undertaken by the tobacco .ompanies some decades ago in fact a traffic book co- goesred by naomi arrestees into great detail. they have hired some the great people who have turned out lies in exchange for money. they're doing the same for large carbon polluters. you will remember that the tobacco companies hired actors and dress them up as doctors and put them in front of cameras with a script that had them saying they were doctors and the public didn't need to worry about lung cancer or any other diseases that they might have heard were linked to cigarettes uch cows as doctors they cou thing to worry about. many tens of millions of people died during the 40 years between the surgeon general's warning

and the first meaningful steps to rein in the deceptive marketing and the killing of people. they're doing exactly the same 97% of all the climate scientists agree with it , a consensus. god forbid if she had chest pains or got worse and if you are able to consult the hundred leading heart doctors in the world, 97 of them said oh my god you need to have this procedure and change her diet and exercise. and there were three who said i am not sure yet, you need to do some more tests. what would you do? butanswer is pretty simple, that is the question the world faces now. median the u.s., the news

has been intimidated, frightened , and not only frightened, they are vulnerable to distorted news judgments because the line separating news and entertainment has long since been crossed. ratings have a big influence on the selection of stories that are put on the news. the deniers of the climate paids, quite a few of them by the large fossil fuel it is like aally family with an alcoholic father who flies into a rage if anyone mentions alcohol. so the rest of the family decides to keep the peace by

never mentioning the elephant in the room. many in the news media are exactly in that position. by theseswarmed deniers online and in letters and pickets and all that if they even mention the word climate. so the very timidly get frightened and are afraid to mention the word climate heard some of them are changing now, thank goodness. but while the news media is not mentioning it here, has not been, the large corporate driven advertising agenda has kept putting out these messages. clean coal oned of the three principal sponsors of every news program and every talking head show, why is that?

is that because they have an idea that the consumers watching television are going to say, mildred i am going to go down to the store and buy us some coal. no! no. purpose is to condition thinking and to prevent the consideration of a price on carbon. it is just that simple. both president clinton and i have said, it is an old saying that if you see a turtle on top of a fence post, it is a good bet that it didn't get there by itself. when you see this anomalous outcome here in the u.s. public, it didn't happen by itself. >> one last question. , vicefrom wilson golden president of government affairs at xerox. what is next for you and how might those of us nearing retirement become active in your good works? >> oh, what a lovely question. [laughter]

i thought i'd end with a softball. >> well as a chairman of the climate reality project i have spent most of my time on trying to move our country and the world past the political tipping point yacht which we recognize the reality of what is going on. there was a cholera epidemic in london. and a famous doctor there made a map and put a. everyplace there was a case of cholera and he overlaid the map on the sewer system of london and in that way found that one malfunctioning pump on broad street was the approximate cause. just a few years later, louis founded the -- we need

to connect the dots now. of globallion tons warming pollution that we spew every day into the atmosphere as i said earlier is trapping the -- making worse and contributing to the extreme that are related to climate. these extreme temperature events are now 100 times more common than they were just 30 years ago. the pointwe awaken to where we say hey, we've got to do something about that? that is how i spend most of my time. the climate reality project will have its third annual 24 hours of reality next month, a global telecast. we had 18 million vo viewers

last year. david said earlier in the private equity i am cofounder and chairman of generation investment management, which pursues sustainable capitalism. although i didn't have the occasion to talk about that in depth here, i know that your corporate purpose initiative is really in the same space and we would love to work with you on that. help onthat wants to to climate issue, go climate reality.org. thank you, elena for inviting me here today. >> if everyone is besieged while the vice president leads. on behalf of brookings and certainly on behalf of myself, thank you for being here. [applause] >> it is my pleasure. [applause]

>> on the next washington journal, we will talk about what is next for legislation in the u.s. house to fund the government as it prepared to work through the weekend. we are joined by washington times political columnist charles hurt. all it by an update on the navy's investigation of the shooting earlier this month at the navy yard in washington, with chief of information we are admiral john carbon. -- john kirby. federal times senior writer sean riley is our guest. washington journal live every morning at 7 a.m. eastern on c- span. the fiscal year ends on monday, september 30. the senate today passed a bill funding the government through november 15. the house gavels back in tomorrow at 10 a.m. eastern for

general speeches and noon to debate funding the government passed september 30 and other legislative business. life average here on c-span -- -- life government here on c-span. president obama speaks to reporters in the white house briefing room followed by remarks from mitch mcconnell and harry reid on the senate floor. then to briefings after the party line vote to send the senate bill funding government back to the house. you'll hear first from senate democratic leaders, then republican senators ted cruz, marco rubio and mike lee. the senate today voted along party lines to remove the language from the house passed bill to defund the healthcare law.

vote, president obama spoke to reporters at the white house and said republican plans to delay or repeal his healthcare law would not happen. congress has until october 1 to pass a budget avoiding a government shutdown. the president begins by announcing he spoke on the phone hassananian president romani. this is about 15 minutes. >> good afternoon, everybody. before i discuss the situation in congress, let me say something about opportunities in our foreign policy. just now i spoke on the phone with president rouhani of iran. the two of us discussed our ongoing efforts to reach an agreement over iran's nuclear program. i reiterated what i said in new york. while there will surely be important obstacles to moving forward and success is not guaranteed, i believe we can reach a conference of solution. i have directed secretary kerry

to pursue this effort with the iranian government. we had constructive discussions with our partners, the european union, united kingdom, france, germany, russia, china, together with the iranian foreign minister, and going forward president rouhani and i will direct our teams to working expeditiously in cooperation with the p5 plus one to pursue an agreement. throughout this process we will stay in close touch with our friends and allies in the region, including israel. we are mindful of all the challenges ahead. the very fact that this was the first communication between an american and iranian president since 1979 underscores the deep mistrust between our countries, but indicates the process of -- the prospects of moving beyond that difficult history.

i believe there is a basis for a resolution. iran's supreme leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons. i have made clear that we respect the right of the iranian people to access peaceful nuclear energy in the context of iran meeting its obligations. the test will be meaningful transparent, and verifiable , actions, which can also bring relief from the conference of -- comprehensive international sanctions that are currently in place. resolving this issue would also serve as a major step forward in a new relationship between the united states and the islamic republic of iran. this is based on mutual interest and respect. it will facilitate a better relationship between iran and the international community as well as others in the region, one that would help the iranian people fulfill their potential, but also help us address other concerns that could bring greater peace and stability to the middle east. a path to a meaningful agreement

will be difficult, and at this point both sides have significant concerns that will have to be overcome. but i believe we have a responsibility to pursue diplomacy, and we have a unique opportunity to make progress with the new leadership in tehran. i also communicated to president rouhani my respect for the iranian people. this comes on the same day as we can possibly come to a diplomatic resolution on syria, when they security council votes. this binding resolution will ensure that the assad regime must keep its commitments or face consequences. we will have to be vigilant about following through, but this could be a civilian victory -- a significant victory for the international community and demonstrate how strong diplomacy can allow us to secure our country and pursue a better

world. now, america's security and leadership do not just depend on our military strength or diplomacy. first and foremost, america's strength depends on its strong economy, where our middle class is growing and everyone who works hard has a chance to get ahead. let me speak about the situation that has developed over the past few weeks on capitol hill. here at home the united states congress has two pressing responsibilities -- pass a budget on time and pay our bills on time. if congress chooses not to pass the end of monday, the fiscal year, they will shut down the government along with many vital services that the american people depend on. the good news is that within the past couple hours, the united states senate acted responsibly by voting to keep our government

open and delivering the services the american people expect. now it is up to house republicans to do the same. i say that because obviously democrats have a great interest in making sure that these vital services continue to help the american people. so far, republicans in the house have refused to move forward. and here is the thing. unlike the last time they threatened this course of action, this debate is not really about deficits. our deficits are falling at the fastest pace that they have in 60 years. by the end of this year we will have cut our deficit by more than half since i took office. so that is not what this is about. in fact, if you have been following the discussion, the republicans in the house do not make a pretense that that is what this is about. instead, house republicans are

so concerned with appeasing the tea party that they have threatened a government shutdown or worse unless i gut or repeal the affordable care act. i said this yesterday, let me repeat it. that is not going to happen. more than 100 million americans currently already have new benefits and protections under the law. on tuesday, about 40 million more americans will be able to finally buy quality affordable health care, just like anybody else. those marketplaces will be open for business on tuesday, no matter what, even if there is a government shutdown. that is a done deal. as i said before, if republicans have specific ideas on how to genuinely improve the law, rather than cut it, rather than delay it, rather than repeal it, and i am happy to work with them on that, through the normal democratic processes. but that will not happen under

the threat of a shutdown. so over the next three days, house republicans will have to decide whether to join the senate and keep the government open or shut it down, because they cannot get their way on an issue that has nothing to do with the deficit. i realize a lot of what is taking place now is political grandstanding, but this grandstanding has real effects on real people. if the government shuts down on tuesday, military personnel, including those risking their lives overseas for us right now, will not get paid on time. federal loans for rural communities and small business owners, families buying a home will be frozen. i'm starting to get letters from people worried about that this will have an impact on them directly. critical research into life- saving discoveries will be immediately halted. federal government has a large role across the country and

touches the lives of millions of people, and those people will be harmed. even the threat of a shutdown already is probably having a dampening effect on our economy. we saw that the last time these kinds of shenanigans were happening up on capitol hill. any republican in congress who is currently watching, i encourage you to think about who you are hurting. there are probably young people in your office right now looking to work for you without much pay because they believed that public service was notable. -- was noble. you are preparing to send them home without a paycheck. you have families with kids back in your district who serve their country in the federal government, and now they might have to plan how they will get by if you shut the government down. past shutdowns have disrupted the economy, and this shutdown would as well. it would throw a wrench into the gears of our economy at a time

when those gears have gained some traction. that is why many republicans senators and many republican governors have urged republicans to knock it off, pass a budget, and move on. let's get this done. this brings me to congress' second responsibility. once they vote to keep the government open, they have to vote within the next couple of weeks to allow the treasury to pay the bills for the money that congress has already spent. i want to repeat -- raising the debt ceiling is simply authorizing the treasury to pay for what congress has already authorized. failure to meet this responsibility would be far more dangerous than a government shutdown. it would effectively be an economic shutdown with impacts not just here, but around the world. we do not fully understand what

might happen, the dangers involved, because no congress has ever actually threatened default. but we know it would have a profound destabilizing effect on the entire economy, on the world economy, because america is the bedrock of world investment. the dollar is the reserve currency. the debt that is issued by the treasury is the foundation for our capital markets. that is why you do not fool with it. some republicans have suggested that unless i agreed to an even longer list of demands, rolling

back pet projects they would like to see, we would push the button, turn america into default for the first time in history, and risk throwing us back into a recession. i am willing to work with anybody who wants to have a serious conversation about our fiscal future. i have demonstrated that, by putting forward serious reforms that would bring down our long-term deficits. i have said in the past and i will continue to say that i'm willing to make a whole bunch of tough decisions and ones that may not the entirely welcomed by my own party, but we are not going to do this under the threat of blowing up the entire economy. i will not negotiate over congress' responsibility to pay

the bills that have already been racked up. voting for the treasury to pay america's bills is not a concession to me. that is not doing me a favor. that is simply carrying out the solemn responsibilities that come with holding office up there. i do not know how i can be more clear about this. nobody gets to threaten the full faith and credit of the united states just to extract political concessions. no one gets to hurt our economy when millions of innocent people, just because there are a couple of laws you do not like. it has not been done in the past. we are not going to start doing it now. i am not going to start setting a precedent, not just for me, but for future presidents, where one chamber in congress can basically say each time there

needs to be a vote to make sure that the treasury pays its bills, we will not sign it unless our particular hobbyhorse gets advanced. imagine if you had a republican president and a democratic speaker, and the speaker said we will not pass a debt ceiling unless we raise corporate taxes by 40%, or unless we pass background checks on guns, or whatever other list of agenda items democrats were interested in. does anybody actually think that we would be hearing from republicans that that was acceptable behavior? that is not how our constitutional system is designed. we are not going to do it. the american people have worked too hard to recover from a bunch of crises, several of them now over the last couple of years

inflicted by the same folks in congress we are talking about now, to see extremists in congress cause another crisis. keep in mind this whole thing has to do with keeping government open for a few months. the continuing resolution, the bill that is designed to avert a government shutdown, basically just funds the government for a couple of months so we could be doing this all over again. i'm sure the american people are thrilled about that. that is why we have to break this cycle. my message to congress is this do not shut down the government, do not shut down the economy, pass a budget on time, they our -- pay our bills on time. refocus on the everyday concerns of the american people. there will be differences between democrats and

republicans. we can have all kinds of conversations about how to resolve those differences. there will be areas where we can work together and where we can disagree. but do not threaten to burn the house down simply because you have not gotten 100% of your way. that is not how our democracy is supposed to work. every day that this goes on is another day that we are not focused on doing what we need to be focused on, which is rebuilding this great country as -- this great country of ours so our middle class is growing and everybody has opportunity if they are willing to work hard. that is what i am focused on. that is what congress should be focused on as well. thank you very much, everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> house speaker john boehner's

office released a statement following the presidents remarks. following a weeks debate, republican leader mitch mcconnell and democratic leader harry read spoke on the floor before the senate voted. their comments run about 20 minutes. following the comments, the chamber voted both remove the language defining the healthcare law and to shorten the length of the continuing resolution to november 15.

>> i'm not sure if you have a fax machine at home. not many americans do anymore. need to a lot of small businesses. so it seems a bit odd to tell small businesses they need to fax in enrollment forms for obama care. that is just what the obama administration is now doing. i might paraphrase the president. the 80s called and they want to health policy back. to be fair, snail mail is also an option. it looks like the presidents people will try to have the issue fixed soon, despite passing the law more than three years ago. sameagain, this is the president who told us that obama care is working the way it is supposed to, president obama said. those who are to have health care won't see many changes under this law. the same guy who promised us his healthcare ideas would make american premiums lower and that they would be able to keep the

plans they liked. so forgive me for being a little bit skeptical, given how these other rosy scenarios have played out. i am not the only skeptic out there. just ask the folks who have artie gotten laid off or seen their hours cut. ask the graduate who can't find anything but part-time work. ask the twentysomething who is going to lose her employer over inlan and pay more the exchanges. the reality simply does not match up with the rhetoric, that includes the presidents remarks yesterday over in maryland. he said there is no widespread evidence that obama care is hurting jobs. that is actually what he said. no widespread evidence. we all know the president was hanging around with bill clinton the other day, what we didn't know was that he was getting pointers on syntax. it makes you wonder, what would constitute widespread evidence

of job loss in this president's mind? yesterday his press secretary dismissed reports of a company dropping health insurance for 55,000 employees anecdote, maybe that's how things look from the south lawn. it looks a lot different if you have just lost her health care plan that you liked and you wanted to keep. senator moynihan used to tell us, data is the plural of and tote. .ata is the plural of anecdote there are just too many stories about the impact of obamacare, far too many to be discussed with the wave of a hand. ironically, the same day the president was paying more rosy scenarios in maryland, the administration announced yet another delay in this loss -- in this law's implementation. the revelation

of yet more exchange problems. this time with an exchange here in d.c.. you might take anyone of the problems, explain it away, say doesn't matter, say it is an anecdote, but what we are here is a constant drip drip. of seeing what is happening to our jobs, our health care and the economy. it all adds up to just one thing. the law in trouble. a law that needs to be repealed. that is the goal of every member of the republican conference here in the senate that is united on the need to repeal obama care. we want to replace it with sensible bipartisan reforms that will actually work and in a few minutes, each and every one of us will vote against funding obamacare. the american people want this law repealed. republicans want it repealed. i would not be heard surprised

if a number of our democratic colleagues secretly want it repealed as well. that welem here is can't get that done unless some of our friends on the other side are prepared to step up and work with us on the issue because there are 54 of them in 46 of us. this doesn't mean that we will give up the fight if they don't, we won't. there are a lot of other things we can do in the meantime. we can follow the administration's lead and offer an obamacare delay for the american people. the administration seems to think as mrs. deserve a break from obamacare. doesn't the middle-class deserve the same treatment? republicans think so. i think we might be able to convince enough democrats to join us on that. to help us provide fairness, fairness to the middle-class. yesterday one democratic senator already signaled his willingness to delay some of the worst aspects of the law as well. he called a delay for the

american people very reasonable and sensible. he posed a question, don't you think that would be fair? the answer is yes that would be fair. that is a question for our democratic colleagues to respond to. any of them know how badly this law is hurting their constituents. isn't that just the fair thing to do? of course it is. i'm calling on democratic senators to put the middle class ahead of the president's pride and call for a delay for everyone. we have filed legislation to do just that. a bipartisan majority of the house already supports it. let's work together to actually do it. once we get that done, let's keep working to get rid of this law and replace it with real reforms, not with ideas from the 1980s, but with common sense, step-by-step reforms that will actually lower the cost for the american people and spare them from this terrible law. , i yield the

floor. order, thee previous time until 1230 is reserved for the two leaders for the final 10 minutes reserved for the majority leader. during my time in washington, i have had the opportunity to work with many reasonable and responsible republicans, including those serving in this body today. republicans ine this institution, the united state senate and respect the government which is support. partyday, the republican has been infected by a small and instructive faction that would rather tear down the house and govern from it. these extremists are more interested in putting on a show, as one republican put it, then in legislating. that is why they have presented the senate from taking action to avert a government shutdown last

night to put on a show today. that same vocal minority is determined to waste the dwindling hours before government shutdown. one day, basically. ringsminute that passes is one minute cluster the shutdown, a shutdown that would shatter our economy. they continue to obstruct and delay. you see, mr. president, a bad day for government is a good day for the anarchists among us. those who believe in no government. that is their belief. anarchists of the tea party believe in no government. are backed by a very wealthy group of people who fund them. note thesetant to

two-party obstructionists don't represent mainstream republicans , either in this body or mainstream republicans in our country. thertunately, their grip on rudder of the republican party is firm. the last few years, these radicals in the house and senate have driven america from crisis to crisis. ,e lurch from crisis to crisis leaving a trail of economic distraction behind. now they have taken the united states government hostage and demanded an impossible answer. the affordable care act has been the law of the land for four years. the united states supreme court has declared it constitutional. it will help 25 million to 35 million people in america who are currently living without health insurance. it will allow them to get access

to the life-giving care they need and deserve. i don't know if people really know what it means to not have health insurance. not have the ability to go to the doctor and the hospital when you're sick or hurt. some of us do, mr. president. how tenss understand of millions of people in america cannot go to the hospital when they are sick or when they are hurt. mr. president, i was a boy, about 10 or 11 years old. i was so sick. i can remember how sick i was. i had been sick for quite a long time. the little house we lived in. but you see, we didn't have doctors. there were no doctors for 50 miles.

.e had no car i was really sick. we didn't go to doctors. but it was obvious that i was really ill. so one of my older brothers came to visit and he was with a friend. don,friend of my brother, agreed to take me to the hospital. hospital and ie still have the scar, mr. president. i had a growth on my large intestine. i would have died had i not gone to the hospital. like to not gois to the hospital when you're sick.

we took and wash -- we took in wash. through a tv wagon came which was a truck that would do x-rays of somebody's just to find out if they had tuberculosis. it was still around. go heard myn't mother went and had her chest x- ray. cameresident, the results back in a little card in the mail. she had tuberculosis. what did we do? what did she do? nothing. nothing. boy caring about my mother, i worried so much about that. imagine even to this day

how she must have felt. , it looks like it was a false positive. but that doesn't take away the concern that i had for a long time. i can't imagine, i repeat how my mother must have felt. had some view of what it is like not to be able to go to the doctor or hospital when you are sick or hurt. again, our member my little brother coming along on his bicycle he fell off and slid and was hurt. .e was crying i guess he was 10 years old and no one was home. i helped him get to the house and laid down.

i went and found my mother. my brother never went to the doctor and had a broken leg. he laid on that bed. you couldn't touch the bed it hurt so much. she laid there until he could get up and walk about 10 days later. these people who just nonchalantly don't focus on the fact that millions of americans have no health insurance. we can't just walk away from this. the healthcare law that we have, mr. president is important.

republicans fought long and hard in opposition to obamacare. mr. president, they lost. it was a fair fight. made their case against obama directly to the american people in november last year and they lost again. not by a small margin, he won by 5 million votes. what was the main issue in that campaign? it was healthcare. the american people overwhelmingly reelected the president. one reason they did is because of healthcare. floor, rightthis over there, a colleague of ours, a senior senator from arizona, john mccain spoke of elegance about this law. a law he opposes. this is what he said, the people

spoke. they spoke much to my dismay, but they spoke and reelected the president of the united states. that doesn't mean that we give up our efforts to try to replace and repeal obamacare, but elections have consequences. of the american people supported the president of the united states and renewed his stewardship of this country. uson't like it, but all of should respect the outcome of elections which reflect the will of the people. who said this again? who said this? who is this john mccain? fighter in war and in public service. man who held the mantle of the republican party's nomination to be president of the united states. at some gadfly, but an american patriot. the history books will talk about that in generations to come.

the republicans heard his , for which the senate and the country should be grateful. so mr. president, the challenge fall, closing in on the end of the fiscal year, those of us who respect the system of government devised by america's founders, those of us who believe in the rule of law and that elections reflect the will of the people will face a test. can we prevent an economically disastrous government shutdown and can we protect the full faith and credit of the united states? mr. president, one newspaper, not lots of newspapers but one newspaper, look at the headlines. blocked aners

strategy to avoid shutdown. one newspaper. another headline. is it any wonder the stock market is going down? is it any wonder that people are concerned? is it any wonder that someone like the woman who works at the parks said to me that i have been through this before? i am not going to get aid for my work. -- i am not going to get paid

for my work. i began to let these modern succeed?s democrats will vote to revert a government shutdown -- will vote to avert a government shutdown. message we will send a to radical republicans that we will not allow the law of the land to be used as a hostage, a law that has been in place for four years. many of myd that so senate republican colleagues seem to understand the stakes of this debate. the economic health of the still struggling nation and economic well-being of still struggling families. i urged sensible republicans and house of representatives to follow our lead, to follow the lead of republicans over here. let the house democrats vote,

don't just make it a majority, let the 435 members that serve in the house of representatives vote, pass a clean bill to avert a shutdown. defy the anarchists, respect the rule of law and help the senate govern. >> mr. president, i ask that the comments left for senator mcconnell and may be given back and that we begin the vote. following the 54-44 vote, senate democratic leaders spoke to reporters and called on house republicans to vote on their version of the bill. speakers include majority leader harry reid, chuck schumer and patty murray. their remarks were about 20 minutes >> the government is going to shut down in three

days, 10 hours, five minutes, nine seconds. the senate has acted. we have done it with bipartisan cooperation. we passed the only goal that will avert a government shutdown monday night. i said this on the floor, i say it again -- this is it. time is gone. our rules are different than the house. the bill would pass the house -- the bill that we just passed would pass the house overwhelmingly if the speaker had the courage to bring it to the floor and let 435 members of the house of representatives vote. i think they should think very carefully about their next step. this will force a government shutdown. they need to accept what we just passed. to be absolutely clear, we are going to accept nothing that relates to obamacare.

there is a time and place for everything, and this is not that time or place. we are willing to debate or willing to do that, on any issue, but we need to do it in a call, rational atmosphere which we do not have now and we have not created that non-calm, non- rational atmosphere. if people want to help us improve obamacare, we have done that before, we are happy to work with them, but not in some slam-bang way force us to do the measure. we are not going to be extorted. the country is not going to be extorted. we are not going to have a gun to our heads. we are not going to allow republicans to say give us what we want or the economy is going to close. think about that. this is no way to govern, and it has to end. the time for games is over.

the american people, not surprisingly, expect their elected officials to act like adults, reasonable adults, not adolescents desperate for any attention they can find. think about how this one group, the tea party -- think how they look to the american people, sitting around a kitchen table, worrying about a job. it has tremendous impact. i read on the senate floor today headlines from one newspaper today, one newspaper, 12 different headlines about how bad things are if the government shuts down. these were not editorials. they were news story headlines.

the middle class are the ones we were elected to serve. that's who we should be thinking about. they are the ones who are going to pay the price if the republicans force a government shutdown. middle-class families all over america do their very best every day to make ends meet and provide for their families. but when they turn on the news, they see elected officials wasting time with silly games, and that is what they are, trying to score cheap political points to satisfy a very small number of people in america. as i said earlier today, they do not represent republicans around the country, those tea party anarchists. they do not represent the republicans in the senate. but they have had the ability to basically stop us from doing anything.

how do you think they feel? here is a president who less than a year ago won an election by 5 million votes, 5 million votes. obamacare has been the law for four years. why don't they get that? why don't they talk about something else? people deserve better, so i say to my republican colleagues, you better put an end to this hostage-taking, because to go further you should accept our bill or let the whole house vote on it, and i say that to the speaker. time is winding down. three days, 10 hours, 15 seconds. america deserves better than

what they have tried to do to our country. chairman mikulski? >> the senate has acted responsibly. it has sent to the house and of representatives a continuing resolution to keep the government open until november 14, that continues funding levels at fiscal 2013, and enables us to lay the groundwork for longer-term solutions for the funding for fiscal 2014 and cancel sequester by reducing public debt. the house -- the senate reacted and acted very responsibly.

into procedural votes, we got over 75 votes. for final passage, we got a majority. now the time is for the house to act. the house has to understand that ping-pong politics only pains. it does not get to the bottom line. we ask them to accept what we have sent over so we could get into the real issues of what is fiscal 2014 going to look like, how can we reduce public debt by $100 billion a year, do it in a balanced way, and be able to keep our economy going to our government functioning, and american people really at work? failure to pass the cr will lead to a shutdown. a shutdown is not an idle exercise. it will mean that only very

minimal, essential services of this government will be run. it is not just turning out the lights on the washington monument. it means programs like applying for your social security benefits means that those offices will either be closed or have reduced hours. it means the disability backlog will only get longer and longer. it means the loans and grants being processed to buy their home or to get a student loan will be delayed. in other words the whole , apparatus of the government squeaks to a halt. people who are literally placing themselves in the line of fire, our military in afghanistan, whether our fbi agents at their now, making sure there is not another terrorist attack, food

-- are going after sexual predators. they will be on the job, but while they are on the job they are going to have to take iou's from their employer. they should not get in iou in they should not get in iou in their checkbook. what we owe them is making sure we act responsibly. what i do is ask the house to accept the commonsense solution that the senate has sent so the president can sign it and we can get on to solving the real problems of the united states in a way that is effective, affordable, and mean something to the people we represent. >> consider what we witnessed this week. the effort that had been

underway, a 21-our speech on the floor of the senate, the efforts of the most conservative tea party groups in america putting pressure on the united states senate, all sorts of efforts to persuade, cajole, and threaten the republicans in the senate on the votes that we have just witnessed. what happened? 44 republican senators were there today. 25 of the 44 senators voted not to shut the government down, to move forward. i hope the speaker looks at this honestly. his approach, the tea party approach, was rejected by the republicans in the senate today, 25-19, and after all that effort, after all the threats, after the ads being run against republican senators right now,

they voted with us not to shut the government down, 25 out of 44. for those that have given up on bipartisanship, look at what happened on the floor of the senate today. it happened was in my mind a repudiation of tea party politics, a repudiation of the scenario, one scene after another. we should take that message across the rotunda to the speaker's caucus, let them look at the cold hard facts of numbers that happened on the floor of the senate. the democrats stood as one on all the important issues. when it came to this critical procedural issue, two that could have derailed this ever, we had the bipartisan support of republican senators, and the vast majority of those on the original cloture vote and then

the support on a critical vote, a budget vote on point of order. that to me says there is still hope. please reward those who stood with us today and make sure that those who did not, both sides of the rotunda, i understand they are playing with a lot of problems for america, problems for the government, services we provide, and for our economy. >> thank you, and i want to thank my colleagues. here in the sense we have just taken action to avert another self-inflicted wound to our country. senator cruz and senator lee's attempts to defund obamacare -- there were many heartening votes. we thought we would really -- it would be a nail-biter on the motion to waive the budget act, but 14 republicans, including senators mcconnell and cornyn, voted to waive that, because they realized that it is bad for the republican party, bad for

the country. senator mcconnell stepped aside, he let the process play out, and mainstream republicans helped democrats pass the cr to avoid a shutdown. so now the ball is in speaker boehner's court. everyone was saying this will never happen. we are now three days, nine hours away. it keeps getting lower, if you have not noticed, and we are getting closer every second. this could well happen. the unthinkable a week ago is very possible today. and why? because the republicans' house caucus is tied in a knot. they say many different things, but they are saying right now that they will not take up our bill to avoid a government

shutdown, and instead, they reach into their hats and pull out a new idea every day or some republican proposal to attach to. they are tying themselves in all kinds of knots, but the solution is staring them right in the face -- pass the senate bipartisan bill, plain and simple. we're saying to the speaker, like that quotation from "field of dreams," listen to the voices telling you to pass this bill, ease your pain. put this bill on the floor, it will pass, and then you can move onto the next issue. make no mistake about it, if speaker boehner tries to attach anything to the cr and send it back, then the republicans will be shutting down the government because we will be at the risk of one person, senator cruz, no matter what else, anything he puts in that bill, let senator cruz delay it, the government shuts down.

we are making a plea to the rational and mainstream republicans, do not shut the government down, because if you shut it down you are hurting people. what the republicans and the house want to do is hold hostage the middle class, millions of innocent federal workers who will not get their paychecks, hundreds of thousands of veterans who will not be able to process their disabilities, tens of thousands of construction workers who are working on federal highway projects -- all of these are innocent people, and yet the republican caucus says unless they get their way, their whole way, every bit of

their way, they will hold these people hostage and hurt them even though they had nothing to do with the crisis. so, speaker boehner, put our bill on the floor, stand aside, let members vote their conscience, and the government will stay open tuesday morning because we are confident there are more than enough votes to pass the senate bill. the tactic of waiting until the last minute come to deals has been used a lot in recent years. and in the past, it has worked out at the very last minute. let's hope that happens again, but if speaker boehner attaches anything about the likelihood of that happening becomes smaller and smaller.has passed a clean short-term funding bill and the only thing that can cause a completely unnecessary government shutdown is another tea party tantrum in that house. house republicans have got to

stop playing political games with our families and our economy and past the senate shutdown prevention bill without any new gimmicks or tea party panders. and then we need to join together at the table and work toward a long term balanced and bipartisan budget deal that the american people expect and deserve. families across the country are sick and tired of the constant crises, and of all the challenges we have as a nation, this one should be easy to solve. the absolute bare minimum, we should be able to do in congress, is to keep our government open. the very least we should be able to do is deliver to our constituents and not actively sabotage our economic recovery. the senate has done responsible thing today. now it is up to boehner to decide if he represents the tea party or if he is going to do the right thing for the american people.

>> are there any active negotiations, any avenues with speaker boehner now? >> no. it is clear, the four or five of us, we have made it very clear that the only way to solve this problem is to accept what we have done, just accept it. if they are interested in shutting down the government and we know there are some of these people, part of the weird caucus over there, who want to shut the government down -- they have said so publicly -- i heard something on the radio today where one member said the debt ceiling does not matter. this is the weird caucus. >> [indiscernible] >> i am not going to speculate

on what they are going to do. let them send us whatever they are going to send us and we will send it right back to them, stripped of all the craziness that they have. we have made it clear, the only way to keep the government open is to do the right thing. the american people are wondering out there, there are 435 members of congress, why can't they vote? that is what they were elected to do. why won't the speaker let them vote? it would pass overwhelmingly. yes. >> you know better than anybody that legislating is [indiscernible] to play the devil's advocate, why wouldn't house republicans put something else on this spending bill and send it back to you and try to blame you for the government shutdown? >> because it is obvious that will shut down the government. we cannot move -- >> why would it not be your responsibility? >> you're using their caucus'

math. >> a handful people in your caucus voted to vote for your amendment for this -- >> handful? they all did. >> it may be politically unpopular for the next year. what do you say to them because they will be accused of sending obamacare -- what do you say to those members? >> we had that debate. it was romney-obama. they spent tens of millions of dollars. the american people said, romney, you're wrong, we do not accept your ridiculous charges, and the american people do not accept these ridiculous charges now. this is hard for me to continue

to say this, i get tired of hearing myself. this is a law four years old, declared constitutional. let them find something else to be weird about. [laughter] >> in 2012, every democratic incumbent was attacked for being for obamacare. do you know how many lost? none. >> does that extend to the sweep of -- [indiscernible] >> yes. thanks, everybody. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] senator cruz and others called on the house to continue the push of defending the president's health care law. this is about 15 minutes.

>> we now move on to the next stage of this battle. senate democrats stood united in refusing to listen to the american people. obamacare is the biggest job killer in this country. millions of americans are hurting. they are seeing their health care threatened, and yet sadly today senate democrats stood together and refused to listen to the american people. now we move to the house. the house last week showed remarkable courage, standing up and fighting to defund obamacare. the house listened to the american people, and i am hopeful, confident that the house will continue to stand its ground, continue to listen to the american people, and step up to respond and to stop this train wreck, this nightmare that is obamacare.

when that happens, the bill will come back here, and it will be an opportunity for senate republicans to come together, for senate republicans to come home. i very much hope when the house bill comes back up all 46 republicans stand together, stand united, and i hope that some of the democrats who today decided not to listen to their constituents hear the voices of the millions of americans who are hurting and do the right thing and stand up and stop this train wreck, the nightmare of a law. "train wreck" and "nightmare" are not my terms, they are the term by the lead democratic offer of obamacare and one of the leading union leaders in the country. it is the truth that millions of

americans are suffering because the law is not working. >> thank you. thank you for being here today and thank you for the work you have put into this effort. it sounds like the democrats in washington are obsessed to shutting down the government. i do not know of anyone who wants to shut down the government. the only thing we want to shut down obamacare is because of the harm it is doing to the middle class, to hard-working people who are working hard just to get ahead. our lives we have been told this is a country where if you work hard and you sacrificed you can achieve a better life. those of us in elected office should be against anything that is an impediment to that dream. obamacare stands in the wake of that. that is why we are so passionate. today we had the opportunity to do that. democrats come from states where people who do not support obamacare, decided it was more important to the hard-working men and women of our country. this only gets worse from here for the middle class and for people trying to get ahead. i hope we will have an opportunity to do it again. we will take advantage of every

opportunity we have to fight on behalf of the men and women of this country who want a chance to achieve a better life for themselves for them and their families. thank you. >> we all know government will be funded. the question is whether it is funded with or without obamacare. the house republicans last week, listening to the voice of the american people, often for the latter, to keep government funded while protecting people from the harmful effects of obamacare. today the senate took the step

of bringing up that legislation, not as is, never presenting the senate with the opportunity to vote on the measure as it exists. they chose to use a device that allows the majority leader to bring up one amendment, an amendment that gutted the house- passed continuing resolution, and prohibit everyone else from introducing amendments. this is unfortunate. the american people continue to be alarmed why this law, a law that has never enjoyed the majority of -- a law that has never had the support of the majority of the american people and a law that becomes less popular as time goes on and with good reason. i ask the same question -- how many more americans will have to

lose their jobs, have to be told that their hours are being cut or their wages are being diminished or they are losing their health care plans? 20,000 home depot employees were informed last week as a result of this job. our job is to protect the american people any way we can from the harmful effects of this law and we continue to explore every opportunity to do that. >> there seems to be some disarray within the republican party. there was an open split on the senate floor yesterday. this disunity among republicans does that argue against your fight? >> it is unfortunate senate republicans were not united this time around, but i am encouraged that house republicans have been united, that last week when they voted a stood together to defund obamacare. i hope and believe that when the house takes the this up again,

house republicans will continue to stand together on the side of the american people, and i am also hopeful when the house sends the bill back it will be an opportunity for every senate republican tuesday for the principles we all share, to stand with the american people. >> is there an orthodoxy you expect out of republicans leading to debate on the floor, as with senator corker yesterday? >> every republican has been outspoken in eloquence against obamacare. when the house stands up and does the right thing, i think it will present the opportunity for every senate republican to stand arm in arm with the house republicans. and then it will present an opportunity for senate democrats.

senate democrats did not listen to the american people, to all the young people coming out of school who are not able to find a job. they did not listen to all the single moms waiting tables were finding themselves working 29 hours a week. they did not listen to all the union workers who are seeing their health insurance coverage trend to be taken away. -- threatened to be taken away. as james hoffa said, millions of americans are seeing their health care destroyed, and "destroyed" was the language he used, and today senate immigrants do not listen to those millions of americans, but this is a process that will go back and forth between the house and the senate. the house was always in the position where it was going to lead, and from my perspective, we look forward to helping and supporting the house standing up and doing the right thing and fighting for the american people. >> will there be another real filibuster -- [indiscernible]

>> [indiscernible] >> again, the government will be funded. the question is whether we fund it with obamacare or without. the house passed a continuing resolution. the senate has chosen to strip out that language from this measure which is now in the process of being passed by the senate. that was unfortunate. this is not about calling for a shutdown. >> what do you want to do the house to do in the next steps? >> i want the house do stand with the american people against

obamacare, in favor of keeping government funded while defunding obamacare. >> how will that happen? >> a variation of this. what form that takes will be up to the members of the house, and to their leadership, i am confident they will do the right thing. >> there are some members of the house who have said what they could pass might be something that could pass for both parties here, maybe a delay in obamacare for a shorter time or even a repeal of the medical device act. would you guys hold that up with a filibuster or would you let them take a vote on that? >> it does not make sense to speculate on possible bills the house might pass. you should see what the house passes. in my view what is critical is that the house passes a measure that protects the american people from the harms that obamacare is causing them the jobs that are being lost, from being forced into part-time work, from skyrocketing premiums, from losing your health insurance. that is what i am confident the

house will do. >> [inaudiible] >> we have had numerous conversations with members of the house, but at the end of the day, all 435 members are elected by the people in the districts, and each member of the house has responsibility to listen to their constituents. i'm confident if the house the since the people as it did last week it will continue to step forward and respond to the suffering that is coming from obamacare. it was sad to see senate democrats together turn a blind ear to all the people suffering under obamacare during the extended filibuster that we

debated in. we read letters from people who are losing their health care. a few weeks ago ups sent a letter to employees saying they were going to lose their health care. people are hurting, and if the house continues to listen, they will act decisively to prevent the harms that are flowing. >> [inaudible] >> i have said for a long time i do not intend to vote for any continuing resolution that funds obamacare. i think obamacare is a train wreck, a disaster, a nightmare, to use the words of mr. hoffa. it is time we see more leaders in washington listening to the american people and helping stop this nightmare.

>> [indiscernible] >> i am not going to speculate on any possible continuing resolution that will come. on the vitter amendment, one of the things that frustrates the people so much is the hypocrisy in washington. obama has granted exemptions for big business, for members of congress, but hard-working american families are told there will be no exemption for you. if you do not happen to have high-paid lobbyists, if you do not walk the corridors of power, then the senate is apparently not listening to you and not interested in treating you as well as members of congress and big bigness. that is fundamentally wrong. the idea that washington should operate under principles that are good for them but not for me is why people are so frustrated with washington. the ruling class is treated differently from hard-working american families. the people hurting the most are young people, single moms,

hispanics, african-americans, people who are being forced into part-time work, facing skyrocketing premiums, and who are losing their health insurance. i hope both houses of congress step forward, listen to the people, and stop obamacare, the biggest job killer in this country. thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> house members are tweeting about working over the weekend. says -- allntative set for a weekend at the capitol. called onone says --

the gop to stop holding the affordable care act hostage and threatening to shut down government. onthe fiscal year ends monday, september 30. in house gavels in back tomorrow at 10 a.m. eastern for general speeches. -- live coverage on c- span. to worke is scheduled through the weekend and gaveling back in saturday at 10 a.m. and noon eastern to work on a bill funding the government. next is house minority leader nancy pelosi speaking to reporters on republicans tried to deep on the health care law.

and some house tea party members talking but the impact of the law on the country. later, planning for a possible government shutdown. nancy pelosi talks about avoiding a government shutdown and the republican strategy of trying to defund the health care law. this is half an hour. >> good morning. in just four days, the american people will see the affordable care act come into effect. on october 1, the health insurance marketplaces will open

for enrollment, offering american families more competition, more choices, and most importantly, affordable quality health care. a new study this week shows that 95% of uninsured americans will see insurance premiums that cost much less than expected. the average american consumer will be able to choose from 53 different plans offered by insurance companies who they know and hopefully can trust. premiums are even lower for workers and families who qualify for the tax credit. an openly competitive marketplace is just one way millions of americans are seeing lower costs and higher coverage thanks to the affordable care act. nearly 13 million americans receive $1.1 billion in rebates from insurance companies last summer. that is because in our bill we had it show that the insurance companies must spend their money insuring people and not on advertising and the rest. 6.3 million seniors have already saved $6.1 billion on

prescription drug medication. that is because of closing the doughnut hole. 105 million americans have received lifesaving preventative health care services for free. as you all know, being adults yourself, for those who need to be on their parents' policy, they can do that until age 26. that is in effect. children are not subjected to discrimination already because of pre-existing medical conditions. so much is already in effect, but so much more will happen january 1, and people can begin enrolling on october 1. it is transformational. it is about a healthier life, liberty to pursue your

happiness, whether you want to be a photographer, a writer, start your business and be self- employed, change jobs, you're not job-locked. you can follow your passion, not policy. it is entrepreneurial, as the president said yesterday in his great speech on the subject. it is entrepreneurial and frees people up to start their own businesses and not stay where they are because of health insurance. so i think it is very exciting. i mean, can you imagine being there when social security first came into effect or medicare when it became the law of the land? people began to enjoy the benefit of the legislation. that idea, compromise is made, translated into legislation that become public policy that will improve the lives of american people. it is very exciting. on the other hand, in a matter of days, four days until the

enrollment of the affordable care act, and just three days that we will see the question as to whether our government will be shut down. we must do everything we can to avoid that. but over and over again we find ourselves with the same question why are we at the brink again? that is the question people ask us as i travel throughout the country. just to put it in context chronologically -- you know i love temporal markers. where we are today and how we got here. on march 1, you will recall the president called the four leaders to the oval office to talk about how we would proceed with the legislative agenda that included the project.

the republican leadership, mr. boehner -- speaker boehner and leader mcconnell said that they wanted to proceed under the regular order. that was their mantra. for those outside of the beltway, regular order means you pass a bill in the house, you pass a bill in the senate, and then you send it to conference to negotiate, to reconcile your differences. we welcomed back the order of conference committees. i think that transparency goes to the process of the american people. so the regular order is was going to be. house passed the bill. senate passed the bill. and that was the end of the call to regular order. after the house passed its bill, you remember -- you remember, right? the republicans were saying no budget, no pay, as far as the senate was concerned. when are they going to pass the bill? well, only a matter of weeks. nonetheless, both houses passed the legislation. then we said, ok, regular order.

we now go to negotiate at a conference table. for around six months, nearly six months, republicans have refused to negotiate. they have refused to negotiate. and they say it is the president. the president was following the path of the regular order that they suggested. so by doing that, by turning their backs on what they said they wanted, and we certainly do, too, regular order, the republicans sowed the seeds of this dangerous partisan path we find ourselves in today. it is impossible for democrats to negotiate with house republicans because they cannot even negotiate with themselves. instead of legislating responsibly, they want to live dangerously, and that is not good for the american people. and now, with only three days left, republicans are threatening a shutdown that will hurt our economy, threaten jobs

and job creation and believe our -- leave our families with less security, and leave our country with less security and our economy with less stability. this is the most irresponsible way to negotiate a budget. it is not negotiating. especially when democrats have been ready and willing to work with republicans to pass a responsible bipartisan bill. you know that our ranking member on budget committee, chris van hollen, has proposed presenting a budget that would end the devastating across-the-board sequester cuts. reduce the deficit in a responsible way, keep the government open and working for the american people. we have asked over and over and over again for a vote on that budget. and republicans do not bring it to the floor because it makes so much sense. if the american people saw the alternative, i think the clarity and distinction would be made. and what mr. van hollen is suggesting is in keeping with what the chairman of the

republican appropriations committee, chairman rogers -- he said the house, senate, and white house must come together as soon as possible on a comprehensive compromise that repeals sequestration, takes the nation off this lurching path from fiscal crisis to fiscal crisis, reduces our deficits and debt, and provides a realistic path line, discretionary spending level to fund the government in a responsible and attainable way. chairman rogers, chairman of the republican appropriations committee. the committee has always been a bipartisan committee, but even their chairman is proposing a path that we fully subscribed to.

the number is too low for government to function in a responsible way for the american people. and it is not anything that the republican majority in the house seemed inclined to follow. if that were not enough, that were not enough, the house republicans are astonishing disregard for the stability of our economy goes well beyond their threats to shut down other basic services for the american people. they are holding the entire economy hostage, and their tea party ran some demands significant costs for economic security. if they succeed, you can expect higher interest rates for your mortgage, car payment, credit cards, and student loans. higher interest rates on your business loans that you used to pay employees and expand your businesses. the loans that grow a business. and significant blows to your 401(k), we went through this, when the stock market reacts. house democrats agree with the president.

this is nonnegotiable. you can have any conversation you want, but threats and willingness to default, the discussion of a lowered our credit rating two years ago. the ideology of the republicans is a luxury the american people cannot afford, especially when it comes to putting in doubt the full faith and credit of the united states of america. that is why house democrats and the leadership of deputy whip peter welsh are calling for a clean increase in our debt limit. 186 democrats have signed on to prevent another gop-manufactured crisis. regular order -- oh, nevermind. uncertainty within their own caucus, we do not know what they will vote for from one minute to the next. i do not think they know.

and the threat to the full faith and credit of the united states of america. it is beneath the dignity of the first branch of government, the legislative branch. we have a responsibility to come here to represent our districts, to advocate our points of view, and to come to terms with what compromise will work for the american people. any questions? yes, ma'am? >> do you have any comments to speaker boehner? >> i will see the speaker and speak with him about this. i have a great deal of respect for him and the office he holds. he is my friend. i have not received any -- i am trying to think, i do not know, i speak to him if i see him or we speak by phone. in other words, we have had a number of conversations. i just say do not expect this to be helpful when it comes to the

debt ceiling, because we do not think that is negotiable. but let's see what we can do, working together for the cr. the path that they are on is one that gets farther and farther away from any compromise -- you know what, let's see what they send. in all fairness, and, again, i respect the speaker and his role and the confidentiality of our conversation, only to say we stand ready to help on one but not to take down the full faith and credit of the united states of america. i do not know that they even know what they are doing, so it is impossible to say how we might react to something that they do not even know yet what they are going to suggest. >> democrats have done a very good job of holding fast and being disciplined on such things as the farm bill and other things, not helping them out, i guess. is this a different scenario?

>> it is about helping the american people. >> is this a different moment in the cr fight? you going to help them out? our members allowed to come back, and will you allow democratic members to sort of bail them out of this? >> members will vote the way members will vote. nobody can say what will happen until we see what they are going to propose. we had hoped that the republicans in the senate, that the tail would not be wagging the dog to the point that they cannot bring up the bill last night. but the tail did wag the dog. the bill will not come to the floor for another couple hours. after that we will see how republicans will react to that. people make judgments. nobody can tell you how the vote will go unless they know what it is they are voting on. but i do think -- i do not think there will be any support. 186 members signed the letter. many who do not sign letters are

there on the debt limit. that is nonnegotiable. >> is this more likely now than a few days ago, a shutdown? >> i hope not. i am always optimistic. everyday is a new day. this leadership on the republican side has brought bills to the floor but does not have the majority there. fewer than 40 of them voted for sandy aid, for example. fewer than 40. on one amendment, a powerful amendment that really mattered. on any sandy aid, fewer than 50. that is like 20% of the caucus that voted for sandy aid, not anywhere near 51%. a majority of them in a strong way voted against the violence against women act. yet, they had to bring it to the floor. 600 days after the authority expired and 90 days after sandy. very late and overdue.

nonetheless, they all largely voted against both of those measures. you know, the fiscal cliff vote, another budget bill and what happened there. in any case, it appears that there is a solution. it is bipartisan, and everybody has made their point. again, beyond that, they are a luxury the country cannot afford. >> how important is it for house democrats to have even just a short term crv above sequestration levels? and if it comes to it, do you think a shutdown would make a debt ceiling fight less likely? >> i just cannot buy into a government shutdown. again, i would not be able to sustain the energy level, the intellectual challenges all the

time if i thought we were on the path that it looks like we are on, but how do we get off it? let's hope that sanity will reign. everyone has made their point, and then we can make progress for the american people. we would love to split the difference on what we all agreed to in the budget control act in a bipartisan way, the 1.57 figure versus the 988. mr. hoyer would like to see that happen, as would i, and he would like to see that eliminate our sequestration altogether. we'd like to go to a place like that, but i do not know if the republicans are likely to compromise.

>> do you think it is important, even for one month or two months, to hold out on that? there is some debate about that, even in the short term. >> we will see what the senate since back to us. we're talking about a matter of hours. what we would love to see is the senate send a bill back. they have made their point, and they feel confident about fighting the fight and reaching their goal of putting your medical decisions in the hands of insurance companies, back into the hands of insurance companies, so that is what this is all about. now let's go forward. i mean, something happens, you make your attempt, it does not work. how long do you just bang your head against the wall at the expense of our country? so let's just see what they

send. as i said to yesterday and the day before, it is really hard to talk about and speculate on where members will be and how we will work together and build that consensus when we do not know what the republicans will send us. >> what is the functional effect in terms of getting an eventual agreement if what transpires over this weekend is a much shorter-term cr that brings the process closer to the debt limit and those things become a little more congealed, i will say, closer together? what is the functional effect of that? >> well, in fact, they were closer together. they were on the same path. they were in tandem, and then republicans realized that they could not get the debt ceiling raised no matter how much baggage they attached to that engine.

the full faith and credit of the united states of america is not something that should be tied to closing down government. the closer it gets, the more unreasonable it gets, the more irresponsible it gets. i would hope that the scenario described is not one that we come to, because it is two different subjects. yes, they are all about budget, but one is the full faith and credit of the united states of america and the other is a priority debate on spending and saving and growth. we all should be about growth. everything the republicans are talking about, whether it is not lifting the debt ceiling or making the cuts they want to make without making the investments that we should be making, it is about slowing growth and we are losing a million jobs as it is with that sequester number. we will lose a million jobs. some say 1.6 million.

i will be my usual conservative self and say one million on that subject, most defensible subject. this is silly. maybe, maybe they did not get some orientation on how serious the work is that we do here. clearly, they are a manifestation of what president washington cautioned against when he left office, which were political parties at war with their own government. and that is what we have, wagging the dog -- the tail wagging the dog of the republican party now. >> there have been in some of these legislative cul-de-sacs. the other point made a moment ago, are you surprised that we are this late in the game and there is not back-and-forth that the white house? meetings at the white house, back channel talks between the chiefs of staff and the chief of staff on boehner's side.

none of that is happening. that seems very strange. >> it is very strange in light of the fact that on march 1 in the oval office, the republican leaders said they wanted regular order. regular order is house passes a bill, senate passes a bill, and we go to the table. seeing what happened there, we were very pleased. because regular order is what we come here to do. it is a term that is fraught with meaning. so you abandon it and it becomes confusing to people. >> [inaudible] >> because it will not go to conference.

they will not go to conference. they will not negotiate. and typical of them, they say we will not go to conference to negotiate to reconcile the difference between the house and senate bills, which are quite different. then they say the president will not negotiate. the president is always negotiating. bravo for him for declaring that the full faith of the united states is not negotiable. but everything else is a normal discussion that you have. i think you see what is happening here. they cannot even come forward what they say in the morning does not exist in the evening. they cannot even negotiate with themselves much less anyone outside because there's not a talking point. really, let's clear the air with this. we have a responsibility to pay our bills. a large part of the deficit that is being subjected to the debt

limit increase was amassed during the bush years. find me, please, one statement that any of these people made about the deficit and its rapid growth under the bush administration and the change from when president clinton was president, four or five of his last budgets were in balance or in surplus. president bush comes in with his failed economic policies, grows the deficit, two unpaid for wars, a prescription drug bill that gives away the store to the pharmaceutical industry, and tax breaks to the wealthiest people in our country that do not create jobs. we support middle-income tax cuts, we all do. at the high end, it does nothing. did you hear these endangered species budget hawks saying boo- hoo or anything else that they said at that time?

they simply did not. then president obama comes in and the deficit is coming down at a very rapid rate, it will be in half by the end of this year of what it was when he became president. he said it would be cut in half in four years. it happens in five largely because they has the job creation initiatives. nonetheless, that is the path we are on. the debt is coming down because the slowing down of the rapid increase of medical costs to our economy. people are working on this. people care about the debt. when president bush became president, in just a few years, he had the biggest fiscal swing in the history of our country. a path of $5.6 trillion of surplus to $5.6 trillion deficit. $11 trillion cost change.

we all care about the deficit, and how we reduce it is by growth. more revenue coming in, more people are working and better jobs, more opportunity. how we reduce it is to take a look at our tax code and see where we can have savings. why should we giving $38 billion in tax breaks to big oil as an incentive to drill and make $1 trillion in profit, and then say we want to cut education. that is part of their policy. then we have to make -- put everything to the scrutiny of -- does this work? does the money, investments they are making -- let's reevaluate our priorities, their effectiveness, and cut cost where we can. that is what you go to the budget table to do. [no audio] that is where they refuse to go. why do they refuse to go? because they are afraid of the

contrast that the transparency of a conference committee will reveal. the differentiation between our statement of values about how to grow our economy, reduce our deficit, and make our future better, investing in the future versus the republican budget with a litany of bad things that it does. confusion is their friend. they like the confusion rather than the clarity of going to conference. they took that step after saying that is the path they wanted to go down. as soon as those steps were taken, they made an about-face,

one that is harmful to growth and can have serious consequences for our economy. i hope it does not happen. we will see. to end on a happier note -- how can i resist another chance to talk about oracle team usa for their america's cup victory in san francisco? it made history, the catamaran. 19 races over 15 days, the longest number of days on record, the most race days. the first winner-take-all final race that it came down to the last race in 30 years. after trailing 1-8, our team usa surged ahead to win an unprecedented eight straight races to hold the america's cup high above their head. it is a beautiful sight. we were there cheering them, but not on days when it made a difference.

a huge crowd amassed there as the races brought us to victory. that was what was exciting about it. i have to thank larry ellison for his vision to democratize the race. most americans -- it was always at sea, you went on your yacht or sailboat to see it. anyone who could see san francisco bay could see the race. it went from whitecaps to blue collar. it was pretty exciting. our former mayor gathered people who worked locally to make it a success.

we are proud of all of them. something pretty exciting going from 8-1 to 9-8, don't you think? a pretty big comeback in sports history. >> you are dying not to come back miraculously? >> we have in every other year program. [laughter] maybe three of the five. >> niners won last night. >> thank god. quite a time getting it here. just go to abc, but not here, or cbs, but it was not on here. in any event, more on sports later. thank you all very much. >> thank you.

>> steny hoyer called on his colleagues in the house. here is a look. ladies and gentlemen of this there are many of us that have been asked by our fellow citizens to come to washington, d.c. and other privilege of sitting on this floor and making -- the hope -- responsible decisions for their country. age of us have been given an honor and i hope you to bust --

each of us have been given an honor and i hope we will respect that. >> the house will come in order. ladies and gentlemen, we're days away from shutting down the government. --are a few more days rom from folding on the credit of the united states of america. i believe there is a small number of this house who are rendering captive and this house unable to reach compromise. people will not reward any one of us. opinion, mr.y speaker, a working majority for responsibility in this house. i choose to believe that. i do believe it. . pray that it is a case

i ask my colleagues to come to gather on behalf of the american people and our great country to act responsibly. i yield back the balance of my time. also calledocrats on house republicans to vote on a clean bill funding the government will stop they spoke to reporters for about half an hour. >> i look forward to seeing you this weekend. no one is laughing, ok. let's start. xavier becerra, chairman of the caucus. we held a pretty extensive caucus this friday afternoon, even though republicans have completed voting for the week.

we do not have a budget in place for our government. we are ready to work. we wish we weren't watching this brinksmanship and fiscal cliff resurface again. it was a bad movie when we saw the first time. it doesn't look any better as a re-run. democrats believe we should be focusing on elected representatives of the people on strengthening the middle class. helping our economy grow more jobs. if we don't have a strong middle class, we may as well turn off the lights. we're not going to create those jobs. we're not going to continue to be a leader in the world if we don't focus like a laser beam on creating middle-class jobs and helping grow the middle class so that they can buy that home, they can send their kids to college.

for the life of me, i don't think any of us understand how shutting down our government and stopping services to the middle class to that soldier's family, to that veteran who has come home, to that senior who relies on that meals on wheels lunch, how shutting the doors of government will help in any way strengthen the middle class. this is where we see ourselves. we would urge our republican colleagues to put country before party, to stop with this discussion that what governs in the house of representatives are party rules, not the rules of the house of representatives, not the rules provided to us by our statutes or constitution, but a political role, a so- called hastert rule that is a republican party rule that says, don't you dare let anything go

on the floor of the house unless it has the support of a majority of republicans. not the majority of americans that were elected to serve the country, but a majority of republicans. if you're going to put party before country, we will end up seeing these folks shut down government. we urge our colleagues in the house republican party to please think of putting country before party. the american people have witnessed enough. no small business in america would run the way the house of representatives is being run today. if no small business on main street would run this way and expect to survive, certainly largest economy in the world should not be run this way. we think it's time to get to

work, to strengthen the middle class. we have a lot pending. we still have to deal with making sure that we don't let our country for the first time in its history default on its past obligations, to make it clear that we believe in the full faith and credit of the united states of america. we still have to finish fixing a broken immigration system arid the house is showing the obstruction and dysfunction that makes it clear that we are not helping the middle class. there are any number of things that we can do. the last thing we need to do is watch as a very dedicated group of tea party members tell america they are ready to shut down government. we are ready to work and we hope our republican colleagues are willing to join us. let me yield to the vice chairman of the democratic caucus, the gentleman from new york, mr.

joe crowley. >> thank you. here we are again on the fiscal cliff. the american people once again put on edge artificially. there's enough calamity, both man-made and naturally occurring out there in the world today. we have seen it with the flooding in mexico, the floods in colorado. we have unrest in the middle east and syria. we have had 13 individuals last week killed less than a mile from here. the response of the republican congress is not to find a solution and let americans know everything is ok with their government, that government will go on.

instead, it's to create an artificial crisis. the american people do want more crises and they certainly don't want artificial crises. they want the republican congress to get its act together. that is now the full responsibility of the speaker, to get his caucus together and come up with solutions. the american people want solutions to the problems they are facing. no more man-made crises. we are here, prepared to work throughout the weekend to ensure that government does not shut down. our question is, are our republican colleagues committed to ensuring the government does not shut down? that is a question for the speaker and his conference. we democrats stand ready to ensure the government will continue to operate. with that, i will give you our lead man on the budget, the gentleman from the great state of maryland, chris van hollen. >> thank you, joe and javier. it's great to have all of you here today. we don't know how much longer we will be here as the republicans

try to figure out what they will do next. one thing we do know is that all signs point to the fact that they are hell-bent on trying to shut down the government in order to implement the tea party extreme agenda. we don't yet know what the speaker intends to do, other than what appears to be the plan, to put another amendment on the continuing resolution unrelated to keeping the government operating and focused on trying to dismantle or derail the affordable care act. if that's what they do, that will be a sure sign that they are focused on shutting down the government rather than doing the business of government and trying to do what we can to support the middle class. it's also troubling to hear they're going to double down on the strategy in the coming weeks with respect to the so-called debt ceiling, which simply means

the government should be paying its bills on time. their position once again is there going to prevent the u.s. government from paying its bills on time, jeopardize the full faith and credit of the u.s. government if they cannot enact their extreme agenda. we have seen reports they are essentially taking every tea party idea and throwing that into a package and telling the country that if we don't enact that extreme agenda, they're not going to allow the country to pay its bills on time. as everybody in the country realizes, if the government doesn't pay its bills on time, the middle class gets hurt first, as the chairman as indicated. it is irresponsible and reckless. we stand ready to work with them to try to resolve this. that is the last point i want to make. we have been trying to bring our republican colleagues to the negotiating table on the budget

for months and months. the law says that we should have committed -- completed a conference committee on april 15. the house passed a budget, the senate passed a budget, but the speaker of the house refused to appoint negotiators. in the senate, the public and senators blocked henry reed -- republicans blocked harry reid for appointing them. it is insane, but they did. what they clearly intended for all along is to create these artificial crises. if you threaten to shut down the government or threatened that we will no longer pay our bills on time, under those pressing circumstances, they will get their extreme agenda put into place. it does not work that way. it is not going to happen.

>> chris, thank you much. >> is speaker boehner were to break with that and to end up adding something to the cr that was unrelated to obamacare, could they send that back to senate? >> we are interested in keeping our government operating. we all pay our taxes. if we want to collect our social security check, we expect the doors to be opened. if we pay for the government to issue a passport so we can go visit an ailing or dying parent, we want to be able to do that. we should focus our efforts on this budget discussion on issues that relate to the budget for our colleagues on the republican side insist on including things that have nothing to do with budget and all to do with their

republican extreme social agenda. we hope for things that simply have nothing to do with the budget so the republican people can extort the american people? i don't think so. i think the president has made it very clear. we want a clean budget vote. all the far right social agendas are off the table. members of congress will continue to come to work. but if the republicans shut down the government, there are a whole lot of americans that will not get to go to work and other americans that they will not be able to receive the services they pay for. a vote on budget and only on budget. you want to debate your social agenda? you can vote that up or at a later time.

do not hold hostage the american economy and the american people so you can get your social agenda. it is too important to the middle class and two important during this time of economic recovery to not weaken the pillars of recovery that will allow the middle class to get back on its feet. i don't think democrats are going to engage in the shenanigans. >> [speaking spanish] >> [speaking spanish]

[speaking spanish] spanish] [speaking [speaking spanish] other questions? question was a bit open- ended. republicansying the except the language on the affordable care act --

>> if they were to bring up the c.r. and leave off any provisions that have to do with defunding it. you have seen the list of different provisions we have talked about having. >> without specifying what they would add to it. what we have said all along, we're about amending and fixing. i don't think we should use this process as a legislative fix for the issues they're concerned about. we have other ways of doing that, bringing the bill up, debating on the floor. and building scone us is among democrats and republicans. that's not happening right now. there's no consensus building going on. they get their way or they shut down government. that's not how it's supposed to work. it's up to them to -- in the house of representatives, we like to be in the majority. hope to be back there some day. the ball is in their court, the deadline is coming.

three days away. the ball is in their court to move something here to keep the government open that is not continuing to promote the agenda other than repealing the global care act. it's not going to happen. 43 times, 44 times, 45 times, it will not be repealed and not this way, and quite frankly it will never have repealed. if they have the ability to have both houses, the bill will not be repealed. the american people won't stand for it. >> you said you would not support a sequester. position?ill your >> i'll support a clean budget bill. i will not support my colleagues on the republican side trying to inject their social agenda into a budget bill when we're on the brink of shutting the doors to our government.

when services are essential. we're waiting to see our colleagues to provide a clean vote on a clean budget bill so we can keep the doors of government open and we have yet to see that -- our republican colleagues have made it clear it is their intention to put in their social agenda regardless of what the american people are saying. so what we're seeing is a fight among republicans. they can't decide among themselves what they want to do. while they're out there brawling, the american people are watching. pretty soon we'll be impacted in major ways if they let the government close its doors unnecessarily. so we wish it would stop their fighting, internal fighting and

decide what they want to do. hopefully what they decide to do is give the american people a chance to let the representatives vote up or down on a clean bill to fund the government so we can provide the services that americans pay for with their taxpayer dollars. >> what happens if the senate gets it to november -- have to do it all over again. do you have any idea that a budget conference can have in the interim or another bill in the interim or any sign at the end of what i believe is the next 45 days it would be different than what is happening right now. >> i'm glad you asked that. we can only hope. unfortunately hope hasn't gotten us there in the last three our four months. as we said earlier, we've been trying to go to an negotiation on the budget for months now. the law requires it. we'd be completed -- we'd complete the conference by april 15. but we're well over that. you can't have a conference if our republican colleagues refuse

to appoint their negotiators. i would hope, but it's only a hope, that between now and november 15, our republican colleagues will be willing to come to the table and truly negotiate. i think i should point out that we have tried eight times now in the house of representatives to simply get a vote on our plan that would replace the sequester. the sequester is eating away at important investments around the country. it's eating away at important investments in the infrastructure and transportation, it's eating away at scientific research. and the congressional budget office just told us yesterday in the hearing before the committee that if we don't replace the sequester, it would be 1.2 million fewer jobs in this country this time next year. that is another self-inflicted wound, which is why we're going be working very hard between now

and november 15 to eliminate that drag on the economy, which would effectively wipe out -- wipe out the last three months of job growth. that's outrageous. that's a self-inflicted wound that we can't afford in this country. so i can only hope that in the next couple of months our republican colleagues will do what they've refused to do for the previous four months which is to try negotiate on these issues. let me just close -- again, this is a calculated strategy on the part of the republicans. they didn't negotiate for four months in the normal course because they thought that by threatening to shut down the government and threatening they wouldn't pay our bills, they would force the country and the president to accept their

extreme ideological agenda. they knew they couldn't get it at the negotiating table at the normal course, that requires compromise. so they're trying to force an uncompromising agenda by threatening to shut down the government. we hope that sanity will finally come to the house republican party in the coming months. >> final question? >> how much frustration is there in the caucus for having a vote if it comes to that even a short term measure that would provide sequester levels that many people oppose? >> i'll start. we're three days away from watching republicans shut down the government. and as of this moment, we don't know what the house republicans will put on the floor of the house for a vote. that's -- that's the lunacy of where we've gone where the greatest democracy in the world

is being governed here in congress by folks who haven't decided what they want to do to fund the government with an annual budget bill with less than three days to go before the government shuts down. so what do democrats want do? democrats want to stop the game playing. democrats would like to have a clean bill. democrats are ready to make tough choices and hard decisions on how we continue to reduce the size of the deficit and how we get americans back to work and how we strengthen the middle class. we're ready to do all of these things. it's tough right now friday afternoon three short days before the government is going to shut down, our republican colleagues haven't told us what we're going to do in terms of a government to make sure we don't shut the doors of government. it's crazy. 85% of american people, 75% of the republicans in this country say it's not appropriate to play with the american economy and our government services in this

budget fight. and so, i think there are folks here in congress not listening to their own constituents if 80% of the american people are saying stop this game playing. democrats have said from the very beginning, got the clean bill, you've got votes. even if there's tough choices we have to make. not once in this process and our ranking member mr. van hollen can attest to that. not once have the republicans reached out the the house of representatives, 231 voting democrats, not once have we had our republican colleagues reach out to democrats and say let's put together a budget bill so we can all vote on it. it's been a totally republican process and it should surprise no one that democrats are prepared to go against any republican bill which tries to inject ex-train yous matters mattersaneous

that have to do with a social agenda in what should be purely a budget bill three days before the republicans shut down the government. >> i would just add what frustrates our caucaus is the fact that the republican caucus is not focused on finding solutions. we want to find solutions to the problems we have right now. but throwing out hypotheticals three days before the deadline is not the time to do that. a month ago, two months ago, four months ago, five months ago. that's the time for hypotheticals. now it's crunch time. what steps will the republican caucus take to make sure the government doesn't shut down. it frustrates all of you, the american people, and the democratic caucus. we don't know their intention, what their plan is to keep government open and operating right now. it's all hypothetical. in the end, what i know is there are hundreds of thousands of federal employees. this is real for them.

this is not hypothetical. they don't know whether or not they'll be going to work after october 1. and what impact they will have on their families and on their lives. we don't know what impact, though we can suggest it will be negative, what impact the shutdown of the government will have on our economy, the job loss that will not be recovered because of that. these are not inconsequential events. we understand that. it's frustrating to us that we once again at the 11th hour as opposed to doing this in an orderly way, in a fashion that again does not create man-made brinksmanship. this is all man made. this is all done by republican caucus. because they are so bent on their ideology and to repeal the affordable care act, they are blinded by everything else. and they are blinded to the consequences of what they're playing with. and i think the american people are beginning to understand this all too well.

>> well, we've been frustrated we've been denied eight times a vote on our plan to replace the sequester. again, the sequester, all of you know, these are the immediate tax cuts that are having an impact around the country. overall, the nonpartisan congressional budget tells us that we'll result in up to 1.2 million fewer jobs this year and the best estimate is 800,000 fewer american jobs this time next year. are we frustrated that we've not had an opportunity to even have a vote on our plan to save 800,000 jobs? absolutely. and we're going to keep fighting for an opportunity to replace

that sequester. it's not good for the country. and we can achieve the same amount of deficit reduction, in fact, even more deficit reduction without the job loss under the plan that we've proposed as a democratic caucus here in the house. and in the people's house, we think that the american people deserve a vote on that. the speaker wants to vote no. he wants to vote to have 800,000 fewer jobs in this country at this time next year, that's his prerogative. but we think in the people's house, the american people are entitled to have a vote on the proposal we put forward. >> we're hoping you'll hear some news, we'll hear some news that our republican colleagues have decided to drop the obsession with the party platform and jamming that into a budget bill three days before they move to close the government. we're ready to move forward with them on a clean vote, on a budget bill. we have been for quite sometime. it would be helpful if they

would show they want to extend a hand of 231 representatives of the american people. it's time that the american people saw us doing some stuff together. and if 80% of the american public will think stop jamming the process on the budget to get your social agenda, we agree with them. we're ready to work with our republican colleagues, there's a middle ground. there's common ground. we should start looking for it before we shut the doors of government. we thank you all for being here. we'll be in touch. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> arkansas representative rick crawford and other house republicans spoke outside the capitol of the impact of the health care law of americans on the economy. the news conference ended after a protester accused the republicans of wanting to deny health care to millions of people. this is 15 minutes.

>> ready? okay. great. well, i want to thank y'all for coming it today. we came out to provide a little perspective here. some of the things that aren't being talked about with regard to the cr and obama care being at the center of the debate. number one, we know america is up to our eyeballs and debt. we don't think it's time to rush forward with trillions in new entitlement spending so what i'm doing is introducing a resolution that will ask that question. and members can say yes or no. my question is, does it make sense to move ahead with $1.3 trillion in new entitlement spending when we're in the middle of a debt crisis. we're going to put that question to all of the members. our answer is no. we hope that our ceilings across the aisle and across the capitol would see that as an opportunity to say no, it doesn't make sense. and then we might be able to take appropriate action.

that's our resolution -- call on members to explain why they think it's a good idea to rush forward with $1.3 trillion in new entitlement spending when we're in the middle of a debt crisis. so that said, we want to thank the members that have come out today. i appreciate it. we know they're all busy and got things to be doing. i appreciate them coming out and being here today. if there are any questions, i'd be happy to answer them. i'm going to let dr. fleming speak. he's a medical doctor and can comment with some detail on this. >> thank y'all for coming out. i'm dr. fleming, small business opener. the president quoted a congressman saying that congressman said obama care is the worst piece of legislation ever.

well, ladies and gentlemen, that congressman was me. and i fully stand behind that statement. as you just heard congressman crawford say, for heaven's sake, in a period when we have entitlement programs that america can ill afford, we're now launching even a new entitlement program that will be a massive transfer of income from one class of people to another. destroying our income. destroying jobs. and really perversely removing people from the health care rolls they're already on. now why in the world would we want to do that. so in the final analysis, what obama care represents for the american people, it's a loss of the insurance they have, but a steep rise of the cost of the health care of their insurance and the loss of their jobs or reduction of that job down to part time because we know that since the beginning of the year, 77% of all new jobs are part

time jobs. that's because companies all across america are rapidly moving their employees from fulltime to part-time jobs. so they're losing not only their health care in some cases but they're losing their jobs, their income, and certainly their standard of living. so i certainly stand behind this measure. i think we should remind those devoted for obama care all of them democrats, not a single republican ever voted for this deal, we should remind them and have them remind their constituents time and time again of the fact that this is a whole new entitlement program that's destructive for america. thank you, i yield back. >> thank you, dr. fleming. i've got an e-mail from a constituent this morning that works at one of the largest hospitals in my district. they had a meeting, administration rolled out the news that their health care costs were going up. and as a result, their retirement benefits were going down. and these are just some of the symptoms that we're seeing

already manifesting themselves with the implementation of this law that's ill conceived. so my point is this -- we want senator reid to answer the question -- does it make sense to speed forward with $1.3 trillion in new entitlement spending in the middle of a debt crisis. and if there's anybody else who wants to weigh in, i'll give them the opportunity. if not, i'll take a few questions. >> i wonder if you see an alternative sort of fall-back position if defunding is not achieved? >> you know, again, we don't know what to expect from the senate. we haven't seen anything there. we don't know what they'll do. this is not anything other than the fact that we need to make sure that the folks back home knows where their senator stands, where their member of congress stands. and we want to get them on record. three years since the law was

signed and i think people need a reaffirmation of whether or not their senator should continue to spend recklessly, we think it's not. >> when talking about the comments, you brought up the fugitive slave act that that would be a worse -- >> yeah, that was in reference to i believe a state rep from some other state who had made a reference to that. i didn't specify any legislation in the past, obama care takes over, under the government rule, 1/6 of the entire economy, the most important part of our economy. health care, what could be more intimate for each individual american than their health care? not only do americans now have to be accountable for their finances to the irs, now they have to be accountable to the irs for their health care.

so if you add that to the loss of jobs and actually the loss of health care and the costs of health care, insurance, i just i think it's incomparable. >> you're saying modern history the democrats are going to come back with the stuff from the 1950's. you want to clarify what you're talking about? >> i think what i said is very clear. >> i'm going to yield to my colleague from kentucky, mr. andy bahr. >> thank you, rick. i appreciate you putting this together. andy bahr, sixth congressional district. i think this is important because it points out obama care threatens to further undermine the solvency of health care plans in place. in my district, we had a number of seniors like every other district dependent on medicare. you're already seeing the fiscal

pressures that obama care has placed on medicare. the medicare trustees are saying now that the hospital insurance trust fund is set to go bankrupt in the year 2026. a whole new entitlement program that cbo projects the costs of $2 trillion will put further pressure on medicare. remember, obama care razed medicare to the tune of $216 billion. rural hospitals all over kentucky that are seeing their reimbursements slashed as a result of obama care. obama care victimizes medicare. the independent payment advisory board, which is a financing mechanism for obama care, is threatening to ration health care services for our seniors. so this resolution makes a point. and that is that obama care threatens an already fiscally

insolvent safety net in our country. we need to focus on saving medicare. we need to focus on forcing the government to keep the promises it's made. obama care makes that impossible. that's another important dimension to this discussion. >> thank you, andy. i want to add another thing. i heard from one of the seniors in my district recently. and just simply put the question to me -- am i going to have to choose between medicare, social security, and obama care? and i can't answer that question. and i don't know if anybody can today, that they can say for certainty that no, you won't have to choose -- all three of them will be there. but as andy indicated and as dr. fleming indicated, this presents a major challenge to the

solvency of those programs that we've promised to our seniors and that we intend to deliver. and so, again, i would just ask that senator reid answer the simple question, does it make sense to speed ahead with $1.3 trillion in the middle of a debt crisis. and for the folks in my district, that answer is no. and for me, the answer is no. it doesn't make sense. so we need to slow this down a little bit and give the american people a little new perspective. interesting fact, this seems a little backwards, but in 2008, the national debt was $10 trillion. four years later, it's up to $16 trillion. and interesting fact here is while that debt has increased by 60%, the annual interest percent on it has decreased, going from $451 billion in 2008 to $360 billion in 2012? why do i make that point? that's because interest rates are being artificially suppressed. when they normalize -- i say when because they will normalize, that will put further pressure on our budget. that means that probably the interest on our debt becomes the

single biggest line item in the federal budget. as we see obama care continuing to put further pressure on programs like medicare and as andy indicated, he had a lot of critical access hospitals in his rural district, so do i. they're all asking me, what can we do to fix this problem. i know what the wrong answer is, that's speeding forward with $1.3 trillion in additional entitlement spending in a debt crisis. having said that, if there are further questions or if anybody else wants to make a comment, i would be happy to yield to them. but any other questions? i know congressman king was planning on being here. i don't see him. if there are no further questions -- >> i want to ask the question, one of your republican colleagues said there's a political risk of republicans for a shutdown. all of you may represent safe districts. but anyone who doesn't think is a high risk isn't playing with a full deck.

why do you not think this is a problem? >> first off, the point of this message has nothing do with the government shutdown. and i can't speak to the political dynamics of other members' districtings. i can tell you that i'm the first republicans since 1873. so i would hardly consider my district to be a safe republican district. and i certainly am not a proponent of shutting down the government. this is a measure that would force members of congress and senators to say yes, it makes sense or no, it doesn't. to spend $1.3 trillion in additional entitlement spending in the middle of a debt crisis. it has nothing to do with shutting down the government. it's a clarification so that folks back home know where their member of congress stands, where their senator stands with regard to our spending problem in this town. i think we need to reassess and reaffirm and give senators an opportunity to speak to their folks back home through voting

yes or no on this resolution. >> how can you call yourself christians and deny health care to 30 million people in america. how can you call yourselves children of god? >> i think that's a good time on that to end this -- >> because you call yourself christians. you call yourselves christians, these are killers. they're worse than the guy that had the navy yard incident. these people are demons. we are here today to call in on the pope to exorcise them, pray for them. they need god's power to be relieved from these demons that are possessing them. you see, they broke up the press conference when we talked about god.ildr of god. they are not -- they are not children of god. >> they are not -- >> they pray for their souls. >> we are praying for their souls. we are praying for their souls.

but we need to do something about it. we need to vote them out of office. they are destroying our congress. i just asked him a question. that's all. or what? i asked him a question? this is a free country. i asked him a question. he refused to answer because he is a demon. these are demons. maxine waters of congress said, these are demons! these are demons. >> you are not christ-like understanding. you're not christ like in yourself. >> i am doing christ's work. he stood up to the demons when he was here. my name is rocky -- and i'm part of the prayer at the pump movement. we're here today, going to have an exorcism here in the front of the capitol steps. we're going to pray for these demons that are destroying our nation. we need to -- we need to pray for them. i have a young man here who is homeless.

he needs health care. and he can't get health care. they want to hold up the budget, shut down the federal government, just because they don't want 30 million people to have health care. that is the demonic spirit and we're going to pray and pray and pray that god will deliver these demons from capitol hill. these are demons. i repeat. if maxine waters said this out in california -- i believe it. we have been fighting them. they are worse than the guy that did the shooting at the navy yards. their policies are killing -- they're killing millions of americans. my name is rocky twyman.

r-o-c-k-y t-w-y-m-a-n. i'm the founder of this movement and we invite you over here as we pray away these demons. >> on the next "washington journal," we talk about what's next for legislation in the u.s. house to fund the government as they prepare to work through the weekend. we're joined by "washington times" political columnist, charles hurt. followed by an update of the shooting earlier this month at the navy yard at washington with rear admiral john kirby. a discussion on the u.s. postal service following two hearings in the senate, what legislation is in congress, and how the agency could be impacted by a federal shutdown. federal times senior writer shawn riley is our guest.

"washington journal" live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. the fiscal year ends on monday, september 30. the senate today passed a bill funding the government through november 15. the house gavels back in tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern for general speechls and noon to debate funding the government past september 30 and other legislative business. live coverage here on c-span. as congress debates a budget to fund the government, outlining the defense department's contingency plan. he spoke to reporters about employee furloughs and military activities that would continue under a shutdown. it's about half an hour.

>> i think you know who i am. good afternoon. that's probably the high point of this discussion. so i want to start with a few words and then aisle turn to -- then i'll turn to your questions. let me start by saying that the administration firmly believes a shutdown due to a lapse of appropriation should not occur. the administration is working with congress to try to prevent a lapse. we have to be ready for a lapse of appropriations. what is involved in the planning? as i answer this question and everything i say today, i'm going to focus on the department of defense, solely on d.o.d., but other federal agencies are definitely affectled.

i don't know lots about them. so i'll focus on d.o.d. first, d.o.d. appropriations lapsed, we can only conduct limited activity specifically authorized by law. the lapse could lead to civilian furloughs, it will, in fact, but the furloughs are different than the sequester furloughs that occurred this summer. the sequester furloughs sought to reduce cost. we had the authority to design them to reduce cost and reflect policies like minimizing the effects on readiness. in the case of appropriations, law governs, not policy. the law says in the event of a lapse of appropriations, d.o.d. could only conduct activities designed to protect safety of life and property and carry out a few other activities. administration lawyers interpret this to mean that d.o.d. can support specific military operations of the secretary of defense has approved, afghanistan, for example, and a number of others. we can also maintain emergency services, police, fire, emergency medical. we label the activities that can continue as accepted activities.

and you will hear me use that word repeatedly in the next couple of minutes. what would happen under a lapse of appropriations. first, government employees would be significantly affected. in the event of a lapse, all of our military personnel would be directed to remain on normal duty status. their military status means they can't be placed in a nonpay status so we would direct them to continue in normal duty status. civilian workers who support these accepted activity, again, afghanistan, emergency activities, they would be directed to continue to work. but all civilian workers who do not primarily support accepted activities would be placed in a nonduty, nonpay status on an emergency no notice basis on the time the lapse occurs. based on planning in 2011, we expect roughly half of our civilian personnel to go into this status, a nonpay furlough status. pay of government employees

could be seriously affected if the lapse continues for a period of time. during a lapse, d.o.d. cannot pay military personnel and civilian personnel, even if they have been directed to work. military and those civilians directed to work would be paid retroactively once the lapse of appropriation ends. civilians on emergency furloughs and those for primarily doing nonaccepted activities would be paid retroactively only if a law is enacted, providing the authority to pay them. training and travel of military and and civilian employees would be disrupted unless connected with activities, training and travel would have to stop. stop before it starts or if it's going on at the time the lapse

occurs, folks on tdy on nonaccepted travel would have to pack up and come home, although they could do that in an orderly fashion. we would require to do some other bad things to our people. we couldn't immediately pay death gratuities to those who die on active duty during the lapse, we would have to close stateside commissaries, personnel activities would be disrupted, probably would have to be stopped, and a number of other actions. d.o.d. vendors would be affected, especially if the lapse continues for a substantial period of time. vendors working on contracts with funds obligated prior to the lapse, the fiscal '13 or earlier funds, could continue to work. assuming government personnel are available to provide any needed supervision. and it could be paid for that work. but during the period of the lapse, we can't sign new contracts or extend old ones unless they're directly in support of accepted activities. so if i haven't already confused you, let me try to sum up by saying all of these confusing actions affect the d.o.d. mission.

we can and will continue to support key military operations. we're allowed to do that by law. but the law would force us to disrupt many of our support activities. we couldn't do most training, couldn't enter into most new contracts, routine maintenance would have to stop. we couldn't continue efforts to have contracting or financial management. even worse, the lapse of appropriation causes civilian furloughs and that's one more blow to the morale of our civilian workforce. that morale is already low and i think it would get lower and that adversely affects productivity and costs taxpayers' money. even if the lapse never occurs, the planning itself is disruptive. people are worrying right now about whether their paychecks are going to be delayed rather than focusing on their mission. and while i can't quantify the time being spent to plan, it has or will consume a lot of senior management attention, probably thousands of hours of employee time better spent on supporting

national security. for all these reasons, i very much hope that congress acts to avert a lapse of appropriations. and it will sound contradictory, i hope you'll understand when i say that i hope that we're all wasting our time planning for this lapse. but then i'll stop and i'll be glad to answer your questions. i'm going to get george here. >> since everyone went through the furloughs recently, can you explain a little bit in detail the difference between the civilians who were furloughed under that and the fact that there are fewer numbers being furloughed now. could you get maybe an example, it would help for the people to understand what -- how that difference is and i just have a second -- one of the second questions. i know contractors is a hard thing to get your arms around, but is there any way to talk about the number of contractors as in people that could be affected by this? >> first, on the furloughs, the ones we did in the summer are called administrative furloughs.

long notification process that we needed to go through that were designed to save money. so therefore, as i mentioned, we had the authority to design them based on criteria like readiness and cost savings. these are specified by law. anybody who is not -- any civilian not primarily working on an accepted activity has to be placed on furloughs. trying to think of good examples for you. well, here's one -- most of our working capital fund employees are going to not be furloughed immediately because the working capital funds have a cash balance based on funds obligated before the lapse. so if you have the funds and they don't have to be furloughed right away. that would have to be gradually some of them if we run out of cash.

whereas most of our working capital fund employees were furloughed in the summer because we wanted to reduce costs. but as far as the contractors, briefly, all of the ones that are working on contracts as i said obligated with money before the lapse would continue if supervision was available. in the early stages of a llamas, -- lapse, that would be the majority of the contractors, most of them will be working on contracts by definition of funded before, if the lapse continues, that number will fall. but i don't have specific numbers. >> trying to clarify on the -- on the difference between the contractors -- if i'm not mistaken, there are 650,000 that were affected over the summer. now it's about 400,000. so a difference of a couple hundred thousand seems to be a lot. >> and again it's -- the numbers are roughly right. i don't know exactly how many. probably around half. it will be close to that.

and, again, working capital funds alone, 100,000, 150,000 of people who will keep this time and there are many others. they're just totally different animals. just because once driven by law, one's driven by policy to save money, one is driven by law -- accepted and nonaccepted activities. >> they weren't contractors, correct? >> yeah. no. i'm talking government employees now. contractors, most of them are going to be able to work if supervision is available because most of them would have numbers. most of them would be funded by contracts already funded with fiscal '13 or earlier money. >> looking toward that october 15 paycheck, can you give them a sense of how long the government shutdown might be able to go before their paycheck was definitely delayed? i mean, if congress reached an agreement on the -- >> the earliest we'd start having trouble would be october 7. that's not a hard date. we'll push it as far as we can. at some point, we have to run the payroll. i'm trying to coordinate getting the department ready to shut down.