a whole set of reforms which are badly needed. they have also said we are going to deal with a number of hot button issues like the one child policy, labor reeducation camps, they have focused on the major issues of food, water, air, corruption. they have done that at the same time that they have cracked down on those things. so, they have -- i say they are dealing with issues that the people care most about today. again, i don't think that is a winning formula. i think over time they won't be as successful as they are going to be a less they have a more open, inclusive government.

>> that woman here and then the gentleman in the back near the camera. >> thank you. as china embarks on its economic reforms, i'm wondering if mr. paulson could talk about the secrecy of these reforms especially in the financial reform area. >> the secrecy is very important of a reform because, for instance, if you normalize the labor market with, you know, and

let everyone migrate to the big cities and take their benefits with them, you have them flooding beijing. they cannot accommodate more people. how do they do that? they are going to normalize the market for second and third tier cities first. the financial market reform, you know, they are going to need a budget responsibility. they have to be held accountable and have sources of revenue that they can call on, but right now mayors don't have budget responsibility and they don't have financial statements that are transparent which are required to have a market. if you need a municipal finance

market, they have a ways to go up because they cap fiscal reform, tax reform, give mayors the tools they need to manage a budget. these are going to be very -- that is why he has given himself seven years from the time the announced these policies which was some time ago to get them done because it is going to take a while. what i look at are what are the things that can be done soon and are they doing them? are they doing the things they need to do right away? i focus a lot on the financial markets. the reason i do is these are things that have been studied, debated in china.

they know what the issues are. they -- these reforms are very important. i start with the idea of letting foreign financial institutions come in and compete because you are going to need a world-class institutions and i have never seen a situation where i believe joint venture, institutional investors, or investment banks -- it is hard enough to run one where you have control so you're never going to get there with a joint venture. reforming the markets so that they -- capitalist allocate to households rather than state owned enterprises. eliminating the caps on the interest rates that savers receive. there are a whole list of

things. the other things i am going to look at is competition. are with a moving quickly to do the tough things with the state owned enterprises? it is not going to get easier as time goes on. i have been quite encouraged by not only what they have said about the markets playing a decisive role, but some of the steps they have taken the, the rollbacks, the red tape, and the regulatory barriers to keep their private sector from getting and competing into certain industries. they have done a lot in terms of weighing out a very ambitious program. they have moved very quickly like in areas like anticorruption. we have to wait and see for the environment. >> you are talking to an

american worker. yes, i understand that the air i breathe has something to do with the pollution that comes across the globe from china. if i am an american worker, my wages have not gone up, my company has a lot of investments in china and they tell me it is good for me but i am not so sure about that. what do you say to american workers whose wages are stagnant and see that men in cities can do business in china. what is in it for me? what you say to them? >> the american worker is struggling in manufacturing. we have eight or nine times the output we had in 1950 with the same number of workers that we had then. when i go through plants in china, i see very similar things to what i see in the best

companies in china and the u.s. which is i go through manufacturing plants, i see robotics and technology. this is inside. we need technological advances. it is driving productivity but in almost every industry i look at whether it is architecture, engineering, almost any business, technology and manufacturing is destroying jobs. we need to really focus on this and focus on having the proper training programs, etc. what i say to people in the u.s., i think worst and most important, we need to fix our

own economy. that is going to be the key to our relations with china and everything else. everything starts with our own economic strength. the things we need to do to be competitive. we can kick all these things off. there was a good number of them. the other thing i would say to a u.s. worker is we should be fighting to open up and continue to open up opportunities for u.s. products in china. right now, it is very interesting. you talk with farmers and ranchers, that is an easy sell. they look at what is happening and how fast the consumption engine is growing. it is no longer -- you mentioned wall street. it used to be wall street and a lot of the global companies. i think right now the constituents -- clean technology companies and technology in the state and city level, there are a lot of people that are looking

for chinese investment to come in. i went to a company in china last friday which wasn't that long ago. it is a leading manufacturer of auto glass. they just bought a huge plant in ohio. they are going to hire 1000 people. i think that is the case we need to make. i think it is a hard case and i sure don't want to be the one that is trying to say this directly to someone who has lost their job in a plant. i don't think there are a lot of jobs -- products we are importing from china by and large are products we would be importing elsewhere.

that is the fastest-growing area. that is why we have to fight so hard to open up these markets. >> with that, please join me in thanking hank paulson. [applause] >> thank you, mr. secretary. thank you all for coming, especially on a rainy day. we will be continuing this conversation for another year at least so i hope you will join in with us. thank you. bye, bye. >> members of congress, it my great privilege and high honor

and personal pleasure to excellenceyou his hamid karzai, president of the afghanistan. of [cheers and applause] >> thank you very much, thank you. please, please, thank you very much. thank you. thanks a lot. thanks a lot. please. the great honor. , mr. vice president, of congress, guests.ished

the great people of the united states of america. it is my distinct honor to speak on behalf of the afghan people assembly.gust i thank you and the people of for yourt country ourrosity and commitment to people. you have supported us with your resources. with your leadership in the world community, and most importantly with the precious soldiers.our [applause] >> find more highlights from 35 house floor coverage on our facebook page. c-span, created by america's companies 35 years ago, and brought to you today as a public service by your local provider.atellite

american enterprise institute will hear from former british defense minister liam aboutis morning, government surveillance and privacy issues. the focus on edward snowden's leaking of classified n.s.a. at 10:00 a.m. eastern. at 8:00 the women in the world summit. stories of bombings and chemical syria, and a conversation with hillary clinton. now a look at the american tax system and proposals to change it, from "washington journal" this is a little less than an hour. washed in general continues. host: our conversation on this tax day takes a look at the fairness of the tax system. andguests, rebecca wilkins william mcbride.

to both of you, thank you for joining us. one of the reasons we wanted to come on was a question pull -- posed by gallup. the question is, he said, do you regard the income tax you have to pay this year as fair? yes, 41% say no. guest: fairness is in the eye of the beholder. it is not well defined. good true, you have got a survey there that indicates most people do not think it is very fair. i think they are right. depending on the various definitions of fairness. general principle of fairness is that everyone is treated equally under the law. our tax code does not do that and has not done that in a long time. 100 years or more.

does note tax itself treat people equally. it taxes income. it taxes people for generating income. it does depend on your income. guest: most people are not upset with the amount of taxes they pay, but they're upset when ge or mitt romney has a lower tax rate than they have. our tax system is not very fair in our view because we believe it ought to be more progressive than wealthier people should have to pay higher. if you look at an income test come the wealthy pay the majority heard if you look at the tax system overall. the tax system is almost flat.

everyone pays about the same amount of taxes as they take in their share of the country's income. the top one percent earns about calmf the countries in the and pay only 24% of the taxes. those who make more pay more taxes, what you think about that? that is the progressive tax. it has become more progressive than ever. wrote -- renowned organization based out of paris looks at tax codes in the developed world. they found a few years ago the u.s. tax code is the most progressive in the developed world. there are a lot of stories in about people skipping out on taxes. rich people skipping out.

on average, there is a burden on the income tax very skewed to the high-end. >> we're making progress as far as taxing people who make more. would you agree? the problem is the other taxes folks pay. on the other coast. on the bottom fifth pay 17% of income. the top one percent pay less than three percent of their income. state taxes tend to be very regressive. aggressiveing a very income tax can you make up for that. apply it to washington. here are we? guest: we have gone through a time of a lot of gold up,

with dave camp's proposal in february. it has not been well received by congress by other party. -- either party. passing more temporary something called the tax extenders list of provisions, this helps is nice, in particular, so i think it is back to normal business. the proposal, one of the reasons our previous guest told us -- people make a certain type of income when it comes to taxes. that is right. there are so many provisions it is hard to summarize but yes, it

does target the rich in many ways. and changes all across the income spectrum. guest: this plan would get rid of a lot of special interest tax breaks. feeling theeneral tax code is about to be overhauled. itn you get to the details, will be difficult. everybody has attacked -- a champion and everyone will fight for their own particular brick. >> two guest joining us to talk about taxation. if you want to ask them questions about the current tax system we have, this is your chance to do so -- you can make your thoughts known

on our twitter page. you can send us an e-mail. a little about your organizations. the center for tax justice. guest: we work to influence cap policy to make the tax system more fair and sustainable. totainable means it is are fairr what you want and and that it taxes people according to their ability to pay. founded in 1937, always been nonpartisan, nonprofit organization. we have always advocated for according toicy principles laid out by economist 's going back to evan smith. it is on our website.

we advocate for simplicity on the tesco, neutrality, transparency, stability of the tesco, and no retroactivity. that means, do not change the law retroactively and change taxes on people for income they earn 20 years ago. seven brackets as we speak. some of the efforts consolidate into two. some things are lost during the process. what about the idea? when it comes to your idea of simplicity, buying a bunch of ax brackets are the benefits? guest: it is meaningless.

what is compensated about the tesco are all the special rules and provisions and credits. we think there ought to be steeper productivity for the code. right now, someone making $350,000 pays the same tax rate as someone making $350 million. we think there are -- there is a lot of room for tax brackets. guest: it is a clear measure of there has been improvement in that the guard. would be ao brackets further simplification. but you're right that we have software now and most people use turbotax and something like that. that is not the biggest sort -- source of complexity. biggest

source is the stuff is mrs. have to put up with current that is arcane stuff like how many right off for your investments. over -- other complexity for individuals, the credits they received, the earned income tax very little understanding of that by the recipients. fraud in that of program as a result. qwest should it be maintained yaks --? --guest: should it be maintained? guest: no. there is 11 billion a year due to improper payments. you make changes to it as far as businesses and how they are tax? the complexity there is

many fold. labor cost in businesses, they write is off immediately. expenses,investment equipment, machines, computers, must be written off in years and decades. this is complex. i do not really think the fraud is driven by complexity. there is fraud in all levels of the tesco. tax is costingre the u.s. treasury about $150 billion a year. people cheating on the eit's the, they know their cheating. just like those filing false returns in getting millions of dollars in refunds. the problem is the reinforcement from the irs to combat that people areake sure only taking the credits they are entitled to. you keep cutting the irs's budget while giving them more and more to do.

it will unfortunately suffer. let's go to a call. republican line, go ahead. caller: thank you. do they tax all rich people the same? you failed to mention warren buffett. clinton andsident his wife hillary. these are very wealthy people. you only mentioned mitt romney. there are a lot of wealthy people. do they all get taxed the same? they do not. you are working, you get a much higher rate. i is mitt romney because it was a recent example that was well-publicized. warren buffett pays the same

rate as mitt romney. president obama pays a much higher rate because much of his income is earned income, like salary royalties instead of investment like dividends and capital gains. it does not matter how much you may, whether $20,000 or $100 million. if your income is from work, you will pay twice as much in contact many would for investment. guest: on twitter, it was just asked that it is dividends and gains. guest: i would agree the whole tesco needs a serious overhaul. tax dividends have been the case since thel gains beginning of the tesco 100 years ago. that is the case in most countries, that there is a lower rate on the sources of income. there already tax once before on

orbit income tax. whatever is left after that tax is distributed in shareholders. most companies have been reducing the corporate income tax era that is the source of a lot of jobs. and the source of a lot of investment. the u.s. has not performed the corporate tax code incorporations. we're left with the highest tax rate in the developed world. 60% left over for shareholders. host: what is president obama's thought on changing that? out hishe president set framework for corporate tax reform which proposed bringing to 28%. down he proposed corporate tax reform be revenue neutral so it does not raise revenue.

in order to bring the rate down, you need significant changes. a system butg to even slowing down and having businesses write out their investments over longer years. i would like to address the corporate paying tax first. since this is a test justice on a tax policy recently published a report where they looked at the fortune 500 for five years, 2008-2012, among that -- the companies consistently profitable over the five years, the average corporate income tax rate they paid was 19.4%. of 35%.r half the rate there were 11 companies in that group that did not pay any tax in that one year. 26 of those corporations did not pay any income tax in any of those five years. earned $170, they

billion. also, corporate stock, a lot of endowment funds, pension plans, and a lot of it is not being taxed at the corporate level at all. the double taxation argument does not really apply in a lot of instances. that is one measure of rates. you can look to economists for other measures. economist at oxford university. every year, they publish a comparison of corporate tax rate across the developed world. the u.s. comes up with the highest corporate tax rate. after japan. statutorythe highest corporate tax rate. the u.s. overtook them when japan reduced their rate. rateok at effective

studies and we have the highest tax rate on average in the developed world. variation across countries and effective issue is they are more or less profitable. you do not pay taxes and we have no office. half the countries have no problems in one year. the study rebekah is referring to was done in a very atypical time. losses written off over many years. you have to look at the economic studies. caller: good morning. tax system issive

not much more than this. we can think about it. corporations and business do not pay taxes. the progressives, they will take money from the rich and give it to the poor. you take money from the rich and tax the oil companies. corporation and mine go up. when you start talking about all this progressivism is great, maybe you ought to think about what socialism does across the ocean and tell people the truth about these taxes. there is not much evidence that taxes influence rises. companies compete based on prices in the market. corporate income taxes are

actually borne by shareholders. the people that own stock in the wealthy.re very research papers show about half of americans do not own any stock at all even in their retirement plans. when we think about competition between companies, we think about it as a good and because a bettercompetition is service at a lower price. think about competition. what does it mean? tax rates go down and down and the country with the lowest tax rate has the worst load, the worst military, the least amount of health care, the worst public services. is that the kind of country we want to live in? if you want to live in a low country, you should move to small yet. --other examples of local

local tax competent -- countries , the u.k. has a corporate tax a -- tax rate now. this is the average corporate tax rate in the developed world. it is 25%, compared to 40% in is the. very this developed world. they have health care. by many measures, the health care work better than ours. they have plenty of tax revenue. they get their tax revenue from other sources. we do not have to rely so taxes. on income the corporate income tax is self-defeating at a high rate. the corporation found ways allowed -- around it. corporations are everyday, almost every day or every week, there are headlines of a reparations leaving the u.s.. just yesterday, walgreens was in the headlines for considering a

move to switzerland. it is for tax purposes. the problem is not just that it causes a loss of tax revenue in is, it moves that some jobs and over time, it moves the whole company. you can destroy a company through taxation. that we willies mention, switzerland, ireland, they do well because they are parasites on the rest of the world. rates and tax artificial shifting of tax rates and they propose tax rates i a lot of money. european countries that have a lower tax rate than we do, as an average, also have very stiff

value added taxes. in france, the value added taxes now are 20%. every time you make a purchase, you pay an additional 20% in taxes. us going i cannot see to consumption tax area we have to figure out where we can tax. if the -- a study is published every year that shows where countries are and how much they collect in taxes as a percentage of your product. the u.s. is 33rd out of 35. fewer taxescollects as a percentage of their economy than the u.s. does. john, you are on with our guest, our independent line. caller: the problem in the united states is that the filthy rich bloodsuckers on the high politicall

offices in the states and in the nation. rich,ield for the filthy mr. mcbride, is just giving you the same old worked over complete ohlone. the cure for u.s. economic problem's is to tax the rich. they are getting away with murder. amen. >> we do tax the rich. the average rate is 25%. it is actually more than double the average income tax rate across taxpayers. the oecd and other organizations have already a very progressive tax system, the most progressive in the developed world. we are shifting most of the tax or an to the high-end. the top one percent pays a greater shares than the bottom

of the 90% combined. it has been increasing through every administration over the we continue to make the federal income tax code more and more progressive. so i think, like the corporate out ontax, we are maxed taxing the rich through the federal income tax. it is self-defeating. the rich find ways around it. it does not raise enough revenue. we have many problems with deficits resulting. tax evasion, avoidance, tax planning. say the rich find ways around a bit it goes to her point that even if you pay a top rate of 25 chances are you are not paying the actual rate of 25% or so. ,uest: the actual rate is 39.6% so they bring it down through various ways. they can move their money around. that is the problem with an

income tax, particularly one with high rates. they find ways around it. guest: i have to agree with a call on several points -- the real problem with tax reform not being done is the way campaigns are funded. one of my favorite bloggers last year said members of congress ought to wear a nascar uniform every day with a logo of corporate sponsors who support them on their uniforms. wealthy and corporations have a lot of influence in congress. they have a lot of power. they spent a lot of money library -- lobbying and they get the tax rules they want and they also can afford very high price tax lawyers to do planning to help them get around the rules. making the tax code simpler would actually help a lot -- not in terms of rate but in terms of rules, because when you have a special rule for a certain type of income or taxpayer, then people try to manipulate their

transactions to fit within the special rules so they can get that low rate. while we look at averages, and sometimes they tell us something meaningful, a lot of times they don't. the average tax rate for the wealthy might be 25% but we know a lot of people are paying much less than that. there have been well-publicized cases. host: reggie from norristown, pennsylvania. democrats line. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead. caller: a couple of questions. you put up a graph on the state taxes on the last segment and you said pennsylvania was three percent. there is also a county tax of 2.1% you pay on top of that. i don't think that is fair. a surrounding county two miles

east of me that pays no tax -- and that is a rich area. i live in a blue-collar area and we have to pay an additional tax on top of the state tax, and another county next-door timmy pays no taxes on the county tax. and another question. overseas taxes and products. that companies that go overseas and make their products overseas -- or sell their products overseas do not pay taxes. -- from 1969other saying the irs, tax from companies outside the u.s. of citizens. what happened between 1969 and today and how, we did not enforce that rule for people trying to evade taxes by going overseas? host: let's talk about the state income tax. we think about the total federal level but you have to think about state the local tax and how they contribute to the

overall tax responsibility. mr. mick arrived. guest: we told what the taxes and their are states that the local income taxes. that is a whole layer of complexity that is unnecessary, that the caller is right about. it is very difficult to figure out these multiple layers of income taxes. whether some are written off against others, etc. base of income, the different definitions of income, it is very, very complex. itsincome tax is, by nature, very, very complex. it really shouldn't be at the local level. it is an absurd layer of complexity. guest: i do agree with that. it is unfortunate how our tax system has developed and that there are so many different jurisdictions that impose tax. but the states that do impose an income tax tend to have much more fair systems.

the states that rely instead on sales tax or property tax or tend to taxof taxes low income people at a much higher rate than they tax high income people. so the income tax is a way to make up for that. host: good morning. joining us from massachusetts on our independent line. go ahead, please. caller: good morning. like most viewers, i am totally before to buy all of these percentages and statistics being thrown around. i suspect it is deliberate. it sort of reminds me -- there are lies, damn lies and then statistics. felt they percent were tax fairly -- 51% feel they are tech daily. if half of them are not paying tax at all should they even be counted as far as the survey is concerned? don't i don't know why we

have a flat tax with no exemptions, no deductions, and let the chips fall where they may. thank you. host: ms. wilkins? guest: the problem with the flat tax is it makes the flat -- tax system even more regressive. as i talked about earlier, state tax systems tend to be very regressive and if the federal tax code was not progress in, you would have lower income people paying a much higher percentage of their income in taxes. focus on the federal income tax because for most of us, that is the biggest amount of tax that we pay. but low income people know a different story. a low income single mom goes to the store to buy her kids school supplies and she has a $20 bill in her pocket. she knows she can't put $20 worth of stuff in her cart because she knows when she gets to the checkout stand there will 12% tax so10%, 11%,

onlys careful to pay -- by $18 worth of stuff. we cannot just focus on the income tax because all americans pay taxes. it is impossible to live in america without paying any tax. you might not pay any income tax but you pay a lot of other taxes that everybody contributes. that is how it should be. host: the notion of a fair tax? guest: a flat tax it makes a lot of sense. it has been proposed by economists going back to the 1970's. the idea is basically to get a way of tracking of people's defined,s it has been particularly the taxing of their investment income. so the big difference is, you tax wages, which are relatively easy to track and hard to escape taxation on wages, and then you don't tax what people do with those wages after that. you don't tax and additionally

if they choose to write to buy groceries. you do not tax additionally if they choose to buy shares in a company. the current income tax double he taxes returns on those shares. that is the fundamental source of the double taxation of the income tax. host: what it the -- layered on by a sales tax? guest: a sales tax in addition to a flat tax would double he tax consumption so you have to do one or the other. a flat tax or a sales tax. host: if you put a flat tax at the federal level on top of the sales and use taxes we already have at the state it would be very, very regressive. idea of fairness in "the washington post" talks about the marriage penalty. i married people treated differently tax wise than single and is it fair? guest: another feature of the income tax system. we have four if it filing options depending on your marital status.

-- four different filing options. that is three too many. should be one. we have all sorts of special provisions depending on how many children you have an depending on your marital status. it is very complex and unnecessary. guest: there is a marriage penalty if both spouses work that if only one spouse works there is a bonus because you basically get to use your spouse's tax bracket. does trade working couples definitely than it treats people that have one spouse staying at home. host: washington, d.c. go ahead. democrats line. myler: thank you for taking call. i had a comment for both people. for the gentlemen, when you are talking about the effective tax keep theneed to discussion on us. she was talking about effective tax rate that companies pay and your response was talking about the effective tax rate compared to other nations. for the lady, when you are

talking about a flat tax, what in thence does it make percentages? you are not paying a larger percent of you and, to make more ,oney -- if the flat tax is 10% it is 10% of 100 million dollars or $10,000. you are paying the same percentage. in terms of having the sales tax with a flat tax, if i am buying groceries for $20 or buy groceries for whole foods for $1000, the six percent sales tax is the same amount so it is not really regressive. it is regressive because of low income people have to spend more of their income. spend more sales tax as a percentage of their income. you know if he ever lived paycheck to paycheck which most of us have that one time of our spent all of our paycheck on things we need like

groceries, clothing, gas, etc.. but high income people only spend a fraction of their incomes. you pair a flat tax with a sales tax it will be very aggressive -- regressive. guest: i would agree with that. you don't need to bank taxes on consumption, -- two taxes on consumption. but going to a that tax will be an improvement in taking off layers of double taxation on investment, particularly corporate investment. we double he tax corporations y tax.d will -- or triple the additional layer, the third layer, is the corporate income tax which, again, is set very high and the u.s. this thatcher tory corporate rate is the highest in the developed world. there was a question about the effective rate. many studies were done by

academics at places like oxford university of calgary, university of north carolina and they found the u.s. has one of the highest effect of corporate rate in the developed world and that is in the mid-20's. ok? mid-20's. that is down from the statutory corporate tax rate of about 40%, just like the individual side of things. people do bring their defect if ratesdown -- effective down. host: we have two guest talking about tax issues. you were just hearing from william mcbride, the tax foundation, and you were also hearing from rebecca wilkins, citizens for tax justice, their senior counsel. joe from new york, independent line. caller: good morning. and you hear me? i would just like to tell bill and rebekah there is a basic

principle that says the consumer ultimately pays all taxes. talking about not the consumer. in new york state among we worked beyond the fourth of july to get our independence pat taxes.about 60% of our that includes the jurisdictions of federal, state, and local. it includes the county. the school district. the city. and other special districts. that covers the income tax system, a property tax system, a sales tax system. all of new york state. i think you people, both of you, have not mentioned that the consumer ultimately pays all taxes. and your example of the mother going down and buying milk and paying a sales tax of $.10 or whatever you said it was -- that is only part of it because the store pays property taxes and the owner of the distribution products, the tracking system, they pay taxes.

that is in the price of the milk before you put taxes on taxes. host: let me later on his call, a thought from ron on twitter saying all americans should take for the share of government services, even state and municipal. guest: think about what our taxes by. we want a strong military. we want police and fire protection. we want good roads. we want a good education system and we want a good public health system. there's a lot of things we want government to do, and those things cost money. the issue is, should all of us contribute to that? of course, most of us think all of us should. while we can talk about averages, the problem that makes people upset and makes people think the system is not fair is that they see well-publicized cases like ge or warren buffett who pay a different rate than the rest of us pay. that really rankles those people. it is amazing to me that the corporations especially, you

know, when they decide where to locate, they want to be somewhere that has good infrastructure, roads that can move their products, an airport close by. they want an educated work force. i want a nice place for their employees to live. yet so many of them don't think they have any obligation to help pay for those things. get all thosehey things and places like canada, u.k., ireland, switzerland, and lots of european countries. and all of those countries, they pay a lower corporate tax rate than they do in the u.s. both in terms of the statutory corporate great and the effective corporate tax rate at the end of the day. so we have a corporate tax system that is too punitive and pushing companies outside the u.s.. we have fewer corporations in the u.s. now than we have had at any time since the 1970's. a are finding ways outside of the corporate tax regime and

moving to the individual code. most businesses in the u.s. file under the individual code. that can change because taxes on that side have been raised. it is a very punitive system or business production of income. host: a viewer says on twitter -- hell us about the decline of real wages in the middle class and the texas compound the problem? guest: definitely taxes compound the problem. the preview caller mentioned this. the tax freedom day report that just came out. we do total out all the taxes and we do it by state. we count the local income taxes and the property taxes. in taxy do result freedom days going into april, may, and june in some cases. there are a lot of taxes out there. the biggest one is the federal income tax by far. guest: the federal income tax of the biggest for a lot of people but for a lot of people it is not the biggest one.

they have to contend with all the other taxes as well. when we compare the u.s. system with the countries in europe, we have to remember that all of those countries depend on a very consumption tax. i just don't see that happening here. host: in our last segment we something called tax extenders. talk about what they are and what they do on the budget and your perspective on this process we are seeing on capitol hill. ms. wilkins? guest: there is the biggest budget buster you never heard of, tax extenders are 55 provisions of the tax code that would just temporary when they were and acted and every year or so they extend those for another year or two. collectively they cost about $50 billion a year. the 10-year estimate for those is 700 billion dollars. they are huge. most of them benefit businesses. two of them especially benefit

profitses who shift overseas. they should not be extended. if we think they are good tax policy they ought to be made permanent and they ought to be paid for. if they are not good tax policy, the expire at the end of december, we should let them die. guest: i agree with almost all of that. bere is -- they should not temporary. no aspect of the tax code or the laws should be temporary. we should determine which are the useful provisions, the ones that are beneficial in terms of generally agreed-upon terms. investment, economic growth, hiring, etc., etc. attempted, anden they are having hearings right now in both the house and senate to determine the merit of these different provisions, so we will see what shakes out. but some of them are very

important, particularly bonus depreciation -- expensing investment for business rather than the complicated process of writing off for decades. there are other provisions that benefit is missed. active financing is a very arcane sounding thing. compete the banks abroad, puts them on a level playing field with other banks operating abroad. so these are temporary provisions that matter a lot for businesses. host: should they be incorporated in the tax code altogether rather than piecemeal extending it? guest: there is disagreement about them, which is why they are always passed piecemeal. we need to come to some sort of agreement as to which meet merit and which don't and pass those which have merit on a permanent basis. host: what about merit for some of these extenders? guest: there might be a few that all to be made permanent but we think they would be very few. art of the problem is congress

is trying to influence behavior through the tax code and it is not a very efficient or effective way to do that. and a lot of cases, a spending program would be a lot more efficient and effective meeting the goal they want to meet. the most egregious part of this whole process right now is that the senate finance committee just reported the extender's bill out of committee without any pay for, so there is no revenue offset. on the other hand, they can't pass the unemployment insurance extension because they can't find a way to pay for it. but they are willing to extend $50 billion a year in primarily corporate tax breaks without any revenue. harbor,thony from palm florida. democrats line. caller: first, i want to thank rebecca --can you hear me? host: if you are listening to your television, speak on the phone. caller: it is on need. justice is onex

of my go to websites. you give great information and i appreciate you on the show today. great facts. i think if you listen to the gentleman, i just think that you keep talking about this burden on corporations and this tax burden and the high tax. corporations don't pay this high tax. very few of them pay the 35%, if any. 2008ffective tax rate in on average i understand for fortune 500 companies was 4.7%, last year, 12.7%. your listeners need to understand that you can throw 35% up there and put a spotlight on it but no one is paying that. i just want to thank citizens for tax justice for doing the right thing and educating theyone about the fact that working poor and the middle class our work -- paying more as

a percentage of income than the wealthy. guest: those are wrong numbers. the effective corporate tax rate that you cited four percent or 12%, those are flat wrong. again, i will refer you to academic studies on this published every year, they compare the u.s. to other countries. the u.s. generally has a corporate effective tax rate of about 25%. year after that way year. it has gone down recently because of the massive financial crisis and the massive losses that occurred over the last five years, causing write-offs going forward. 20's bys still in the every reasonable measure according to irs data and data that is -- the bureau of economic analysis data, according to financial statement data looking at individual corporations as a citizens were tax justice does.

what citizens for tax justice is emphasizing that the variation and a looking at some companies -- yes, and some years they don't pay any income tax. a lot of those companies are not paying corporate income tax because they do not have profited that year and they are not legally supposed to pay taxes on non-profits. it is a profit tax. a lot of other issues with their analysis. i would refer you to the academic studies that do this in a more holistic way using various data sets to find a corporate effective rate of about 20 five percent. guest: our corporate tax study excludes companies that have losses because we know they don't pay tax rate would look about -- fortune 500 and we included only companies often will all five years of the study and we found a lot were not paying tax. while we have been going through recessions, we have been doing and thedy since 1984 corporate effective tax rate has never been much over half of the

statutory rate. the problem is the outliers. retailers, for example, are paying pretty close to the 35% rate while high-tech is playing -- paying in the single digits. utilities are paying negative tax rate and transportation to paying higher. because of the special tax breaks in the code. because the way the rules are written where some types of income is taxed differently and some types of businesses get bigger deductions, there are credits that in effect certain types of activity, all the competitions in the tax code. guest: i would refer you to irs data -- it is on their website, easily accessible. you can look at the total number,and the average and it will not show you returned by return data. you have to get financial statements from companies to look at that. here have been studies and

they say using financial statements on average operations pay 25%. some companies do not pay that every year in and year out. some pay way more than 35%. so there is massive variation. there is the profit issue. inre were massive losses 2000 7, 2008, 2009 and they wrote those offer years and years and continue to write them off in some cases. there is the foreign profit issue. this is not counting taxes on foreign profits abroad. is -- are many studies out there doing this in a very open and transparent way and i refer you to the academic studies. host: let's go to peter in st. petersburg, florida, on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am really enjoying the program. you guys are definitely covering a lot of things that have been

really bothering me lately. i have been reading articles on the white house. an old article, increasing taxes on the middle class -- consumer spending. also on cnn that got an article called how america is rigged for the rich. i think a caller from new york hit on a lot of these topics. benefit america if the taxes for the rich and how how doesso sheltered, our government to believe that lowering their taxes so they can keep reinvesting in the economy and that is the way our economy is setting up right now -- however, i don't see any benefit? i just see me and my family, our taxes is going up and our income is going down, on everything. guest: that is really the problem with our current system, is that the rules are so complicated and there are so many special tax breaks for different types of income and

different types of taxpayers that a lot of wealthy people and a lot of big corporations are able to really aggressively lower their tax bill, maybe not a terribly legally, and pay lower rates than a lot of middle or low income people are paying. i think that is why people don't think the taxes them is fair, they are right. guest: the tax system is not fair. people are right about that. effective rates for corporations are very high, though, as i said, 25% on average. and on average for individuals it is about 10%. one caller mentioned another of the, about 50% population does not pay the federal income tax, the personal income tax. so it is very skewed to the high the with the rich paying vast majority of it. the top 10% pay about 70% of the federal income taxes. skewed, and ivery

think this creates a lot of complexity. that is one source of the complexity. we need to get to a flatter system where everyone is treated equally. the out the complexity of deductions, the various special treatment features, for sure, but the income tax is inherently complex. we need to get away from an income tax. host: do you think we will ever see a major change -- change to the tax code as we know it? guest: are to predict. hundred years. it started out as a tax on the one percent. it was a very small tax. it did not raise a lot of revenue. since then, it has become the major dominant source of revenue for the federal government. and it has become more and more progressive and shifted the burden more and more to the high end and a source of major redistribution in the federal code. guest: the income set -- tax,

the highest source of revenue and the individual income tax and payroll taxes make up 82% of the federal government's revenue. corporations only contribute 12% in the most recent years we had numbers for. work fork people that a living have every right to be upset. host: on this tax day, joined by two people who follow the issue closely. you heard from rebecca wilkins, citizens for tax justice and you

now republican senators spoke saturday in manchester, new hampshire, at an event hosted by the group citizens united and americans for prosperity. this is 40 minutes. >> thank you. [applause] thank you. in theomes a time

history of nations when a country passes the point of no return. that time approaches. that time is near. the question remains, will you be sunshine patriots? firstou shrink at the sign of probation or will you men and women of courage and fight for your freedom? will you? will you fight for your freedom? [applause] those who would trade your are inside security the gates and breached the walls. they are here. the question is, will you stand? i have had enough. i will not waver in my defense of freedom. i will not wilt in the face of adversity.

i will stand and fight them at every point. [applause] dilutey that we need to our message and be a little bit more like the democrats. it's exactly the wrong thing to do. our problem isn't that we are too bold, the problem is that we are too timid. you go to washington and what that we areold is for revenue neutral tax reform. i frankly don't care. if that's what you're for, i will go back to kentucky and be an eye surgeon but i want nothing to do with the timidity of revenue neutral tax reform. [applause]

i want nothing to do with budgets that never balance. i don't care if it's republican or democrat, i want nothing to do with budgets that never balance. some say we can defend the second amendment but let's ignore the fourth amendment. let's defend the second amendment but that first amendment is not for conservatives. the whole bill of rights is what we are here for. [applause] some will say we don't have enough money for welfare or entitlements but we have plenty of money to bailout and give corporate welfare. hogwash. we shouldn't be sending one penny to rich companies.

we send $20 billion a year in direct subsidies to companies. corporate welfare should once and for all be ended. [applause] the top 100 companies in our country averaged $200 million apiece. and you've got republicans in washington saying that it's in the bag. rich companies don't need your money. it's an insult to those among us that say we don't have enough money for these other programs but we have enough money for rich friends. want -- some will say you

can have religious freedom and the obamacare mandates. they are mutually inconsistent. or give up on your business to stay true to your faith, that should not be a question. it's not something an american business has to answer. shouldn't force people to buy things what they don't want and go against the religious morals. some would say that you can have have definite detention of american citizens an.

remember what martin luther king wrote from the jail in birmingham? binding on a makes minority but does not make binding on themselves. it was a debate with one of the senators. you're going to take an american citizen and send them to guantánamo bay without a trial? they are dangerous. it begs the question, who gets to decide? these are people that might be terrorists. multiple guns in the household. a raise of fans but people might be embarrassed. ammunition.

in cash.o pay nin has changed the color of their hair. stains on clothing, missing fingers. these are characteristics of the people they are looking for. included the constitution party. people that are pro-life. people that think we should have security at the border. want my lawyer before they send me. some people think and some people say you can have justice and put our young people in jail for decades upon decades for nonviolent crime.

some of you may not have thought about this but it's important to think about. told a woman yesterday who me my son is 18 years old. the wrong place at the wrong time, he always wanted to be in the military. he got caught. the punishments are out of this world. was given 55 years in prison for marijuana sales. 55 years in prison, you can kill somebody and be out and 12. growu want our movement to and add new people, the people and the powers that be say to dilute your message. become democrat light. we need to be more bold with our message but we have to reach out

to people that have not been listening. the door is not going to open up to the african-american community until we have something to offer. your kids and grandkids aren't perfect either. you get a better lawyer. it may not be part of our group here. besides, we are the party of justice. we need to be that party of justice. the unemployed. anybody here been unemployed?

-- ady have a top time tough time? there are members that have suffered and had those problems but we have the show concern for people out of work. we have to have concern for those people and have ideas. guess what? the president's ideas are not working. 20 million people are out of work. black unemployment is twice white unemployment. 3.7 million women have been added to the rolls of poverty. maybe it's their side. if we want to grow our movement, -- i thought the bank

bailouts were a horrible idea. sending myeel like money to a guy that made $100 million a year working on wall street. and somehow me and middle america, i am supposed to send my money to bail out these bankers. that is part of why the tea party started. they were frustrated with republicans and giving up on the democrats. are frustrated on republicans voting for the bank bailout. there is a bigger working than an honors class. i want to tell the workers of america that we are on their side. the president keeps offering you free stuff. more unemployment insurance.

when is the last time that we created millions of jobs? it was under ronald reagan. forwardld reagan come and say, let's just cut taxes for low income people? he said let's cut everyone's taxes. that's what rich people pay. more revenue came in in fact. people were carter and make more money. more revenue comes in. say,n't let the democrats richower the taxes for people. anyone here ever work for a poor person? we are all interconnected and we've got to get beyond this class warfare. we can't let them beat us up -- how manyave to

people have their policies employed? barely growing. you never get out of poverty. the government steals the value of your dollar. you have a little bit more. the gas costs more and you can go on vacation. all of this occurs from big government. $17 trillion worth of debt. losing onesay we are million jobs a year because of the burden of this debt. we are on a precipice. the time approaches.

i remember seeing patients in my and looking at my money market account. my definition of panic is when you are worried about your money market account losing its value. i still worry about the fundamentals of that. our movement has never been about the plutocrats. the other side paints it is that. will let the media know we are the middle class. why isn't he helping us? [applause] the president is simply loading more people in the wagon. these are not bad people in the wagon. they are people out of work and suffering. he debate needs to be not about who cares more, it needs to be about what policy will help people more.

new hampshire, send me your money, i will give you some back later doesn't work. policy ism with the if i come to new hampshire and i take your money, here is $100,000, go create jobs for people. nine times out of 10, i will pick the wrong person because the marketplace chooses. think about solyndra. president took $500 million from the middle class and gave it to one of the richest people in our country. that doesn't sound like it's good for the middle class. the president says a lot of things but doesn't quite get around to doing them. phone? got a cell you are under surveillance.

the president says he's not listening, he's just looking. even that's not exactly true. they occasionally are. if we want to grow our movement bigger, the message resonates with some young people. young kids on the right and on the left, this message resonates. they don't like our message, they just don't have any money. you have to talk to people about things they are concerned with. thosed of listening to supposedly in charge of the party that want to dilute the

message, we keep our core message. they take it to people. it we will be the dominant party again. i love the image of that. we need to proclaim our message with the passion of patrick like a man coming over the .ill singing with optimism no matter what walk of life you are. we once again proclaim our message like a man coming over the hill singing, we will be the dominant party.

is senator ted cruz. [applause] >> wow. [applause] >> god bless new hampshire. [applause] afp.less wow.

each ofilled to be with you today. thank you for that incredibly warm welcome. blessed to me are have two little girls at home. caroline and catherine. caroline is five and catherine is three. indeed. for every one of you who are parents, you know god makes every child very different. is the essence of sweetness. she is just a sweet, sweet little girl. rascal. is a , heidi had those girls up in d.c. one weekend. a beautiful fall day. we decided to show the girls mount vernon. we are driving down the george washington parkway.

the trees are turning. they are red and orange and yellow. we are driving down and caroline is sitting behind me kicking the back of my seat like she always does. catherine is sitting on the other side. caroline asks her sister, catherine, what do you want to do when you grow up? catherine says, i want to work in the u.s. senate. i want to work with daddy. boring. says, that's we are going to be rock stars instead. zinger. tosses out the besides, daddy will be dead by then. [laughter] that's a real conversation. i'm sitting there like, hello, i'm right in front of you. de me wonderake me

if maybe caroline had been speaking with republican leadership. [laughter] >> you are the leadership >> "washington journal" continues! [applause] even more in portly, you are the leadership. there is nothing as scary in washington as what i'm going to face tonight. sext week, caroline turne six. when i get off the airplane, i'm going to a princess sleepover party. [laughter] last week, caroline told me, daddy, you are not invited

because you are not a girl. i said, sweetheart, if it is in my house, daddy is always invited. she proceeded to put her hands on her hips and say, fine, then we are going to play attack the daddy. in a few hours, i'm going to walk in my home to be greeted by 11 six-year-old girls dressed as disney princesses try to tackle me. let me ask for your prayers that i might see tomorrow morning. thrilled to be back here. to be back with so many friends new hampshire. i'm thrilled to encourage -- you all are here because there is a sense of urgency to what's happening in this country.

you all are here because you understand that this is not in or near retirement politics. archedeats we are facing her neck. ie most common thing hear is, ted, i'm scared. i'm scared for the direction of this country. i'm scared for my kids and grandkids. we're bankrupting the greatest country in the history of the world. profoundly optimistic. together, we will turn this nation around. [applause] let me tell you three things we need to do to turn this nation around. number one, we need to stand for liberty. [applause]

liberty has never been more under assault that it is right now. this administration has tried to go down the bill of rights and violate each one of them. irs that doesn't respect the first amendment. it is going after individual citizens saying, tell us what books you are reading. tell us the content of your prayers. federal government has no business asking any american is the content of our prayers. [applause] i do kind of wish the answer had been, forgive them, father, for they know not what they do. you look at the second amendment. -- you don't need a

punchline. [laughter] you just say his name. the next time you're at a party, ,alk up to someone and just say "joe biden" and close your mouth. they will crack up laughing. [laughter] said, "if anybody attacks your house, go outside with a double barrel shotgun and fire both into the air. ." that is very good advice. if it so happens you are being attacked by a flock of geese. [laughter] look at the fourth and fifth amendments. our right to privacy.

how many of you have your cell phones? please like to ask you, leave your cell phones on. i want to make sure president obama hears every word i have to say to them. [laughter] you look at the 10th amendment with the federal government trying to intrude into the prerogatives of the states all across the board. things like trying to set educational standards. we need to repeal common core. [applause] and then there's the pattern of lawlessness in this administration. ignoring law after law after law. if this president does not agree with the law, he refuses to enforce it. whether immigration laws or welfare laws or marriage laws or drug laws.

-- pleasebama care take obama care! [laughter] 30 times this president has simply unilaterally changed the law. no authority in the law for that. how many of you will remember sixth grade civics? your member schoolhouse rock how a bill becomes a law? apparently the president missed that tday. we have never had a president asserted the authority to ignore and unilaterally changed the law . this should trouble everybody. anybody who cares about rule of law and the constitution. when you have a president who can pick and choose which laws to follow and which laws to ignore, you no longer have a president. [applause]

to stand for liberty. number two, we need to stand for growth and opportunity. [applause] officeer one priority in from the day i was elected, bringing back jobs and economic growth. the reason is simple. that is the top priority of the xans i am proud to represent and the priority of americans all caps this country. you want to know why people are frustrated at washington? the biggest divide we have in this country is not between democrats and republicans. it is between entrenched politicians in both parties in washington and the american people. [applause]

all across this country, people are frustrated going, what is wrong with them? they get elected and go to washington and they stop listening to us. they stop listening. the top priority of the american people at his jobs and economic growth. in the year i have been in harry reid senate, we have not spent a minute talking about jobs and the number of. it is simply not a priority. aboute not talk fundamental tax reform. we should abolish the irs. [applause] for five years, we have been trapped in the great stagnation under president obama.

his policies are not working. the rich and powerful, those who walk the corridors of power are getting fat and happy. economic obama agenda. the top one percent the president loves to demagogue are in the higher share of our national income since 1920. nothing happened after 1928. [laughter] the people who have been hurt the most by the obama administration are the most vulnerable among us. young people come hispanics, african-americans, single moms. people who are struggling to climb the mer economic ladder. i think of all of the issues we face from the perspective of my dad. 57 years ago, my dad fled cuba. and torturedrison

and beaten almost to death in a cuban jail. he came to america at age 18, fling the batista regime. he could not speak in the spirit he had $100 so and was underwear . i don't advise caring money in your underwear. [laughter] dishes, job washing making $.50 an hour. he worked seven days a week and paid his way through school and went on to start a small business and to work towards the american dream. policies -- myhe father was still washing dishes today, the odds are very high he would've lost his job because of the 1.7 trillion dollars in new taxes from this administration. because of crushing regulations that are hammering small businesses. small businesses generate two thirds of new jobs in our

economy. it is kids like my dad were the ones bearing the brunt, getting hammered by the obama economic agenda. had been lucky enough to not lose his job, the odds are overwhelming he would've had his hours forcibly reduced to 28-29 hours a week. you cannot pay her bills or theater kids or pay your way through college on 20 hours week. the reason we should support is it is foundational to opportunity. the opportunity of everyone to achieve the american dream. [applause] i think every republican should have two words tattooed on their hands. growth and opportunity. i'm so inspired by you all, i might get an eagle tattooed on my chest. [laughter] [applause] exactly.

leads to my third and final point. how do we turn this country around? empower the people. [applause] i am powerfully optimistic and hopeful because of each of you. the answers are not going to come from washington. re is nothing new under the sun. we are we are right now is early like the late 1970's. you had jimmy carter in the white house and you had the same failed economic policy. out-of-control spending and taxes and regulation. producing the exact same misery and stagnation. you had the same reckless foreign policy and the same naïveté making the world a much more dangerous place. we sawoss this country, a grassroots movement of millions of men and women who

came together and became the reagan revolution. that did not come from washington. washington despised ronald reagan. it came from the american people. the reason i am optimistic it is, i am blessed to have the opportunity serving the senate to travel across the country. at the same thing is happening all over this country. -- men andwaking up women who have never been involved in politics are looking up saying, what is happening to this country? we're losing our freedom. we're losing the future for our kids and grandkids. let's get back. let's get back to the free market principle. let's get back to the constitutional liberties that this nation was built on. [applause] i'm spending my time, not focused on washington, not

trying to convince washington of anything because they are not listening. ist i'm trying to do instead help energize and mobilize the american people. all of you who said you had cell phones before, if you are willing to come together and join a grassroots army, i would ask each of you with your cell phones to text the word "growth" to the number 33733. 33733, text the word "growth." we will not turn the country we are able to energize and mobilize millions of americans to hold washington accountable. i don't know if your member the movie, the usual suspects. where they talk about the greatest trick the devil ever

played. to convince the world he did not exist. lie that the media tries to play is to convince us that the american people don't believe in the values this country was built on. it is simply not true. democrats, ifto you listen to the media, although i repeat myself -- [laughter] [applause] they will tell you there is no hope. they will tell you we cannot turn this around. they will tell you that you can't stop obama care. they will tell you that kathleen sibelius resigning is a result of obama care's success. true, i hope every

democrat will follow her path and resign as well. [applause] you want to see the power of the grassroots? last summer and last fall, millions of americans rose up and said they don't want the disaster. we don't want the suffering that is coming from obama care. , so many millions of americans say that we elevated the debate. where are we right now as a result of your efforts? at hispresident obama is lowest approval rating is ever been in six years in office. [applause] today, obama care is at its lowest approval rating it has ever been since the day it was signed into law. [applause]

you want to know where the country is? it is often a good barometer to look at the late-night comics. said, "so,jay leno president obama tol called me ad said, if you like your job, you can keep it." [laughter] [applause] a couple of weeks later, jay went back to the same theme. ,, holidays are coming up, thanksgiving -- the first thanksgiving, the pilgrims said to the indians, if you like your land, you can keep it." [laughter] [applause] let me tell you something. as a result of the men and women in this room and as the result

of millions of men and women standing up and saying obama care is a disaster, it is not working, it is hurting millions of americans, i am convinced we are going to repeal every single word of obama care. [applause] it will not come from washington. it will come from each of you. new hampshire is the live free or die state. still, and forever. [applause] texas, that is a sentiment we can relate to.

let me tell you something that my father has said many times. "i saw freedom taken away and cuba. i will die before he let it happen again in this country." [applause] that is why we are here. that is why you are here. to keep spreading the message of freedom to your friends and family and neighbors. , together,y to say let's come together and get back to the free market principle and get back to the constitutional liberty. get back to the incredible america offers.a ♪ i am humbled and thrilled to stand with each and every one of you as we work together to bring america and work together to restore that shining city on a hill that is the united states

of america. thank you and god bless you! [applause] >> it is mike crapo budge -- my great privilege to present to you the president of afghanistan. [applause] thank you. thank you. please, please. thank you very much. thank you. thanks a lot. please.

honor.for the great speaker, mr. vice president, members of congress, distinguished guests, the great people of the united states of honora, it is my distinct to speak on behalf of the afghan people in this august assembly. i think you and the people of this great country for your generosity and commitment to our people. you have supported us with your resources, with your leadership in the world community, and most importantly, with the precious

lives of your soldiers. [applause] find more highlights from 35 years of house for coverage on our facebook page. c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago. brought to you as a public service. on the next "washington journal," we look at the financial disclosure statements from candidates on how much money they are raising. the chairman of the federal election commission will discuss how his agency has been affected by the recent supreme court decision on campaign contributions. natural gas in relations between russia and europe. journal" is live every day as 7:00 a.m. eastern.

the american enterprise institute will hear from the former british defense secretary. they will focus on edward snowden. 8:00 p.m. eastern, we are hearing the fifth annual women in the world summit. stories of bombings and chemical attacks in syria and the conversation with hillary clinton. now, a forum on russia under president vladimir putin. the mccain institute hosted this 90 minute conference. i want to thank all of you for coming out on a rainy

evening, a chilly evening. we have a mission of advancing character driven leadership. we want to identify emerging leaders around the world who have strong commitment to character and values and can bring about change in their own societies. institute is a part

of arizona state university. can find us on the web at mccain institute.org. this is being broadcast on c-span. -- will be an opportunity to be interactive. i want to introduce our moderator for the debate. moderated the november 1 of a we held over one year ago. >> thank you. tonight.r joining us what a lively and timely topic we have tonight. who would have thought we would be really in the thick of such a brewing crisis?

,nder president vladimir putin russia has clamped down at home and has sought increasing influence abroad. president putin is now encircling eastern ukraine and to dos to to be poised the same as he did in crimea. no one knows exactly what his ultimate ambitions are. to wreck havoc on his neighbors? to create the glory days of the soviet era with a new russia? gas drivenn oil and economy. acknowledgewest

sanctions will also hurt world markets. mind thatso keep in the u.s. and its allies need russian cooperation on many key international issues and crises from the civil war in syria to nucleariran's ambitions. how do we manage this crisis? how do we deal with president putin? is his a rush on the wrong side of history? -- russia on the wrong side of history? -- or is he making history and is the time again to contain russia? my debaters tonight know so much about this topic. there are some of the foremost thinkers on russia and ukraine and eastern europe.

these will be the containers for the evening. those who feel, the engage we need to have a more engaging policy toward russia, thomas graham.

andrew weiss is the vice president of the carnegie endowment for international peace. clearly a lot of knowledge here on this stage tonight. each side will have a five minute presentation on their argument. each side will have a three-minute rebuttal. i will ask questions. then we will open it up to you. sowill keep to strict time that they have concise and cogent arguments. hopefully we will be able to get a very engaging and lively discussion and a lot of food for thought as we deal with this important crisis. david, you will

kick us off. >> thank you for holding this timely event and inviting me to be part of this panel. i was in kiev last week and had an opportunity to go down and see what is still an unbelievable and moving site, barricades and barriers still there, tenants still there, people still sleeping there overnight. also, the memorials to the people who tragically lost their lives, shot down by snipers. of what reminder to me those people were and are fighting for. aspirations to live in a free country, a democratic country, a ukraine that respects human rights and dignity, rule of law, , a westernorruption

orientation. essentially everything that vladimir putin is opposed to. he views all of those things as a threat to his own role and his interests. people say the best way we can respond is by helping ukraine. that is true. economically, military assistance. it is hard for ukraine to focus on fixing its own problems when part of its own country has already been annexed by russia. we have to a computer improved efforts with ar strong pushback. in the face of naked russian aggression, the west cannot sit by and engage in a business as