speaker john boehner vowed to fight for spending cuts. here is what he said. the president says he isn't going to have a debate with us over the debt ceiling. he also says he's not going to cut spending along with the debt limit hike. and then citing a poll conducted by republican david winston, boehner said, 72% of americans agree any increase in the nation's debt limit must be accompanied by spending cuts and reforms of a greater amount. the debate is already under way. number two, texas senator john cornyn took that fighting spirit even further threatening a partial government shutdown. he said in an op-ed, the coming deadlines will be the next flash points in our ongoing fight to bring fiscal sanity to washington. it may be necessary to partially shut down the government in order to secure the long-term fiscal well-being of our country rather than plod along the path of greece, italy, and spain. president obama needs to take note of this reality and put forward a plan to avoid it immediately. finally, pennsylvania republican senator pat toomey voiced the

same sentiment earlier this week on "morning joe." >> our opportunity here is on the debt ceiling. the president has made it very clear, he doesn't even want to have a discussion about it because he knows this is where we have leverage. we republicans need to be willing to tolerate a temporary partial government shutdown, which is what that could mean, and insist that we get off the road to greece. >> governor, i don't doubt that 72% want to see the spending cuts. which way do you think the public sentiment swings if there is a government shutdown? >> well, i think pat toomey is a little confused, mike. it's a continuing resolution. if they didn't fund the continuing resolution, the government would shut down. if they don't lift the debt ceiling, the economy shuts down. not only the u.s. economy, maybe the world economy, and the consequences are drastic. look, the bottom line on this, michael, and you know this, is nobody should be threatening or rattling sabers. everyone, president obama, harry reid, everyone knows we need

significant spending cuts. it's about time we act maturely and get together and try to find out what the spending cuts that we have to make can be made in the least onerous way for the american people. but spending cuts we need. we also need to raise more revenue. the fiscal cliff only raised $600 billion of revenue. we need to raise another $600 billion of revenue, and we've got to go about finding a way to do that as well. >> congressman, do you agree with that sentiment? i constantly in my role as a talk radio host hear from people who say the spending is out of control, and if this is spun as republicans standing up to all that spending and saying enough is enough, i think the wind could be at the gop's back. >> well, i don't know if the wind is at our back. first of all, governor, nice to see you again. >> hi, steve. >> i would tell you that spending is the problem, but where we missed the boat was by resisting on the tax side so long it became all about the taxes, that the spending got

lost. as the governor correctly points, this fiscal cliff deal only raises $600 billion over ten years, which is $60 billion a year, and if you look at the sandy package that's coming up, that's $60 billion. so that money is already spent, and we're still borrowing $1 trillion. but the governor hits the right tone. people have been afraid to look for that common ground. i happen to be a simpson/bowles supporter, and we really need the big deal to fix the country. >> governor, i think that many people don't appreciate the fact, don't understand the fact that when we talk about the debt ceiling, we're talking about bills accrued. this gets a little complicated in the messaging is my point. >> sure. but i think it will be clear to the american public by the time the debt ceiling -- let's assume we don't lift the debt ceiling. it will be clear because wall street will make it clear, the banking community will make it clear what the ramifications are to americans by not lifting the debt ceiling. and you're right, mike, all this is about, as the president said, is paying for the bills that congress has already voted to

fund. and it's not lifting the debt ceiling to pay for future spending. it's to pay for the bills that we've already accrued. but regardless of that, regardless of that, the people want us to get together and do something. it's why i was sad to see steve decide not to run for re-election because we need republicans, we need more republicans who are going to stand in there and say, yes, spending is the issue, but we've got to realize that we've got to have reasonable revenue that comes into the mix, and we've got to look at everything. when it comes to spending, defense cannot be a sacred cow. we have to look at everything, and we have to have legitimate entitlement reform. and on our side, mike, we have got to do this. i was on "the cycle," one of msnbc's shows, and i suggested that raising the age on medicare given the fact we're living longer isn't a necessarily bad idea. the three progressive hosts, you would have thought that i proposed treason to the american government. >> congressman, let me ask you a question about your next endeavor.

politico pointed out the republican party has a primary problem. gop primary voters have become so conservative that they're nominating candidates who are losing winnable elections. in the past two cycles, these five candidates lost senate elections that should have been walkovers for republicans and would have given them a majority in the senate. delaware's christine o'donnell, colorado's ken buck, nevada's sharron angle, missouri's todd akin, and indiana's richard mourdock, and then you add in the fact that the rightward leaning gop electorate has also attracted some fringy candidates to the presidential race who led according to the polls at different points. let's take a quick walk down memory lane and revisit these names and faces. donald trump led at one point, michele bachmann led at one point, rick perry, herman cain, newt gingrich, rick santorum. what do they have in common? they were leading in the polls. what's your prescription for this primary problem? >> well, my next endeavor, the nonpaying one, is going to be to head up the republican main street partnership to give

comfort and cover to both center right republicans and center left, i guess, democrats to stand up from the fringe groups on the right and left who have the courage to do the right thing. you know, if governor rendell and i were in charge, we would have fixed this thing. >> thank you both. coming up, the house finally got around to voting on a package for the victims of hurricane sandy. it may sound like a small thing, but a conservative group promised to target those who voted for it. this is "hardball" the place for politics. d. total effects cc cream c for color. c for correction. [ female announcer ] fight 7 signs of aging flawlessly. cc what's possible.

welcome back to "hardball." after a week in which the democrats and the republicans

from the northeast pulled a vote on hurricane sap di aid, the white house got around to voting for it today. it overwhelmingly voted $10 billion for flood insurance, but not until an overwhelming number of congressmen said it is about time. >> this legislation is vital. this is not a handout. this is not something we're looking for as a favor. >> this action by the house republican leadership is too little and too late. >> these are human beings, human beings, children that have been completely displaced, and it's up to us to get them back on their feet. >> this is a total, total disaster in helping those people that we are pompously saying and pontificating about we're helping them. isn't that wonderful? what's our jobs? we're not doing anybody any favors. that's why we were sent here. try it once in a while, democracy. you might like it. >> still, the bill has its critics on the right. the club for growth encouraged

republicans to vote against the aid, and 67 members of congress, all of them republicans, voted no. joining me, communications director for the club for growth, barney keller, and ron reagan, author and msnbc contributor. mr. keller, let me start with you. what's the nature of the opposition to the club for growth to this aid package? >> thanks for having me, michael. first, i should say that the club wants the victims of sandy to get the relief that they need from the government, but, unfortunately, what happens is every time the government has a disaster relief bill, what they do is come up with a big spending bill. it's not paid for. there's no accountability or oversight, and it's loaded with pork. i'm afraid that's what we saw in the senate bill. i'm afraid that's what we're going to see going forward is another big spending bill that isn't paid for, isn't offset with anything -- >> to be clear, because i was confused about this, the house version did not have pork. we can agree on that, right? >> well, the bill that passed today was just an extension of flood insurance, but it wasn't paid for again. pork is just one of the many

issues that were in the big senate bill that governor christie and others were upset about and members of congress -- >> so i'm clear, if this were a funding bill for nails to be used in shingles for people's roofs, you'd have still been against it on the basis that there was no offset. it's the offset, not the nature of what it was, that drives your opposition. is that true? >> well, no. that's not entirely true. in today's bill the nature was just that it wasn't offset. the offset is just one of the many things. we think that the bill could be parcelled out into smaller chunks. there's no reason why the government has to go and appropriate $10 billion in one day. we don't know if that money is going directly to sandy victims. you know, the flood insurance program itself is broken. people should be asking why people are paying premiums, but yet the fund doesn't have enough money to pay out the claims. these are fundamental problems, and every time we get into a disaster, we do the exact same thing. we keep kicking the can down the road and asking our children to pay for it. that's what we're doing --

>> let me ask ron reagan to weigh in. ron, after the senate early passed its version of the sandy aid bill, senators john mccain and tom coburn put out a list of what they call questionable spending in it, including, for example, $2 million to repair damage to the roofs of museums in washington, d.c., while many in hurricane sandy's path still have no roof over their heads. $150 million for fisheries as far away from the storm's path as alaska. $15 million for nasa facilities though nasa itself has called damage from the hurricane minimal. all of those provisions were stripped from the bill the house approved today. i want to underscore that. it was pork-free. ron reagan, what do you make of this? >> well, as far as those provisions being in there in the first place, unfortunately, that's how sausages are made in washington, d.c. let's remember, we're talking about an appropriation that is some 10,000 million dollars. you cited less than $200 million out of that that is questionable. it was stripped out, but even if it wasn't stripped out, even if

that was the price you pay for greasing the skids of government to get needed aid to people, i would argue that it is necessary, that you must do that. it's unfortunate, but we must do that. now, look, if you want to have a discussion about flood insurance in this country or what fema does or how it does it or how effectively it does it, that's fine. but you don't do it when you have thousands of people in desperate need. you don't hold those people hostage in a sense to your ideological predispositions. that is an ugly, thuggish way to do business. >> barney, he's essentially saying when the house is on fire, put the water on it, and then sort this out. >> that's not entirely fair. what ron neglects to mention is the reason the house has broken up this sandy relief bill into three different parts is because they also want a $33 billion appropriation to go towards future disaster mitigation projects. now, i don't know exactly how that $33 billion is supposed to grease the skids of washington. i guess i can think of a couple different ways, but, you know,

again, we can't keep adding money to the debt that we don't have. we can't keep borrowing money from china to pay for it -- >> is there something wrong with disaster mitigation? future disaster mitigation? i think that would probably be a pretty good idea. given what happened in hurricane sandy. >> ron, i don't understand how building levees five years down the future in new york helps a person who is looking for disaster relief right now homeless on the street. perhaps you can explain that to me. >> what's wrong with thinking ahead? i don't really understand -- >> then it should be considered -- >> -- so upset the government would spend money without any offsets. you must have been absolutely furious about the wars in iraq and afghanistan. >> we're furious about all the profligate spending that went on. >> barney, one question if i might. for consistency, was this your position on katrina? >> yeah. we opposed the katrina relief bill. it wasn't offset. look what happened to the hurricane katrina bill. they passed a huge spending bill. it wasn't offset, no accountability. afterwards we heard stories

about fema trailers being untouched in new orleans while people were starving in the streets. >> ron reagan, if i can make an additional point reflecting on the first segment of the program. there are votes and there are key votes. club for growth says this is a key vote, which means it factors in -- barney, correct me if i'm wrong -- it factors into the rating they give to members -- >> that's correct. >> and so, therefore, ron reagan, this plays a role in primary season. you know, this is the sort of thing where if you voted for that, you got lesser of a score for the club for growth. you've increased the odds you will draw a republican opponent in the next midterm election. >> yes, i understand, and that is the threat, of course, but again playing that sort of game when you've got people in need just seems to me to be strangely ugly, and it puts republican candidates, forget about the democrats, it puts republican candidates in a very difficult position. they have to toady to the club for growth and not vote their conscience i imagine in many instances. many of these republicans i assume really wanted to help

people, but they felt like they couldn't because they'd pay politically down the line. >> barney, respond to that. it reminds me of the whole grover norquist issue and the pledge against tax increases. >> well, i would just say that the problem with republicans is that they don't act like republicans. you know, people send republicans to washington supposedly to cut taxes and limit government. after the fiscal cliff deal they voted for, if they had voted for the sandy bill, they would have voted to increase taxes and expand government. so i think the republican party, you know, if they're really serious about saving america from its debt crisis, i'm a young guy, but i'm not too old to remember when the national debt was $14.6 trillion. that was just last august. we just hit the debt ceiling at $16.4 trillion. again, we can't -- >> ron reagan, a quick final word. >> listen, the republican administration that preceded the obama administration is responsible for most of our debt -- >> absolutely they are. absolutely they are. >> indeed. >> we helped get rid -- >> there you go, common ground. >> you don't hold people that

are suffering hostage. >> thank you, both. >> not the right way to go. >> thank you, ron reagan and barney keller. we appreciate you both. michele bachmann is trying to do something that's failed the previous 33 times it's been attempted. that's next in the "sideshow." remember, if you want to follow me on twitter, you just need to figure out how to spell smerconish. this is "hardball," the place for politics.

back to "hardball." now to the "sideshow." first, photo-op, photo shopped. no doubt nancy pelosi is proud the house democratic caucus for the 113th congress has more female members than any previous session. a photo-op of the congresswomen took place on the capitol steps yesterday, and nancy pelosi

posted it on her flikr account. the problem, those four women at the top were not at the photo-op. they got there eventually, but it was late, everybody was cold. it's a case of the photo shop, and people noticed. today pelosi was asked if the photo could really be taken as an accurate historical record. >> it was an accurate historical record of who the democratic women of congress are. it's an accurate record it was freezing cold and our members had been waiting a long time for everyone to arrive and that they had to get back into the building to greet constituents, family members, to get ready to go to the floor. it wasn't like we had the rest of the day to stand there. >> evidently they were running a tight ship. next, out with the old, on with the old news. any guesses what the first bill introduced in the 113th congress happened to be about? a couple hints. house republicans have done this before. in fact, 33 times. all of them unsuccessful. here is another hint. michele bachmann was behind it this time. she broke the news on twitter yesterday saying, quote, i introduced the first bill of the 113th congress to repeal obama

care in its entirety. somehow i just don't think the 34th time is going to be the charm. next, it's everybody's dream to walk into a deli and find out that a sandwich has been named after you, right? well, not in this case. if the words total baloney sum up your thoughts about how congress handled all the fiscal cliff chaos, you will want to head to virginia's roanoke bagel company and order the congressional sandwich special. it's a mostly baloney sandwich. one of the shop's owners gave the scoop on how the sandwich made the menu. >> listening to the nonsense and, you know, waiting for congress as we always do and waiting and waiting and waiting. we had ordered bologna. i thought we needed to do a bologna sandwich. >> the congressional sandwich is, for now at least, a limited time offer. finally, has capitol hill really seen the last of barney frank? yesterday marked his final day as a massachusetts congressman, but apparently frank is game to prolong things a bit.

on "morning joe" today frank broke the news he wants to take on the position of interim senator when john kerry becomes secretary of state. >> a month ago and a few weeks ago in fact, i said i wasn't interested, which is kind of like you're about to graduate and they said you have to go to summer school. but that deal now means that february, march, and april are going to be among the most important months in american financial -- >> so you're considering it. >> yes. in fact, i'm not going to be coy. it's not anything i've ever been good at. i have told the governor i would now like, frankly, to do that. >> frank's version of summer school, as he put it, would last until a special election takes place for the seat most likely this summer. >> that's "hardball" for now. coming up next is "your business" with j.j. ramberg. total effects cc cream c for color. c for correction. [ female announcer ] fight 7 signs of aging

flawlessly. cc what's possible.

this letter recently landed on my desk. i'm a 35-year-old female who

purchased my inn a year ago. my occupancy is 20%. i drive an old car and i work seven days a week and i nef get away. help. well, we decided that this connecticut inn is in need of a business makeover. that is coming up next on "your busine business." ♪ small businesses are revitalizing the economy. american express open is here to help, and this is why we are proud to present "your business" on msnbc. hi there, everyone. i'm j.j. ramberg and welcome to "your business" the show

dedicated to giving you tips and advice to help your small business grow. recently we received an e-mail from a woman entrepreneur in trouble. she is the sole operator of a small bed and breakfast in ledyard, connecticut. when she saw our program, she sent in a letter pleading for help. we felt that our associates might help to bail her out, and that is why we decided to give this innkeeper a "your business" makeover. >> reporter: the "your business" makeover team is on the road again and just passing through historic mystic, connecticut. >> we are getting close, because we are passing foxwoods resorts, a huge tourist destination. it looks like we have arrived. all right. let's get to work and help this business. you must be erica. >> i am. >> i'm mike from the