leadership team in the house of representatives. thank you for being with us. >> good morning. >> let me introduce our reporters. from "usa today" and washington bureau chief for "the washington journal." we are all interested as the debt ceiling date moves closer, what you see as the endgame for what is going on with the standoff on the budget in washington. how do you see this all coming together and ending? >> regrettably, my crystal ball is a little fuzzy. house republicans have now put one offer on the table, a second offer, a third offer, a fourth offer. we are not through negotiating, but we are through negotiating with ourselves. regrettably, the president called congressional leaders over yesterday to tell them in person what he already told them in public, that was we refuse to negotiate. ultimately, i do not believe that is what the american people

believe in in divided government. house republicans won a few simple things. we expect to negotiate under our constitution. it is congress that has the power of the purse, not the power of the rubber stamp. house republicans will negotiate in good faith. we are not going to rubber stamp necessarily what the president and senator harry reid want to do. second of all, obviously obama care is a huge, divisive factor within our nation. regrettably, for house republicans it is not going away as long as president obama is president. but we said, if obamacare is going to be imposed upon the nation it ought to be imposed equally. equal protection under the law. no special deals for big business, big labor unions. no special deals for washington elites while working americans are having to suffer through this program. alternately, this is about tens of millions of our fellow

countrymen, underemployed and unemployed in this week, tepid recovery. and trillions and trillions of debt. we are on the road to bankruptcy. people in washington say, don't rock the boat, put this off until tomorrow. we cannot put this off until tomorrow. the opportunity on the continuing resolution and the debt ceiling is to deal with improving our economy to put us on the road to fiscal solvency today. today is the time to seize the moment. >> congressman, as you pointed out, you had four bills. they rejected everyone. what is it you realistically hope to a combo should now? give us a specific proposal you think might actually work -- >> we're not sure anything is going to work if the president and harry reid refused to negotiate. in the press today, the administration said they really do not care how long the

government shutdown last because "we are winning." they take a political view that this is about politics if it is not about the republic, about citizens who are suffering, i'm not sure they go to the negotiating table. if obamacare is going to be imposed upon the rest of the country, employers, big businesses should not get a one- year reprieve if their employees do not. if obamacare is good enough for working americans, it ought to be good enough for the president and the vice president, the cap, the white house, and members of congress. there should not be any special carveout. otherwise, in our budget we have a number of items. the so-called supercommittee. there are lots of ideas on the table we are willing to negotiate in order to promote economic growth, get our country

back to work. and again, to do something about this explosion of debt. more debt in four years under president obama than our nation's first 200. as one economist famously said, something that is unsustainable will one day cease. we have to deal with it today. in our house republicans budget written by congressman paul ryan we have hundreds of ideas that we are willing to negotiate in good faith but cannot negotiate a loan. >> you say you are willing to negotiate in good faith. the house passed a budget, the senate also passed a budget. why want the house negotiate that budget? >> we have conferees that are appointed, happy to talk about the budget, the cr, the debt ceiling. nobody is showing up. i find it somewhat ironic that a body that did not even bother to follow the law and ignore passing a budget for four years

now all of a sudden is lecturing the house about budget matters. i find that somewhat ironic. >> congressman, i take it from what you said that the goal is no longer to defund obamacare and no longer to delay the individual mandate. >> if i could interrupt, this is always the goal. democrats have been working on their version of a government controlled health care system, i would argue, since harry truman. certainly at least since hillary care. it is unrealistic to think that after three years the republicans are going to throw in the towel. but the law is the law. probably 95% of obamacare is what is known as automatic spending or mandatory spending. so regrettably under the law -- no, we are not going to quit fighting for this, but at this point if the president turns down these other offers, all we're saying is at least apply the law equally.

the president has already done 1100 special-interest carveouts. that should not be happening. there is a carveout for big business and labor unions. that should not be happening. there is a carveout for washington elites. why isn't the president the first to sign up for obamacare? he is not subject to it. >> i understand your frustration the senate will not accept the versions of the continuing resolutions the house passed. at least they voted on those. i am wondering why the house will not vote on a clean extension of the continuing resolution the senate has passed. >> they have voted on it. they have table a number of these measures. it is important to note that it is house republicans who passed legislation to open our national parks. the president says no, i will veto that. house republicans have passed legislation to make sure our veterans get their benefits and the white house has threatened to veto. we have legislation to ensure the national institutes of health that is critical work for

patients with cancer, including children, and now we know senator harry reid on cnn when asked why he would not open up the nih, even if you could help one child struggling with cancer, the answer is, why would i want to do that? it seems to me this is a rather cynical ploy. the white house is quoted in the papers saying they do not care how long the shutdown lasts. it is regrettable. so we have passed bills, bill after bill to keep the government open. we have disagreed. it is our fourth offer on two provisions of obamacare.

if it is good enough for working americans, it ought to be good enough for the washington elites whom opposed the bill. there is a one-year reprieve for employers. there ought to be a one-year reprieve for employees. that is a position that would be overwhelmingly supported by the american people. i think you know we are now getting 25, 30, 35 democrats in the house to say enough is enough, let's get the government back open and they are supporting these provisions in the house. >> i want to challenge you a little bit on the statement that there is a carveout for washington elites. what you are really talking about is the employer contribution that the federal government has always made to employees of congress and members of congress. you are saying now they should no longer get simply because obama is -- >> what i'm saying, right now members of congress would have been the only people in the individual pull that were receiving an employer contribution. >> the only people -- >> if you want to try to

convince the american people that somehow washington elites are getting the same deal, you can carry on that case. it is not the way i see it. there is a broader issue here. it is not just members of congress. why isn't the white house involved? why isn't the president, the vice president, the cabinet, the white house personnel. why aren't they part of obamacare? one thing the american people are cynical about is washington elites imposing laws on others that they do not impose on themselves. i just want to be treated equally under the law. we now understand opm, i am not sure, people will have to look into it, are now putting members of congress and their and their staff into the small business exchange. last time i looked, government and congress was not a small business. i do not know they have the legal authority to do this. it is a simple issue, what the level of their compensation ought to be. i think a clear reading of the law, it is hard to figure out

how you could be having an employer contribution in the individual pull. i just do not think opm has the legal authority to do that. the law has so many different special-interest provisions and sweetheart deals. so let's make it clear in the law. i do not want to lose my employer subsidy, but i do want to follow the law. >> 15 minutes left. >> congressman, you do not have to look far beyond the government shutdown to see the next problem, that the country is close to hitting the debt ceiling. given that deadline is approaching very quickly, do you think it is now likely that both issues, the government shutdown and debt ceiling increase the white house ekes, will be resolved together? >> i would say with time on the clock, i do not know exactly when the so-called date will take place.

treasury has the opportunity to manage that. the date is whatever secretary lew claims the date will be. frankly, there may be a likelihood there. again, house republicans have a bill, hr 807, the full faith and credit act, to make sure america never defaults on its bonds. no default on sovereign debt. and the white house issued a veto threat. why would they do that? i can only imagine yet again they want to use it for leverage for their vision of government, their vision of spending. that is not going to happen. whatever passes for fiscal responsibility in this town, which is not much, that is attached to the debt ceiling. it is a very important vote. be it the budget control act, again, whatever passes for fiscal responsibility in washington dc is attached to the

debt ceiling. the president says, i refuse to negotiate. ok, fine. let's at least take to fall off the table. the other day i saw something i never thought i would see in my lifetime. a president of the united states appearing to spook markets. he is asked on national television. his response was, they do not take it as seriously as they should. i have never seen that before. >> the problem financial professionals inside the administration see with the full faith and credit act is it would amount to paying off chinese bondholders but not guaranteeing other creditors of the government get paid. and it would make people in the bond market reluctant to buy bonds if they are under a legal cloud as to the provision might be disputed in court. there is a practical problem was not raising the debt ceiling. do you not agree? >> i do not know what could be clearer under the law than

taking sovereign debt, taking our u.s. bonds out of the debt ceiling calculation. i am unaware of any legal cloud. i am aware of a veto threat. i am a where of a president of the united states who clearly wants to try to hold our sovereign debt hostage. the bond rating agencies, as i understand, moody's and one other, they get it. they understand this is about sovereign debt. the american people do not equate bonds with funding the next irs star trek video, the travel expenses for the alabama watermelon queen, pottery classes in morocco.

there is something very different between a bond obligation and a budget priority. we are on a road to bankruptcy. everybody says, let's do it another day. others in the administration just want to turn off the debt ceiling boat. my guess is greece did not have a debt ceiling boat. detroit did not have a debt ceiling boat. it is like turning off the smoke alarm when the fire breaks out. >> i want to press you on that a little more. you mentioned moody's. moody's said that even if we prioritize the debt,, november 1 when we have a payment due they will not be enough receipts in the federal treasury to pay both the bondholders and social security recipients, much less veterans health care and military salaries and all of the other things you have exempted from the shutdown. would this be even worse than the shutdown? >> the full faith and credit act, in accordance with the constitution, explicitly exempts social security. it would not be a part of the

calculation. at some point we have to deal with this debt crisis. there are those who always want to put it off to the next day. i am sure there were voices in greece, in detroit, saying put it off for another day. but no, we have to do this today. i am saying this not just as a congressman, but as the father of a 10-year-old son and 11- year-old daughter. on the verge of being the first generation in america's history to leave the next generation with less freedom, fewer opportunities, and a lower standard of living. there is no economist in the land who believes her current spending trajectory is sustainable. nobody. congressional budget office, general accountability office, private economists, even the president of the united states has said the drivers of our debt are medicare, medicaid, and health care. nothing comes close. i give him and a for candor but f for effort. what i'm hearing, let's just turn off the smoke alarm. let's cut the wire. let's take it down. no, let's begin to deal with the problem.

>> that raises the question. there is a chance that what might emerge here is a return to a conversation about a big budget deal. maybe now the grand bargain people talked about a couple years ago, but something meaningful that would at least it the issues back on the table at once. is that a likely prospect? >> we cannot even get harry reid and the president of the united states to open negotiations. my mother-in-law famously said the least you can do in life to show up. today, right now, we cannot get the president and harry reid to even show up. that is an impasse. i do not think that is a position that is acceptable, alternately, to the american people. i would hope people can come together in good faith and negotiate without compromising their principles, compromising their policies.

clearly we hope there can be an element of fundamental tax reform to this. i served on the supercommittee that unfortunately did not succeed, but i will tell you this -- we came closer on a bipartisan basis to coming together on fundamental tax reform probably than any other item. the president himself has put at least a handful of very small, minimal entitlement reforms on the table. so they would at least show up to negotiate. i think there would be something to negotiate over. republicans, we are not going to sit idly by, not going to rubberstamp their plans. we are going to do something to get people back to work and we are going to do something to get us off this road to national

bankruptcy. >> i wonder if maybe your party has not had more success in this arena than you are giving yourself credit. discretionary spending has declined each of the last two years for the first time since the korean war. there has been some progress on the spending front. i am wondering if that is an argument for continuing the conversation. because you are enjoying something of a victory and may be declaring a victory for yourself. >> i am happy to declare a little bit of a victory. relative to history, i am very proud of the fact that for the first time in my lifetime the federal spending is actually decreased two years in a row. that has never happened before. that is a great thing, and i celebrated. the challenges relative to the size of the problem, it still qualifies as something close to a rounding error. the bottom line is, we need economic growth. the lesson affordable affordable care act, we are getting mired in 1.5% to 2.5% gdp when the norm is three percent to 3.5%. i think we are capable of four percent to five percent. on the spending side, you cannot have entitlement programs that grow at five percent, six percent, seven percent per annum

with economic growth at 1.5%, two percent. at some point the math does not work. i would hope the president and his people would come to the negotiating table and negotiate in good faith. the constitution gives congress the power of the purse. this is what we are supposed to do. lawmakers make laws. we are debating spending bills and borrowing money to pay for spending bills. so far all we hear from the president and senator reid as we are not negotiating. let me ask you about the politics of this. speaker boehner has floated the idea that the debt limit voters so serious that if he had to he would cross the aisle and get democratic votes to pass a debt limit increase. you're the former chairman of the gop conference. would you support that?

is this a test of speaker boehner? >> i think that story is inaccurate because i spoke to the speaker about what he said. house republicans have passed a bill that says they will never be default on the bonds, there will never be a default on sovereign debt. we encouraged senator reid and the president to take it up. it is a fact that the president has issued a veto threat. the speaker has said before, we are not going to sit here and continue to press on the accelerator on the national road the bankruptcy. again, default on sovereign debt is totally unacceptable. but we are not going to borrow more money to pay for pottery classes in morocco and the travel expenses of the alabama watermelon queen and thousands of items you can find in the budget that are not going to pass the smell test or the laugh test or the fiscal responsibility test of the american people.

so again, i hope the president and senator harry reid will be reasonable about this. but that is why we have a debt ceiling vote, to correct where we are. >> you know, the real question here, as you suggested yourself, is not spending on things like the alabama watermelon queen, but entitlements. you have suggested that the president put a few things on the table in his own budget this year that start dealing with these entitlements. is there a reasonable chance that conversation will get underway in the next few weeks? is there a trade-off to be made here where you give the democrats a little bit on spending items they care about, and in return they give you some of the things the president himself has already offered on an tiedemann spending? >> i suppose, having been a member of congress i continue to have high hopes. i have lower expectations. there is something to negotiate

here. when i was on the supercommittee, tax increases are anathema to me as a republican and conservative. i believe they are harmful to the economy. i would be willing to give up something if there would be fundamental entitlement return because that is really the great challenge. how do we get quality health care, quality retirement security, at a price that is not tank the economy and bankrupt children? the president at least acknowledges the problem. the president proposals are not any type of structural reform. a couple small baby steps. i hope there is something to negotiate over there. again, the president and other democrats, have voted to work with us on a fairer, flatter, simpler, more competitive tax code. we cannot negotiate with a

president and a senate majority leader who refused to negotiate. we are not going to negotiate with ourselves anymore. >> final short questions. >> last time you were asked about this on television you quickly change the subject. but i want to read you something. the federal reserve president of the dallas federal reserve bank, richard fisher. you may know him. >> i know him well. >> he says the white house has mishandled this terribly in the sizing this process. you agree with his assessment janet yellen would be a fine choice for federal reserve chairman? >> i do not see a great benefit for me to comment on somebody who is yet to be formally nominated by the president. i think very highly of richard fisher. he is a great public servant. i would be happy to talk about the texas a&m football game. >> will you comment on the process?

>> i think i will decline and wait until whoever they choose to nominate is nominated. i will say it appears to be a unique process the white house has chosen. >> last question, the simplest question. why not go ahead and fund the government for six or eight weeks while these broader conversations we are discussing can commence? >> i would ask them the very same question since we are offering bills that fund 98% to 99% of what they have asked for. now we are passing bills on an individual basis that would open national parks, ensure veterans give benefits, ensure the nih continues cancer research. we have to ask them why they are voting against them. i do not think ultimately that will be a tenable position with the american people. again, we want to negotiate. if obamacare is the law of the land, let it be imposed fairly on all americans. otherwise we have to get america back to work and offbeat road to national bankruptcy.

>> thank you very much for being with us. do you hear any seeds of an accord? >> frankly, not many. this whole week has been a typical example of congress not being able to agree on the things they agree on because of the things they disagree on. what we heard today was the same ping-ponging of the argument back and forth. the the ball is on the other side scored. >> he several times criticized the white house for not negotiating. what has been your view, watching how the president has been approaching this? >> it is interesting. the positions are almost reversed. the white house view is we can negotiate once you reopen the government. your public and position is we will not reopen the government into we have negotiations about the conditions on which we reopen the government and raise

the debt ceiling. between these two positions, and they are polar opposites, and there needs to be something. the view in the white house is essentially the republicans got themselves into this mess by tying obamacare into funding the government. they will have to figure out how to get themselves out of it. in that sense, congressman hensarling is right. >> they acknowledged they would not gain much ground? >> he said as long as president obama is president, it is his signature icon was meant as president, they will not get a repeal. their initial was a repeal, than 80 funding. now they are chipping on the edges and obama has held the line on each one. there does not appear to be anything on obamacare that obama is willing to -- >> it reflects what republicans

will acknowledge privately as political reality. we will not be able to defund obamacare. we will not be able to delay the individual mandate. we are now down to the fallback positions. let's make sure congressmen have to pay as much for their health care. secondly, maybe the democrats would agree to repeal a tax being imposed on medical devices to help pay for obamacare. which would add to the deficit. those are the only two things that are realistic on the republican wish list. i am not sure they are very realistic. >> an opportunity to put obamacare on trial. the irony is we have had this rollout in the past week that has had a lot of glitches and, frankly, the shutdown has overshadowed what would have been a lot more stories about

the legitimate problems with obamacare. there are a lot of legitimate problems with obamacare. just not the ones the republicans are talking about. >> let's talk politics. he accused the democrats are taking the political view in their approach of this. what are the politics of the republicans about what is happening? >> a lot of smart republicans warned their own party that this was a political -- it has got into a position where they try to achieve an unrealistic goal, defunding obamacare, by shutting down the government, that was going to be a political loss. i also have to say that there is the danger if the white house overplays its hand. what republicans are trying to do, and what we heard congas and handsome and try to do, make the unwillingness to negotiate the issue the republicans took. there is danger that might be a problem for them. we can talk about who is right and who is wrong. to voters it is everyone in washington mess this up again. there is some danger for both parties.

>> the difference between this crisis and the previous crises is that we have been through the fiscal cliff, through the budget control act, debt limit debate of 2011. the difference is obama negotiated in each one of those. got some pushback, frankly, from the democratic party, from progressives who say you are giving up too much, giving up too much spending. so that is really what is changing this dynamic. republicans push the limit because they expected obama would continue to negotiate. now he stood firm. >> the journal covers the markets. the congressmen suggested the president was intentionally trying to roil markets. >> to some extent he was. what the president said in an interview this week was the markets are too complacent, they ought to be more worried about this than they are. his remarks i do not think the markets take the prospect seriously. they ared messages --

not going to let that happen. how they do not let that happen is open to question. there was a bit of market reaction of what the president said. not a lot. the danger comes in the week ahead. >> thank you so much for your questions. we have a long weekend ahead. >> that is true. >> thanks. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> a congressional hispanic caucus forum on immigration law. after that, experts look at the next term of the united states supreme court that starts tomorrow. >> i have been asked periodically when were you most afraid during your government service, which my service and government spanned the entirety

bush 43's administration from january 20, 2001 to january 20, 2011. -- 2009. 9/11.ing when asked what was the scariest moment, i think people are always expecting me to say 9/11. in reality for me, it was not the scariest moment. in scariest moments came september and october of 2000 and eight when it genuinely at -- 2008 when it genuinely appeared that the global financial system was on the verge of a collapse comparable or worse than what was experienced during the great depression. >> part one of our conversation with former white house chief of staff josh bolten.

>> on tuesday, democrats and republicans from the house and senate took part in a congressional hispanic caucus discussion on immigration law. they discussed the immigration bill that passed last july and what might happen to it in the house. this is two hours. [applause] >> good afternoon. i hope you have been enjoying all the great sessions today. while the discussions have been phenomenal and the participants engaging, none may be more timely than what we are about to take on this afternoon. this will address the very important topic of immigration and for the first time in history, we are proud to have five u.s. visitors on our conference stage.

if that was not enough, we also have five members of the house of representatives. before we jump in, let me tell you a little bit about my experience. years ago i came to washington dc with the goal of torning about public policy improve conditions for immigrants in the united states. i'm a incredible advocates that i admired and learn from. i was fortunate to meet an incredible group of latino leaders that were part of my cohort that i call friends to this day. with my class and the alum that through thelone -- years, i appreciate the work we do everyday latinos together that are passionate about .ncreasing opportunities

a gamy a foundation to start my career as an advocate for immigrants.

i am hopeful that we can have an immigration system that is in the best interest of our country and reflects our values. we must take a moment to recognize our sponsors. this session is brought to you s byiu. thank you for your ongoing support of latino leaders. [applause] i would like to introduce an upcoming film that will give all in our community great pride. directed, the film chronicles the birth of the modern american movement led by cesar chavez.

between his duties as a husband and father and his commitment to bringing dignity and justice to he embraced nonviolence in the struggle for the rights of farm workers. his triumphant journey is a remarkable testament to the power of one individual's ability to change the system. let's take a look. [video clip] farmworkers have begun an unprecedented strike in the central valley. >> the shabbos group is seeking to force the growers to recognize their group. >> i wish they would all go back to where they came from. >> who is the cesar chavez? >> we do not need you. get the hell out of our country. >> have you seen the headlines?

it is real money. >> we have to dictate terms. this is a moment. this is what we came here. you cannot oppress someone who is not afraid anymore. it']video clip [applause] >> ok. are you ready for the panel? here to lead us in the first hour of discussion is senator robert menendez. [applause] up as a son of immigrant and a tenement building in union city.

he has served as a school board member, a mayor, and a state legislature. he has long been on the front lines of the immigration debate. please welcome robert menendez. [applause] >> thank you very much. if cesar chavez could lead a movement to help farmworkers be able to achieve justice, we can ind a movement to get a boat the house on comprehensive immigration reform. let me thank our event sponsor and particularly medina and all of those who have worked with him and those who have done a fantastic job and help build support.

and all of you for participating in this public policy conference. today you're going to hear from those of us who were together for seven months to write the immigration reform bill. andre poised for a lively necessary discussion to evaluate a pathway forward for reform. it is fitting that we have this discussion here today during the public conference. as we celebrate hispanic heritage month it should not just be a celebration but a call to action to see the house of representatives gave us an up or down vote on immigration reform. the bill we passed in the senate is a historic opportunity to finally reform our broken immigration system. it reunified families. it brings 11 million people out of the shadows into the light. i've always said this is the

civil rights issue of our time. the reason i say that is because inn i have hundreds of cases which u.s. citizens and legal permanent residents get andwfully detained violations of their constitutional rights, it tells an imperativef this is. i do not know about you but i do not want to be a u.s. citizen and be a second-class citizen in the united states. that is why this is the civil rights issue of our time. who care just latinos about reform. theo make up two thirds of 11 million people living and working in the shadows, unable to participate in american life. this is an issue we need to address for our community and for the country.

passing a bill in the senate requires some compromises in order to be able to achieve the ability of what we got which is a strong bipartisan vote. everyone should be aware of certain elements as we approach this discussion. it creates a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the united states and it includes the best dream act provision ever offered under any piece of legislation. reforming our immigration system economic imperative as well. that is not just because those of us in the gang of eight who put this together believe it is true, it is because the congressional budget office, the nonpartisan division that scores everything we do in the congress as to whether this legislation will cost money and save money, here is what they said. cut the deficit

isnearly $900 billion and it nearly a trillion dollars left back andon our nations the next generation of not only latinos but americans. it will grow the economy at 3.3% in the first 10 years. 5.5% in the second 10 years. imagine that type of growth in the economy if we were to experience it today, creating jobs for all americans. add 100 20,000 jobs a year for 10 years. it would raise the wages of all americans, not just those who afford. we can achieve all of those goals at the same time. known are some lesser-

provisions that i think are important for us as a community. protections for domestic violence survivors, asylum seekers, refugees, detainees, children who are separated from parents. it increases oversight of enhancement and training of the border patrol agent's, create a mechanism that allows border communities to meaningfully share their input. the plan reduces vulnerabilities and introduce a strong measures that will keep family together. for the first time if you are a legal permanent resident you be able to reunify immediately with that individual under our law. is just some of the elements. it enhances human rights protection.

also for many others who have languished under the system. believe that this was put on the floor of house of representatives that it would pass with bipartisan votes. is to send a message to the house of representatives to follow what we did in the united states senate and to have a vote on this critical issue. if we have that vote we will be on our way to the president's desk is ready and willing to sign it. let me introduce to you some of my friends and colleagues will ultimately were a critical part of making that happen. he is a man that has been to theed to give voice voiceless.

senator schumer is an advocate for the emigre community. got more. that we senator schumer? [applause] the leader on the republican side is someone who i have come to greatly admire. some call him the maverick of arizona, the man who pushed for immigration reform countless times and is not afraid to reach across the aisle to do what is in the best interest of the nation. as a border senator, he knows the pressing economic and moral issues and why immigration issues need to be changed. he has used his personal political capital to make this a signature issue that we seek to be signed into law, senator john mccain of arizona. [applause]

one of my colleagues is widely recognized as an independent thinker driven by a deep seeded obligations to create more opportunity in the next generation. each of us has stories of how we came to this country. and grandparents arrived to this country after surviving the holocaust. american gave them hope and the opportunity to rebuild their lives. that is why he understands why immigration reform is so important. he let in our efforts of the agricultural provisions of the law. he continues to work in agricultural. senator michael bennet of colorado. [applause]

then a gentle man who has been the driving force on many developments in immigration reform over the last several years. he is best known as the original author of the dream act and has advocated for more protections for american workers who can find themselves in competition with other high skilled foreign workers for jobs. that dicktwo things durbin consistently presses, how do the dreamers realize their dream and how do we protect american workers. there is no stronger voice than senator dick durbin of illinois. [applause] now i would like to invite them to make some opening remarks. do we have a couple of questions we are going to share with the entire audience.

>> thank you very much. let me say. i can tell you time after time in that little room where the eight of us gathered there is someone huge or a line in the sand and said i will not budge unless our immigrants are on a path to citizenship on a fair and reasonable -- reasonable cap. this started out as a fellowship. ortiz.ked for we saw how good she was.

she started out as an lc and has been promoted and promoted because she is so good. now the legislative assistance for health and education, one of the major positions in my office. veronica durant. [applause] ok. i will be brief. the number one question people are asking is not what the bill does or how it can be changed. those are important question. the number one question people are asking is can we get this bill accomplished. i truly believe we can. panel, the house panel, you asked in a whole lot of questions. because of your work and the entire community and because we had some really good allies on we haveervative side,

made huge progress. passed this with a large majority, 68 votes in june. the house was we are not going to do immigration reform. we went to work over the summer. we took a list of 122 house members, republican, who were not for immigration reform that might be able to be won over. write them, of you call them, visit them at their office. many members of the labor , with many members of the very conservative community that i mentioned. saidwent to them and they to them how important this was

in terms of fairness, on or and in terms of america. you want to get your economy going? the answer.re in fact, cbo, a nonpartisan thingshere that scores said that if we passed our bill, growdp of america would 3.5%. that is huge. that is more than any spending program democrats would propose. no one works harder than our immigrants. from whatever country they come from they worked so hard. they are the proudest of americans. in any case, these people went to work. just today, and the weekly standard of conservative magazine listed 84 republican

and now have said very positive things about comprehensive reform which of course has a must. it must include a path to citizenship for the 11 million. we have real hope. the leadership in the house republican knows that if they keep being anti-immigrant and blocking immigration reform, the republican party will be a minority party for a generation. some know that how good immigration reform will be for the economy and future growth of america. together.l of that i believe we can get a bill done. thate house passes a bill is not exactly as good as ours but has a way for the path to

citizenship different than what we would propose but still together inn get conference and pass a bill that will make you all proud. my message to you is twofold. dead.ssue is hardly it is alive and well and alive and well for this year. now.t stop work as hard as you can on every house member is not come out for comprehensive reform. do not let up until they do. thank you for the honor of addressing you. thank you for being compadres. i look forward to being with some of you at least when president obama sits at his desk and science comprehensive immigration reform. thank you very much.

>> thank you for welcoming me here as the token republican today. greatd like to say what a pleasure it has been for me to have the opportunity to work with these four great senators. me too a pleasure for work under the chairmanship of the foreign relations committee of senator menendez who is a worthy successor to john kerry. a person who has carried the torch of the dream act it is dick durbin. when he is written dick durbin will have a very prominent place for his advocacy for these children. as far as michael bennet is concerned, he brings a voice of reason to the people of colorado and important contributions. what can i say about senator

schumer? you all know him. the mosthe is one of effective members of the senate. it is remarkable the job he did in steering pass through the many hours -- during us through the many hours of spirited discussions, insults. we insulted each other quite frequently. we came up with a product. those who say washington is gridlocked, i give you the example of the eight of us that there are still ways of getting things done if people really want to do it. [applause] i view one of my primary responsibilities to talk to the business community and galvanize them. i would just like to mention to you this bill would reduce the deficit by $850 billion over the next 20 years. this is the congressional budget

office. the legislation would add $300 billion to the trust fund over the next decade. my own state would have enormous benefits from it including our economic output that would be increased by $616 million and 8000 more jobs. i have tried to do is go around the country until the business community there is a lot at stake here. the best way for us to get out of the stagnant economy we are in is to pass comprehensive immigration reform. aspect inly one other would like to discuss with you. that is the humanitarian side of it. perhaps we do not talk about this as much as we should. today the temperature down on the border now that summer is over is probably down into the 90s.

the border patrol or local sheriff will stumble across somebody's in the desert. bese bodies will unidentified and they will be taken to the morgue and given a decent burial. there because people wanted to come to this country for a better life. the same reason why our forebears did the same thing. we have not been able to secure the border efficiently. understand also that if we do not give the people of the 11 million of them that are now theng in the shadows chance, the opportunity to do the same thing that our forbearers were able to do, have a path to citizenship, we are going to have 11 million people

living in the shadows and being exploited and abused because they do not have the protections of our constitution and our laws. principal christian nation, we should not let that happen. if there is someone here was never broken a law, please raise your hand. i cannot. people broke the law when they came to our country. they're going to pay a very heavy price on the path to citizenship. we should give them that path. maybe not all of them would choose that path. they should have the opportunity to live and raise a family and have a job and enjoy the benefits of the greatest nation on earth. that is really what this legislation is all about. thank you. it's >> thank you. iwanted to say first that have enjoyed working with these

people more than anything else i have done in the senate. i want to repeat for you something i have said. in the four years i have been in the senate, i am not seen any expression of legislative leadership greater than that shown by the republicans that were in this gang of eight led by john mccain. i say that as a democrat. mccain, lindsey graham, marco rubio con that you said at that table 478 -- 47 or eight months. 8 months. or it was within that we were able to pass this vote in the senate. it is important to say that because of the times we're living in and the politics you see going on in this town. without that leadership we would have gotten nowhere. have been know, we having a lot of terrible flooding in colorado.

visited a community that is outside of greeley in northeast colorado that had been hit by a river that they never imagined it would rule were through their community. i visited to trailer parks that have been completely destroyed. i cannot tell you the percentage of people living there that were undocumented, that it was probably over 80%. i asked in a conversation. working in agriculture. working in construction. cleaning in our hotels. their only asset was the trailer home they owned, because they could not finance it, so they paid cash for it. and now everything is gone, and the federal government cannot assist them, because they are undocumented. they are part of the fabric of our economy in northeast colorado, and that is their community, northeast colorado. it seems to me we have gone on fo