small businesses are being affected by the affordable care act. ♪ good morning, everyone. it is thursday, december 12. it has been an all miter on c- span 2. republicans protesting last months rule change on filibusters. it will be a busy day on the house for -- floor. they're slated to vote on the two-year budget deal to avoid another government shutdown. also on the docket, a farm bill extension. and the defense authorization bill. 10:00overage on c-span at a.m. on the budget deal, john boehner

lashed out at outside conservative groups for opposing the deal. we will begin there this morning with your thoughts on that. republicans, (202) 585-3881. democrats, (202) 585-3880. independents, (202) 585-3882. @cspanwj. us a tweet, you can also e-mail us, journal@c-span.org. conferencey's press with john weiner, he was asked about outside groups like heritage foundation. and there opposition to this deal. [video clip] membersare using our and using the american people for their own goals. this is ridiculous.

more deficitr reduction, your for this agreement. is making thehner case for this two-year budget deal. it is expected to come to the floor today. paul ryan is telling cnn they have the votes to get it through the bipartisan house and senate will take it up next week. joining us on the phone is ginger gibson. give us the latest on the budget deal. what happens today on the floor? see twoe are likely to votes on the floor today. the first will be a vote on the rule and a vote on the budget and the doc six. and then the farm bill extension which will extend the farm bill by three months. negotiators have not been able to agree on a long-term fix to the farm bill time -- to the

farm bill. this will give them more time to keep talking. host: where are the votes right now? guest: we have not seen vote counts. democrats are not telling their votes. see a sizableo number of republicans, minus the conservatives that are unhappy about it. unless democrats can get them over the line, there are a number of democrats that are byet -- that are upset unemployment numbers being included -- not being included in this deal. host: what happens then? where does the bill go next? guest: it goes over to the senate. it appears they will have the

votes they need to pass. we are going to see a lot of democrats and a cancel -- and a handful of republicans to get this over the finish line. ,he house goes home tomorrow but they leave. the senate will be here next week. there will not be many options in terms of amending because the house will be gone. is not a hard deadline. it does not have to be passed before they leave in order to ensure that programs continue. they could possibly tweak it a little, but that is unlikely. we are likely to see this tackle the house to keep the dock fix -- doc fix that is in place. is the speaker, has he agreed to a vote? the speaker has been open to addressing the uninsurance

expiration and extending that. it would appear that something can be reached before the republicans and democrats, he would allow that to move forward. democrats are unhappy about this. people are going to lose unemployment insurance after christmas. these are folks who are receiving unemployment insurance who will stop getting it the week after christmas. a think congress should be addressing this now and before they leave to go home, even if that means they have to stay longer to sort it out. this -- harry reid tweeted this. i will push for an extension when the senate convenes after the new year. he has also said that he would push for an increase to the minimum wage when senate returns in january. what is the likelihood the uninsurance benefits passes both

chambers and minimum wage gets to the president's desk. guest: that is unlikely. the probability of unemployment insurance is much higher than the minimum wage. republicans in the house have shown little to no interest in adjusting minimum wage. part, we can consider these minimum wage bills to be a message from democrats. they're going to push it as a message and hope that when they go home, they can tell voters they are pushing for minimum wages and republicans are not. host: let's go back to how we began. john boehner was telling reporters that the reaction from outside groups, conservative groups to this budget deal is ridiculous. what did you make of that? john mayer has had a lot of frustration trying to get his conference -- john weiner --

boehner has had a lot of frustration trying to get his in lockstep with these conservative groups. they will tell you that they are not answering to these groups. a similarshare philosophy, similar ideas on --islation and are back by they are in lockstep. john boehner has had to deal with a lot of headaches from these groups. they are undermining and derailing things that he is pushing for. these groups came back and said the speaker thinks that we are doing something wrong, it is because he is not conservative enough. that is the internal fight that we have been seeing for the last couple of years and are still seen today. host: who are the outside groups? guest: heritage foundation,

freedomworks, they are a political group obama americans for prosperity -- a political prosperity,cans for club for growth, which is putting money into campaigns for republicans. these are big groups that have a lot of money and are not afraid to spend it in primaries. host: is this a harbinger of what is to come? is it a signal that some of the conservatives who have revolted from him are coming back into the fold? is no love lost between speaker boehner and these groups. they have been not close friends for a long time. in terms of what will happen in the future, i don't expect to

see him embracing them with open arms anytime soon. pushbacka lot of happening in congress from members of leadership against these groups. we saw senator mcconnell pushing back at the senate of conservative -- at the senate conservative fund. to seeprobably going more of that. they are less afraid of them and more likely to have a public dispute with them. host: thank you for your time. commenter, here's a from one of our viewers. finally some leadership from the majority leader. paul, i am glad to see it. minnesota. would you think? my comment is i think they should try to raise the minimum wage. i think it would do more good

for the economy than harm. host: colleen, wisconsin. go ahead. i was disappointed that they did not include the extension of the long-term unemployment. that say it would make it -- make people go look is a fact thatt you have to look for jobs every week. i would like to see somebody like paul ryan or rand paul dress up like a 62-year-old person with a resume that says -- that is to the hilt with and saying that you're unemployed for the last year and a half and see if he can find a job.

i also feel there should be something to force the corporations to hire the long- term unemployed. or somethingrelief because we are not going to get hiringe until they start and quit ages termination -- and quit age discrimination. there should be something attached so that corporations at companies have to hire least a 10th of their work population has to be a long-term unemployed person. host: should democrats vote no on this budget deal? should voteink they for it, but when they go for the

they should attach thiese recommendations. cruel to be cutting off the nose of these people. you work hard to find a job. i have been there. i have done that. house appropriations ranking member of new york yesterday was asked about the budgeton -- the two-year deal, not including an extension of unemployment benefits. here's what she said. [video clip] >> it is urgent that we restore and continue the unemployment insurance benefits. it is outrageous that we should leave this congress and go home

for the holidays went to many people, over one million people, will not be getting unemployment benefits. overall, i think it is important to work together, but i want to make it clear that if we get the house back, it will be a better bill. when it comes to the national institutes of health and education jobs, the economy, we can do better. i think this is the best that we can do at this point. lowey there, saying it is the best that they can do. it will come to a vote, today is what we are expecting. principal, the co- negotiator of this deal, he said that they have the votes and they are expecting a bipartisan vote on this. later today ton

see that vote happened. ron on twitter says this -- liberals have shown their -- their priority is for satisfying a need for immediate gratification. jerry, portsmouth, rhode island. even though i am a democrat, i see both parties are -- i do not see they aren't hitting the nail on the head. are hitting the nail on the head. there should be investments and jobs. investments in this country. hire people, get the money going back through the government. eventually it will. when small businessmen sell their rocks and women sell their products, there will be money coming back into the government. i think those parties do not

have the right picture and we need to revamp a lot of ideas. donna, oklahoma, republican color. hi, donna. donna is gone. -virginia. independent caller. go ahead. they are am outraged going to cut meals on wheels for seniors. these are elderly seniors that need this. many of them cannot get out. there are a lot of things they welfare, allorate kinds of things. to me, the enemy is congress. lawmakersld these vote yes or no? no.er: not if they are going to cut things that people need.

they don't think about us. i am tired. i am not going to vote for any of these guys. they keep getting elected and reelected and reelected and they do not do anything for the people. host: let me show you some of the morning headlines. all-out out war breaks out in gop over the budget hacked. that is in "the washington times." the bulk of the planned deficit reduction would come in the final three years of the deal while the new spending would happen in the next two years. ae u.s. government ran deficit through the first two months of the year.

the front page of "wall street journal," budget deal picks up steam. sayingublican leadership they think they have the votes with bipartisan votes that they could get this through. thisnew york times" morning, the bipartisan budget deal puts ryan under fire from fellow conservatives. for thel rivals republican presidential nomination in 2016 went on the attack blasting the deal and challenging mr. ryan's status as the thinking man's conservative. it is not just the budget, but the lack of long-term thinking. rand paul said i cannot support a budget that raises taxes and never balances nor can i support a deal that does nothing to reduce our debt.

otis, mississippi, republican color. caller: -- republican caller. you doing this morning? -- i got injured on the job. i am disabled from an on-the-job injury. i am going through a lot of things with the company. coca cola, coca-cola enterprises. i am going to put you on hold. you have to turn the television down. let's go to christine, buffalo, new york. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have two comments. unemployed,ng-term i am a professional are and -- that ad my state feels

nurse is a nurse is a nurse. specialized in a specialty for almost 30 years, so it is difficult to translate some of that into what the state expects you to find a job in. here are some comments from our viewers. when they compromise, we lose. isg says, finally boehner getting a back bone and standing up. it is about time gop puts the country first. it is not a good budget deal, but republicans gambling for a shutdown. this deal is better than a shutdown. teresa, tennessee, republican caller. caller: i do not agree with this bill. i believe john boehner and paul ryan gave away everything, any kind of a bargaining tool and they gave democrats everything

they want. this argument that the passing an are not unemployment benefit extension is wrong. signedhe democrats who this budget deal without the unemployment extension. boehner andary, ryan have allowed them to come back with the argument that the republicans hate the poor people and they took away their unemployment benefits. it was the democrats who signed this bill also. let's go back to what is happening in the senate. they started a talk off on -- talk-athon. they are protesting a rules change that democrats made to the senate, allowing a simple majority instead of the usual 60 votes to proceed on an executive nomination.

the senate has continued talking with republicans coming to the floor and harry reid tweeted this yesterday about the talkathon. short supply. in they're wasting the senate's time. mitch mcconnell tweeted this -- democrats broke the senate rules to rubberstamp liberal ideologues like nina pillard. her nomination was approved this morning around 1:30 in the morning. cnn put out this tweet -- the for her tos 51 to 33 serve in washington. a little color for you about the senate talkathon.

cory booker, the senator from new jersey send this tweet out, , late-nighte floor voting for those who can't sleep, fine your antidote to insomnia on c-span. for those of you that know and are watching. they have taken up the of rachel feld bloom who was renominated by the president to be the commissioner of the eeoc. they proved to and that the debate. they got the majority they needed to end the debate. they will vote on her around 9:00 a.m. eastern time for her second term as commissioner. this is her twitter page. lesbian, eeoc commissioner, and with a disability.

tweets on civil rights, discrimination buster. deal talking about budget is expected to come to the house floor for a vote. what he think about senator boehner invoicing -- endorsing the deal and those that disagree ? boehner is lying through his teeth about this budget deal. , but they'rees calling it these instead of taxes. there is no entitlement savings. thathe sequestration stuff republicans fought for. they just let go and gave up. john boehner is showing his spineless self again. it is ridiculous.

are an independent? have you voted republican mostly? --ler: i consider more myself a libertarian conservative. host: who should be the leader of the republican party? caller: i am not sure. i have not given him much thought. -- that much thought. side more with rand paul for example? caller: yes. host: we shared with you what rand paul had to say. the budgetupport deal that raises taxes, never balances, and does not reduce our nation's debt. this tweet, budget pact protects social security and medicare.

it is incomprehensible to me that republicans continue to protect huge corporate loopholes that benefit some of the largest and most profitable corporations. randy, chicago heights, illinois. independent caller. i'm calling about the unemployment extension. her during the 2008 in and -- hurts during 2008 2009. my company closed down. i need this emergency unemployment extension. monthshave eight more ago go before i can get social security. if it ends now, i am dead in the water. i believe c-span is doing a wonderful job of getting the people's voice out there. our government is not hearing.

they should reinstate this unemployment and at the timing of it during the winter months and christmas months, it is not the right time. they should extend it for three more months until summertime comes to give the older people the chance to get out there and look for more jobs. right now in the wintertime, it is not the time to put this -- to quit this unemployment. this headline -- the issue slips -- split the parties and experts. some of the unemployed might drop out of the labor force altogether without the aid and others may be spurred to search harder for a job. manassas, virginia, high, and. -- hi, ed.

caller: this is generational theft. it is destroying the company. the savings on the bill will not pay a half of a percent off of what we spend on interest in the debt -- on the debt alone. government spending is out of control. it is going to destroy this country. people worried about social security and medicaid, they are not going to have that within their lifetime. it will be bankrupt. very --ression discretionary spending is dropping and this is because we have a group of politicians running washington who are selling favors -- selling corruption for favors. it will destroy this country. jamie, fremont, ohio. what do you think? we ought to throw them all out.

there is so much corruption that i have found out about this place, this congress, from the -- from therom me uttermost. it is terrible what we are going through. it is terrible what they are putting the people through. i am tired. host: i am going to remind you and others that you have to turn your television down. this tweet, boehner is the worst speaker in history. he cannot lead his party. fewest laws passed, shortest time work. the people need a refund. some capitol hill reporters saying that the question they asked him yesterday about conservative groups on the outside opposing this budget deal as one they have teed up for him before.

his reaction yesterday saying the opposition before the bill was put out was ridiculous and that this bill would tackle deficit. he encourages support for it. that theytelling cnn have their votes for it. tune into c-span at 10:00 a.m. when the legislative session gets kicked off. secretary hhs kathleen sibelius was before the subcommittee talking about healthcare.gov. here's the headline in "the washington times." sibelius vows to revamp policies. the numbers came out for month of november. november, a from -- shot in the arm for the health site. at that hearing yesterday, sibelius talked about the

rollout of healthcare.gov. here's what she had to say. [video clip] is the right time to begin a process of understanding the structural and managerial policies that led to the flawed launch so we can take action and avoid these problems in the future. i am announcing issue -- initial steps that i have taken. i have asked the inspector general to investigate development of healthcare.gov, including contractors, the management of the project, and performance and payment of our contractors. maryland tavener to create a new position of chief risk officer at the centers for medicare and medicaid services and to expedite the search and hiring. this will be an employee charged with assessing risk management practices to minimize those risks. i will instruct this officer to

look at i.t. and contracting management practices starting with healthcare.gov. kathleen sebelius before the house yesterday talking about the rollout of the, announcing investigation into what went wrong there. news, this is "the washington post" headline about afghanistan. of u.s. is backing off securing a deal that would keep some drew -- some troops in the country. they also have this headline about this hearing on capitol hill. this am with the chief of the national security agency. he was asked about the surveillance programs that they are doing. they were using cookies to track

people. [video clip] >> how do you bring information from outside the country to what we have inside? how do you connect the dots. that is the issue with the metadata program. there is no way we know of to connect the dots. all? not do that at that is an unacceptable risk to our country. -- can we doto do more on the oversight and compliance. there are things being looked at . taking things off the table is not the thing to do. that was a testify -- that was justification about the surveillance programs. sebelius,sed kathleen

you can go to c-span.org and find it in our video library. headline, stanley fischer is expected to be the likely choice for the fed number two spot. that would be the vice chairman and janet yellen is confirmed. john kerry testified about holding off iran sanctions. sides on the senate yesterday to brief senators about holding off on a new round of sanctions. lewas joined by secretary who went up to the capitol to say that we need to hold off on a new round of sanctions and give us time to work this deal. will be before the

senate banking committee testifying about this today. if you are interested in that, she will be giving testimony. will be on capitol hill today at 9:30 before the house financial services committee. he will be testing about the international finance system. span3overage begins on c- if you are interested in watching. to brian, pennsylvania, democratic caller. what you think? caller: as far as i am concerned, john boehner has been a glance -- against the democratic party since obama got elected his first term. he is elected his second term and he is still against him. put down theo

deficit and get it to the bottom, you need to start taxing , oil companies, exxon mobil, bp, etc.. the money they make on gasoline for fuel alone is ridiculous. nobody taxes these rich people. these are the 1%. . used to be a truck driver i know. i paid a lot and feel. 1%.raise the taxes on the this budget deal, no. this is a smokescreen. this is going to get worse. as the republicans and the tea party, once they move in, this is all a smokescreen. this is just to give the democrats what they want and then they try to bowl over us.

chart -- how this the budget deal covers the cost of sequestration relief. 12.6 billion dollars comes from higher security fees for airline passengers. billion comes from higher premiums for federal insurance for private pensions. $6 billion comes from reducing payments to student loan debt collectors. $3 billion comes from savings from not completely re-feeling petroleum reserves and $12 billion from reducing contributions to federal prison -- pensions. $21.5 billion of this comes from cutting other fees including cost-of-living and increases to military retiree pay by one percent. blocking prisoners from receiving government checks like unemployment benefits, and

reduces the risks of social security fraud. what do you make of how they pay for taking away part of sequestration? caller: to reduce the contributions for the military people, not giving them what they need, that is wrong. that is wrong. as far as prisoners getting , no. unemployment i don't see, that should be the way it is. when it comes to our armed service people, they need to get all they can get. that is my point of view. host: what about the pentagon budget itself? caller: it is a smokescreen. i have seen this happen through the years. all through the years i have seen this. it is one way of the republicans wanting to take control of

congress. the house is divided, which i have not seen this in my whole lifetime. this is ridiculous that the republicans cannot get along with the democrats. they cannot come up with some kind of a better budget or better deal than this. republicans are trying to push for more control over the house and the senate. that is all it is. host: the pentagon welcomes this budget deal, but they say, more defense spending is needed. restored,ion has been about 63 billion. saving the pentagon from cuts. the pentagon saying we welcome it, but we are going to need more spending. ed.sachusetts, high,,

caller: they need to kick that bill back. have they until they unemployment fees attached to it. there are people out here dying that they are not thinking about. and have their christmas vacation, that is nice, that is wonderful. people are trying to survive. their up and join -- enjoying their vacation. they need to kick that back and have that piece attached. also, maybe another piece attached to that bill, that allows us to impeach some senators when they are not doing anything. let me share you the opinion of the major newspapers in washington. the editorial for the washington post this morning says this -- a flawed budget deal is better than no deal at all.

they are saying that it is an achievement that one exists at all. the new york times this morning, they weigh in as well saying budget is the minimalist deal. democrats reduce the sequester, but republicans are -- austerity still dominates congress. -- mad tv -- matt kibby is another this republican budget surrender of the short term deal that will ensure long-term overspending. that is what some of the tea party groups are saying about this deal. the speaker yesterday calling it ridiculous that they would oppose it. marty, westlund, michigan. republican color. normally this is the

only forum where americans actually get to speak. i do not know if i can get in everything i would like to say, but i do belong with the tea party. i am a republican, but i would arethat i say on c-span, we in $61 trillion of total debt. over $17 trillion in national debt. anything that these buffoons on both sides of the aisle do is a smokescreen. back to the other caller, referring to loopholes, the government creates the loopholes that these big corporations get these brakes on. the problem is not be corporation -- not the corporation. it is the government that creates the loopholes. as a tea party member, the government not allowing people to get extensions on their checks is ridiculous. money to pakistan and afghanistan and foreign aid across the world, we are going to allow our people to start.

the government does not like to give the people who pay all of the bills in the country back their own money. government creates the conditions in which we live. it is insane. to blame republicans and democrats, everything they do is a smokescreen. member, i also believe that every person should have insurance. they pay all of the bills. government brings in nothing. us bang kevin, fort lauderdale, florida, independent caller. go ahead, kevin. to agree with the caller from michigan a little bit. government sets the conditions, but because of

lobbying, if you want to check facts, the big corporations are the ones writing the laws and handing it to politicians that are getting past. they are the ones creating loopholes, not the government. they are taking their corporate sock -- sponsorship. they should all wear jackets like the guys in nascar. to get to boehner and the budget deal, i was taking a look at the fees forhigher security on airlines when they are cutting tsa members here in fort lauderdale. i do not want to pay more for less. that is ridiculous. i am an educator. john boehner -- his responsibility is to bring bills to the floor and he has not done it. we do not have a farm bill to where i am morning about whether or not i can see -- feed my child milk. students are on reduced lunch,

are they going to be able to afford lunch because milk is going to shoot up to eight dollars a gallon? that is ridiculous. are going to extend the current farm bill until january. caller: extending it and passing one that works and helps reduce americans and farmers is a different story. if they are just going to push the floor, they are turning around and saying that our children are going to have to bear the burden while -- of all of this debt. it sounds like they are asking our grandchildren to bear the responsibility of being responsible human beings that passed bills that will help our economy and people. take house is expected to up an extension of the farm bill because they were not able to negotiate a five-year farm bill. i say they will come back in january and try again. that vote is expected today.

we're also hearing that the house could vote on the defense authorization bill as a suspension which means they only need two thirds to get that through the house. welcomed george h w bush to twitter. he tweeted out on december 10 that barbara and i wish we could have joined the delegation honoring president mandela. they are in our prayers. over 70,000 followers on twitter already. the huffington post that ted cruz attended and walked out of the mandela memorial service in when growl castro -- raul castro came to the podium. he walked out in protest of what happened there. the discussions about the house budget deal.

we will talk to house members coming up next about how they plan to vote. we will talk to kurt schrader and then we will talk to sean duffy. first, i want to show you a little bit of the back and forth in the senate when republicans kicked off their talkathon. this was yesterday evening between harry reid and chuck grassley. it was about the protest on republicans over changing the senate rules. [video clip] >> i object and i would like to state the reason i object. object is heard. >> the reason i object for the to moving these votes is that i think we should follow what regular order we have left

on nominations, especially after the way the majority change the rules on nominations two weeks ago. my friend, this is what we're talking about here the face of destruction. not him, but the republican caucus. stalling for no reason other than to stall for time. werender the rules changed. no wonder the american people look at the senate as a dysfunctional body. ago, we votedeks to make it functional so that nominations and beacons earned -- so that nominations can be confirmed. we have been wasting days, weeks, and months on nominations . we have scores of people, positions of people that need to be filled. we are only dealing with a handful.

people understand the rules. we have changed a few of the rules the last couple of congresses. very little, but we have changed them. if you have a supreme court justice or you have a cabinet officer or someone of that level, they get 30 hours of time alloying the cloture vote. theirome explain position, why they oppose a person. from every one of these nominations, there has not been a single complaint about any of them. journal"ngton continues. host: we are here with kurt schrader. what you think of this two-year deal that you are going to vote on later today? looks like it does not accomplish a whole lot. it deals with the sequester. they call it a budget deal but i think it is making it a grantor

deal than it is. it deals with a small portion of the sequester. cancel some of the sequester has some on the backend and does not talk about the fact that health care providers are having the sequester extended upon them for another two years. host: what would you like to see happen? guest: i would like to see congress step up and put some certainty back into the budget process. we are having businesses on the sidelines not making investments because they do not know what our tax policy is, they do not notice the full faith and credit of the united states is going to be at risk will when we do debt ceiling discussions. that is what is stifling the economy in preventing folks from getting jobs. until we have the courage to step up and make some smart moves and changes in our social safety net and tax reform we are wasting time.

host: are you a no vote? guest: i am going to be a no vote today. -itis -- it is the wrong thing at the wrong time. my hats off to paul and patty to get something done, but it is sad if they deal like this -- if a deal like this reduces sequester by 50% this year and 25% next year and not at all for the following years. you would want the sequester to be completely eliminated. guest: it is stifling our economy. aey will tell you that it is half to a percentage point off of our economic growth. it stifles our economy. anything.t do if you're interested in long- term debt and deficit, you have to deal with the social safety net programs and tax reform.

they say it reduces the debt by $23 billion. caller: it's a gimmick. paul is usually against gimmicks and i am surprised he is buying into this gimmick. it is not the right thing to do. two year released from a small portion of the sequester and we are paying for it with 10 years worth of savings. you are spending 10 years worth of savings to get a two-year deal. that does not make sense. host: what do you think happens on the house floor today? callerguest: i think it passes. i have been out in front on being smart about our fiscal policy doing a little bit bigger deal so i cannot vote for this. i think most of my colleagues on both sides of the iowa will. -- of the aisle will.

excitedrship is not about this deal. there are some split opinions on it. chris vanchair, hollen, he is not giving an endorsement to this deal. he points out that the alternative is going into january 15 and having been presented by the leadership of continuation of the current sequester, which is at a lower level than this yield that they struck the other day. for a lot of democrats, that is unacceptable. host: had he feel about including higher premiums for federal insurance, four private pensions. it includes the civil federal workers have to pay more into the pension system and military people as well will see their cost-of-living increase adjusted by one percent. a deal, it ish

not the right policy. sacrifices on- the part of our men and women in uniform were made for a bigger down payment on our debt and deficit, i think they would be willing to go there, but we are picking on them. house republican leadership federal the role -- on employees to balance a budget on their backs. federal employees or staffing, that is the wrong thing to do. in the context of a bigger deal, where you are dealing with a social safety net, every american is willing to step up and sacrifice for the next generation to make sure they have the same benefits and opportunities that our generation had. this deal doesn't do that. deal, at least a deal exists. guest: if that is your mark for

success in congress, shall be it. -- so be it. oregon, you onof the air. go ahead. caller: we have a group called -- democratic party. we are progressive. we do not like this. tell you isying to this, the budget, the sequestration, you need to check this out. what you guys are doing is taking the discretionary tonding from 16% of gdp down 4%. destroy theto economy and take away from the american people. have unemployment insurance and we voted to put you in. this is one of the things we want. we want to look out for the people. you are putting the united states budget in the balance -- in the bathtub. it is being drowned it.

if you allow this to happen. you have the senate. this is the same thing they did to bill clinton. they pushed stuff through until you guys got weak and gave in. just listen. i am finished with us. the very next year, after these bush gotbudget when into office, he gave it all back. it is no good. at sounds like congressman schrader might agree with you. guest: he has good points. he is well informed. i like seeing citizens that are seeing what is going on. the budget stuff we talked about is small potatoes. we need to do tax reform. the wealthy are not paying their fair share. most of the citizens in my district are willing to put a hype.llars into the

they have benefited from the assistance. fix the viability of social security and medicare. we are not addressing those issues. we are not doing our job. eric is right on target with that. host: shutdown is over? i am confused. they made this economy worse with adding new debt with no solutions. what is going to happen in february and march? we have the debt ceiling yet to come. people are going to be confused. there will be an outcry. the budgetot solved problem. we dealt with the sequester. come february and march when the debt ceiling needs to be raised, it will be interesting to see how many republicans vote for this. if they vote for this budget,

they will have to raise the debt ceiling. it is going to be fascinating to see what happens. host: terry, republican caller. good morning. caller: i have a couple of things. everybody likes to put -- point fingers about the sequester being a bad thing. i think that was president obama's thing. more importantly, i was watching c-span and the shenanigans going on in the senate. will they put out the message -- the nomination, the way they're going about it, it is disturbing. you are stacking the deck in the district court. is that fair? to shut down a voice of the

senate, the minority. that is mind boggling. host: the talkathon continues in the senate on c-span2. they have been talking all through the night about the judicial nominees. a vote is expected around 9:00 a.m. for the equal opportunity commissioners renomination over there. guest: the sequester was not an obama thing. .his was set up by congress we did it to ourselves. american people should or ought to know that we did not expect the sequester to take effect. we thought that we were capable of greater things, making the tough decisions on the debt and deficit. that means dealing with the social safety net programs and with tax reform. added1.2 trillion that we to the budget from 2011 through

the sequester, that was not supposed to be done by the sequester. we were supposed to use that as a hammer to make sure that we would step up and do the right thing. everyone says we need tax reform. why the hell aren't we doing that? those,ner we deal with the less drastic action we have to take. why aren't we doing that? outside interest groups, everyone is worried about the election. my colleagues are worried. if they tried to do the right thing, they are in big trouble. my democratic friends, they're going to get beat up as they talk about the safety's -- the safety net program. host: you would put social security on the table for these negotiations? guest: they have to be.

it is not about cutting benefits. the payroll taxes out of a. when they do get it up to the 90% level. medicare, we are already using federal income tax. we need to back it. installed inbeen for a number of years now. we need to fix these programs. we have come out cautionary. why are we not talking about that? that is where the real courage is. that is why these people elect us. they liked us host: host: to do the big thing. maryland and virginia, democratic color. caller: i was interested in the two-year budget deal. i have been unemployed for six months. i finished up with my state. we are trying for an extension through december.

nothing to look forward to in january. still in trouble. there is nothing in this budget deal to deal with unemployment insurance. you are not alone. there are a lot of places where it has run out. the economy is not replacing the jobs that were there before. there is nothing now in the deal. i know that the democratic leadership on the house side has decided to offer amendments into this deal. so far, no takers. host: . retweeted out that extension of unemployment insurance should not be part of the deal. he will push for part of the extension after the new year. guest: i will not happen. -- that will not happen. he will not get 60 votes on the senate side either. this is tough right now.

i am of a mixed opinion. who should be getting them? ostensibly, we are three years past the recession. it is still very tough. marilyn is not alone. a lot of folks in my state art struggling to put food on the table. these are hard-working americans. they need a little bit of help. i am interested in what sort of opportunities we could come up with. at some point, we have to look to taken jobs that were not the jobs we had before. createde safety net has a new class of untouchables who will never find work again. republican caller. caller: thank you for taking my call. you seem to explain the problem very well. you actually identified all of the items that we ought to be dealing with to address the

deficit and debt problem. my problem is not just with you. it is with all of congress. you explain things very well. why don't you tell us specific things that you actually do to lower the deficit? other than taxes, taxes, taxes. that is what i would like snow. guest: that is very fair. during the last shutdown, i was like you. is there any opportunity to actually do something besides raise taxes? is there some alternative or something we can do on a grander scale? down with a small group of folks in congress -- several tea party members and progressive members and some more moderate members like myself. we went through a budget

able to and we were identify as a group, unanimously , health-care savings. there is money to be had there. you get republicans and democrats as part of a bigger deal to go forth. we looked at whether savings would find anything for the next farm bill. that is coming out in january. there is other cautionary that can be done. we see it already in ryan's bill. bickeredart of the deal. -- bigger deal. we have to put some revenue on the table. we need to talk about some sort of gas tax or mild deal. if you want a highway to run on,

we have to pay for that. there are things that -- all of those things were on the table. we discussed this. we could agree on doing those things. and some down payments. i hope they will get the job done next year. they get a signal from leadership. our biggest problem right now is that leadership is not encouraging us to work together. my view is that they are encouraging us to work apart. that is a real problem. host: the washington post reports that this deal means 2014there is more money in -- i higher spending level. it raises revenues. why not vote yes now and find another day two years from now to and sequester? guest: that takes the air out of the balloon.

we will not do a darn thing for the next two years to solve the problems they were listeners, all of america cares about. we will do all the talking. we do a lot of talking, but we have no pressure. this deal allows the defense industry off the hook for the majority of the severe aspects. there is no accident that the defense budget gets $20 billion. that is the number that has been identified by the defense department and others. we have tope that make sure that republicans and democrats are dealing with this is to not pass this deal. if you pass the deal, the air goes out of the balloon. congress will continue to pass deals and congratulate people. as far as meaningful

legislation, few and far between. the alternative is for us to step up and do the right thing. it is not a grand bargain. that will not save trillions. maybe a little more. that is a real down payment on getting our country back where it needs to be. if you want to put -- if you are a budget tear, you want to solve it. you want business to feel that this is the best place in the world to invest. this budget deal will not create more certainty. it will be a drag on the economy. host: illinois, independent caller. caller: good morning. i have called many times before. let's get down to the facts. the gentleman before called it a smokescreen. it definitely is. you want money? put an import tax on all foreign goods coming into our country. we're spending $1 trillion per

year on wars that we do not belong in. let them solve their own problems. put that 24% into the import tax. put that into the social security fund. $53 trillion out of medicare -- our country is going broke. are these guys investing our money overseas? the wars are wrong. we do not belong there in the middle east. i do not want to hear from this gentleman here. they are skirting the issues. we are in trouble and we are not until we get money in the coffers. the only way to do that is import tax. bring the troops home from the middle east. guest: i agree with part of what

you are saying. i think that you are right. our troops should come home. we are in countries now the do not even want us to be there. the united states is negotiating with folks in afghanistan to get extra troops there. it is crazy. i do support the policy to go in anywhere, anytime to take care of terrorist. i do not care which country it is. if they're not willing, we will go in anyway. that does not mean having troops overseas. we have troops in europe fighting a cold war that does not exist in a more. they deserve to come home. americans want us to take care of america. we're spending so much money overseas. a lot of that effort could come home and create jobs. that is what you're are talking about. i agree with you there. on the import tax thing, i do not agree. it is a global economy right now. we are part of the wto. we cannot unilaterally force an

import tax. we will end up running afoul on trade. business will suffer. jobs will suffer in this country. to your point, i think we have a smarter trade policy. one of the big issues in congress after the first of the year will be trade promotion authority for the president. can he present an up-and-down vote? the pacific trade pact is coming. we want a fair trade pac. that is going to be a difficult task. today and tomorrow i have a trade rep coming in. i'm going to look at the trade agreement to try to make sure it is fair. the advantages to american business. hopefully, we can increase our revenue. the president is working on increasing our exports. host: andy christiansen wants to bounce this off of you.

the loopholes -- we know what they are. guest: well, i agree with him. we need to do that. that is part of that tax reform strategy. we want to start from a zero plane. that is the only way we're going to get this done. it scares everybody. if you start at zero, no loopholes, then add things back that are important -- we have a lot of things going on that really you are hard-pressed to say would give us an advantage right now. we give away $1 trillion in tax loopholes every year. if we had most of them back, we could create a lot of jobs. make medicare more solvent.

we are not doing that. host: what about agriculture subsidies? guest: it gets beat up a lot. we're the only committee in town that has offered to reduce the deficit. one other committee is willing to pony up and spend less. we are conservative by nature. we understand that you cannot have your cake and eat it too. we are willing to do this. we are eliminating the direct payments program. that is a big deal. i think that american farmers understand the program. we are having a battle right now. subsidies and crime insurance programs are a little too high. let's live to fight another day. we will have an opportunity. host: will you vote for this extension? guest: i will not. that allows congress to do the

job. we need to stay here and get this done. we should not go home two weeks early when the farm bill needs to be done. we can do this next week. we can pass the farm bill and get it done. host: that is what is holding about? guest: yes. people could not get into work because of the snowstorm. i live out west. we do not a lot of snow, but we get to work in the morning. i understand they're working on deals. find. we have a whole other week. let's keep us here in washington. we should get paid to do our job, not to not do our job. host: he is serving in his third term. districtents the fifth in oregon. he served in the oregon state legislature. blue dog democrats are

conservative republicans who serve wall street, not mainstream. they will help republicans. guest: i do not know what script she is reading from. that is totally wrong. if you are a blue dog democrat, you have earned the right to be a democrat. that means you're in a lot tougher to district. i am a democrat for a reason. it would be easier in some respects to be a republican. i choose to be a democrat because we believe about people. we're trying to do the right thing. we're not trying to balance the budget on the backside of americans. it is the -- it is astonishing earned $250who million are considered middle class. we are still out of touch here in washington. it is ridiculous. blue dogs at a spectrum to the

democratic caucus. we talk about a different way of doing things. we're fiscally responsible. that is the value that we bring. we are certainly a lot better than the republicans. host: how many are there of you? guest: we added three new members already this year. we got wipes down in the 2010 elections. we're are down to 17 or 18 members now. from a high of 60. it is a shame of -- what happened to some people. they were misinformed. people want to get rid of the problem solvers. those are the people you are more up. host: richard in cincinnati, ohio. independent. month or howuch a much last year did we save by getting out of iraq? guest: i believe the budget

yearly is $80 billion. we put that into the war effort overseas, not just iraq. host: do you have a follow-up? caller: $80 billion for the whole year? are you sure? guest: pretty sure. caller: i don't think you are. guest: it has been in the trillions of dollars -- caller: that is more than $80 billion per year. guest: that is an accumulation over decades. we were fighting a battle. we have authorized this in the past. it assumes in overseas contingency. host: because of the drawdown of the troops? guest: that is correct. caller: let me ask you one more thing. if we are costing trillions of dollars blessed over the -- left over the last 10 years, why

would we want to give the pentagon more money? guest: i think that is a fair question. they need to tighten their belt. when i talk to my friends in the armed services committee, they are willing to admit that there are efficiencies that can be taken care of. we have too many weapons systems. i alluded to the fact that we have bases all over the world. they are outdated and do not need to be there. they are set up are set up for fighting a cold war that does not exist. the pentagon needs to reevaluate the mission. we're not going to be fighting anymore land wars. that is world war ii mentality. we saw that in vietnam. we were kicked all over the place. that is the war of the future. we need to do the war on terror. we have the ability to deal. that means we can drawdown

regular military personnel. we are building all of these ships. we have more than anywhere else in the world combined. we can make some huge savings in the military budget. when the defense industry and defense department cried foul, i say that we need to reevaluate how we do business. every person in america had to reevaluate how they did business as a result of the recession. every household had to look at their budget in detail. i do not see that happening in the department of defense. host: christina in pennsylvania. democratic caller, go ahead. caller: i am concerned that you are willing to weaken the social safety net. $50,000 american household has two earners -- $37 goes to snap, seven dollars goes $5,000 goes to

corporate welfare. why not make a flat tax for social security so that bill gates pays the same percentage as a person earning $150,000? why not eliminate the corporate wealth and have a sales tax on every single stock exchange? we all pay sales tax here. why does it cost six dollars to pay shipping on the smallest whatyou might order, but does it cost to ship a refrigerator across the ocean to us? why are there no terrorists or value added taxes? there is an incredible amount of money out there. it could be helping us out. we could put money into the social safety net. a poor person who gets an extra dollar spent it.

that is stimulus. give the money to the people who need it, so it will be spent. the social safety net is not where to cut. host: we got the point. guest: it was a good point. i agree with the main juice of what you're talking about. you are missing the point of the social safety net. it is going bankrupt as we speak. -- thatecurity by 2033 is 20 years from now. every single senior will have at least 25% reduction in their benefits. that is not right. congress is not willing to step up to prevent that. we should be here. that is our job. you are busy living hand to mouth. we should be stepping up and dealing with those big issues. medicare already does not pay for itself. i agree that we need to make

revenue part of the problem. i have republican friends and we increase the payroll. there is opportunity to do that. we assigned the benefits so that the wealthier do not get the same benefit. most people do not know this -- people are living longer. unless you are in a manual labor job, we can make exceptions. folks can work longer before they need to take advantage of that social safety net. most of the cedars that i talk to would that be ready. i think they are right. we're going to look at tax reform. i have had a lot of big businesses come in and say they would trade their loopholes for a lower tax rate. that may be a lower rate, but you'll probably pay more. they understand that. a lot of business folks are willing to do that.

they get an advantage from the tax reform proposal. i do not think you want to go sales tax or flat tax. unless you have great exceptions. everyone pays the same percentage. that is great if they are bill gates. 10% of your income -- you are not living so well. be careful. easy, but itlly really disadvantages the poor. we have to fix those. host: windy tweets in, wouldn't the social security problems be eliminated if you eliminated the cap completely? please do it. guest: it would not fix it entirely. said, i have republicans as well of lots of democrats who want to raise that cap a little bit. or at least give it up to where was. we're set up to percent of the payroll.

republicans understand that. democrats understand that. we can get back to that. this will not solve the problem. we need to make sure that we're are dealing with this in a smart way. that means testing. if you are bill gates, why the need social security? there are ways to deal with this. republicans and democrats can come to a deal. i cannot just have it my way. it cannot be all cuts. you have to work together on this with both to get the deal done. host: in the marketplace section, they have a war he on the minimum wage. what they write about is that it is 10 square miles, nestled between seattle and tacoma. it consists of an airport and its surroundings. it has raised the minimum wage to $15 per hour.

that is the highest municipal minimum age in the nation. it is a test to see if this can work for businesses. guest: that is a pretty exceptional minimum wage. i call that a living wage, not a minimum wage. seatac is an airport. most areas are regions of this country. will workhink this for most of america. host: you do not think that sets momentum? guest: my hometown is nothing like seatac. we are struggling to get by. we want to pay more than the minimum wage. minimum wages minimum wage. we have a deficit in oregon. over nine dollars per hour. i think that is reasonable. the minimum wage should not lose

purchasing power over time. we want more. we want people to earn good incomes to support a family. that means dealing with our big issue items. that means tax reform. getting our country back on track. make businesses feel confident. this is the place to invest. reid also said he would take up majority -- minimum wage. per have pushed for $10.10 hour. would you oppose that? guest: i would have to see. oregon is already at nine at -- nine dollars. we have taken some big hits. we will see what comes forward. i do not know if they will get that out. i would be surprised. host: bryan in florida. republican caller. caller: a couple of things.

first of all, congress in general is a bunch of double talkers. republican and democrat. i keep hearing talk about closing loopholes and cost savings. i am a project manager. we start off small and work our way out. why don't you start by removing yourself from exemptions? i do not understand why you are from obamacare and other programs. guest: we are not exempted from obamacare. to go on the health care exchanges. i just signed up the other day. i had some difficulty, that is for sure. i did sign up for my health care on the exchange. i paid my fair share like every other american. i will have better health care over time. i will sacrifice a little to make sure that everyone one of you has access to health care. i also want to make sure that

everyone pays something for their health care. unless you are low income. we waited have access to health care. host: tony in maryland. independent caller. caller: i would like to know what percentage of you is social security responsible. then i would like to know how much money has each president taken out of social security? this final question is, why are we paying to print money with interest when we can do that without interest? the entire congress is dysfunctional. we should have a direct opportunity like sweden. get rid of congress altogether. have a direct democracy. anyone could easily solve this deficit.

congress is so compromised. it is unable to function properly. host: congressman? guest: i will not disagree. you get something for this. maybe they like that system. most americans would appreciate that. i just do not think this is the way we operate. we are dysfunctional. people are afraid to make tough decisions. i am in a different situation. i'm a little older and i raised a family. they have great careers. it maying this because be something to add to the equation. not every member of congress is incompetent. we have a lot of hard-working folks. even people that i disagree with, most of them are trying to do the right and from their standpoint. this is a big country. coming from oregon, it was eye- opening for me.

there is a diversity of opinion. you see it playing out today with these republican parties to. it is tough. democracy is not easy. it is the best that we have. direct democracy -- that is up to the american people. if they want to do that, i suppose. not everyone is inclined to have to deal with us. it can be very frustrating. want to go down that route, so be it. it is tough for 400 35 members of congress to get something you have hundreds of millions of americans trying to get something done. there is chaos. i think the representative form is pretty good. vote no on theto house takes up the two-year budget deal drafted i paul ryan. chairwoman,cratic

patty murray, of washington state. we go next to cleveland, ohio. democratic caller. caller: i would like to make a couple of statements. we could solve a lot of problems. put money into social security. the unemployment -- those people do not get as much as they have to get. half of what they were making. by the time you make your car payment and house payment, you are through. bring the minimum wage up to $10 per hour. host: ok. guest: i think republicans and democrats have offered up jobs bills. we do not seem to be able to agree on all of the elements. i do agree. we need to put some jobs on the table. one of the big things that we should be doing -- we need more doctors and nurses.

we should be having a jobs bill to create a vibrant health court. that is an area that we need more help. i totally agree. unemployment -- it is not a sweetheart deal or anybody. you are living on half of your income. it also keeps the economy going. one of the earlier callers talked about low income folks. you are trying to get by and you have those to pay. we should be putting together a package that helps americans to get back on their feet and solve the long-term problems. host: did the affordable care act create jobs? guest: yes. we see a huge need for health care professionals going forward. whether or not we have the opportunity or the courage to put money into educational institutions -- one of the premier medical schools in the country is ready, willing, and able to graduate primary care decisions.

-- physicians. but that takes money to do that. i think we should be helping our universities to make sure they have access to developing the health care that we need. host: let me end with a tweet. it says that the solution to our problems are well-known. willingness to make difficult choices is nonexistent and d.c.. guest: i do not know if it is nonexistent. there are folks and i would consider myself in that category -- who are willing to make the tough choices. they have voted on the four for trying to encourage a plan. they have voted for other bipartisan alternatives. there are people who are willing to step up. the problem that we have right now, in my opinion, is that the system -- republicans are scared to death to get flight on the right side.

democrats worry about that too. it is causing dysfunction. we need to fix the redistricting. folks should vote their conscience. host: thank you for talking to our viewers. if you want to follow the congressman on twitter, you can follow his thinking there. we will cross the aisle and talk with a republican -- sean duffy of wisconsin. then, later we will talk with small businesses about how the affordable care act is impacting small business. but first, a news update from c- span radio. --more on the budget deal paul ryan is speaking earlier on cbs. he says that the deal that he brokered with senator murray was the best possible in a time of divided government. criticism, hersh

said that we were a little caught off guard. arrivesy of state kerry for work to secure an israeli, palestinian peace deal. the director of wise health department has been killed in a small plane crash off of the island molokai. those are some of the headlines. the archduke francis ferdinand and his wife were in syria though. that was the capital of bosnia. they were on a two or. it was a bad day to come. it was a holiday. serbia, the neighboring company, was furious. it was a serious provocation. build --been trying to he was one of the people within

austria-hungary and they decided to kill him. there have been warnings that something was approached. they shot one of -- one of the conspirators shot the archduke of his life. archdukesassination of francis ferdinand and his wife and the events leading up to world war i. margaret macmillan, sunday night at 8:00 on c-span. >> the other thing that we could do, whether it made a difference or not, is use counterfactual history text. key, the the low- moderate republican -- wendell w ilke, the moderate republican. suppose they had chosen charles lindbergh. he was very isolationist, and quite sympathetic.

if you have had to take president lindbergh instead of president roosevelt, i think history would have turned out differently. i doubt he would have made the preparations that roosevelt made. after japan that attacked the united states, that he would have oriented the war toward europe. rather than keeping it focused just on asia. in that sense, franklin roosevelt made a big difference. >> foreign policy and 20th century presidential leadership. sunday at 7:30. part of american history tv. this weekend. >> washington journal continues. host: congressman sean duffy is here. republican from wisconsin. you plan to vote yes when the house fixup is budget deal. guest: i do. if you look at the dysfunction

in washington, the republicans and democrats -- it is remarkable that patty murray and paul ryan sat down and got a deal. not every aspect do i agree with. it gives me a little heartburn. i think that america wants to see the government work. they want to see the politicians come together and find middle ground. we want to move the country forward and stop brinksmanship. this is a bill that actually does that. we take the fiscal cliff off the horizon. we actually get to see this work. host: where do you think the support lies in the republican party? are there enough votes to get this through? guest: i think that there are. we do not have enough people to carry it. i think we will have democrats support as well. i see this as a bipartisan deal. i think that sometimes, neither

side of the aisle, perfect is the enemy of the good. there is a majority of people that want to see us move the economic ball down the field. i think that is what we're going to see today. host: did you vote for the budget control act? guest: i did not. host: does this go against the budget control act? guest: no. we have offset some spending. you look at the sequester. we had some cuts that were against -- they were form the way that we spent. we are focusing on the discretionary side of spending. frombudget deal moves us discretionary, which is 40% of the budget, to the mandatory side. to start to have the conversation is important. to have some offsets on the mandatory side will relieve some spending pressure. that could be an net benefit.

groups likevative the heritage foundation are opposed to this deal. guest: i have not heard that. host: here are some tweets that they put out. the more they spend, the more we pay. makingt out that we are promises of future spending decreases again. post says that the spending will increase by 45 billion. higher than it would have been after a deal. the heritage foundation put out that the government promises savings, but then they spend your money. guest: here is what we are doing. there is some truth in that. we do increase spending over two years. what takes places over 10 years. host: is that a gimmick? guest: it is a reality. these are structural options.

we will actually stand well be on the 10 years. we have changed the structure of mandatory spending. that could be a good thing. this is the way it has been going for some revenue. it gets us to the balance point. host: here are the tweets. from rand paul, he says he cannot support a deal that raises taxes and does not balance. it does not reduce the debt. is he right? guest: in washington, republicans control house of representatives. we do not control the senate or the white house. if we're going to find an agreement, we will not get everything we want. if we do not do this deal, i will say that i respect senator paul. if we go to january 15 and we are pushed into a shutdown policy does not get

better. it gets worse. the country is not better off. is this a deal that i can stomach? is this a deal that can move me into a better position? i think that the answer is yes. for those who say no, can we get a better deal? can we get a better deal with the president on this one? the answer to that is no. if you cannot get a better deal, this is the best you're going to get. you have to be a realist as well , when you look at how these budgets are structured. host: corporate growth yesterday -- according to this piece, they put this out. it could hurt gop incumbents on election day. are you worried? guest: that may be considered a veiled threat. i do now or present heritage. i represent central, northern, western wisconsin. i am committed to my constituents. if i can find a deal that i

think sticks to our principles, i will go for it. i will not be held to the voting card. they are not in my district. my constituents are and i know my constituents. host: congressman obama ran on two dollars and $.50. the sequester gave us cut the mayor working. guest: the sequester has reduced spending. no doubt about that. he did get his tax push at the beginning of last year. dealis just -- this is a that stays true to the sequester levels. we know that it is over 10 years. in the end, i think it is the best deal that we can get the keeps the government open. host: we will go to phone calls. alice waiting in arizona. democratic caller.

caller: hello. i have a few comments like to make. one is that i think you guys in congress and in the senate caused the whole problem that we have now and i do not understand why you are so hell-bent for leather on upholding the free- trade agreement. that put all of the working people out of business. or at least hurt them terribly. host: let me ask you -- what greement are you referring to? caller: it hurt the american people. it is hurting them now. host: ok. you were not around for the nafta though. guest: i was not here for that.

havea believer that if we free-trade refrigerate, it helps our country. i can actually create jobs. that will be a net winner for us. those who are isolationist and want to cut our country off, they will have less jobs the muscle. host: paul is next in pennsylvania. republican. what is the name of your town? go ahead. caller: first of all, thank you to c-span and thank you to the congressman. i can understand the frustration they feel. there are simple, sometimes unrealistic, solutions. people do not take the time to understand the complexities. i hope we are not guilty of that with the suggestion. it is a very small community here with a high unemployment

rate. there's a call center in town that offers pretty good jobs. we have health insurance and benefits. under the current employment conversation, those who are allegedly actively looking for work are not compelled to take a job at this facility. the problem is that they are receiving cups -- government subsidies. they will lose them if they do not meet job targets. widest the catch-22? system allow the benefits to continue for so many months without compelling those who received them to take jobs that are available? thank you for taking my call. guest: i am from a small town two. also in wisconsin. when you have government that tries to do oversight, it becomes difficult and

challenging. when they tried to get into specifics about people looking for jobs and taking jobs -- as you look at the unemployment, we're trying to help out those who have fallen on hard times. families have lost their jobs. i want to make sure that we ever program in place to help them out through tough times. we can be that transition back to a place where they can get a good paying job. host: we will go to billy in orange, texas. republican. caller: yes. in asking interested a question. i have never heard of anybody addressing this. with theto me like unemployment rate so bad, why are we allowing so many people

from other countries to come jobs?ere and take the guest: what i would say in regards to immigration and immigration reform -- my concern is that we educate the brightest minds in the world. whether at the university of wisconsin, harvard, m.i.t.. we have great institutions. sometimes we educate those folks and we send them back to the borders. , stayd like to see us say in america and take that great education and start a business. help us develop new products in america. i think we should extend that offer to them. i think it is a net drain -- a net gain to have those people here. they contribute to job growth. host: and in pennsylvania.

republican. caller: i am just curious -- i try to follow what is going on. with thisnd that budget, you want to spend more money for two years. is, if you are out in a few years, everything will change. then you are looking at a whole new deal. two-10 yearsng at down the road. all this could be out the door and four. it does not lead to anything long-term. i am just curious about that. job, buti have a good it is very tough. i work in health care. i am looking at the fact that

nurses need more with the affordable care act coming on board. so, my comment that way would be the lawsuits that come. you are going to take nurses from specialties and spread them all around. you look at that lost wise and it makes a big difference. my other comment is for unemployment. i know people that will not go get jobs because of the unemployment. why work if i can get free money that is paid for? it is just crazy. around,ding all including food stamps. i see people on food see us buying stuff that i cannot afford. host: congressman? guest: you brought up a lot of

really good point. this is a change to the law. if someone wants to change the reforms that we have made, they have to go back and change the law. that will be very difficult to do. i do think that, if you look beyond the next two years, not everyone who is here now will be here two years from now. i think it would be a little shortsighted to think that the next congress will change the applications we will make today. i share your concern with regards to the debt and the money problems. we have to get our much -- hands around these fiscal problems. we are $17 trillion in debt. we are a country who has been spending, borrowing about $1 trillion. this is unsustainable. we have people making tough

choices that can actually get our budget going down. host: how does this yield do that? guest: is a step in the right direction. if you look at the art toward a balanced budget, we are on that. we have work to do. theave to -- some of pressure has to come off of discretionary spending. this is the first time the democrats are having that conversation with us. i think that is important. owned there are also these conversations. i think that we can get this done. do you trust the other side to do what they're going to say they are going to jail? andll find compromise common ground. that has not been happening. there is an issue of trust on both sides.

there are liberals who are angry. you'll see conservatives were angry. in a democracy, it is not always perfect. compromise is never perfect. it is getting a job done and making sure you do not have government shutdowns. in the end, those are bad for the economy and economic growth. host: conservative groups on the outside disagree. the freedom works ceo writes that this is another republican budget surrender. he says that you'll pay more for in airplane ticket. it is not a tax. theatter what they call it, fact remains that the government plans to take more money from you to cover their unsustainable spending. sayt: when do conservatives that we do not want people to use our service? we're asking people to buy an airplane ticket and pay for the use of the tsa.

we do not want them to pay for that fee. we want the rest of america to subsidize the tsa. that is not conservative. , overarchingverall philosophy. the driver of that philosophy has been paul ryan. he is a guy who stood up in difficult times and put up budgets and led washington. who has the best deal he could get. i will not let perfect be the end. figure at put that $12.6 billion. that is what it will bring in over 12 years. guest: we are talking about -- to $5.6ee from 0. you pay for the tsa. host: this is breaking news.

the number of people seeking 368,000,ent rose to that is the largest increase in more than a year. should congress extend long-term unemployment benefits? guest: we have a traditional 26 weeks. half a year. congress decided to use emergency measures to extend that for up to 99 weeks. you, off 99 weeks. it is not an emergency time right now. the economy is growing. not as fast as it should. we have people going back to work it we should reserve this for those emergency times. democrats set this up. ie way that was structured, think it is planned. if unemployment goes in the wrong direction and starts going

up, there is an opportunity to get another 20 weeks back in. host: democrats are unhappy that that is not included. ,e're hearing that to get votes like yourself, despite legislation -- guest: democrats are mad about some of the things. conservatives feel the same way. if i heard paul ryan correctly, he said this came up at the last minute. dollars did not get into the agreement. a lot of good, bad, ugly here. what we have to do is balance things better. weigh the good and the bad. is the good better than the bad? if so, you have to so yes.

i have voted against other bills that one in the opposite direction. on balance, i think this is the right thing to do. -- speakerer banners john boehner's comments yesterday -- againsthey are working this package before it even came out. they did not have the details and they were already saying don't support it. you cannot be obstructionist. you have to be able to get behind ideas. there are some people who live in a world where conservatives, which i am one, controlled the house and the senate and the white house. that is just not the case. advancement and fixing the budget problems. we need democrats to buy into it. conservatives are not going to get everything that we want. thatnk it is unrealistic

these outside groups are trying to hold conservative members hostage by their scoring cards. package that will not get better. host: are you on the study committee? guest: i am. host: there was an article today that says that a top aide was fired after some lawmakers complained that he had been working with outside groups to dealo bring down a budget that paul ryan and patty murray put together. guest: i missed the meeting yesterday. you and i have read, i do not have other details. host: you do not -- you're not one that complained? guest: no. anyone working on a team has to have level of trust. if you see a group of people that came together, and they are

getting sold out by a staff person, that is unacceptable. i think that person does have to go. that was the right call. host: pennsylvania, democratic caller. would like to i say thank you to the cable companies for c-span. think that the whole country, democrats and republicans, would agree that we need our jobs. we have working people. i am not talking about college- educated people read i'm talking about people who go to school and get out of high school and need a job. i can think of two or three things that have happened in the

recent times that have prevented these jobs from being available. with your state. wisconsin has a shoe company. i have been ordering shoes from them for more than 30 years. the shoes that i ordered from them look the same from the very first pair until the latest pair. they are no longer made in wisconsin, those shoes now come from china. the one that is closest to me is in west virginia. they have a sewing factory that used to make brown gloves. they no longer do that. you cannot find a pair of gloves

made in this country. i do not believe that you can. i have looked in every store. in at their gloves, and there are no gloves made in this country. jerome, you have made your point. what is your question for the congressman? caller: i want to know what he thinks he will can do about coming like that. guest: thank you, jerome. shoes -- may mason not be there, but we do still make beer in wisconsin, a great wisconsin beer. i digress. jobs are a big issue. we have to make sure there are policies in place. that grow the economy and create more jobs. we have not seen better job growth -- we have seen things stagnant. with the president has done of the asset listen, we will have

more rules, more regulation, grope government, have more bureaucrats. we are going to impose really big laws that have a great weight on the american economy and one is obamacare. the pressure of obamacare on our small businesses and small is crushing. dodd frank i do not think will advance the cause of economic growth and job creation. it is going to take us in the wrong direction. thatu want to have economy grows and expands where we have good paying jobs, you have to have a regulatory environment that actually works. in my district, there are a lot of jobs in the manufacturing sector. you cannot just come out of high school, you need to get some training in the trades, but there are jobs that are there. we have truck drivers and our district that have got loads that they can haul, but these

are jobs that will pay anywhere $35,000 to $65,000 a year. you need a cdl, good driving record and some responsibility, but they are out there. again, we need more of them. we go to jeff next, independent caller of georgia. caller: i have two questions, ma'am. farm, andlittle bitty it is so small it is not just going out to get a job. job probablyt paying about seven dollars, eight dollars an hour is the best thing i can see around here. i just want to know how they come up with this budget. like so fast. now it is on the floor.

it is a democrat and a republican during i think the democrats is doing a great job because they are getting a lot of stuff done, you know what i am saying? were: we know that they negotiating for weeks if not months, patty murray and paul ryan, and there seems -- their teams were very close but i found out about the budget deal when you did. thise have known negotiation was going on. what i think a positive is that came out, we all had three days to look at it, view it, study it, make a decision about it. do not come out one item we had to vote on it the next morning. have a chance to look at it for 30 days, but three days is pretty good. we can look at it and make a determination as to yes or no and go quote. read it or been briefed on what is exactly in it and evil comfortable voting for

it? guest: yes, and again there are some things that i do not like in the package, that i am ed, we are keeping deficit reduction, we have really good stuff. that has not been happening. this is one baby step in the right direction of reform and manager race adding. in mandatory spending. it is not always start with big leaps -- it is baby steps that bring you any right direction, get people comfortable, modifying 60% of the budget that is growing so fast. this is the first time, and we're going to have to hopefully advance this of bipartisanship on the mandatory side of spending in the future. if you go toway, our website, you will be a will to find their the omb station, the administration's policy statement on this budget

deal and a summary if you do not want to read the whole thing. you can find the entire text if you have to the house or senate side. earlier we were talking to congressman kurt schrader. he is going to vote no later today. i want to show you what he had to say. his analysis of republicans being on the hook. if you vote yesterday, you are on the hook for raising may definitely. here is what he had to say. [video clip] what is going to happen in february and march? we have the debt ceiling to come. people get the paper, they agree, they solve the budget problem -- they have not solve the budget problem. we dealt with the sequester, then come february iand mar ch when the debt ceiling need to be raised -- it will be interesting to see how many republicans vote for this. if they vote for this, they will be on the hook to have to raise the debt ceiling. they will spend more money, but they will not raise the debt ceiling in the near term to be

able to do that. it will be fascinating. guest: listen, if you get us closer to that point of government spending being balanced, i think it is uncommon upon us to raise the debt limit. as long as we are going the right direction. i did not vote for the last package in october because we did not reduce spending -- we actually increased spending. so kurt is right. if you do not support this deal, you will have to raise the debt limit. if we're going the right direction, i am willing to raise the debt limit, but if you do not perform the way you are spending and you continue down this path that will lead to a debt crisis, there is no way i will vote for that. so i do think he has a point. host: ok. we'll in illinois, republican caller. caller: sean, some months ago you were on the program and you are asked about scientific evidence about the building that was brought down using explosives on 9/11.

forget about assigning blame, would you personally be willing to review the building seven controlled demolition evidence that over 2000 building expe rts, not rabid conspiracy theorists -- guest: will, this has not been on the top of our list on things we have to deal with ndc -- in d.c. if yes on the honor to look at, shoot me a summary and i will take a look at it. host: well as part of a deal that thinks the 9/11 task force was not adequate enough by this government, so they are organizing to call into our store -- -- into our show. guest: last time i was on i got a call just like this. host: next is gene. very carefully into this federal budget, written several books on the subject. the truth of the matter is

the deficit was greeted by two things -- reductions in revenue and increases in spending. the reductions in revenue occurred by the tax cut that we saw under bush and obama as well as the loss in revenue from all the people that lost their jobs. we cannot resolve the operating budget deficits by simply talking about spending. there needs to be an increase in revenue. we are taxing at the rate of , when wex, 15% of gdp had a balanced budget in 2000, we were taxing at the rate of 21% of gdp. talking about spending cuts is not a solution to the budget problem. guest: can i ask you a question? what year did we bring in more revenue than this year? you know. caller: it is not how much revenue, it is relative to the spending. the only year we had a surplus,

not including social security and medicare is the year 2000. and we were taxing at 20% of gdp. we are at 15%. you cannot balance the budget without addressing both revenue and spending. host: ok, gene, let the congressman respond. guest: you make it a point, but this is the most revenue we have brought in in american history. we are running hundreds of billions of dollars in budget deficits appeared big problem for us. we have a spending problem and we have to get our hands around the spending of our entitlement system appeared if we do not do that, we cannot raise taxes fill the shortfall of the promise our government has made. i agree -- we need more revenue. we need that revenue by putting more people back to work with good paying jobs. more people were, they make a better salary, they pay more taxes, which brings us more revenue. i am all about that. i'm also about reforming the way we spend. i think it is important that if

your government makes a promise, they should be able to keep that promise. but if you're politicians in washington just make promises that they know they cannot keep, that is dishonest and i think in the end, it does not bode well for the american people. let's make sure we are responsible. to your point, if i could go on for a moment, if you look at medicare, medicare is going broke in the next 10 to 12 years. instead of fixing medicare for seniors who have actually pay for it over the course of their lifetime, instead of fixing added a, they have whole new entitlement system in obamacare for the rest of the country. if you cannot keep medicare solvent for your seniors, why are you making a new promise to the rest of america? let's first six medicare for our seniors before you start making new promises for everyone else. that is a row problem in washington. it makes us feel good, comfortable to make a promise, but if you cannot keep it, i think it will create problems for the american people. enactedtweet -- the gop

the sequester and set of digging in, doing hard work, creating a responsible budget. this is a small budget two-year postponement. sequester, we never thought that was the best way to cut spending. if we did not get this -- at the supercommittee did not reach an agreement, sequester cuts would kick in. it was a blunt force hatchet that was used for these spending reductions. i have always been in favor of saying -- can we do it a better way? figure out a better way to reform the government to spend their the answer to that is yes, and this is a bipartisan attempt to do that. to find out other revenue, a long-term, get a little reprieve to the discretionary side of the spending spreadsheet. host: we go to pennsylvania, steve, independent perio caller. caller: hello, representative

duffie. i think what is happening around the united states is people are losing total faith in the honesty of their american government because of the obamacare that has kicked in. i follow politics very closely, thewith the hearings, answers in the grandstanding by that are supposed to be honest about the security of the website is opening our government to penetration by other countries. i do not see how anybody can think to even enact a program that forces me to take health insurance mine provided by my work than with my health insurance. with the budget deal coming down, you are exactly right with the medicare, and the recipients of medicare because if you do not have obamacare, the take the medicare off of my taxes so i can put that in my pocket, put that in the economy, and to start spending because the average american right now who is a homeowner and a landowner

is virtually being tapped out of existence. when we get to a point where we are tapped out of existence, the government is going to fail, and there is going to be anarchy in this country. host: ok, steve. guest: we have to be responsible and look at the projections of promises and revenue and do they match up in the future. for me with obamacare, in my district, i have a lot of counties, 25 counties, and 10 of them -- and there is only one plan, only one option for people in these smaller, more rural counties in my district 30 that is a real problem. there is no option for them. i hear horror stories. i've a woman who is named in denise in my district needs a kidney transplant. she lost her health care coverage, she went to the exchange to see what was going to work for her, maybe a better price, better coverage. she found out that her coverage does not cover her doctor at

cover theoes not transplant. she has come to our office saying can you help me out. we are trying to find eight legislative fix for this, greta, but there are people who have done the right thing, people who were focused on making sure they were being responsible, taking care of themselves and their family and making sure they are health care covered. it is those very people who have been kicked off their health care plans in a this philosophy that we will have new winners and losers in the implementation of obamacare appeared when you have middle-class families who have done the right thing, and you're making them losers, that is wrong. people are not paying less for health care -- they are paying more. deductibles are going up. the democrats could have come and said we're going to offer you, america, a plan that makes you buy more coverage, maybe coverage that you do not want, you may be a 63-year-old man and you probably do not need maternity coverage but you're going to happen and we are going to do that for you and you are going to pay less for it.

that is insane. that is never going to work and we had a president who said we are going to tell america all these different things about this bill that were untrue. they had to tell these untruths to get america to halfway buy into the passage of obama care. now they cannot hide behind the lies. america has a new reality and they are not liking it. it is hitting the many pocket book. host: i want to get him one last phone call for you. joy in california, democratic caller, you are on the air with representative sean duffy, republican of wisconsin. caller: good morning, representative duffy. i have a story about my family. my parents met -- they were both in the army, they met in korea. they serve a term, moved back to california, and my mother stayed system..a. my father got a job at transamerica. he had blue cross insurance, and

he worked there 30 years and never filed a claim. until he came down with lymphoma. was a rare form, he was denied by blue cross. the doctor he wanted to see and the type of chemotherapy that he needed. at the time.in a y i moved back within two weeks, we hired an attorney, and long story short, we walked into the blue cross office and he got his doctor and he got his medicine. he lived eight years longer. now for my mom, with the v.a. system, she had type two diabetes, heart issues, blood pressure issues, never once was she denied any care, medications were mailed, they contacted her when her next appointment was, it was a wonderful, wonderful experience. she died recently of a heart

attack. the only thing wrong with obama care is that the health insurance companies are still involved. guest: and there are some who won a government single-payer system. they think that is better off. if you have government paid for everything, you would have covers.ealthcare i think the government never does a better job than the private sector in making sure the private sector is more involved and it will lead us to lower prices and better service. but when you see big government, when they cannot -- you have insurance companies involved now and you look at how ineffective the government is with a rollout of a website. if they cannot get that right -- so to you i would say i want them to cover everyone's health care and do it well and do it right -- they cannot even do the website. they cannot even get the promise right. i do not want to trust them with my family's health care, though i am because i will be on obamacare. i want to make sure i have

choices that are far beyond what the government wants to offer me as an american and as an american consumer. i think the relationship with rour government where hyou life-and-death decisions are not made by you and your family but by bureaucrats in washington. that is not what our fathers envisioned, it is not good for our country, and in the end, i think it will fundamentally change the american people's relationship with its government and not for the better, for the worse. i think we're going in the wrong direction with obamacare. i think we have to reformat, we have to make sure we are able to fix problems in a system where people with pre-existing conditions can get coverage, that people are not kicked off their health care plans. there have been a lot of problems. but this fix is not a fix that is working for the american people. if you look at polling because people have seen its rollout and the cost to them -- they do not like it. it is an opportunity to fix it or roll it back and go with a more conservative or a more bipartisan approach to health- care reform. host: congressman sean duffy,

republican, wisconsin. if you want to follow him on twitter, @repseanduffy. thank you. we want to give you any action on the senator and we've had live coverage around the clock since 2:00 p.m. eastern time yesterday when the senate began in protest over changing senate rules over judicial nominations and other denominations. the senate right now on c-span nomination ofe l to serve asl the equal opportunity employment commission appeared that is over on c-span2. here on c-span, we are going to talk about the impact of the affordable care act on small businesses before the house comes in at 10:00 a.m. eastern time. we will be right back after this news update from c-span radio.

sayse commerce department retail sales rose .7% last month. the biggest gain in five months. october's figures also were revised higher to .6% during two straight months of healthy sales suggesting steady hiring is encouraging americans to spend more this holiday season, particularly on big ticket items. senate continues as our debating and voting on president obama's nominees for various posts. bloomberg is citing a source close to the matter is saying president obama has already offered former bank of israel governor stanley fischer the position of vice chairman of the boardl reserve replacing janet yellen. the report has gone to say that thefischer has accepted position. cbs news chief white house correspondent mark poehler tweets this hour that it was 13 years ago today that the supreme court of the united states and decided the 2000 presidential rulingn with a 5-4

against the florida recount. that of course made george w. bush the president of the united states. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> it is a rare constant in american political life. if you look at congress in 1901, less than 2% of members came from working-class background, got into politics and eventually up in congress. the average member of congress been less than 2% of their career doing manual labor, service industry jobs. this is one thing that really has not changed, you know, lots of different aspects of the political broadcast of change, broadcast television, the rising candidate elections, big money in politics, decline of unions. while all of this is happening, one of the constants during that , during the last 100 years or

so is that working-class people are not getting elected to political office. >> it doesn't matter that there's there is a sociocultural disparity between most elected officials and the citizens they represent? that as carr's looks white-collar government hurt if the midnight at 9:00 on afterwards. in january, in-depth with radio talkshow host mark levin. all part of booktv we can on c- span2. for december's booktv bookclub, we want to know what your favorite books were in 2013. throughout the month, join other readers to discuss the notable books published this year. go to booktv.org and click on book club to enter the chat room. "washington journal" continues. host: we want to introduce you to john arensmeyer, founder and ceo of the small business majority, here to talk about the impact on the health care law on small businesses. what is your group, what is the small business majority?

guest: good to be here, greta. we are a national small business advocacy organization. we were founded and run by small business owners. we are focused on bringing the voice of small businesses to the public on a host of issues. we do a lot of scientific research looking into the attitudes of small business owners on override he of issues. we combine those with small business voices. we have 12 offices in eight states across the country, and we are regularly talking to business owners, organizations, educating them about policy but also making sure their voices are heard in washington and state capitals. host: how does the affordable care act impact small businesses? an important is development for small businesses. first of all, and whole bunch of new rules are going to benefit small businesses. the illumination of the pre- existing condition rules means that now business -- the

elimination of pre-existing condition rules means that small businesses -- i am worried i will not have health care for myself and my family. now they know that health care is available, they will be able to go out and start a business just based on their business desire. a recent study said the affordable care act is going to potentially create another 1.5 million entrepreneurs in this country. that is the first thing. then you have got the development of the establishment of the marketplace is in every state across the country. businesses payl 18% more than big businesses for the same coverage, but now small businesses will be able to pull together in a small business exchanges or marketplaces, and get the same benefits that big businesses have, negotiated rates and the same administrative efficiencies. cost-containment provisions are built into the law as well. there is a lot that is potentially good for small businesses, and what we're doing is making sure we are educating small businesses about the

options. host: the small business health option program, small business exchange, marketplace. if small businesses use shop, they must offer coverage to all full-time employees. guest: only if they have more than 15 employees. host: how does affordable care act define a small business? guest: for the purpose of offering coverage or not, it is 50 or more full-time employees. they do count that as working 30 hours a week or more. that is only 4% of the businesses in the country. 96% of all small businesses have no obligation to provide. of the 4% where there is an obligation, the vast majority, about 95% of income are already offering coverage. so it is a very small percentage of businesses who are not offering that who will be required to. host: most small businesses have under 50 employees. guest: correct. ast: is the aca definition of

small business, 50 or under, the same as what you would define as a small business? guest: there are a lot of ways to cut it. for health-care purposes, that has traditionally been the dividing point. in most states, the "small group market" is 50 and below. we define it as 100 employees or fewer, the small business administration defines it as 500 or fewer. has: the administration delayed several assets of this health-care law. what are delayed when it comes to small businesses? guest: two primary things have been delayed. first of all, let me say that the small business marketplace is in every state including the state that the federal government is up and running. there is information online, there is the ability to compare pricing online, and the same process that brokers now used to get small businesses enrolled via paper and insurance companies -- the same process is

available with a small business exchanges. what is not available are two major features for the next year. component,llment which is totally added, something that is like this now, it is not exist if you are buying coverage from an insurance company. that is being delayed for a year. and the really innovative feature in these marketplaces is that once an employee or picks a level of coverage for his or her employees, the employees can have choice among various plans at that level. int has also been delayed the federally-facilitated marketplaces of 33 states. that is being delayed for a year as well. we are disappointed this is happening, but we want to stress that the changes themselves are in fact functioning. -- the exchanges themselves are functioning. host: what is the impact of these delays? guest: the competitive advantage that the markets have over the outside market as they are in the states that are implement these features.

the advantage of being able to sign up online will not be there. there is a little more work to be done to make sure that brokers and small business owners understand that there is a process, but it is a paper- based process. host: they have to pick up the phone and talk to somebody, and you think that will -- that is too much of an issue for them to have to pick up the phone? guest: the application can be downloaded from the site, and it is to be filled out on paper. we recommend, and the reality is, that most of this is going to be done by brokers and agents , as is the case today. most small businesses when they purchase coverage use a trusted broker and agent peer we found and are pulling that two thirds of small business owners trust a qualified third-party to help them. that is really where most of this is going to go. paper -- those processes used today with traditional coverage, so all we

really got here is an expanded set of options. now the small business owner can look at the outside market, but they can also look at what is being offered on their state's exchange. host: we're talking with john arensmeyer, the founder and ceo of small business majority, talking about the impact of the affordable care act on small businesses. in 2009, you served on a panel at the white house summit on health care reform. are you a democrat, do you belong to the democratic party, what is your position? guest: our organization is nonpartisan, and we base all of our work primarily on the scientific research we do of small business owners. i should add that every single research sample we have ever respondentshow the self identify with party. it is always a plurality republican and sometimes majority republican. self-at reflects the described affiliations of small business owners across the country.

we have taken that information because we are interested to see how that lines up and we view the cross, etc. the work we do is based on the additions we find in the research and conversations with businesses across the country. host: the small business provision delayed one year to 2015. what then are small business owners responsible for? what do they have to do yo? 96% of smallaid, business owners to not have to do anything. we urge them to look at what their options are. with a should be doing is looking at their options. if they currently offer coverage, and they're usually doing a with a broker, they should sit down with a broker and say what are my options here . i understand there are these new marketplaces, what is the marketplace in my state, what is being offered, take a look at what is there and get educated about that. need to educate their employees about that as well. if they choose not to offer

coverage, and in cases where there not offering coverage, we urge them to for themselves and families but also for their to getes, we urge them that information out to their employees because there are now options for the employees to purchase coverage on the individual marketplaces and is a requirement that everybody have coverage -- host: no penalties for small business owners. guest: no penalties for under 50 employees. caller: greetings from the bronx. questions for the two of you to consider. --ave a couple of fans friends who have small businesses with less than 50 employees, and of course the prices have been skyrocketing year after year with the renew worse, having -- with the renewals, having to change carriers, finding a cheaper rate to cover the employees. friends in particular are

looking into the possibility of getting a waiver for abortion in medical coverage because they -- the larger company's have taken it, some churches, school organization, but even hobby lobby, a private company, a christian business, so to speak -- my friends are looking to do that. and something that popped in my mind this morning, i wanted to throw it out to you regarding this topic, is if roe versus wade is based on privacy between doctor,idual and their how come we cannot look at this coverage now with obamacare the family when it comes to abortion? i will get off and let you discuss this live on tv. thank you. guest: thank you. first of all, the very beginning of what you said, i just want to empathize, the prices have been skyrocketing for the last 10 years, so i want everybody to understand the environment in which we have found ourselves when the law was passed is that there were double, sometimes troubled digit increases -- sometimes triple digit increases

in of health care costs that have doubled over the last 10 years. as you suggest, small business owners were really feeling the pinch. this led to the decline how much was being offered. as for the other issue you talked about, the reproductive rules andere are standards as to what needs to be covered in the affordable care act, and at this point, i mean, there are already sort of basic provisions, and reproductive rights are required to be in the aca-compliant plans because it is deemed to be a health issue, an issue that affects the overall cost of how all this is paid for in the system. i don't believe that waivers are being offered to large or small businesses around this issue right now. host: by the way, we want to hear from small business owners this morning. we're talking about the impacts of the affordable care act on you and your businesses. (202) 585-3883.

caller: i called on the republican line. host: that is fine, go ahead. caller: with the small businesses, they say they're going under. that affect our busines -- our big businesses. they say the health-care law is creating more debt. who owns our debt, and if they decide to collect, what happens? guest: well, i think, basically -- there is no evidence right all, the-- first of journey is to find out what happens with cost. what we have seen as the affordable care act has been implemented is the increase in cost it started to come down. when you look at cost in the individual market in the other market, if you look at apples to apples, at the marketplaces are taking effect, the average is about the same or less. there is no evidence at the moment that there are increased

costs. beere will be an original -- individual cases where what is being offered is more expensive. if you look across the board, that is being -- it is less than it was. host: what does the affordable about hours worked and what constitutes a full-time employee, and are small businesses telling you that they're cutting back on hours? requirements as far as who has to offer coverage -- as 30time is defined hours or more. that is the standard. we have not heard -- maybe anecdotal cases of people making decisions -- we have not heard that people are making major business decisions about their employees based upon trying to be over or under this level. as a former small business owner, it is difficult running

your business looking at something like that. you really end up hiring people and assigning them hours based upon your business needs. so there may be some outliers out there making decisions, but for the most part, we are not finding that business owners are doing appeared again, i want to stress -- this is only 4% of the businesses, and forming percent of the businesses -- and of the 4%, most are already offering coverage. you do not have a bunch in this category. host: what about tax credits for small businesses under the affordable care act? guest: the affordable care act allows small businesses to get tax credits if they fall below third -- certain threshold. 25 employees, and there is a sliding scale, 10 employees and $25,000 and average wages, you get the maximum credit. the credit has been in place since 2010. it had been 35%, it is going up to 50% next year. foundudy we did last year

that 70% of businesses could potentially take advantage of the credit if they were offered. we know the take-up rate on the credit has not been what we have all expected. there is a process involved. you have to actually get the paperwork together and file it with the irs in order to get the credit. this is all part of the educational process. for small businesses to understand what is in the law. host: will small businesses have to pay more fees because of the aca? guest: there are no fees that the small businesses will have to pay as small business owners. host: we go to break next -- ri ck next, nashville, tennessee. caller: i thank the guest for giving us all this great information. this area of tennessee, we have a lot of dedicated people trying to get the information out about the benefits to small business

es. i would ask the guest if he would speak to the issue -- at the end of the day, this is truly a human issue. the benefits, the tie in for our states here in tennessee, we are not pursuing medicaid expansion. we have a federally run exchange, which again, because of the step down the legs in implementation of the marketplace, that keeps people out of the marketplace, and minutes active, especially information to make the good decision about getting insurance . if you could speak about the impact of tecate expansion, what that would do -- of medicaid expansion, what that would do to a state like tennessee, like a mississippi were the wages are depressed, and what that would be for small businesses. guest: in tennessee and every

other state, small business owners need to get educated about what is available to them. you talk about making sure that small business owners are informed. that is absolutely the case. we have resources to help with that. we urge small business owners to talk to their brokers about that. medicaid expansion -- it is absolutely true that basically the states that have chosen not to take the medicaid expansion are leaving a lot of money on the table that will come in and of people,e swath particularly those from wherever the state is currently covering, it is something under 100% up to 133% of the property level. that leaves a lot of people out of the system. all that is going to do in addition to really having a negative impact on people's lives, it is going to force the states in the counties to step up and pay for that coverage in one form or another. one thing we know in the health- people get is that sick of people have medical needs and someone ends up paying

for it. when you have large numbers of we currently have with uncovered care, those of us with insurance are paying for that. we go to county health clinics, the counties in up paying for that. at the end of the day, the states that do not choose for the moment to take the medicaid money aren't going to find -- are going to find them selves and big fiscal bind, which is unfortunate. we hope that the policy makers in those states understand that this is really an opportunity to bring more resources into the system for everybody, and that is going to have a benefit on the state's economy and the businesses in the state. host: on average, how much do small businesses pay in celery? -- salary? is it typically minimum wage or less, what if it? guest: only about 10% of small businesses pay the minimum wage. most businesses pay more. have --ce, you do not

by having a minimum wage law, and we believe it needs to be increased, you are only affecting a small percentage of businesses that are currently offering it. in fact, what you are doing is you're putting more money into the system, putting more money into the hands of consumers, and at the end of the day, what we're hearing from businesses is it is more important to have money in the economy, money in the hands of middle-class consumers toured the other thing about the minimum wage is that, you know, there may be certain types of businesses that want to pay more for their employees, but they know that the competitor down the street is not being required to do so, so if all votes are risen in terms of what is required to be paid, there's no competitive disadvantage to anybody. host: what if the education level of small business employees? guest: it ranges just like the rest of the population. you have folks who do not have high school group agrees, you have -- with high school

degrees, you have people with some college, undergraduate degrees. 50% of theess is economy and it covers a wide range of industries. you have got a pretty good cross-section of the american population working in small businesses. host: 50% of our economy. do you know how that compares to other country's economies? guest: it is comparable to other country's economies. it depends on how you define small businesses. it is somewhere in the range in developed countries of about 50%. to ron who is a republican in stillwater, oklahoma. caller: hi. i have a couple of points. one of them for your callers, to help remove some of the dysfunctional conversations. the reason why i say that, tell them to mute their tv, but also do not pay any attention to the

tv because of the delay. host: good point. caller: one of the points that they use thes is criteria 50 employees, but recently on c-span a have had hearings talking about where the government is combining unrelated businesses to come up with the 50 employees, like one example they had a woman son's business and also invested money into another relative's business, but she had absolutely no control of the businesses, but because of the criteria, both of those businesses are combined to meet the 50 employees. i will take your comments off the air. guest: well, i mean, there are certain regulations determining what constitutes the businesses.

generally are you sharing an identification number. the goal is to make sure that if it is truly a business that is being run and managed by the same people, or the ownership is common, it is considered one business. i do not know the particular situation you cite. it is certainly not intended to wholly unrelated businesses, even if there might be some common ownership somewhere up the chain. there are many different types of business forms. there are different ways in which businesses are owned. obviously regulations have to strike a balance and figure out what truly is one unified business and what multiple businesses. whatieve that is basically the case is here. you may have a few situations where somebody perceives it as not being quite fair, but we have not heard of too many situations like that. host: we heard yesterday that

the numbers for enrollment in november shot up. here is a headline in the "houston chronicle," november -- shot in the arm for the health- care site, enrollment more than doubled but still far behind projections. what do you make of the news? guest: we're not surprised. everybody is disappointed that the reluctant not go smoothly. we are talking about in a long- term process, obviously once you get the system worked up, you will start to see numbers go up. of the glitches early on were because of the tremendous interest in this. i think it is to be expected that once you have a fully functioning system, people have confidence in using it. that is when you will grow and spread. host: we go to michael nexen monroe, louisiana, democratic line, small business owner -- we will go to michael next in a monroe, louisiana, small business owner. caller: i have a proximally 150

employees, and i am a medicaid provider, and i am concerned about whether or not we can provide the health insurance due to the fact that we receive our money for medicaid. we receive approximately $11 per hour from medicaid, and we pay our employees approximately eight dollars an hour. how can we afford to pay for health insurance when we are limited by medicaid? host: michael, hang on the line and listen to the response here. guest: every business has a particular business model that they need to follow. obviously -- many businesses are not able to offer coverage because of cost. we found in polling that we have done that 86% of the time when somebody does not offer coverage it is because of cost. you and every other business has to make the decision whether to do that. if you have 150 employees, obviously you have an obligation now to do that. i cannot speak particularly to particularcs of your

aspect of the medicaid business, provideare obligated to or will pay the penalty that are out there. it is something you need to look into as part of the overall conversation of your employees. host: mike, how is it that you get decade money and distribute it? caller: like i said, we are a medicaid provider. medicaid provides us about $11 an hour. we provide health services to the elderly and disabled. so if medicated paying us -- if medicated is paying us -- if me dicaid is paying us $11 an hour employees eight dollars an hour, it would basically put us out of business. do small businesses get money out of medicaid?

i'm not following how that works. guest: i'm not sure the visit as he is in, but essentially anybody based on your income status, you can apply for medicaid, and that is a significant these of the overall panoply of what is being offered to people under the current system and under the system going forward. my understanding is that individuals apply for medicaid, and if they are eligible, they -- medicaid actually pays the providers based upon the services that they use, so that is how it works. it is really an eligibility questioned her to the problem with the states that haven't taken a medicaid expansion money if they are leaving a whole swath of people that do not make enough to purchase on the marketplaces. host: markets-huntsville, alabama. -- mark is next in huntsville, alabama, democratic caller. caller: i'm not a small business

owner, but i work for a company, and it is well -- i mean, there are hundreds of employees that work for the company. they call it a full-time temporary, which i work 40 hours a week, every week, but there is no benefits because every 10 months, they lay you off for a week, and then they rehire you right back after a week. so that, i think, is kind of a loophole that they have come up with so they do not have to pay you any benefits. we get no help insurance, we get no 401k, no vacation, no sick days, no nothing. employ hundreds of people. first of all, i am not even sure that is legal, so i do not know

if the gentleman can address that are not. i had one more question as far as obamacare and health -- now it is the law, so you have got to sign up for it. i just can't figure out how the government can -- how they crunched the numbers just based know,r income, you because the irs knows how much you make per year. how do they crunched the numbers and say that you can afford health insurance without knowing what all your other expenses are? host: ok, mark. guest: the standard for getting the subsidies on the individual marketplaces, which i think is what you are referring to, is income base. it is based on income, based on the size of your family. government made a couple of fairly easy to digest

parameters for making that decision. it is truly the case. the subsidies go all the way up to 400% of poverty, which for a family of four is over $90,000 a year. yes,ere is a casemate is a you need to have covered, but we're going to make sure it is affordable for you. obviously people at the lower end of the spectrum do not have to pay very much at all for coverage. on the other question about the company in the layouts -- i cannot speak to your particular situation you're in the requirement that it be 30 hours -- to your particular situation. has aalth-care law requirement that it be 30 hours a week. that if theesting case here, but they need to bring themselves into compliance. if you are concerned about that, i would suggest you perhaps talk to an attorney or talk to some other experts who can possibly help you, see if your situation,

if there is a problem or not, and i am not saying there is. host: we're talking with john arensmeyer, the founder and ceo of the small business majority. we have about 10 minutes left. jay in florida, republican caller, you are next. caller: good morning. i was listen to you touting all these great and wonderful things that obama care is going to offer to small businesses, which is a group of people who have opted out or have been pushed out for another year and are not even going to have to participate this year like the rest of the population, along with large businesses. it is not make any sense that you were saying that there is going to be millions of new entrepreneurs created because now they can go out and get health insurance. i do not think entrepreneurs start their businesses based on whether or not they have health care personally. i think they go out and they start their business and they try to succeed, and then once they do they can gain more money, more income. they will buy better insurance

at the time the they can do that. that is usually the way most of our economics works until now. you're advocating this, yet she asked you a specific question -- she did not ask of your organization was democratic, she asked you if you were a democrat, and you just answered as organization, but from what you are stating in everything that you are stating, it seems to me that you are coming at this holy as the democrats -- wholly as a democrat. that is all. thank you. guest: as far as entrepreneur were starting businesses, it is a pretty well-documented fact that the existence of a situation where people cannot get coverage because they have a pre-existing health condition has been a terminus impediment to people starting businesses. we did a report that came out in 2009, the work was done by

johnson gruber at m.i.t., and a big part of that report was to show a negative side of job loss, people staying in jobs they do not want to stay and, for help purposes -- health purposes. those of us who started businesses before know how powerful a sentiment is to go out of want to do something entrepreneurial. the johnsonrom foundation which says that now there is going to be no pre- existing condition bans on getting coverage, sadly that another on .5 million people who have been too worried about -- anothertarting 8 1.5 million people who have been too worried about going in starting a business are going to be able to do that now. that is one of the number of benefits that small businesses and potential small business majoritowners have under the la. host: the small business majority was founded in 2004. you represent 6 million small

businesses. guest: there are 6 million small businesses that employ people in this country. 22 million that are self- employed. host: with varying political point of view. guest: yes, we have done enough of this polling to know that we rapidly -- they are plurality republicans. host: craig in ohio, democratic caller and a small business owner. caller: hi. i just had a, and for the previous caller, -- i just had a comment for the previous caller, and then i had a question. an entrepreneur wants to protect these so capital, which is himself. i think that is why an entrepreneur would like to have pre-existing condition and life- threatening illness coverage. so it is not a democratic

opinion. you have to protect yourself as you go about creating your business. i do not think that is a point to take, to say that well, you are democrat because you support the law. i think entrepreneurs need to protect themselves as they venture. mment i would make is the small business majority, all the health-care companies that stand to benefit from the implementation of the law -- why have they been basically silent over the last three or four years when the -- i guess you could say the frame -- people say this is socialism, a government takeover, all this stuff that sounds to me like fodder, how come they have been so silent? if there were so few represented on national coverage any help in the health industry

itself was covered, one at that stem the fears that most republicans are most people in the country -- one at that -- wouldn't that have stemmed that fear? guest: we have been going out and meeting systematically with business owners across the country, working with business organizations, all of whom are craving information, trying to understand what is in the law. we have found what works for us is to simply get out and state the facts. we do not take a position that the law is perfect. we take the vision that the law is the law. we point out the benefits that exist for small business owners out there, and we talk -- we make sure that all the stakeholders involved in the , business owners, advisers, organizations, understand that we agree to try to stay away from the politics of it and not make this into a political food fight. it is really about getting out ts, giving people the fac

and letting them understand what their options are. that is what we have been doing for the last 3.5 years and that is what we will continue to do. alabama, republican and a small business owner. caller: good morning to you. a couple quick numbers for you. these are actual facts. i do not know when we will see some relief, my 19 employees, the increase was -- they all have individual. total increase amongst all my employees. that is hundred $63 per person on average. i only have five people that -- thate to get through is $363 per person on average per child have five people that were able to get through. $2015 average for the five

people who were able to get her. -- through. business, we are in the business to make money. money is tight these days. to theustry is related housing market, which is not the best right now. but the program has now for the $366ance that we once had, more three or plan with a higher deductible and $363, it costs us more money either way. i will let you talk to your guy will get often hear your response. guest: thank you. caller: i think the oldest employee i have is 43 years old. guest: overall, what we have seen we are looking to apples to

apples comparison looking at existing coverage to the new plans are being offered is that the increases are falling -- are far less than what were projected. that is not me on every individual case that is going to be the case. in fact, for -- that does not mean on every single case that is going to be the case. fact, some plans will be more responsive than the cheapest plan. some groups with younger employees are going to end up taking slightly more -- paying slightly more. it is important to look at the apples to apples comparison between what people have had and what is being offered. there are some cases with plans people had that thought they liked were really airboats. i guess they were inexpensive, but if anything happened to the people, they were not going to cover them. again, i do not know your situation. it is important to talk to professionals and get some es