in the country. so whether he does it or not, i'm certainly no expert. i think the leadership of the congress is on the right path based on my conversations with them to focus on things that can be done and do them. a budget. that sounds like a really radical idea, but i think they will pass a budget. they will actually go to committee. they will talk about priorities. and they will go through the regular order way during the next year, which will be quite hopeful that we get back to a place where people can have different views and they sort those things out through the process where a budget is created and hopefully with less deficit going forward and the president can respond to that. and if he engages i think it will help his legacy, to be honest with you, but if he doesn't it sets the stage for a

2016 election which is going to be different elections which is you republicans are a party of no and we are for progress. you can't say that if you are just opposed to any action that the congress takes. i think it is a huge responsibility and a great opportunity for republicans to show what it looks like if conservative leadership gets back into washington. >> okay. you did it, you said 2016, so -- [laughter] as you know, i will have to turn in my white house correspondents' association card if i don't ask you this question. what do you think about 2016 and yourself? >> oh, me personally? >> yes. >> oh. 2016 is like any other year. >> kind of like any other year. >> so i'm thinking about running for president, and i will make up my mind in short order. not that far out into the future. i don't know the exact timeline. it is the same decision-making process that i always had which

is can i do it in a way -- do i have the skills to do it in a way that tries to lift people's spirits and not get sucked into the vortex. that sounds easy, easy to say, harder to do. do i have those skills? and i have to really do a lot of soul searching to really make that determination. and perhaps more important, can i do it where the sacrifice for my family is tolerable. every person that runs for office at any level, it is a big sacrifice because it is a pretty ugly business right now. i'm not saying oh, woe is me here and don't get me wrong, but there is a level at which i would never subjugate my family because that is my organizing principle. that is my life. i'm sorting that out. i don't know if i would be a good candidate or a bad one. i know, i kind of know how a republican can win, whether it is me or somebody else. and it has to be much more uplifting, much more positive,

much more willing to, you know, to be practical now in a washington world, lose the primary to win the general without violating your principles. not an easy a task, to be honest with you. >> a question that kind of reverberated through the last couple of republican nominating cycles are the things that you need to do to win a republican nomination contrary to what you need to do to win the general election. >> frankly, no one really knows that because it hasn't been tried recently, so. my personal opinion is mitt romney would be -- would have been and would be a great president right now. i honestly believe that. i think he is a problem solver. his life experience was designed to here is a problem, let's go fix it. put aside the idelogical differences. how do we go from point a to

point b to fix it. i can imagine lots of power point presentations and going from point a to point b and fixing things and that would be healthy right now because our government isn't working in a 21st century way. put aside democrat, republican ideological. it is just not woking at the level that you would expect and it is because we never transformed how government works for people. every one of your businesses is radically different than it was two years ago, much less five years ago. yet if you walk into the halls of government today in washington, it looks kind of like 1975. and it has got to -- we got to figure out a way to get to the point of beginning to fix this stuff. and so i think you have to take that risk. >> let me ask you one last question, and then i want to open it up to these good folks for questions.

but does your gut tell you that 2016 election regardless of whether you are involved or not, is it about the domestic situation in the u.s. or is it going to ultimately be more about u.s. role in world? >> six months ago i would have said it might be a continuation of the focus on domestic issues because they are big and they are challenging. but i think there is a growing awareness that we can't withdraw from the world, that there is an unraveling taking place and it impacts our -- not just our security interests but our economic interests as well. i will think foreign policy and maybe a reevaluation of what the role of the united states is in the world will become important and there are competing forces in both parties to deal with this. i would argue that an engaged america is better for america than a disengaged america. i would argue that a president

needs to speak few words but those words need to be -- they need to resonate. they need to be real. they need to be taken to the bank by friends and foe alike. i would argue that we need to rebuild our military and intelligence capabilities. not so much intelligence capabilities but persuade people that the intelligence capabilities we have keep us safe and they are important and they are not a violation of civil liberties but a means by which we can be free from the jihadist attacks that are happening and will happen at a greater pace if we continue to retrench. i would argue that free trade is important because people that trade together and become interdependent in a positive way economically are less likely to create friction diplomatically or militarily. there is a lot of discussion that needs to be had about what is the proper role for america, and i would argue that the

traditional role that democrats and republican presidents alike have had since world war ii which is an invigorated american leadership is the proper role for our country. and i think that probably could become a bigger issue. >> let me see who out there has a question they want to ask. right there and if you could wait for the microphone, that would be great. >> thank you, governor bush, for your thoughts. trend lines, governor bush, just to go back to the point you touched on, trend lines today seem to suggest a time of extraordinary opportunities across all vectors of human enterprise. headlines suggest one of conflict. i think as you point out american leadership is going to be pivotal to whether through cooperation we are able to capitalize on the trendlines or

whether we will give way or succumb to the headlines -- one of conflict. question or rather i would be interested in your thoughts on can american leadership rise to that occasion? >> absolutely we can. i mean we have done it time and time again. i think the key to this to make a -- you know, to get to a point where foreign policy where america's leadership in the world is accepted by a great majority of americans is that we are growing economically here first. i mean if you ask the former head of the joint chiefs of staff or the current one what the great threat for america is, they would say the budget deficit and the lack of economic opportunity for people. it is not that we are incapable of, you know, defending the sea lanes in southeast asia, which we have the capability of doing. we still have a, you know, military superiority that is

while under challenge, certainly second to none. so if we started to grow again economically where instead of having declines in median income, which we had the first time i think in american history where we had a recession where we have had a decline in median income, instead of having that we had rising median income where the middle class was more optimistic about their children's future and their future, i think there would be not just an acceptance but an embrace of a more active engaged american foreign policy and that would do the world a whole lot of good. because but for us, who? who? who has the capability of providing security and stability in places that are being disrupted by all sorts of changes, cultural, religious, technological. the world is being, you know, disrupted, some in good ways and

some in really bad ways and we are but for us there is no source of stability that allows that transformation to take place in a peaceful way. so my hope is that people are much more optimistic about our role in the world because their life is getting better and that sustains a foreign policy that is more naturally suited for the united states which is today, still, the only super power in the world. and if we act accordingly, i think we create a more prosperous world and a more secure world. >> right there. >> governor bush, you know, lately in the news some of the -- some from the democratic side have started to question the focus of the political capital after the 2008 election. in other words, where are the democrats focused their agenda right after this election. >> yes. >> and you brought up five areas

that i guess there were things like energy and regulation and immigration and tax and education. well, if political realities, political viscosity limited you to one or two, what would you focus on? >> well, i mean the two easiest things -- can we do it like so that you are successful and then you can create a climate where you could be more successful? can i change the question to do that? it doesn't work that way where you are just not going to -- you can't ignore these issues that -- all of which need to be fixed. but i would say the two big things that would be the quickest way to jump start investment in our own country that creates higher wage jobs rather than lower wage jobs over a sustained period of time is an energy policy that celebrates this incredible revolution that has taken place that is something that should be marching bands for rather than concern about, which is the energy renaissance in our own country.

and the innovation being applied each and every day to make it even more beneficial. getting out of the way of that and encouraging it to happen at a faster pace and immigration reform which is something that if we could give people confidence we could control our border and shift from a broken immigration system to one that allowed us to have first 250,000 or 300,000 first round draft picks. the other issues become easier to fix because we are growing and it is not based on, you know, trying to divvy up a smaller pie. those are the two things that are less politically, believe it or not, wouldn't appear that way if you read the news. but those are the less challenging issues that allow us to get in a place to deal with the bigger issues. in the interim there are possibilities of dealing with some issues on a smaller scale and i think that is what the republicans in congress will do.

my guess is that there will be efforts to reform corporate taxes, for example. and might deal with the worldwide income challenge and reversion absurdity. if we are going to have an inversion absurdity, ought to be the other way around. out to be that foreign companies are buying u.s. businesses to relocate here. we should be beneficiary of the absurdity rather than suffering from it. it could create the chance to bring back $2 trillion in cash. many companies in this room i'm sure have cash overseas where your shareholders would punish you. might be that four year life expectancy might go to three bassed on shortsided policies. if you could move to a strategy that allowed us to bring back some of that money at a fixed rate, perhaps you reduce the deficit and create an infrastructure fund that republicans and democrats would like and batch it with pension fund money and create half a

trillion dollars of infrastructure moneys that could build. now i'm just talking out loud here so this is blue sky stuff so whoever is going to tweet this or whatever, please caveat this. if you had $500 billion and created 50 projects of national importance of infrastructure, don't you think that would lift the spirits of america? where bottlenecks would be resolved. broadband could be brought to every school instead of taxing people on their cell phones, which is the proposal in front of the f.c.c. i believe right now. there are ways to solve problems in a bipartisan way and get to a point where the complexity of our tax code doesn't retard economic investment in our country. that should be done already. that should have been done, you know, three years ago.

my guess is if the president wants to engage, that is something that the republicans and he could agree on. >> i think we have time for one last question. right here. >> governor, maybe just a comment or two on the united states and china and how you see this playing out and what that relationship could evolve to. >> it could evolve to a really ugly place, particularly if we pull back kind of in a permanent fashion. the threat of that is there and we should be cognizant of it. it also could yield economic benefits if we are fully engaged across the board. i thought that hank paulson's efforts to create and i think the obama administration has continued this, to create constant dialogue by sector, private sector as well as government, secretary to

secretary kind of arrangements where the misunderstandings are lessened is hugely important. i traveled a lot to china. and my last trip was last year. i didn't go -- actually, i didn't go this year, i went last year. and every meeting i had on that trip, i believe it was, or maybe it was the second-to-last trip, it was right after the summit between the chinese president and president obama in palm springs which by reading the "wall street journal" -- which is my newspaper of record. >> didn't pay him to say that. >> looked like it was a pretty good summit and worked out good to me. i don't know. i mean generally there seemed to be good dialogue. every person that i met brought up the fact that mrs. obama wasn't at the summit. it made no news here because frankly, you know, i -- i was thinking, well, she is a mom.

her children are in the white house for crying out loud. it is pretty hard. maybe she had to do what we did for our kids in 7th or 8th grade, probably had to do the science project with them. there was normal motherly things that she had to do and that is the american way. the chinese viewed it as an insult to their very glamourous first lady. it is very, when you have such big cultural differences and if you have had experience in china you know this much better than me, you have to be completely immersed, completely engaged to eliminate the stupid things from creating problems because there is going to be big things that are going to create problems that they will disagree with our actions and we will disagree with them. and i think that ought to be the first effort is to have full comprehensive engagement. you can't ignore china as it

moves, you know, as it emerges as a world power. and then the the second thing i would say is that if you reach that point where there is a level of trust that is high, and i'm not an expert to know where we stand today in that regard, then we ought to encourage china to take a leadership role in helping solve global problems. that everything on their foreign policy can't be about simply their economic interests. that they need to play a constructive role in a lot of different ways that today they don't feel compelled to do. so, but i know for a fact retrenching will create misunderstandings that are going to create huge economic hardships for both sides and perhaps as china grows militarily and asserts itself in the region, you know, something far worse than that. >> governor bush, we are out of time. we have to honor our commitment to get you get back home. this conversation and the one

earlier helped set up the conversations tomorrow and appreciate very much your being here and we are grateful for you to helping us get launched this way. >> thanks for the invite. >> thank you. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> wednesday, i look at the obama administration's nuclear arms control efforts in the progress of the treaty with russia. the under of state for arms control and international security talks to the brookings institution live at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span. in november, the environmental projection agency -- protection agency announced a proposal to air-quality standards. environment and public

works subcommittee holds a hearing focusing on air-quality regulations on wednesday. that is live at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> this month is the 10th anniversary of our sunday primetime program q&a. we are featuring an encore presentation of one program for each year. kenneth feinberg's interview of the september 11 victim compensation fund. in two thousand six, the importance of the african-american assistant. 2011, robert novak. from 2008, the value of higher education in america. from 2009, conservative commentator. 10, a decade of compelling conversations. 7 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> brothers brad and dallas

woodhouse on opposite sides of the political spectrum. they talked about their documentary on "washington jou rnal." this is 45 minutes. urnal continues. a moment, we will introduce you to brad and dallas woodhouse. their new film, " woodhouse divided." ♪ [applause]

>> i always hope we are divided about it. i don't hope we ever agree on that. hope we are divided about it. i don't hope we ever agree on that. >> we will send him a message today. hands off my health care. hands off my health care. thank you. >> these lies, we're going to pass it. if the american will do not like it -- the momentum has moved toward the president in the past week. there and iss out going to lose. money offe a lot of of their misguided ideology. >> that is it, you're just making stuff up. >> lisa and i are having our own event because of obama'sailing agenda.

-- obama''s failing agenda -- o bama's failing agenda. ♪ host: woodhousedivided.com is the website. who introduced you to brad woodhouse and dallas woodhouse. what was this film all about? guest: it is interesting. when it started out, i did not know it would be a known. it was supposed to be a short, for youtube. then brian miller, who directed and shot the film and produced

and edited the film, saw a story there about, you know, our political divisions in america. and he did it really based around the health-care law and the fighting past the affordable care act, which my side one. but dallas was fighting in north carolina, so it had a political element to it, but also an element of, these are the types of divisions that you see in families. divisions in your state and counties in america. it was kind of a microcosm of the political battles he had seen in washington and around the country. host: what is carolina rising? guest: a nonprofit political group i started to sort of help the conservatives and republicans in north carolina who may come into power and sort of tell their story in north carolina. the film goes through a lot of the time that iran the north hairline a chapter of americans for prosperity. , it goes through a

lot of the time when i did that. i spent the early part of my career as a television reporter. in north carolina. -- moviemaker, brian milker ,yan miller -- brian miller when i went into the television news business, we became very good friends. we have children the same age. with him on some projects when i was at americans for prosperity and he came up with this idea. at first, he did not know what he was going to do with it. he ended up following me around the north airline it in washington and over the course of three years, as we fought the health-care issue, and what is interesting about the movie, it is about an hour and 10 minutes long, it is not really a story of just grabbed and dallas veryouse, who have

different clinical ideas. i make my living in north carolina fighting on the right side of the aisle. her brother makes his living in washington trying to destroy the country for the left side of the aisle. [laughter] so we are little different. but it is not really the story of our family. i would make the contention that it is the story of our family and the conversations they have around the thanksgiving tables, and the conversations they will have with their extended families and christmas and hanukkah coming up in the next couple of weeks. talking about the very real discussions family have about dividing politics in our nation. host: we have a clip of what it is like at thanksgiving in your house, but what was it like rowing up? growing up, we did not take political sides growing up. our parents -- guest: he was significantly

older than me. were: our parents interested in following the news and politics, but they do not force us what to believe. i was older than dallas and went to college, and we were not all that close when we were children. we actually got a lot closer when we got older and he moved in with me. he paid rent for a few years, and that is when we got closer. he left the news business and went into politics, my mouth hit the floor because i just had no idea that he was going to be a right wing republican wingnut. guest: i do not know about that. i am a product of the reagan resolution -- revolution. washington,e up to your brain gets poisoned, as we see constantly by people who, peer. guest: present company excepted, right? woodhouse, dallas

woodhouse. they are brothers. "woodhouse divided." let's see what your thanksgiving was like a few years ago. >> dallas, i see a lot of good pictures of you from your bus tour earlier this year. what smart asked comment are you going to make now? ass comment are you going to make now? >> after you lose, we win and we pass it and it gets in law, will you keep your job? >> shut up. 8-5, democrats. 8-5 against it. you cannot even keep your own stay together. 8-5.

♪ >> the woodhouse man yell at each other. men yell at each other. guest: it is funny, you see that clip, and brad was right that they were able to shove the health-care bill down the throats of the unwilling american people. how has that worked out for you? it has not worked very good for the country. i don't think so. >> we had the votes in congress, and we passed and the republicans run the senate now, run the house, and that is what our democratic process is. a bitgree with you quite on the success of the health-care law. on thiser people coming show and predicting that the health-care law would crash the economy. >> eu in the video said that the people would love it.

has that worked out? you believe the american people love it. guest: i believe the people who have gotten it -- guest: [inaudible] there are polls that show people have gotten it, people have signed up and they are receiving health care through the exchanges, they do love it and i will show you these polls. think of this there is a lightning -- on the building. someone is going to get struck. young ande pretty they have not been bitten by the bug. important thing to know is we do set the stuff aside. brad will be in raleigh in a few days for christmas. intol welcome his children my home and whether he comes or not is an open question. and: you come in near family members say, oh god, they

are here and add it again? guest: we have a very boisterous family. whether it is about politics or about some discussion of athletics or sports, we are going to have a boisterous conversation. fan ofis not a big having arguments about politics. it is not just us. my wife is the chief of staff to a republican member of congress. i -- they gang up on me when they have the opportunity. guest: at least i do not have to sleep with her. that is a good thing. but no, i think, what i hope people get out of the movie, and it is free, you can watch it , is that, look, i believe

in political division. i think it is good. we have had an election here recently. brad did not talk to me after that. it did not go his way. we smacked him around in north carolina. eat his candidate. beat is a good thing -- his candidate. which is a good thing. we fund the government, getting something done in this lame duck session i expect needs to get done. other things, we disagree on. we need -- we need political division. that is ok. >> you are right. you did not agree with the president. we can disagree without being disagreeable. having the economy humming, how i -- having unemployment below -- host: how did that work out?

host: i am also concerned --guest: i am also concerned the country out of recession, got a below 6% which your party left out of control, is below 3% of gdp, 11% when bush was in office, look. we can argue about why the midterms turned out the way they did. the republicans ran on nothing. guest: what did democrats run on? what did your candidates run on? what did your candidates run on, brad? ran on hatred of the president. you saw this. a press conference in kentucky. "you're the majority, what are you going to do?"

" we are going to restore regular order." that was his agenda. not say anything about jobs or health care, fixing it, doing something different. he said we're going to restore regular order. you are in not say anything abot jobs or health care, fixing chal hill and your party will have to have an agenda. host: brad woodhouse and dallas woodhouse. yes, they are brothers, and they are polar opposites. we will get to your calls. joining us from new jersey, good morning. caller: good morning. gentlemen, you need to stop what dallas,oing and you, you represent a part of the republicanhost: party, a frencht is so loud mouth, that what you -- people who make sense. right now, what you have to do to get to the people, they start

they have awakened the -- ed host: do you want to respond? guest: look, i was on the forefront of the tea party movement. the modern-day republican party, i think it is a movement out of love, love for country. it really started overspending and health care. we have fought about since the beginning of our republic. much. isis something our -- it something we will fight over, so long after brad and i are ashes to ashes, dust to dust. guest: is something we will fight over, tt protesting when president bush

was expanding medicare. guest: a lot of people process and over that. guest: when he spent trillions of dollars on a war in iraq he started under false the tenses -- look. guest: [indiscernible] the tea party was a creation of the insurance company, [indiscernible] guest: timeout. timeout. guest: that is crazy. why do you insult -- guest: i am not insulting him. is, theirsaying history is not spontaneous. spontaneously, when people start casey showed up in raleigh, to get on bus and go to washington dc. he set up invitations and paid

people. .ll types of people i am not saying they did not believe what they are protesting, but suggested some popular uprising that had nothing to do with what the -- it depends on the question. u.s. to go to sign up and they overwhelmingly supported it. we're just going to get people to sign up and be more more popular. that is the attitude of the obama administration and democrats and we have seen how that works output it. host: let's go to joy in north carolina. you are right, i am from down south, and i'm your mother. i disagree that all families are like ours. i don't know many families that are fighting at thanksgiving.

glad that this thanksgiving was the year you two were supposed to go to your in-laws, and i am hoping you will have some of this out of your system when you come here for christmas. i would really like a peaceful christmas. i love you both. this was not planned. she called in on a normal line. but did -- but since you did call him, what was it like to raise the two voice? boys?: -- easy.: it has not been and i love politics. their dad and i both love politics and we follow the entire country. i know that we have to take responsibility for them.

they're both very passionate about what they believe in, and i love that about them. but i hope they get this out of this is in today on the program. host: are you a democrat or republican? i am a registered democrat, many years ago. but i have at times but my ticket. i am concerned for the party that will expand medicaid. i have an autistic grandson who sol expand health care, those are, i guess i am more of a one issue person right now my life. i have such concern for my autistic grandson. host: we are glad to hear from

you. james from fort worth, texas. democrats line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. good morning, c-span. dallas, hope you let me speak without rudely interrupting like you do with your brother. the republican party spent the last 40 years converting the american middle-class income into executive compensation and investor payouts. currently exists with two factions. in stateather was politics for a long time and i grew up and attended the 1951 republican national convention. i pay attention to it. , theere is the thing republican party currently is composed of wall street sorry, butand i am the tea party is a reaction to white backlash reaction to the election of our first black resident. it started with him with signs

with bones in his nose. guest: i think those comments are undignified and what i will the biggest negative gottion the president has is on the health-care law and so has the president. host: the house divided on the affordable care act? >> dallas, i see a lot of good pictures of you from your bus tour earlier this year. comment aret ass you going to make now? all, after you lose, we win and we pass it and it gets signed into law, do you get to keep your job? we should point out that was the same clip we just pointed out moments ago.

let's go to greensburg, north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for the opportunity. i do not know any republicans so this will give me a good opportunity. i have always wanted to ask, what is it in a prison's mind or in their heart that makes them begrudge another human being having access to health care? don't think anybody begrudge is somebody having access to health care. what i will say is there are medicaidhat people on do not ask -- necessarily access health care. in some cases, they access are and what i would say, we have taken a situation here with the health-care law and in a lot of cases, the vast majority of people were happy with what they had and we made their situation worse.

i got a get in here. all questions to from callers have been to you. that is factually not true. absolutely, we're getting the savings. medicare inflation has gone down. the premiums for most americans have gone down. seniors have access -- guest: keep their plans? guest: yes. guest: oh come on. guest: one of the biggest lies was always cancellations, some people lost people loss plans, but they got better plan. host: let me jump in.

we'll come back to this. here's more from the film. [video clip] >> we are here to represent you represent yourself -- every member of the united states of the senate this bill we want killed. when i stand up in front of a big crowd, it is exciting. you have a lot of people to you -- you can star for a rock minute. thank you for coming today. we're going to send a message today -- hands off my health care. >> he's a rabble-rouser. he inflames people's passions. he's just on the wrong side of the issue. those tea partiers

really got all those people -- they talking about? -- that is harry reid right? "woodhouse the film divided." guest: what you thought was pure unadulterated politics. the republican governor of massachusetts passed a healthcare law almost identical to what the president passed. there were republicans in the that and the senate

other healthcare laws, then, a democrat got elected and proposed health care law. he said let's take the health exists ce system as it in the build on it, expanded, but keep it in the private market. and republicans -- they can lead a democratic president went on an issue. guest: i will stand with my brother buddy, a senator who says that the democrats made a big mistake. to another go carolina.om north caller: let's talk about carolina rising.

they did away with the earned income tax credit. the only people in north carolina rising are the wealthy. guest: thank you to the caller:. caller on correct the a couple of facts. over the past couple of years, number of tax a reform. to pay everyone's taxes them. we started four years ago when tax for anybody who goes and buys anything, we the sales tax. we cut the iincome tax for everybody. the reality is, you cannot cut taxes for people who do not pay them. nature of -- then, we

did a major tax reform. people for years have talked tax reform -- it was hilarious to me in the last election that we had were kay to talk d the nerve reform, her opponent had passed one of the tax or form.e of a lower the tax rate for everybody. guest: he did. he provided a huge tax windfall to the wealthiest in north carolina. went after medicaid -- very similar to what republicans -- guest: that's a lie. guest: let me say this -- bunch of issues in an election in north carolina for

be the laws that won't same when governor mccoury is up. the governor is one of the least popular governors. guest: he is in fine shape. truth of this -- one second -- is so ax reform the rate , you lower -- north carolina republicans, did it ng the governor anyway. it was a tough road, and it will be rewarded for. host: will you ever run for political office?

guest: i don't believe so. if you does, i will run his campaign. chance.not a host: republican line. are you with us? on to vermont. on ler: i want to comment dallas's attitude, it seems typical of republicans. brad was saying, tthat the republicans will not vote for their own ideas because they do not want democrats taking credit for it. guest: brad has appointed some of the health care law had looked at -- the individual mandate.

you think the entire republican party has to accept it? i don't think so. you made him the nominee passed the nt, he bill. guest: yyou have to remember the president did not even run on his own bill. guest: when you get to washington, you have been congress to deal with. guest: are you saying the president is only for an individual mandate? guest: i'm not saying -- you are only against the health care bill because the democrats propose that. that bill, at the time, you were against it because the

democrats propose that. that bill could've been introduced by republicans. the truth is, republicans do not want to reform healthcare, they want to take it back to where it was when insurance companies called all the shots. not against the health care bill, i'm free market. i'm not a republican, maybe i am e voted republican, but i free market. film is called "woodhouse divided." good morning. guest: good morning. qualify my e to i have n, i am a vegan,

veterans benefits. you come from, and the southern states, lead the all the negatives in healthcare, finance, and others. is very easy, it appeals to a majority white crowd which is going extinct. guest: i am certainly not antigovernment. thank you for your service. we commend, especially this holiday season, all the members of the military who have given so much for us. it is a shame that the present united states has not stood up law and order.

guest: that is one of the most irresponsible comments i've ever make -- to say this president has not stood up for law enforcement or for troops. guest: i said -- guest: what you're saying is completely undignified. guest: has he stood up and said that people should be responsible? bbut anyways, the caller -- guest: you want to talk about party protests -- gunshots get me - don't even started. guest: i just want to say, the am not to the caller i antigovernment. a strong have military.

making people pay for people to show up at the emergency room is also not the way to do it, dallas. your putting the gun to taxpayers had either way. is so is the free market good then how come the healthcare industry is going to make people? guest: we did not have a free market system. you were not able to buy healthcare across state lines. we were not able to have true health care savings accounts. we could have had a more free market system, and i continue to support that. host: let's go to the next caller: from georgia. in northern ive georgia, 6 miles from

from north 12 miles carolina. to my three children were born in north carolina. guest: you're in god's country out there? caller: yes. i've lived in north carolina. what i wanted to say, the in son republicans whine this area is because of fox news. no one has said that. news has evidently use subliminal advertising. so ave friends that are

brainwashed, tthey used to be intelligent people. but, the reason people vote fox blican is because of foxnews says that the democrats will take away their guns. people in this area want to go out and hunt. in st: in our senate race north carolina -- and i think states bates in other were undignified -- but, in a rth carolina, we had substantive debate on education funding, other issues. a serious debate. good for state.

host: this tweet, poor brad, he to t really love his brother keep from reaching across the table and slapping him. guest: i would not do that. do love dallas dearly. host: but this is how you interact when you talk politics? guest: yes. host: let's go back to the film. available online at woodhousedivided.com. [video clip] has ou know the momentum moved forward in the past week. people see this leadership on display.

>> i've always tried to take an interest in his personal career. somebody out there will do what he does, so he might as well do it and make a lot of money off of it. is, the democrats have been very good to him. host: from the film, we will go to dallas woodhouse. of my brother.oud the easter o to bunny role at the white house. he gets to have cocktails with joe biden. he's been on air force one. i am proud of him. i disagree with his ideology, but he's done it great deal. there's a picture of him with president obama and my mother's house. was in one person obama

raleigh, president obama commented on how good my brother was in the dnc. whatever your ideology, that means a lot to your family. and you know, i disagree with president's politics -- i think he's a good man, but i disagree with his politics. of the hope you get out can disagree you vehemently, and we do, but then we get together and go out and play football with the kids. we have a lot of conversations on one phone, we hang up another, but that we pick it up and call again. about these to talk things. that is up -- one thing about is -- we had extended family that say do not talk about this, do not about that -- but why?

guest: i do not know what we would talk about if we didn't talk about -- and look, the whole family to some extent or the ked in politics government. our parents started out in in the tic politics back late 1950's. had their wedding reception in the governor's mansion in north carolina. it's to say, it is in our blood. think it reflects what some other families go through, but it is an extreme case. melissa from o to raleigh, north carolina. caller: maybe i should confess that i worked in the same retired as fore i dallas.

guest: melissa, how are you? caller: i watched when she did. he's getting a bad rap here. he never paid anyone to go to washington. i was one of those people that read that health care bill, and was s really sad about what in it. i said at the time to dallas, nobody who voted for that would understand it. that e do not understand it is -- in the first 30 pages it says that according to this blog, and this regulation -- there is not one democrat who voted for it that understood what they were reading. guest: i do not believe that is true.

i think that principles of healthcare reform are fairly simple. we went to get rid of discrimination on pre-existing conditions. we expanded the ability for people to get health insurance by eliminating gender discrimination. i do not think it is a complicated. no matter what politics are -- a divided country -- if anything the president does gets above 50%, i would be surprised. the health care law is working. there is not any dispute, it is down cost -- we had 10 million more people to have health insurance now. what do you want? dallas is right about one a radical -- a

radical conservative, radical republican. the traditional republican view so be it. you can live on the street. guest: i have never said that. guest: every insurance policy in the world, in this country, is regulated. they regulate auto insurance. should be regulated in a way that lowers cost? my god, what a horrible thing. host: at what point do the work of brian miller become a film? guest: i'm not sure. they may have decided from the a little , i was blindsided.

people were attending strategy meetings, and making web videos. dallas was leaving these boisterous rallies on capitol hill? just kept coming. i thought, my god, again? then finally i realized, this is not going to be a 10 minute for you to, it will be a documentary. i want to say about brian, he he t the entire thing, edited it, he asked the questions. i think there are very few things of this quality that have been done by one person. none of it eally to it's important understand, we never set out to make a movie. this is what we did.

me, raising my kids. meaning, having to deal with brother at thanksgiving. and the camera picked it up. host: i would ask you to reverse roles and be very serious. what advice would you give the democrats moving ahead in the next congress? guest: obviously i would change some phases. it is hard for me to believe keep some faces like harry reid, nancy pelosi the same. way to ed to find a present some credible ideas on work conomy that they can with the republicans on. have to the republicans show, and present some things that they can send to the

president. -- my side is very as large of anything -- comprehensive immigration, reform, nsive tax anything comprehensive. it depends on several things to happen, and we do not believe that the government can do big things. you have to send one bill at a time, one part at a time. that's what the republicans do, and the democrats should join them. host: let's go to our last call. caller: good morning. i just have a couple comments. brad has been tight mahogany obama care is, and how is working so well. why has so great, obama delayed the mandate for the last couple of years? just do it.you

my second comment is, remember nancy pelosi's comment, we have in order to bill know what is in the bill. say this -- the present and hhs has the authority to implement the law. look, you saw last year, there was some real problems with the website. they fixed those. this is what dallas would tell you, it is a big law. the implementation has been good, the mandate will come in. i think the law will continue to strengthen. you can look, people are -- burning up the phone lines to enroll. i would give ice

to republicans is satisfied their hatred for the president. they get 70% of the vote, they are drawn to the very extremely , conservative -- this hatred for the present is what the leaders and of having to deal with. this with u will see mcconnell, finding some accommodation where they can with the president, then they get pulled back by the caucus. grow a pair, and of being pulled by your caucus by these elements that are completely to your president. the president has repeatedly -- was trying to make a big dealing with debt, walked away from

because there were so many people in the caucus that have sheer hatred for the present. they say, you cannot compromise with the president. you cannot govern that way. host: final question for you, of your did you get out system? guest: you can never get this of your system. i hope people watch the film. it's a great film to watch in the holiday season. guest: we will have these discussions around the dinner table. guest: we will have these questions in the rest home while we are looking for tea, nurse, help me.

>> on the next "washington journal" randy weingarten continues push for early childhood education. then matt lewis talks about jeb s announcement that he is actively exploring a 2016 bid. ther that, david ahrens of national brain tumor society looks at the prevalence of brain tumors and brain cancer in the u.s.. plus your phone calls, facebook, it's and tweets. live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> next, former senators box kerry and john downforce discuss congress, the federal budget and the 2016 general election.

later, an interview with jeb bush of florida who will announce he is exploring a presidential run. >> in november, the environmental protection agency announced a proposal to strengthen air quality standards for ground-level ozone. wednesday, a senate environment and public works subcommittee holds a hearing. to: 30 p.m. live it eastern here on c-span. week, katie pavlovich on what she perceives is the hypocrisy of liberals on their is on women rhetoric >> what your problem with ted kennedy? go back to this idea where this book came from, the dnc convention when they were showing this tribute video because he had passed away and portraying him as a women's rights champion when he left a

young woman to drown in his car. had not gone back for nine hours and tried to save his him behind, she would have operably survived. and you can do an entire video at a convention claiming to preaching and fighting the war on women and glorify someone like that while not including that part of his life in a video about his women's rights record. >> to mark 10 years of q and a, we are airing one program from each year starting december 22 at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> tuesday, bob kerry and john danforth discuss congress, the federal budget, and the 2016 presidential elections. 20 years ago, both senators were members of a bipartisan commission examining entitlements and tax reform. this event is an hour and 10

minutes. >> good afternoon, everyone. you to see so many of coming out in this weather to get here. i appreciate it very much. i am bill hoagland here with the bipartisan policy center. it is my pleasure and honor to kick off this discussion this afternoon. the bipartisan policy center was established by four former senate majority leaders in 2007. senator bob dole, george mitchell, don cashel -- tom daschle and the late pat baker. during their times in congress, they worked tirelessly to find solutions to the challenges that confronted the country. they did this through what we call or what i think of as reasoned negotiations and

respectable dialogue. if you like the raison d'etre for this organization that they established. yes, to look back on the 20th anniversary of the bipartisan commission on entitlement and tax reform, but more importantly, to look forward and how these issues can face the upcoming 2016 presidential elections and the new congress coming in. we are joined this afternoon by two very distinguished public service, senator kerry and senator jack danforth. both worked with those senate majority leaders who founded this place. establishedinton the bipartisan commission on entitlement and tax reform by an executive order in november

1993. chairman gurion vice-chairman on the herculean task of carrying out the executive order and they were joined by 10 other united states senators, two who are still .erving the current majority leader, harry reid, and cap congressman -- thad cochran. the last one who is just retiring from the house, john dingell, and 12 members of the public. , who may joinci us later, was on that commission . but in the end, the commission could not reach consensus. instead, its final report was a compilation of competing proposals. but the two caret -- the two cochairman advance their brave proposal as it related to social

security, raising the retirement age to 70, a cut in the social security payroll tax with the money redirected into mandatory private accounts and adopting price indexing among other changes. although the group was not able to agree to any policy recommendations, the commission found budgeteers to be a milestone in forming policy for the future of the nations policy. itan also make the argument is even more difficult today than it was 20 years ago. i will now turn this over to my friend and fellow colleague bob inby who i have labored with these vineyards for many years. he served here at the bipartisan policy center on the debt

reduction task force that i can say did reach consensus in 2010 but none of them were elected officials at that time. and bob is currently the executive director of the concorde coalition where he has been since its founding in 1992. and again i would like to point out by bipartisan duo of the late former senator paul sangha of massachusetts and late former senator warren rudman. so bob, i turn it over to you. >> thank you, bill. pleasure to be here at the bipartisan policy center. thank you to the bpc for hosting us today. bill noted, 20 years ago, two respected united states senators were appointed by president bill

clinton to chair a bipartisan commission on entitlements and tax. during the course of their deliberations, they produced a currenthat declared budget policy were unsustainable, current trends were unsustainable. they also found key trends about the nature of the problem many issues that policymakers need to address in order to find solutions. it really was a remarkable report in two respects. 1, 30 of the 32 members of the commission agreed on the seven findings. defining the problem. defined thegs had nature of the problem in the intervening years since the second remarkable thing is that all of those findings unfortunately are still valid. when i was looking through them earlier this year, i felt, boy, you could release these today

and they would still be valid. that i couldidea ask bob kerrey and jack danforth if they would like to do that because, after five presidential elections, 10 congressional elections, and at least four commissions,san though same fiscal policies are still unsustainable for the same reasons that the kerry-danforth commission had established. so as we head into another election, we thought it would be a good idea to look at the seven findings again to help explain why current policy is still unsustainable, why it matters for the nation's future and why it is an important issue for the 2016 presidential candidates to take up.

-- i won't goings into them in great detail. you have the report and i will skip over the slides so we have more time with the senators. basically, they address the need to close the gap between government savings, between government spending and revenues. that is kind of elementary. but they also talk about the need to improve savings and help grow the economy. they talk about the need to help rising health care costs. they talk about the need to address the demographic trends in this country. and they recommended that we adopted the social security and medicare call to action to make the revenues and the spendings in those two key programs come more into line so that they are sustainable for the long-term. note that, with the deficit coming down right now, and it is coming down, it is easy for people to forget

that a lowering deficit still leaves you with a whopping debt. for the public, the media, candidates to lose track of the fact that we still have a problem that needs to be addressed and i hope we can talk a little bit about that in the q&a. to yield, i am going the floor, as they say in the senate, two are distinct guest speakers, bob kerrey and jack who together served more than 30 years in the united states senate and served as governor for bob kerrey and attorney for jack danforth in their home states . >> great. it is great to be with jack again. brief, i wasely

senator for 13 years. the first and most important question for the mecca people to ask and have answered is do we have a problem? if you don't think there is a problem, particularly the candidates, and especially the press needs to ask the candidates is there a problem? if there isn't a problem, why propose anything? i think we do have a big problem and it's a demographic problem. a few can't blame it on anybody. it's demographics. it would have been able -- it would have been easier to solve it in the mid-1990's when the demographic problem began to become a reality. , baby boomers day are moving into the ranks of eligibility.

and they are entitled to these benefits that are specified. in the longer you wait, the more difficult it is to solve the problem. again, it is not a problem that was created by lessor right here and it is a problem that we sickly promised more than the current law is able to keep. if you don't do it in the day at some point, it's going to get worse. at some point, you have to cut benefits or raise taxes higher than relatively modest adjustments. even relatively minor dustman's can be difficult. relatively minor adjustments can be difficult. anybody that proposes a solution to the problem is going to be criticized for that solution. alan simpson and i introduced legislation in 1995.

goes on to talk to people who are 75 years old. you have to wait until your 70 to retire, what do you think of that? it's not retirement age and younger. it is eligibility for normal benefits. the point that i am making is to be as much easier cosponsor of the do-nothing plan. you can have a liberal solution or a conservative solution. but it's not like finding a cure for cancer. there are only 30 or 40 things you can do. there are not many selections you can make. the public in the press began to say to senator windbag, why are you sponsoring the do-nothing plan?

why are you sponsoring something that will produce a tremendous cut in benefits for people that are under the age of 30? and i can tell you why. because i am 71 now. votes 70% of his row. 20% of them though. why should i do something that is going to help them? i'll just make a speech and say that i care about my kids and grandkids. the biggest problem that we have going in to the 2016 cycle is the one that we had in 19941995. far too many members of congress, for too many candidates get left off the hook because it's easy to sponsor the do-nothing plan as a consequence of getting very few questions of why are you proposing something that is going to make it even worse for the people you say you care about the most. i'm done. [laughter]

years since our report. we just had sandwiches downstairs and a bunch of us, we had a spirited discussion on the following point. is it fair to say that nothing has been done on the budget in 20 years? those who said, well, it's not literally true because there are some little things. my position is nothing has been done. >> nothing has been done. [laughter] bipartisan politics that i want to highlight. we negotiated that. [laughter] the anniversary of simpson bowles, this month.

and nothing has been done. , as bob said,ize that there have been six or seven other commission reports since ours. and nothing has been done. i think that the lesson of this is that commission reports, no matter how good they are, aren't very efficacious. they don't really do very much. and you can have the most persuasive case. i can remember after our report came out, we had these beautiful charts, just unbelievable graphs demonstrating where we are heading on social security, medicare, total spitting -- total spending, so on. -- iember presenting thought i did a good job of presenting the case -- to a

group of people, older people mainly, and they just viewed it with total disbelief. they did not want to believe it. i think that is fair to say that neither politicians nor voters want to accept that something has to be done that's serious with regard to the entitlements and in some way we've got to increase revenue. the 2012n-up to presidential election, there was the famous debate in iowa. aspirantsidential were asked the question would timescept a deal with 10 real spending cuts, $10 of real

spending cuts for every dollar of tax increase? and if you would not accept that, would you raise your hand? all eight raised their right hands. they would not except such a deal. that is another way of saying take the pledge. if you elect to be president, i will not do anything to deal with the problem of the debt. you cannot together a program to deal with the debt. arrangement is off the table, there was a piece recently in the politico. politically the simpson bowles recommendations have been used against people who supported them. what they do is they take some

pieces of the recommendations. a run commercials. instead of dealing with the whole problem of what to do about the debt as a totality, clever politicians will take some little piece. opponent is in favor of increasingly the retirement age or reducing mortgage interest reduction. you could say that in about 10 seconds in a commercial. it is politically devastating to do that. what the public wants to believe is that you don't have to deal with the hard problems. you don't have deal with medicare or security. we could cut waste in the budget. are notiting programs

particularly inefficient. there's no inefficiency in writing a check. what they point to and what they hope is the case, the average citizen like the people i spoke is there is a bunch of wasteful things. cut back. eliminate them. they heard stories. they tell these stories. they hear about something that is ridiculous. some program about why frogs have warts. cut that. they believe that is going to take care of the problem. but the fact is 10 years from now entitlements plus interest

on the debt will consume 91% of the federal revenue. 15 years from now 100% of federal revenue. what does that mean? if the government were totally efficient, if there isn't one penny of waste, there is not enough in those discretionary programs. to pay for the rest of government. it cannot be done. the wasteful spending argument doesn't hold water. is if you don't want to touch the entitlement programs, there is a squeeze put on anything that pertains to investment. research. infrastructure.

education. anything that would produce future growth gets squeezed in order to pay money to elderly people. i think what we need is a of theess pursuit question of what to do about the national debt a connection with the next presidential election. candidates on the spot and keeping them on the spot. asking them questions. follow-up questions. more follow-up questions. attend -- intend to do. what is their answer? to educate ourselves.

and talking to the media. basic facts of this. what is a reasonable answer? what isn't? keep the candidates on that point. organize forums. on that specific issue. what to do about the debt? entitlements? keep them on it. it is sad. challengers only say this in election time. challengers love debates. love political debate. do political debate mean? is you ask thete position ons your

say social security? you have two and a half minutes. a minute and a half rebuttal. that is the typical debate. you could ask. they will talk for two and a half minutes. issuey will get over the of waste. don't do anything. it is a frogs and warts deal we have to address. any politician could talk around any subject for two and a half minutes. anybody. debates, talk about you know what lincoln douglas was? lincoln douglas was a series of seven debates. each lasted three hours.

on a single subject. but to do about the extension of slavery. that was the subject. 21 hours these two candidates debated this one issue. happen think that will on the issue of entitlements. to.thing like it has otherwise the next election will been.t every election has frivolous. i want to get a question. with didn't introduce you at the beginning.

she has the campaign to fix the debt. a. will be hearing from may you mentioned that debate in iowa. they would reject a 10-1 deal. thehave some advice for regarding candidate? >> i think it will rest with the press. are at least as good as republicans on skating on this. forecasting the moment this would get ugly is now. 2014. looks different in the next 10-15 years. if you win, you will cement a

budget in 2017. over 90% without taking changes in mandatory programs. the thingsfund all you want to find? keep our nation strong. fund it at a fair level. infrastructure and education. it.press says, you can't do we're talking if this person becomes president in 2017. cap got -- they have got to have a budget. wins areies whoever saying, we have midterms. we don't want something

controversial. those of us over 60 50. we don't have to be told. we know how important it is. we vote accordingly. we will respond to fear mongering. we will be forging in the alley for food. are insufficiently peach got a to do the right -- insufficiently patriotic to do the right thing. i don't think democrats are less capable of dodging the press. i emphasize this will be a critical time. it could get ugly. you don't want the american people surprised. they were able to dodge it through the presidential campaign. you are able to

get a bipartisan commission as diverse? was it difficult? had people who voted. created byion was the president. i asked if you would be willing to cochair with me. the staff was hired by both of us. it made it a lot easier to get an agreement. start off with no party involvement. they suggested to come out with an interim report. it would be difficult to get a consensus. identify the problem. we did.

there was some pretty significant changes. it is so true. i could imagine a debate. what do do about social security? hell no. i won't go. i will not go. i talked about the greatest generation. give me a standing ovation. i hope that doesn't happen. the american people will get shocked when they find out what has to occur. it was unsustainable. was thenterim report factual background. the charts.

here is where we are. here is the rate of spending. that wasn't really controversial. what was controversial is where do we go from here? there were 32 members of the commission. we agreed on recommendations. we go for five people to go along. nobody else. people to to get focus on what we are to do about this. >> they do focus on it. ,iven this set of circumstances the recession had a negative impact on 401(k)s. i dish no income beyond social security.

-- additional income beyond social security. both parties acknowledge that. you get something comparable. .e have to fix something we do it separately. they will a sickly demagogue it -- basically demagogue it. targeted. fearmonger. bad things will happen. sometimes we forget good things would happen. could you address that? what would be the benefit? >> i feel like i should be quoting immanuel kant. [laughter] think it would be easy to face either primaries.

growogether a proposal to the economy. security.etirement true.ack said is the republicans allowed a list of things they say their base won't allow. stimulate a way to the economy. increase security. .> i know go, could i ask a question? >> sure. think there will be more bipartisanship in the next congress? will it get worse? idea.aven't the foggiest

i didn't know it would rain today. [laughter] i don't know. hope springs eternal. i hope there is more. it is the only way. take the health care debate. health care is controversial and personal. it is easy to say bill hogan wants to get rid of your medicare and demagogue the issue. on a subject like this, it has to begin with both together. it is impossible. hope they will do it. best regards. merry christmas. happy new year. you are great. [laughter] >> thank you both. questions.ns -- two

how do you present this? other than the sky is falling? should the country get stronger? or weaker? it is getting weaker. weakness.s more dollars in the future of servicing the debt is nothing. you get nothing from that. that is weakness. what is making the country investing in those things that lead to growth. what are those things? research. infrastructure. education. .hat is what leads to growth

are we going to do more? or are we going to get weaker? that is the way to present it. , whether there is there was in the paper on how there's no overlap in the two political parties anymore. there used to be. the most liberal republican is more conservative than the most conservative democrat both the house and the senate. shows. what the analysis that is a difficult situation. .he polarization the republican party has been pulled to the right and the democrat party's been pulled to

the left. why is that? politicians want to get reelected for elected. the way to get elected is to listen carefully to the constituents. primary.ely to vote in tell them what they want to hear. nothing unusual about that. the customer are the activists. they show up at town hall meetings. they show up to meetings. they vote in elections. that is the base. that is what politicians are hearing. is there an alternative voice? where is the rest?

peoplere the voices of who say we should have a future? i think that is the big question. of spiritednch people who want to get something going. aya, thank you for being patient and waiting. we wanted to get as much time as we could. what do you think? [laughter] >> ok. first, read the report. -- it was viewers something that changed my life. i read it at the time i was starting to wake up to the budget deficit and didn't know

if it was that big of a problem. it caused me to change my career. the more you realize this is a serious and profound problem. i remember those charts. they were excellent. it is hard to go through the basic data and not come away realizing we have a problem. what i think is stunning is 20 years later we still have the exact same problems except with the demographic nature of them. read the report. read the report. real work has been done. the last thing to read is a congressional budget report. the layout the trajectory is unsustainable. no question.

the deficit has come down so much. all the focus is on the short term improvement. that has been the result of not smart policies focusing on cap's. hasn't improved is the fact that our debt levels are twice the historical average. is twice as we were when went through the crisis. upis projected to go starting again in an unsustainable way forever. the situation is bleak. political situation is bleak. look at what we have done.

that only do put in place a comprehensive plan, but make it worse. we snuck in as much as $30 billion. we're talking about extending the expired tax breaks. 42 billion dollars. we have been laying on more debt. barely any notice of it. i remain discouraged. these issues are tough. , youople talk honestly need courage. leadership. bipartisanship. do this together. i don't think we are going to see real efforts. if we are not going to fix the debt, could we not make it worse? a real commitment to not adding

more. i think this is what we have been talking around. the next president is going to .ave to make this their issue the national campaign -- focus on the agenda. tackle fiscal issues responsibly. i couldn't agree more. that means the media not letting up. focus on the issue. acknowledge the problem. put out a plan. only works if everyone agrees. if you have one politician that and runs up against someone who says we will grow our way out, it is tempting to believe that easy storyline. only people who educate the country. educate them media.

deeper candidates a discussion. real choices will have to be made. one of the most important things people do is the budget. i think it is important we prepare. offer a budget that achieves real improvements. i wish you talking about how to balance the budget. i feel that is out of reach. one thing -- we shouldn't let our debt grow faster than our economy. it is impossible to be thriving if your debt is growing faster. .r interest payments ask with upside is. cbo has run calculations and models.

it is a comprehensive debt deal in place, that is one of the surest cases to growth. that is how you would grow the economy. all of that is incredibly important. it doesn't work if keep by -- borrowing. borrowing.require the drumbeat has kept up. a presidential campaign were people demand answers. bill and an go to audience. so much has been said. nothing has happened. happen.things did

think we did put into place a balanced budget that was successful. the difficulty is we did a lot of things that didn't help the long-term. we have restricted growth exactly in the areas that is important for our country. investment in health care. education. .ransportation those of the areas we really have control of spending. done is the last time we did other mental capturing form was before this report. 1986. reform.'t focused on

it should happen in the next congress. i'm pessimistic. one other point i would like to make is something also happened. what happened was the debt to gdp which was about 35-36 percent is not close to well above 70%. back inissue is that 1994, the amount of investment from foreign investors was close to about 30%. 65% of our debt is not owned by americans, but people overseas. many have heard this before. we wouldwith taiwan have to go to war with china

protect taiwan. it is an overstatement. makes the point that we don't have the same degree of sovereign tea. it is risking the future of this. -- country. there have been things that have been accomplished. other things happen on health care. the per capita is coming down. those 85 and up will be expensive and coming. i think we have huge challenges. i want to focus on the need to focus on positive aspects of deficit reduction. positive aspect.

i don't think we could grow ourselves out of this. tax ourselves out of this. >> a report came out yesterday. when this report was put the favorability rating on the congress was something like 70%. 70%. the favorable reading of congress is below 20%. that is what you get for all that pandering to the public. [laughter] >> if that is true, then it adds to the dilemma of if they can do anything. they are going to be accused of not knowing what they were doing to begin with. it i