where the power -- party out of power out raised the party in power. in that measure, people are believing in what we are doing. that fixing the ground game and fixing the digital in taking control of the nomination ross us is important. -- process is important. the rnc is enjoyed a lot of success. at where people are heading, is14 to be anyone writing stories it does not look like it is going to be a disaster for democrats? it looks like it is going to be a disaster for democrats. we are heading into a big year for the republican party.

going forward, i think we have to make sure that we put together a process an operation that gives our nominee the best possible platform in order to be successful. all i would tell you is that my going to last many years at the national party. things have flipped. the reverse came true. the blame onng anyone particular person or any one particular year. i would say that slowly over time, the rnc had become a u-haul trailer that got hooked up to presidential nominees for

a short. -- that circular problem caused us to atrophy in a big way across the country. that is what i am trying to address as chairman of the party. i am not trying to commit here and tell you that we have targeted the world. we have recognized some of the fundamental issues that we have faced at the national party. i'll try to address those in the best way that i know how to address them in. we have been successful. i think there are things that cannot be denied. recommend -- recognize we have a long way to go. >> we want to thank you for doing this, mr. chairman. thank you very much, sir.

>> here's a look at some of the

events scheduled on c-span. that's politician will talk about iran's nuclear program. this will be live from the atlantic council. -- atlantic council. the director of the national drug control policy will speak. we will have that live at 3:00 eastern. >> shortly after world war ii, the department of state became and then stuck that a military force was needed to guarantee the security of the foreign services across the world. students were taught the fundamentals of security. the pitfalls and

problems which are hazards to security. they learned of the ad vet -- adverse affect of misconduct. >> this may have an adverse affect. generally speaking, these areas are the black market. illegal money exchange. reckless driving. drinking. and early marriage. >> a 1964 training film from the state permit security posts. c-span three.n next, alice rivlin. she talks about healthcare enrollment and the federal budget. this is part of the atlantic

conference. about one half of an hour. >> thank you edward. next up, we have the honorable alice rivlin. she is the former vice chairman of the federal reserve board. she is a senior fellow at the brookings institute. you can follow her on twitter. derek thompson will be interviewing her today. unfortunately the ambassador is very ill and wanted to be here but cannot make it. we will continue on after this. >> thanks everybody. alice, while you fiddle, janet yellen had her first meeting

today and tomorrow. what issue she will have to raise is the evans rule. employmente the falls below 6.5% you think about madeng rates. this was before we realize that quickly unemployed it was falling. the denominator is changing. people are leaving the workforce. it has become clear that the recovery is not in a state where we want to be raising rates. room, were an ear in that how do you shape her understanding of the labor market issue and how do you think she is going to try to sway this group to think differently about employment and raising rates? >> she doesn't need me to help her understand the labor markets. she understands it very well. she and her colleagues have been

making some of these same points. they have been making speeches. material, thed labor market is complicated. the unemployment rate has fallen quite respectably. that is not a good indicator of what good shape we are in in the labor market. we know that people have dropped out. they have given up looking for work. this is been a very deep and long recession. the particular manifestation has been many more people who have been unemployed for a very long time. some of those people have given up. on top of that, we have people who are working part-time who would like to work full-time. true in aoften recession. this is a bad recession. it is overtaken by the demographics.

we have people taking early retirement or dropping out because there are a lot of people in that age group. this the baby boom generation reaches retirement. it is complicated. discussionect the would say a lot of those things. they may even change the statement that they make at the end. they may put less emphasis on the unemployment rate and more of these other factors. huge debate in washington. the labor force participation , people who are interested in working or working has fallen to its lowest rate since the 1970's. demographics play a part. what else is going apart? >> demographics are playing a big part. the recession is playing a part.

there is a lot of long-term unemployment. some structural factors. you always have structural factors. there are different industries. i think it is not a surprising fact that we are having fewer people in the labor force. of the things you're working on right now is healthcare research. the rollout of the affordable somewhathas been disastrous from a pr standpoint. if you look at the democrats fortunes in november, this is a noose around her neck. from a policy standpoint, what are the polyp -- numbers that you are looking at saying? is this succeeding or failing on its own merits western mark --? technical glitches were

extremely unfortunate. i am shocked and saddened that this happened. it should not surprise anybody. anybody who is put a big system orin the public sector private sector knows it is really hard and it doesn't work the first time. he to test a lot. they did not do that. i don't know why. the real question is has the website recovered? mostly yes. the numbers are up. 5 million people have enrolled. if that is not seven, but it is up there. we need to watch over the next few months. how fast to those numbers go up in the next couple of weeks. what happens after that? do people get the insurance if they thought they bought or is there going to be more glitches. we are doing a complicated

thing. people are say we should've blown up this whole system and started over and had a single-payer system. we didn't. we have a very competent system with medicare, medicaid, employer insurance, we were filling in the last cap. it is much harder to patch the system than it is to start over. that is what we are doing. report,ok at this cbo it will reduce the amount of work done in the u.s. economy tremendously compared to previous estimates. it will kill all of these jobs. it will not kill the jobs, people would choose to work less or give up their work. there healthcare would no longer be tied to their employer. is this good or bad? >> it is probably a good thing. many of us over the years

pointed out as a reason for having a different kind of healthcare that would cover the uninsured that there were significant people who are stuck in jobs because they needed the healthcare and they might have a highe or a child that had healthcare costs. if could not leave their job. they would lose their healthcare. they could not get more because there was a pre-existing condition. the affordable care act has changed that. there is no more concern about the existing conditions. you can go to the exchange and buy health care and get a subsidy if you have low income. it is not surprising that some of those people will give up those jobs. >> on the one hand, the long-term demographics and

recession driven decline in the participation rate and the number of hours worked because of obamacare is giving people healthcare, you have a worry that there is not enough americans working enough hours to pay for the obligations we have promised ourselves with social security and so on? >> not because of obamacare. seeing is what we knew was coming. the baby boom generation is retiring. surprise! we have known about these people since 1946. we should not be surprised that we have a large generation of retirees. people are living longer.

this is putting upward pressure on social security and on medicare. we know that. see what we want to do about that. it is not a terrible crisis. term problem that we have to face. the easy part is fixing social security. that should be done thick -- quickly. the longer you wait the harder it is. we should get a bipartisan group as in 1983 and say we need to fix this. had we do it? they would have to compromise. not a dirty word. we now think of it as something terrible. compromise you don't have principles. that is nonsense. principles and we

all have to solve problems and get things done. social security is a good example of that. nobody serious was to kill it. it is a very good program and has served a lot of people well. we need to fix it and that is very hard. aboutalso talked immigration. tell me why you are more optimistic about this coming to a solution. isi think the doc fix something we were not fixing because we are so polarized that everybody agrees not to. what is a doc fix? people with very good intentions decided we needed a formula for changing physician payments under medicare. the growth ofo

gdp. then when gdp did not grow as fast as they thought it would, it meant that doctors were getting less. congress in its wisdom said we don't want to do that. they postponed it and they kept postponing it and they kept postponing it. the way the law was written, it was the cable it of. now, if we went back to , we would have to by 28%.ors posses -- fees by 20%. so, we've got a bipartisan compromise. several committees in the house and senate came together and they worked hard. they compromised and had a permanent fix to this that was quite sensible.

now, it can't be passed because it has gotten caught in the polarized politics. at certain party says we won't consider this. not unless you postpone obamacare. you're not talking about the democrats. >> no. it does not matter. this is just an example. reasonable people on both sides of the aisle want to do this. they can't do it because we are in this gotcha politics. >> one of the things we want to do is help income inequality. there are two solutions that have been rolled out. minimum wage. the the other is the earned income tax credit. which is the better policy? >> i would both.

we're not raise the minimum wage in a long time. raising the minimum wage would help quite a lot of people. i am an economist. i am stuck with that. we like to think of efficient ways of doing things. the earned income tax credit, which is basically a wage supplement for people who are ,orking at particular wages that is a more efficient way of doing it. this discriminates against people who don't have children. it would raise the income tax credit for people who don't have children in

a the itc was founded in republican administration. what are the odds of being raised this year? >> it is another example of my theme, which is if you have part is -- bipartisan support for something, do it. stop worrying about where the blame falls. up yourr norquist was earlier. he has another theory. >> i am not surprised. >> we used to have people who wanted to expand the government a little bit and they compromised. theory for why we are in such a terrible moment of polarization? i don't have a theory. i do a lot of things have happened.

system it is our primary old people to the right or the left depending on which party they are in. that is exacerbated by the way congressional districts are drawn. that is up whole story. if you look of the senate, it is polarized to. it does not have to deal with districts. our political leadership has gotten out of touch with the way most people think of things. averageet a group of citizens or representatives around the table, if you give , they will sit there and talk about it and then they will cut deals. if they know they have to have a solution, they can find one. -- congressthere

was that way, but it is not. because the deficit fell so quickly between 2010 and 2013, the debt is stopped casting such a long shadow on d.c. politics. should we be thinking more about our long-term debt? are the upfront problems on the front burner? >> is not a choice. we have a lot of burners. we can took -- cook two things at once. i would like to think of the in comparisonon with what looked like at 2010. i was on simpson-bowles. at that time, the recovery was

just beginning. we weren't sure if it was going to take old strongly. it the deficit was very high. the stimulus was spinning out. we knew the deficit would come down if the economy recovered. there are big expenditures for medicare and medicaid. tax system.usy the solution was to fix the tax system so that it is better and raises more revenue. slow the growth of the health care. that was the right thing to do at the time. if you look at it again now, the same patterns are there. it looks less scary. the long-term future looks less

scary. there are two reasons for that, but they may not be sustainable. one is the political system has cut discretionary spending a lot. military and in the domestic. permanent,me that is you get very low numbers for discretionary spending. i don't know if that is sustainable. ?an we run the government i don't think so. the other thing that has happened and may not be sustainable is the rate of growth in health care spending has slowed. it has slowed dramatically. we are not quite sure why that is true. part of it is the recession. part of it may be that we have finally come to our senses and realized that our system is very

inefficient. some things are happening. i hope that both are true. hope both are true. we are working very hard at the brookings institution on how do we keep these reforms sustained so we can produce more health care for less money. that is where things are. ,> from a messaging standpoint hawks are in a position where it is be careful what you wish for. i was talking on another panel. there were a lot of people raising the point that in 2010 we needed to do something about this debt. if this it and that are easily conflated among people whose job alls to look at cbo reports day. it is very easy to confuse these issues.

in a way was the opposite of what they were asking for. they wanted larger deficits in , short deficits in the long-term, and they wanted to do this by holding onto discretionary spending. they want to cut entitlements and the long-term. practically no changes to medicare and social security. opposite? the exact >> the word deficit hawk is used to loosely. ofyou say the right policy four years ago is invest more in long-term growth. that means more transportation,

more skill. that is just discretionary spending in general. at the same time it works to slow the growth of entitlement over time. especially inefficient health care spending, and fixing the social security system. and we have an attack system as well. i think there is some hope for that. i don't think they are going to do a grand bargain but we may do some of this. it is such a sad little thing to do. we may have a good tax reform. >> we have time for a few questions. >> how would you entrust the issue of health care financing? i think in remarks you have made earlier that if we have chosen

start anew with a new system astead of adding a mix with hybrid system, it would have been easier and by inference we would've had a better system. do i hear your remarks correctly? >> it is easier to conceptually below it all up. --conceptually low it conceptually below it all up. the people talking about single-payer for the united -- they don't how -- they don't have a clue on how prior -- on how hard it is to run he single-payer system in any country. we are a huge diverse country with a suspicion of governance in our dna. i don't think we can even manage 12 if you did.

it is a very popular one. towardsot moved efficiency in the incentives in medicare. why not? because the politics have been against it. and if the politics of our provider groups -- it is the politics of our provider groups that make it difficult to make big changes in the direction of efficiency. good things are happening. i think if we blow it up and have a single-payer system that if we would be really innocent, we don't know how to do that.

>> i'm curious about your thoughts about the fact if the .ace of technological change what you think about jobs 30 years from now? enough jobs.ve the question is how good will these jobs be. that depends on what we'd do about it. if we have a skilled labor force we will have a higher standard economy than we would otherwise. i am old enough to have lived of the scareycle

of somehow machines are going to take over everything or computers are going to take over everything and nobody is going to have anything to do. >> you mentioned weight subsidies. food stamps may fall into that category. low?ey not help keep wages is should there be time limits for how long a safety net should be in place?

>> food stamps could be viewed you earn those wages and you get a little bit more. incentive the way the other safety programs -- i think we need some food stamps and we need housing subsidies for people who cannot afford housing. but they are not the same thing. you are raising a very big question about is the safety nets to generous? i don't think so. i think it might be better designed. but if people are hungry and people can't pay for the

ordinary decencies of life than i think we have an obligation to do so. >> thank you very much. i would like to ask you to talk debtabout the deficits and and building to the impact of health care reform. i know you have done intensive studies on the fact if we don't work on the health care reform, the deficit would be tremendous. way we can suggest congress to work on something sequestration -- you talk about without other partners,

given china. job that affect other markets here you go to that atent, whenever you suggest dashed markets here -- other job markets here? to that extent, when you suggest -- >> that is a lot of questions. i am pro-trade. he gave the case of moving ahead on trade agreement. i would say it is another example of my visas. there is bipartisan support for moving ahead on trade agreements and we can't do it at the

moment. i think that is a shame. revolution.ct a i think it is important not to oversell these things. i was in the clinton administration at the time of nasa. i think it is a good thing. the president was courageous in supporting it. they needed a lot of republican votes to get it passed. i also think we oversold. the cabinets fanned out and said this is the greatest thing since whenever. it is very dangerous to do that. i think it has been a success but a modest success. >> one more question you go