nation" page two. dee dee myers was president clinton's press secretary. she's now a contributing editor of "vanity fair." former house speaker newt gingrich is the cohost of cnn's "cross-fire." we want to welcome "wall street journal" columnist and editorial board member kimberley strassel. this is her first "face the nation." we're glad to have you. and rounding out our foursome, someone who has been here many, many times the chief correspondent of the "washington post," dan balz. let me just throw this out there. does anybody think a deal will be cut in the next 48 hours or are woo headed for default? mr. speaker, why don't you start. >> i don't think we're headed to default, but i doubt a deal will be cut in the next 48 hours. it's much too complicated, and i think that the very fact you only had reid and mcconnell meet yesterday for the first time in 17 days tells you how

big a mess this is, and how much the personal hostility is a part of this. >> schieffer: i was very struck this morning, john mccain and chuck schumer sitting here across the table, two people who are very different ideologically, but they're both smart people. they're people of good will. and you sit here and wonder how is it that these two people, people like this, cannot be the ones to get this thing done? and yet, somehow or another, there seem to be all these pressures, dee dee, on the leaders on both sides that is keeping this from happening. >> well, you have all these processes that begin, and then they die, and it throws it back to leadership. but it hasn't just been that reid and mcconnell haven't met in the last 17 days. they haven't immediate mt. since july. you have leadership not talking to each other. and you have members that aren't controlled by the leadership, particularly in the republican party and the house. now it's back to reid and mcconnell, being the last gasp between a deal and default.

and we'll see whether they can get it there. i agree with speaker gingrich, at the end of the day, there will be a deal because i think cooler heads will prevail. we cannot allow this to happen. but until then, it's high-wire act. >> schieffer: kimberly. >> you strip out all the nonsense going on and the discussion about defunding the president's health care bill, the back and fourth, what you really come down to and what we are at is sort of a repeat of 2011. this has become a fight again over the debt and deficits and spending. and you have a repeat again of democrats saying we don't want to give a dollar, and republicans saying you have got to have a plan before we raise the president's spending authority again with the debt limit. when you look tat in that regard, there shouldn't be any reason you can't come to some sort of solution but it's all been mired down in these extraneous debates of everything which is getting in the way of getting a final answer. >> schieffer: it's not just democrats versus republicans, senate versus house.

it's everybody against everybody. republicans against republicans, especially, in the house, dan. >> well, that has been a lot of this, bob. and as we know, the tea party faction in the house drove this battle story a long time. and the question now is the degree to which the republican leadership can pull back from that and find some kind of agreement with-- it will have to start in the senate, between mcconnell and harry reid. can they then resell that in the house? i think that's why the speaker says, this is not going to come quickly. it's going to take a little while for it to happen. >> schieffer: mr. speaker, what would you have done back in the days when you were speaker if a republican senator called up some of your folks and said i know where gingrich is head, but here's why you shouldn't follow him. and that's exactly what ted cruz did. >> this stuff happens all the time. people forget, the president owns the executive branch.

the president appoints the cabinet. the president is surrounded by staff. in the house and senate, the leaders are actually elected by the people they are leading. so the people who do the elections have enormous authority to run around-- i mean, back when reagan was trying to pass his tax bill asht one point, packwood, the chair of the finance committee, was totally off the reservation, dook whatever he wanted to. we don't do the american people a service when we pretend that the congress is supposed to be orderly and rational. it is not. it's not the nature of it. >> one of the problems from the beginning is it's unclear what this fight is about. right? it was about defunding the obamacare, or at least delaying the individual mandate or whatever. the ball has kept moving. the american people don't know what this fight is about. they're not going to get their way. the republicans went into a fight they could not win. everyone around them except for a hand full of the people in the middle of it it knew they couldn't win it. what is it about?

kim you made the point now we're into a debt ceiling fight, and that should be about spending. but this has not been about that at all. so now they're trying to revamp, focus on what this is about, and come back with some reasonable proposals. >> but it is now. and i think what's actually interesting, we've been talking a little bit about republican division, i think-- and you alluded to this in your earlier interview-- there's now become a democratic division on this. what you have is you have a white house who was talking to the house g.o.p. and did seem to realize-- there is a benefit for them of sitting down and getting this done. if the president does not get some long-term solution on the debt ceiling, if he does not get this budget question out of the way, he it going to be dealing with it for the next three months, six months and you can kiss good-bye his other priorities-- immigration reforms and the economy. you have senate democrats like harry reid stopping that and stopping that and stopping that, one, because they seem to want to make a political point and crush republicans, as it were.

but, two, a lot of them don't want the president to do a deal on entitlements. they like having it as a campaign issue. they like going out and saying republicans are the people throwing granny off the cliff. if the president does something longer term on entitlements, it makes it harder for them to do that. there's a lot of resistance among the more liberal wing of the democratic party to do a deal on that now. >> schieffer: dan, where does this go now? put aside all the things that are-- people on both sides are right on some things and wrong orgs. but we're into this process now. it's like world war i. i mean, it started going down the tracks and nobody really wanted it but nobody knew how to stop it. >> the remarkable thing is how long we have spent talking about process, and now you're beginning to see at least some sign of awe substantive discussion but it seems to me the way out is probably soft process piece first, and then get to the substantive discussion. and i think that's where the negotiations are going to have to be over the next several

days. how long do you extend the government spending authority in order to then have the larger discussion that kim is talking about? but there's also the question about the politics of it. and, clearly, the democrats feel they are in a very strong position right now, and by all measures, all the polling we've seen in the last five days, tells them that. and republicans are waking up to that as well. and so republicans have a decision to make about how far they want to press this at a time when their situation is pretty bad. >> i would just remind everyone, it's 390 days to the next election. i mean, at this stage in 1983, both margaret thatcher and ronald reagan were in deep trouble. in 1995-96, people thought we were in deep trouble. we picked up two senate seats and became the first re-elected house majority since 1928 while bill clinton was elected president. i'll take that kind of trouble every week.

house republicans face a real challenge -- and i may be the only peoplet table that believes this-- i think the president deliberately wants to strip the house of the ability to negotiate in these kind of environments because he understands he has three years of dealing with them because they're going to keep the house. and i think he is really worried that they're going to come back at him every 90 days and get one more bite, and he is prepared to go to the wall. that's wheny when boehner walks in and says i'll give you a clean debt ceiling for six weeks, he says no. reid has upped the ante, and said i won't accept it until you get rid of the sequester. reid is saying to fiscal conservatives i want more money in order to let you pass a bill to reopen the government. >> this is where the definition of success is very odd. how is it a white house victory to push this off for 90 days or push this off for three months ear six months or how much long it is? the only way you really make this dp away is do the opposite of what they're doing, sit down and negotiate and come to a long-term deal on the budget deal. >> i think the issue for the white house is how do you get

some kind of relief from sequester? which is to say, rearrange the way the spending is, and the numbers that they're looking at decline as of january, and so that was one of the problems that they were seeing in what was being talked about over the last couple of days, which is that in january, the numbers actually go down and let locked in, and i think they want some flexibility on that to be able to say is there a way to rearrange the spending, even at an agreed upon level, that makes these levels less onerous, particularly on defense and some other areas. >> well, you know, i think the president has said as much that he wants to break the fever. this isn't a secret. he just-- so i think that's part of where the process has to go for now. he is not going to allow-- he's not going to go along with a process that loads up the debt sealing with extraneous issues.

he stuck between two unappetizing alternatives. on the one harnd a government that will lock in dysfunction, and another a debt ceiling that if he breaches it sends the economy into a tailspin. but negotiating with a gun to your head every few months as kim said is unsustainable. how do you stop it? you get passed it. >> i thinks this a very audacious-- to use one of the president's words-- he wants to repeal 60 years of tradition going back to eisenhower of putting things in the debt ceiling, and he wants to pretend the 18th government shutdown since 1976 is somehow radical and different. and if he can pull off this ieflt reality, he's then free for three years to do virtually whatever he wants. the house republicans, on the other hand, want to make sure the president has to pay a price every time he gets a debt ceiling, and every time he gets an appropriations bill. and that's why this is actually a legitimate, historic struggle, not just a problem of personality defects. >> schieffer: do you think boehner is going to survive

this? >> i think he's stronger than three months ago. >> schieffer: how so? >> i think every conservative who had doubts about boehner has watch boehner very resolutely moving the system down the road and stand by the values that they told him they cared about. and i think john is probably closer to his conference today than he was three months ago. >> but he can't move a bill. >> but on the other hand they may be comfortable saying, "another the president gets to choose. the president of the united states really want to default? the president of the united states really wants to leave the government closed?" >> there's no bill to move. look at what republicans proposed proepsed to the president-- >> because there's no bill to be moved. >> the republican proposal the white house short-term debt ceiling increase, everyone appoint budget confer expeez you want to ease the sequester caps, we'll do that for one or two years and do it in exchange dollar for dollar with long-term entitlement reforms that the president himself has already committed to and agreed with in his own budget. what would not be to like about that from the white house and

they still came back and said no. that suggests there is politics behind this, driving this. that seems to be the sort of agreement that would be eminently acceptable by both sides. >> schieffer: dan, i said earlier, that wouldn't it be smarter for democrats to give boehner a little something that he could go back to these folks and the tea party and help them understand that what they've done here is not for naught, rather than trying to get him down and choke him as some on the president's side seem to do? my thought is that if boehner is toppled, what comes after boehner will be much more difficult for the white house to deal with. >> i i think that's probably correct. and i would assume that the president and the white house team would much rather have boehner there than not have boehner there. i think that they are as dug in in some ways as some of the house people have been on the particulars of this i.e.-- not allowing these decision to be

made against these kinds of deadlines. now, the speaker says this has happened many times in the past. but at this point in our politics, they are holding out as long as they can on trying to finesse that question. >> look, i think, first of all, politics in the large sense is what this country is all about. this isn't a minor game. this is the president of the united states who is dramatically trying to change the country in a variety of ways-- obamacare, the stimulus, you name it. making a decision that he wants to be legislator in chief and that he's prepared to run a very tough fight. i mean, any normal traditional president would have attendant deal that kimberly outlined. this president has no intention of being normal. he wants to dramatically change the country. the house republicans are the great barrier to doing that. and the danger is as house republicans get better at this they'll cause more and more problems for him. this is the moment, i think in his mind to try to soofl it. i would not be at all surprised to see us technically have a huge problem wednesday and thursday. >> schieffer: all right, we're going to take a break and come

back. a lot more to talk about. i'm beth... and i'm michelle. and we own the paper cottage. it's a stationery and gifts store. anything we purchase for the paper cottage goes on our ink card. so you can manage your business expenses and access them online instantly with the game changing app from ink. we didn't get into business to spend time managing receipts, that's why we have ink. we like being in business because we like being creative, we like interacting with people. so you have time to focus on the things you love. ink from chase. so you can. [ male announcer ] over time, you've come to realize... [ starter ] ready! [ starting gun goes off ] [ male announcer ] it's less of a race... yeah! [ male announcer ] and more of a journey. keep going strong. and as you look for a medicare supplement insurance plan... expect the same kind of commitment you demand of yourself.

aarp medicare supplement insurance plans insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. go long. with our panel. kimberly you just brought up something we haven't talked about, just from a standpoint of technical standpoint, they have got to get something done here pretty quick, or the process won't allow them to solve this before we hit that debt ceiling. >> this is now in the senate, and as we know, the senate doesn't move very quickly. needs two or three days just to get something passed and it needs to go back over to the house where there's no sure agreement that that's-- it may not be amended or changed and sent back to the senate. this is going to be a long process. if they don't get something done, started soon, it may not be finished by the thursday deadline. >> schieffer: does anybody at this table think that what we're seeing here is helping the perception that people have of america around the world?

>> well, no. i mean, clearly, it's not. it's not helping the perception people have of america in america. the lack of confidence in the united states among consumers i think radiates all around the world pup had christine laguard saying this morning that it would be devastating if the united states, the go-to country in the world financially, were to breach the debt. now you can argue that some of that spending is flexible, but the problem is perception is as important as reality. and if the markets think that the government can't get its act together-- which they already think-- it will have a very devastating effect. in 2011, we didn't go over the debt ceiling, we didn't breach it, and it still had tremendous consequences. consumers paid $1.3 billion more in interest in a short period of time. and it cost the economy some $16 billion in other ways. that was by not going over. christine laguard said again this morning said she thinks it would cause a global recession. >> first of all, being lectured

by a french leader, given europe's inability to solve any of its major problems doesn't overwhelm me. >> she's not the only one. >>in,in. but i'm saying i watched her clip this morning and thought this is what we need is to be lectured by somebody who represents a euro zone that has totally failed to solve its problems outside of germany. but in addition, i think it's very important to understand two things about this. one, if they really had to, you can by unanimous consent move in two hours between the house and senate. now, that requires a level of agreement that's pretty amazing-- >> a level of panic, probably, too. >> the truth, is the american system when it absolutely has to, can move much faster than people think. the other thing i'll say since i represented the house and have the usual house attitude towards the senate, anybody in the senate who believes they can get a deal gone d.n.a. without boehner's approval and send it to the house to pass the house is totally out of touch with reality. i mean, if reid thinks he can

maneuver the house republicans into accepting his version, they will defeat it just because of the traditional institutional hostility. >> but boehner is still going to have to make the choice, i assume, of whether he has a totally united conference or if the hard liners are split off in a final vote. >> look, it's pretty clear if john gets a reasonable deal, he'll take some heat on the right, and the right has given him-- i think they now believe in him enough that they would tolerate that. the question is, is he in the room helping make the deal because if it's clear he's isolated, he will have no ability to pass anything in the house. >> schieffer: what is the impact on the republican party from all of this? i mean, this poll done by the "wall street journal" and-- the nbc/"wall street journal" poll, i mean, it was stunning. it set people back on their heels. and i've talked to republicans and democrats who both said the same thing to me. in fact, as i said earlier in

the broadcast, one of the reasons the democrats suddenly got the idea of take a harder line is they realized the republicans were being blamed for all of this. >> as the speaker said it is a long way off the election next year. i don't necessarily think this immediately translates into some answer about what happens in the midterm elections. i think the republican calculation is they go forward is having taken this step and got where they are and sort of said they do insist that something come out of this in terms of the debt limit, that what they're hoping is that they can, in fact, get a deal that they can come back and say, look, we did make some progress on entitlements. we did make some progress on spending. which is something by the way the vast majority of the public backs them on. the debt ceiling fight, in contrast to the obamacare health care fight is one in which every poll shows americans think there ought to be some sort of negotiation and deal if you're going to raise the president's spending authority. >> schieffer: one former republican senator-- i won't give his name-- said to me yesterday if there's one good

thing that will come out of this it is that ted cruz will never get another thing done. do you think so? >> well, i think everyone's going to have to step back and ask what the tactics were here. look, every republican is united. every conservative is united that they dislike this health care law. this was a tactical fight from the start. over those who thought it was better to let the health care law go into effect, use it the way that republicans did in 2010 to win a greater election in next year's midterm, take back over the senate, and have a sort of united house and senate to push back against the president versus those who felt you had to take a stand now. and i don't necessarily think that that has proven to be such a swift strategy. >> schieffer: what do you think the impact of ted cruz has been? >> i think cruz-- much like rand paul and much like mike leigh-- represents a new generation of outsiders who speak for millions of americans who deeply dislike

this city, deeply dislike the bureaucracy, and for a variety of different relationships want very dramatic change. i actually think the parallels to them are people like lafallet and bora, people who were bitterly disliked by the establishment. if you represent the second largest state in the country, you beat a multi-millionaire incumbent lieutenant governor, and you arrive with all the certainty of being a texan, and then you behave like a texas an and aggressively go straight at the entire establishment, they're going to dislike you, and you're going to wear the label proudly and cruz will be a bigger figure two years ago than he is today. >> the thing that is so surprising is not that cruz acte acted that way when we got here. pee swut a wide swath and he meant to. is that people followed him into a box canyon when there was no way out. they didn't have any lemple to do what they sought to do and they had no exit strategy when that failed how they were going

to get anything but terrible poll numbers, business community against them, people saying they're no longer going to fund tea party candidates -- not democrats saying that. republicans saying that. and an increased bitterness and infighting in the republican party. his greatest accomplishment isyiing democrats so far. >> i think the problem for the republican party now is which part of the party is actually going to be more dominant. i think the speaker is right that stead cruz and others have a following around the country. but this is not anywhere close to a following that could command a majority, certainly in a presidential election. and at some point, whoever the people are who are thinking of running for president in 2016, are going to have to figure out how you create a coalition that includes the people like ted cruz and the people around the country who agree with him but with a different focus, a different edge, a different look, a different message. not an abandonment of it, but it has to be put in a different

way. and if it looks like the cruz part of the party is in fact the dominant party, then the republicans will have longer term problems. >> two quick things, we're in so much trouble as a party i think christie will win by more than 20 points, just a reminder by how complicated this is. what you're looking for is reagan not goldwater and my guess is it will be a governor, and we're going to nominate a governor who will in fact bring together a uniifying message, largely of economic growth, getting rid of all the bad parts of obamacare, and beginning to get us back to a balanced budget. >> and showing they can get stuff done, too. >> schieffer: we will end it there. thank you all very much. back in a minute.

>> schieffer: well, that's about it for us today. we hope you tune in tomorrow morning for the latest on the shutdown, slow-down on "cbs this morning." we will be back right here next sunday on "face the nation."

♪ [ male announcer ] let's go places. but let's be ready. ♪ let's do our homework. let's look out for each other. let's look both ways before crossing. ♪ let's remember what's important. let's be optimistic. but just in case -- let's be ready.

toyota. let's go places, safely.

captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

hitters at the table to help broker an agreement by midn to for the first time ever we get a look into the b.a.r.t associations. the first to broker an agreement by midnight tonight. >> what happens as the cops arrive. >> the major blow to the bay area. workers get furloughed this week. >> and, good evening. if you commute on b.a.r.t and wonder how to get to work tomorrow because of the threatens strike you are still in limbo. as of right now there is still no deal. there are indications we could see a resolution tonight. the situation is getting getional attention.