the president urged the speaker to hold a vote in the house of representatives on the senate measure that would reopen the federal government immediately. citing the senate intention to

pass a clean your long of the debt limit this week, the president also pressed the speaker to allow a timely up or down vote in the house to raise the debt limit with no ideological strings attached. he noted that only congress has the authority to raise the debt limit. failure to do so would have grave consequences for middle- class families and the american economy as a whole. that is the latest from the president. that is incomplete reputation of any anonymous statement that any staff person may have said and is pretty clear. i want to come back to you and ask you again, another question. can you guarantee that if this commission were to meet and bring out findings, that you and or the speaker can guarantee that tea party members will support those recommendations?

>> i thank the gentleman for yielding and i would like to say mr. boehner does recognize your friendship and support of your district and is delighted that you are here on the rules committee with us. that is an outstanding question. i would say that as the american people hear the debate that takes place between these members who would be there, we hope that the american people really engage on this issue that would have great leverage with all of our members and it would be i think beneficial. as best i can tell you, as i look at the gentlewoman from new york, i think the american people do need to see how we are going to do this. i appreciate the gentleman for asking.

>> i have additional questions. one of them is in reading and rereading the legislation and asking my staff to review it, it says absolutely nothing about how much this will cost. these committees don't just come into existence all of a sudden and don't cost anything. since you have left that out, i would hope before we report -- normally i am in agreement with reporting out the rule most immediately, but normally isn't good enough in these times. we ought to have some idea about how much it will cost the taxpayers to establish such a commission and to have it render its majority and minority reports. does the chairman have an answer to that? >> i do. the working group is what this is called. it is in fact a working group. it is not a committee. it is a working group. bipartisan.

we have not gone and calculated that. i would say, i appreciate the question and we think is working group can get done and get to work and would be done -- >> you sure have a strange way of evading questions. >> if i had an answer, i would give it to you. >> i am delighted to know that you don't have an answer. that is what should be in this legislation. all other legislation that created committees created the financing for those committees. this one does not. i will offer an amendment to the rule that will allow that we do at least establish something, if nothing more than to say that each member's representational alliance -- we are off the track here. i don't understand perpetuating legislation and allowing for a working group to be established if they don't have good working staff and some of the others have had.

i range all the way back to good friends of mine in the coalition long before we got to where we are. apparently your staffer wants to have me say something that you need to say. let me yield to you. >> what i wanted to reply back is, if we use as a standard the committee which was for the purpose of trying to cut a deal of long-term debt, we did give them a designation. we gave them a timeframe. we told them what to do, what the rules -- we are not trying to do that at all. we are trying to establish a working group. we aren't -- i appreciate this. we are trying to get a resolution of some ideas.

>> i think i may have a solution. if the budget committee that has already been constituted -- i am sure mr. van holland would not object to having a conference committee televised to the american people to have this discussion that you want. and we don't have to worry about having more money. >> first off, i think the gentleman very much. what you have done here in this legislation that you proposed as mr. van hollen has wisely pointed out, you say that the working group's charge is number one, overall levels of discretionary spending including for the fiscal year ending on september 30, 2014.

the simple fact of the matter is something that is revenue neutral. that is what you have done. i would ask mr. van holland, do you perceive it the same as i do? how it is your charge would be revenue neutral since it would not include any potential for spending and revenue increases. >> yes, what this says -- even though the title says deficit reduction, we would only allow the group to pursue one kind of deficit reduction. you would not be allowed to both do targeted cuts which we should do and cuts to tax breaks. we talked about big oil company subsidies. you've got big wall street hedge fund owners who get a much lower tax rate than the ordinary americans.

under this legislation, you couldn't reduce the deficit by one penny by closing some of the tax breaks. >> absolutely. in this nation, one percent of the people in this country have hijacked the middle class. that is what my colleagues on the democrat side are trying to do -- that is increase the middle class and widen it so this nation could go forward. i don't imagine that harry reid will let it reach the pilot his desk. i think it is important for the people to know that a partial list of bipartisan budget negotiations since 2010 -- there have been commissions that people forget.

the cantor-biden talks, the obama-boehner debt ceiling negotiations, the gang of six talks, the supercommittee, the obama fiscal cliff stalks. every one of them went nowhere. had we done it at that time, it would have made sense. have we done what the senator wanted to do with his people -- there are things in there i would not have agreed upon but that might not us at a better position today. all i would say is -- this will be my final question. what happens if and when this commission if it were -- a working group, excuse me, if is working group fails and the next

cr and debt ceiling increase needs to be passed? what happens then? >> i thank the gentleman for his question. the answer is that i believe what we are trying to do is come up with an idea to empower members as opposed to leadership that we have been doing. i think our leaders have been unable to do that. i appreciate the job of and for his thoughtful questions and his answers. i would say, this is another opportunity and we are going to keep hoping that -- >> i thank the gentleman. i borrow my time back just to say. i don't need other members to tell me how to do my job. i don't need the leadership of this congress on either side telling me how to do my job.

every one of the delegates in this congress have minds that are just as sound and solid as everybody else. all we have to do is go right down to the floor right now and put on the floor a clean cr and let the body work its will. i predict that it would pass and you all are holding it up and you ought to be held responsible by the american people that you continue to talk about. i want to take something else. i don't only represent my constituents. i represent the people that didn't vote that our american people. they are deserving of our consideration. i don't need a commission to tell me nothing. if we ought to do it, then we ought to do what mr. mcgovern says. but if the public and let everybody see what it is we are doing. the speaker said he wouldn't participate in any more backroom negotiations. here we are getting ready to

establish something else that is going to be some kind of supercommittee. cut me some slack. i yield back. >> this working group is an idea that i would say that i am delighted that everyone has been here. i would ask the gentleman to note that we are on a series of votes that will take place. i would like to ask that you the gentleman please come back after the floor vote and that we plan to add a measure on the faa because this hearing has gone on. we will keep adding ideas. we recess until 2:15. [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> house democrats met to discuss the meeting. this briefing is 30 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. we just concluded a democratic caucus meeting. we are ready to reopen government. this weekend, we had a vote on legislation that passed unanimously where republicans said they were willing to pay our 800,000 or so for load furloughedour workers' hours. they say we should not pass a funding bill for our

governmental operations that we should pay the workers were waiting to go back to work. but that is where we are. today, we saw from the reports on gallup that we have now experienced in the last week of this government shutdown , republican government shutdown, the largest drop in americans confidence in their economy. and if our republican colleagues don't think this is serious, shutting down the government intensely so they can get their way on items i have nothing to do with budget policy, then they should take a look at with the american people are saying. they are telling us that they have very little confidence that this republican congress will allow the economy to continue to improve. we should be talking about strengthening the economy and building a stronger middle class. figure, where tried to out why republicans won't let us have a vote on reopening our

government. we keep saying that we are ready vote here and let america work. if for whatever reason, republican speaker john boehner and our republican colleagues have refused to allow all 433 of vote on the floor of the house of representatives to reopen our government. one, not two,not not three, but some six to eight independent news organizations which have verified that there are enough votes today in the house of representatives to reopen our government. yet republican speaker john boehner refuses to allow members of congress to exercise their obligation and to vote to open

this government. our colleagues have continued to refuse to negotiate with house democrats to reopen this government. we have since april been trying to get republicans to sit down with us to negotiate on a budget and they have continued to refuse to even sit down at a conference table to have that commerce nation. now they want to say they want to negotiate. the time was six months ago and before. we are asking a republican colleagues to see us for an answer. we are willing to take their budget number to reopen the government and we know there are sufficient republican colleagues that we join with democrats in the house of representatives to reopen our government. serious as thes drop in consumer confidence has proven, but this is also absurd. so we hope finally there will be

some sanity that prevails in the house of representatives and house speaker john boehner will for once allow us to vote on a clean jet -- a clean budget. with that, i will yield to our vice-chairman joe crowley and we are joined today and we are very pleased to be joined today by two colleagues from virginia who happened to represent a good numbers of those american workers who are anxious to get back to work, mr. jim moran and mr. gerry connolly gav. joefirst we will go to crowley. >> as i said before, there are two obligations of congress. one is to pass the budget and the others to pay our bills. we failed to do the first and my areblican colleagues talking about failing to do the latter as well. ago, it was as if my

republican colleagues were playing with matches. now they are playing with a blowtorch. they know exactly what they're doing and they have a purpose. in fact, one of my colleagues said that failing to raise the debt ceiling would in essence balance the world markets. i am paraphrasing. it is absolutely absurd what they believe is in the best interest of our country are now. what is in the best interest of our countries to put americans -- to put our government back to work. get the government up and running again and not lay with a blowtorch on the issue of our national debt to resolve what it did to our economy the last time. the downgrade in our credit ratings, how it hurt our economy. we simply cannot even allow this discussion to go further. we either pass a clean cr and get the government up and running again and pass a clean debt ceiling relief bill and

stop taking this uncertainty out of the lives of the american people and quite friendly the world. there is enough uncertainty in the world. we have to stop creating these man-made fiscal cliff's, these man-made disasters. there is enough going on as it is. there are so many other issues that we need to be concentrating on that we are neglecting because, again, of these man- made disasters. will turn it over to con jim ran -- jim moran. now that the house has agreed unanimously to pay federal employees for the time that they have been unfairly laid off from day one of the shutdown until whenever it concludes, the

justification for preventing them from going to work is even weaker than it has ever been. there is such compelling arguments when you're paying people anyway to enable them to do their work on behalf of the record people. it really blows the mind to that a supposedly majority in the house of representatives would want the federal workforce not being able to go to work. economic consequences, that is what we want to discuss, they are enormous. in fact, the washington region will take a very deep cut in its of thisas a result inexplicable action on the part

of the house majority. it's not just the federal employees who have been directly affected by this. we have a contract workforce that is even larger than the federal workforce. , thousands of those contractors are being put on in many cases, having their jobs terminated. many of them worked alongside federal employees. if the federal employees cannot be on the job, they can't be there. the agencies that they work for have been shuttered. so the contracts are no longer reimbursable in many cases. some of them have ongoing contracts. they continue to get paid. that many of them do not. that is why we saw lockheed lay off 3000 people. it was announced yesterday. this will get worse if it does

end.nd -- if it does not we will realize what an incredible hit on the economy that this action took. many small contractors can't get the financing that they need. up.s of credit are drying irking capitalist drying up. in fact, the loss of confidence on the part of investors for federal contractors has been significantly reduced. beyond the federal employees in the contractors, there is the that isthe economy dependent upon that federal activity. jerry and i refer to the fact

that there are best that there is 30% to 40% of our economy that is impacted but there is more that is impacted integrate impacted indirectly. it is the grocery stores, restaurants, the services. if people don't have a check coming in, don't know when it will come, they will not spend. that is just human nature. and they are not spending. we are seeing a significant reduction in economic activity in the washington region. and i know that is happening throughout the country. if this was a self-inflicted crisis, done by the congress at a time when we could have a robust economy. yet we are not taking advantage of economic attentional in this country. in fact, we are pulling it back that when the account is written of the

economic cost of this inexplicable of unjustifiable action on the part of the house that is, we will see far consular than anyone could have imagined. that's why we need a clean vote on the floor the house of representatives. deliver us a clean cr. we know the votes are there. by a majority, probably a significant majority in the house. the senate would pass it. they resident could sign it the same day. and then we could open up the government and and the shutdown -- and end the shutdown. not to do so is almost criminal based on the effects that it is onpening -- that is having thousands of americans. .> thank you

welcome, everyone, this morning. this orwellian sentence called the federal shutdown, there was one brief shining moment of truth. a colleague of ours from the other side of the aisle actually respectu know, we want and we need to get something out of this. the problem is we just don't know what it is. it started out to defund obamacare. now god knows what it is. the other side won the election campaigning ont uncertainty, how awful it was that there was uncertainty about the bush tax cuts and what would happen to them. and democrats were to blame for creating that uncertainty and the terrible effect on the economy. well, little did we know what they meant was we need more of it.

homes -- regis are one of the largest declines in recent memory in consumer confidence. when we faced a similar kind of uncertain created again by them, between the third and fourth quarter, we lost two $.4 trillion in household wealth in this country, including $800 billion in pension value. that is what they are willing to risk. and as jim said, it affects business is in my district, his district and all across the united states. it is not just the federal sector are. it is the ripple effect on businesses, thousands of people being laid off, who will not be made whole in the private sector. because of the uncertainty being created about the foot rent of the federal government and all of the services sort of divided to it. this is reckless. it is damaging to our country.

it will affect our competitive posture. and it will affect the ordinary lives of americans in every corner of our country. it must stop. they keep. >> as we get ready to take questions, i have just been informed that earlier this morning, speaker boehner responded to a reporter's question about the fact that the votes exist to pass a clean budget and we could reopen the doors to government and put americans back to work. his eloquenting is doo.>>e was due -- was we have americans who believe in confidence in their economy. the speaker knows the votes

exist for us to stop this gimmickry. and that is his response. thissaid before, if weren't so serious, it would be absurd. it is time to stop the game playing. you have the votes which you yourself had agreed to put on the for when you had your majorityons with leader harry reid in the senate hearing you backed away from that. how can we trust you if you're not willing to abide by your own negotiated agreement. and when you treat with such cavalier attitude the question of why you won't let america get back to work and have our government reopen. we are about to face in the next week and a half the possibility for the first time in our countries history watching as we tell the world we are not willing to pay our past debts. is this the same way that the

rep of the can speaker in the house will run the show when we have to deal with that in the house? we certainly hope not. there are two consequences, not just a government shutdown but to the default on our past bills. with that, we will take russians. idea that -- is he saying that he can with those was to be known. has he thought of where that type of assertion may come from ? that he isssible saying, because he has the power on what comes to the fore, that he is saying that the votes are not there because he won't let it be there. so that may be a real definition of what he meant when he said the votes aren't there. he's just a point to let them be there. we have been talking for

quite some time now that mr. enabled theeither tea party faction of his caucus as you maycaucus or, be suggesting now, it is part of his plan, that this is maybe not so much tea party shutdown as it is speaker boehner's shutdown. either way, the responsibility falls at his feet. he has the ability to have a clean vote on the cr. they can do it at any moment now. they can walk upstairs. in half an hour, we can pass a bill in the house of representatives. they know there are enough votes to pass the bill. he simply won't let that come to the floor. century, when theygers were persecuted,

gave the benefit of the doubt to czar.are paired -- to the and they would say, if only the czar knew. he wasturned out to that responsible. it is time for speaker boehner to lead and be the speaker, the title which he possesses. >> i think the republicans in happens when were partisan politics infect policymaking. diga party to be able to ight -- to dictate to a democratic body what will happen, you destroy what the founding fathers set up force. read any page of the

house rules that govern the operations of the house of representatives. calledll never hear a so- hassett real. it is not a rule. dictaterepublican party where the republicans have said they will not let anything come to the people's house for a vote unless the political party, in this case republicans, decide they are willing to let that measure come up for a vote. here we have polyp all to dictating what america's democracy will do you at some point, you have to put country before party. and i hope that john boehner is reading the news about how americans confidence in the economy has eroded. it is time to put country ahead of party. democrats -- why is there not

more encouragement given to bipartisan group train now? focus on party? a number of issues, how to resolve some of the budget issues in the bigger issues to have a big resolution of our fiscal solution moving forward. but to have to negotiate with a a gun atur head after the head of the american people makes no sense to us. we are willing to have become recession that leads to negotiated agreements. but remember, john boehner to get shaded this agreement to have a clean vote on the budget resolution. he has walked away from that agreement that he had with senate majority leader harry reid. and that is why we have this government shutdown. senator reed and democrats essentially accepted the republican proposal to extend the operations of government. it was republicans who couldn't

take yes for an answer and have walked away from their own negotiated agreement. so when john walks were from what he was willing to do and he is than willing to impose a dictate what to will happen in the house of representatives, you can see the level of disruption we now have in the house as representatives. so we can talk to our republican colleagues. but if they are always going to walk way from those negotiations and then -- i'm not sure how to say this. the us honesty to not accept what you have offered when it has been accepted, it is tough to negotiate with folks. so whether we talk to rank-and- file republicans are not come if the leadership, it john boehner will sit there and reach an agreement and then walk away from it and then get up there and say you can put it up for a vote because he's got a partisan rule that determines that he cannot put it up for a vote, it

is tough to make any progress. >> i think it is an overstatement to say that it was a formal proposal. i don't think there was. i think there was an attempt to say, ok, there's a group of so- called moderate republicans. where do you stand? is there any possibility of common ground? group ofis it that republicans met with speaker boehner and they were rebuffed. he told them in that meeting that he would bring anything like that to the four and that we would go close up to the debt ceiling and he would wrap the two together. so they get rebuffed by their leadership. >> i would also answer that as well though that it does show that peter king and charlie dent are correct. there are republicans who are willing to work with immigrants to pass a temporary cr. that we know. in fact, peter king and charlie dent have said a clean cr would pass the house.

i think you would pass with more than 20 republican votes. it comes back to what we talked about before. , no longer's refusal ,ust the tea party republicans this is clearly the speakers doing good he is continuing to so thatn the government both parties can continue to discuss and to negotiate the passage of a full budget for our country. >> we are eight days into this and the october 17 deadline is fast approaching. what will break the logjam? us has any -- if we had an answer, we would propose it to is mind-boggling to think that the congress of the united states would actually even seriously consider allowing our debt to default, to undermine

the confidence that the american dollar has been able to generate for 200 years. and the kind of economic implosion that will occur if we actually go past the point of being able to pay interest and principal on our outstanding debt. that is just beyond comprehension. as jerry mentioned, there are members in the house majority that actually comprehend that and don't seem to be concerned -- or to totally concerned about it. we don't know what will happen, but it will be bad and it probably will be worse than we can possibly imagine. it is really not compensated. there is an obvious answer. let's pass a clean funding bill for the government and let's pass a debt ceiling increase of

the we are good for our debts. i commend chris matthews new book called "tipping the gift." we couldn't have had up to that point a more conservative ideological president than ronald reagan and a staunch democrat for speaker of the house. they came together on debt. and raise the debt ceiling. the only condition tip asked to deliver democratic votes at that time -- by the way, under ronald reagan, we raised the date selling -- the debt ceiling 18 times. he asked for a thank you note from wrought -- from ronald reagan for voting for it. reagan in ad ronald tax increase one year after his reagan revolution because it was in fact hemorrhaging red ink. and to the president credit, he

needed a tax increase and he got it. they save social security for another generation in the compromise they worked out. together on a lot of politicians. of policy issues. i commend the example of tip o'neill and ronald reagan, two very different ideological men, but they came together because they understood how important it was to the country. they didn't play the kind of reisman ship with the economy in the future of america -- the the kindeisman ship -- brinksmanship with the economy and the future of america.

>> wall street has a role to play here. i think the business community has a role to play, the chamber of commerce, people that the republican congress have respect for. i know that they are weighing in but they need to weigh in even more. they really need to fine tune the republican caucus on just how catastrophic this would be for the world. maybe there constituents want their interest rates to go up on their home mortgage if it is an adjustable-rate mortgage. maybe they want interest rates to go up to buy a new car or to pay their bills on their credit cards. my constituency doesn't want that. want is forstituents an the government to work. they want to see this government working for them. that is what they are demanding. for the first time in the

history of the united states, the contemplation of a shut down -- you cannot happen. it is unprecedented and the effects would be catastrophic on the world. those outside groups need to weigh in any way each -- in a way in which they have not done before to make sure they understand dust what the consequences are of their actions or, in this case, there in action. leaders republican announced they would be bringing to the floor legislation that send, byng a by car to -- a bipartisan, but camel -- by caramel group. >> not again. oh, my gosh. we know how well that worked when we did the supercommittee. by the way, having served of

this supercommittee, there was nothing super about it. it was just punching. it is another way of getting out and doing what you should. what was born, from that supercommittee was sequester, which we are told by the congressional budget office, to fiscal nonpartisan guide what any legislation process in this country is, cbo is telling us is that sequester will cost us more than a million jobs in his first year of existence. so is that what republicans want? another process that can burst another sequester that will lead to millions of americans out of work? there is no reason why we can't just get her work down. we don't need a supercommittee. we don't need a sequester to tell us how to vote. the votes exist right now to pass a clean budget bill. and i think all of us here understand that the votes exist to keep america from defaulting for the first time on payments.

remember, republicans voted for these debts that they are now saying they don't want to pay for. they were on record voting for the stuff good and then for them to say no, we won't and then jeopardize that interest-rate that someone is paying on their her home andhis or hom now interest rates on student loans will balloon, it is outrageous. it is reckless. it is a responsible for anyone to say that we don't have the votes to move forward to do what ronald reagan did 18 times. americans just want to get to work. colleaguesblican were just put themselves in the shoes of the average american, we would have a vote today. the government would be back in operation, and we would not be risking the likelihood of american families who are figuring out how to survive in the current interest rates on

their homes or their student loans or their car loan. his is reckless. and we don't need another supercommittee, which is not super, to have members to do the job that they were elected to do in the first place. >> let me respond first to the question. we don't need to have another fact,tee created when, in they complained about the fact that the senate had passed a budget. the senate passed a budget. the house republicans have passed a budget. appoint conferees to the budget, first of all. let's pass a temporary budget bill to keep them operating and concentrate on passing the rest of the appropriations bills. there is a way of doing this athout re-creating or remaking of government. we don't need to do that. there is regular order that was being followed until now which

is being directed by the thaler of republicans who are threatening to go bad on america's debts. we don't need to do that. we have a regular order that they could follow if they would just a pointer conferees to the budget. >> so the answer is no. you're not participating in any such committee. >> we could propose a budget and get america's bills paid if we just do what ronald reagan and others have done. and that is stop using extortion to try to get your way on a social agenda that the american people did not agree with in the first place. it is time to get to work. it is time to do it every american has to do. get up in the morning and do what you're paid to do. we are paid to make progress. we are paid to help as this is get americans to work. we are not paid to shut down the government. we are not paid to default on our past obligations and put our economy and every american pocketbook in danger.

if they stopped playing games with their own party, if they stopped letting the tea party why the elephant, let them vote on a bill that lets government it back to work and our economy moving forward. we created over 7.5 million jobs in the past three plus years. we could do a lot better if we didn't have republicans doing this every few months. thank you very much. >> after president obama's news conference, how speaker boehner once again challenging the president but not negotiating over the government shutdown in the debt increase. these comments are five minutes.

>> good afternoon, everyone. as you all know, i had a phone call with the president of the united states this morning. i will say it was a pleasant conversation. although i have to say i was disappointed that the president refuses to negotiate. when it comes to the issue of funding our government, the house has passed for bills. for bills to fund our government and provide fairness to the american people under obamacare. each of those for bills was rejected by the united states senate. under the constitution and our system of government, we ask that they sit down and have a conversation with us about funding the government, keeping it open, and providing fairness to the american people under obamacare. over thesed to do it. last 30 years, dozens of times, there have been negotiations over funding our government. all of those negotiations over the last 30 years have resulted in significant policy changes. and i would remind you that the

president of the united states and i have sat down in the spring of 2011 to negotiate the funding bill for the government from march all the way through september. during that negotiation, there were all kinds of policy considerations. and, if you recall, the opportunity of scholarships for kids here in bc was in fact restored in the law and the president position that, listen, that we will not sit down and talk to you until you surrender is just not sustainable. it is not our system of government. and it comes to the debt limit, i agree with the president. we should pay our bills. i didn't come here to shut down the government and i certainly didn't come here to default on our debt durin. but when it comes to the debt limit, it has been used to carry

significant policy changes that would in fact reduced spending and point us in a fiscal path. president reagan said down with tip o'neill in the 1980s. in 1990 when out to andrews air force base and get into a long debate and negotiation with democrats here in congress. bill clinton went through this three times in the 1990s. president obama and i sat down in 2011 and had a serious negotiation. and while the president today suggested that i walked away from the deal, i would have to remind him that i was in the oval office along with the majority leader eric cantor when we in fact had an agreement that two days later the president walked away from it but it was in fact another negotiation in 2011 that resulted and really the largest deficit reduction bill we have seen in the last 30 years. but in 2010, when democrats

controlled the congress and president obama was in the white a grouphat happened was of moderate democrats in the house wouldn't agree to raise ae debt limit without negotiation. so there was a negotiation that amongst democrats over raising the debt ceiling. the long and short of it is there will be a negotiation here. we can't raise the debt ceiling without doing something about what is driving us to borrow more money and to live beyond our means. the idea that we should continue to spend money on something we don't have and give the bill to our kids and our grandkids would be wrong. and franklybout me it's not about republicans picked this is about saving the future for our kids and our grandkids and the only way this is going to happen is to in fact have a conversation. so it's time to have that conversation. month,t week, not next the conversation ought to start today.

and i am hopeful that, whether it is the president or democrat leaders here in the congress, we can begin that conversation. >> can you tell us what you would say to military families military have been -- families who have just been denied death benefits? >> last week, the commons past the -- the congress passed the military benefits act to pay bills including this. i think it is disgraceful that they are withholding these payments. again, tomorrow, the house will ask specifically on this and i hope the president will sign it. speaker, the president has made it clear [indiscernible] what happens, in all candor, if on october 17? >> it is the time when the wreck

of people want their leaders to -- when the american people want their leaders to sit down and have a conversation. i want to the cover station to happen. the president said that if there is unconditional surrender by republicans, he will sit down and talk to us. it is not the way our government works. thank you, everybody. says he willobama negotiate with how speaker boehner if the house votes to reopen the government. the president's comments came during an hour-long news conference tuesday at the white house. >> good afternoon, everybody. i am eager to take your questions so i will try to be brief at the top give this morning, i had a chance to speak with speaker boehner and i told him what i have been saying publicly.

i am happy to talk with him and other republicans about anything , not just issues i think are important, but also issues that they think are important. that havingold him such a conversation shouldn't require hanging the threat of a government shutdown or economic chaos over the heads of the american people. think about it this way. the american people do not get to demand a ransom for doing their jobs. you don't get a chance to call your bank and say i'm not going to pay my mortgage this month unless you throw in a new car .nd an xbox if you are in negotiations around buying somebody's house, you don't get to say, well, let's talk about the price i am going to pay and if you don't give me that price i will burn down your house and is not the way negotiations work. that is not the way it happens in business kid it is not the way it happens in private life.

in the same way, members of congress and the house republicans don't get to demand ransom in exchange for doing their jobs. and two of their very basic jobs are passing a budget and making sure that america is paying its bills. say,don't also get to unless you give me what the voters rejected in the last the -- in the last election, i will cause a recession. that is not how it works. president would deal with a foreign leader like this. most of you would not deal with either a coworker or business associates in this fashion. and we should be dealing this way in washington. i have heard republican suggest, this is reasonable. imagine if a democratic congress had threatened to crush the had refused to

consider background checks and immigration reform. republicans would not consider that appropriate car. so let's lift these threats from americans. this is not a new position. i asked speaker boehner and other leaders in last week. for i my chief of staff have had serious conversations on the budget with republicans more than 20 times since march. we have been talking all kinds of business. what we haven't been able to get our serious positions from the republicans that would allow us to actually resolve some core differences. have decided to run out of clock until there is a government should out for the possibility of default, thinking that it would give them more leverage good that is not -- more leverage. it is not my characterization.

they have said it themselves. that was their strategy from the start. that is not the way our government is supposed to run. it is not just me, by the way, we has taken a position that are willing to have conversations about anything. senate democrats have asked to sit down with house republicans and hash out a budget, but have been ejected by house republicans 19 times. at the beginning of this year, speaker boehner said what we want is regular order and a serious budget process. so the senate should pass the bill and the house should pass the bill and then a committee comes together and they hash out their differences and send the bill to the president did is exactly what democrats did. except, somewhere along the way, house republicans decided they would not appoint people to the committee to try to negotiate. 19 times, they rejected that. that, the all

democrats in the senate still passed a budget that effectively reflects republican priorities. with republican budget levels government open and house republicans couldn't do that either. the point is, not only the white house but also democrats in the senate and democrats in the house have shown more than ample anyingness to talk about issues that the republicans are concerned about. if the entireo it basis of the republican strategy is we are going to shut down the government or cause economic chaos if we don't get 100% of what we want her. so my suggestion to the speaker is stop making excuses, take a vote in the house and rmf this -- and end this shutdown right

now. there are people willing to vote yes on a budget that the senate has already passed. that vote can take place today. the shutdown would be over. then serious negotiations would proceed around every item in the budget. as soon as congress votes to reopen the government, it also has to vote to meet our countries commitments, pay our bills. raise the debt ceiling. as reckless as a government shutdown is, and economic shutdown caused by america defaulting would be dramatically worse. this for aalk about minute because, even the people can see and feel the effects of there arent shutdown, still some people out there who don't believe that the fault is a real thing. we have been hearing that from

some republicans in congress and that the fault would not be a big deal. so let me explain this. if congress refuses to raise what is called the debt ceiling, america would not be able to meet all of our financial obligations for the first time in 225 years. called raisings the debt ceiling, i think a lot of americans think it is raising our debt and it is not raising our debt. it does not add a dime to our debt. it simply says we pay for what congress has already authorized america to purchase, whether that is the greatest military in the world or veterans benefits or social security, whatever it is that the commerce has already authorized. this makes sure that we can pay those bills. now the last time that the tea flirted withcans

the idea of default, two years ago, markets plunged, business and consumer confidence plunged, america's credit rating was downgraded for the first time, and a decision to ask a go through with this, to actually permit default according to many ceo's would be, ," andtrophic, chaos warren buffett called it as bad as a nuclear bomb. it would disrupt markets and ruin america's confidence in the global economy and might permanently increase our borrowing costs good ironically would mean that it would be more expensive for us to service what did we do have and it would add to our deficit and are debt. there is nothing fiscally

responsible about that. preventing this should be simple. as i said, raising the debt ceiling is a lousy name which is why members of congress in both parties don't like to vote on it because it makes you vulnerable in political campaigns, but it does not increase our debt. it does not grow our deficits. it does not allow for a single dime of increased spending. all it does is allow the treasury department to pay for andwhat congress has already spent. but as i said, it's always a tough vote. people don't like doing it. although it has been done 45 times since ronald reagan took office. nobody in the past has ever seriously threatened to breach the debt ceiling until the last two years. and this is the creditworthiness of the united states we are talking about. this is our word. this is our good name. this is real. and the government shutdown millions of americans face inconvenience or outright hardship in an economic shutdown