tavis: join me next time for the president's head of the deficit reduction committee, alan simpson. >> all i know is his name is james, and he needs extra help with his reading. >> i'm james. >> yes. >> to everyone making a difference -- >> thank you. >> you help us all live better. >> nationwide insurance supports tavis smiley. with every question and answer, nationwide insurance is proud to join tavis in working to improve financial literacy and remove obstacles to economic empowerment one conversation at a time. nationwide is on your side. >> and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. [captioning made possible by kcet public television] captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- --www.ncicap.org-- i took it into a shop once and they said-- they thought it was probably worth perhaps £100 but i ought to get it looked at by such as yourself to get a value on it. so you really would like to know the value? well, i think it is for me something that really appeals. this reminds me of when i wake up in the morning, i have a big fig tr

. >> the ryan plan is a really comprehensive, historic plan that erskine bowles and alan simpson and the debt commission people praised as straightforward and honest. any other plan they submitted needs to deal in the same way that ryan did. if they don't cut this spending, say where you're going to get the money, is what they basically said. we're now waiting to see, with baited breath, whether the senate democrats will propose anything. the house republicans have stepped up. will the senate do the same? >> let me say this. first, the only taxes we're saying is don't give the bush tax breaks to the multimillionaires. no one else's taxes will go up. the pledge that the president made stays. but why shouldn't there be shared sacrifice? you're telling... the other side wants to tell middle class kids it's harder to go to college, wants to lay off teachers, lay off or stop research which creates new jobs. we're saying there should be shared sacrifice. i'll tell you one other place there will be a difference, which is in medicare. we both agree. i think there's agreement from both partie

after their oval office meeting, erskine bowles and alan simpson spoke with reporters. >> yesterday, i laid out a plan to cut $4 trillion from our deficit. it is a balanced plan that asks for shared sacrifice in order to provide shared opportunity for all americans. and i am very pleased today to have erskine bowles and alan simpson, the chair might as well commission. frankly, it is the framework that they developed that helps to shape these issues. as they pointed out in their bi- partisan effort, it is important that we put everything on the table. we have to make some tough decisions when it comes to domestic spending. we have to look at everything, including our security spending in order to achieve the goals that we need. it is important that we look at our tax code and find a way to work together to not only simple fly and make the tax system more fair, but also that we use it as a tool to help us achieve our deficit target. it is also an important -- and i think these gentlemen share the view -- that we cannot exempt anybody from these efforts, that is not a program for us to

alan simpson said it could be a year -- within a year.re stark warnings and the same message is coming from a host of the world's top financial experts. now, the good news -- i got to say, the good news is that our country's strong work ethic and entrepreneurial spirit still exists and the indications are that des spirt the economic drag on our huge debt burden, the economy far slower than normal recovering from this recession is struggling to rebound. if we act decisively now, ending our wasteful spending habits, we can be confident that progress in growth will continue. our nation's leaders are aware that their country is face ago crisis. they have no higher moral responsibility than to act to protect the nation from that danger. today's "wall street journal" had an op-ed by the nobel prize laureate garry becker, former secretary of treasury jurnlg shuttle, and economic professor john taylor. the article embraces the $61 billion in reduced spending passed by the house and debunks the critics unequivocally who call these cuts extreme. th

we talk to alan simpson briefly after the speech and he said to pray for the gang of six. [laughter] i know you had a lot of issues with balsam cent. that was the senator simpson statement. is he right? >> i pray for many of my colleagues. [laughter] -- the deficit is the symptom and spending is the disease. the president talked about shared sacrifice. the problem is on the spending side. we know that in the postwar era, revenues have averaged 18.5% of gdp. they have been temporarily down through the recession which has been exacerbated by the president's policies. in all the models, revenue comes back and marginally increases beyond that point. spending goes from its historic 20% of gdp to 40% over the next generation. you would have to double taxes on the next generation, crush the economy, crushed jobs and frankly lose the american dream if you define that as your children having greater opportunities in a higher standard of living and you have had. when we see shared sacrifice, the only thing we see our massive tax increases when spending is the problem. therefore, it

erskine bowles and senator alan simpson, former senator simpson, they have told us that we are facing the most predictable debt crisis in our history if we don't change, and they didn't say it's for our children and grandchildren. they said it could happen in two years. senator -- mr. bowles said earlier than two years, a little later. senator simpson said i think we could have a debt crisis in one year. so i don't know, hopefully this won't happen, but we've got to get spending under control. there are two ways to do it. one is to work really hard, do what we are paid to do, identify a less productive, less defensible spending programs and eliminate them and try to protect as much as we can the programs that are more productive and doing better good for america. our other way to do it, just sort of take everything across the board, just eliminate everything on a same percentage basis and reduce spending that way. you could do either. i think most people would say we should eliminate the programs at are least defensible first before we have to reduce spending in programs that are more

you have to hear the comments that were made today by both alan simpson and erskine bowles. i read from their statement -- the republican house plan falls short of the balanced comprehensive approach necessary to enact irresponsible plan. the republican plan largely exempt defense spending from reductions that would not apply any of the savings from eliminating or reducing tax expenditures as part of tax reform to deficit reduction. as a result, the chairman's plan raised -- relies on reductions in discretionary spending while also calling for savings and some safety net programs, cuts that would place a disproportionately adverse affect on disadvantaged populations. we have had the verdict rendered by the leaders of the bipartisan commission. the republican in a plan in the house fails the simple test of balance. in fact, if you look at the republican plan, it is simply recycled, rigid, ideology that says we need to provide a big tax breaks to the very wealthy and a very powerful at the expense of the rest of the country. it is dressed up in a lot of nice sounding rhetoric

want to take and build on the model laid out on the fiscal commission led by erskine bowles and alan simpsonat was a bipartisan commission and had support from democrats and republicans. they propose to take some of the spending in the tax ket and reduce the spending and use savings to potentially lower rates but also our deficits. and that is i think the best idea out there. the best idea out there for trying to figure out how do we fix the tax code and make it more simple, more fair, less complicated. but also help make sure we do things that are responsible for a long-term fiscal position. >> lehrer: it was written in the "new york times" today that "finding a way to raise taxes may well be the central political problem facing the united states." do do you agree with that? >> i think that's one of them. but we have to make sure how we can meet our commitments to seniors, the disables, and the poor. and the country divided and both parties are apart. but, again, where we agree-- and this is very important, this is a necessary commitment for progress on this-- is we agree we have to put it

the president met at the white house with his deficit commission co-chairs republican alan simpson and democrat erskine bowles. >> it's important that we look at our tax code and find a way to work together to not only simplify and make the tax system fairer, but also that we use it as a tool to help us achieve our deficit targets. and it's also important and i think these gentlemen share the view that we can't exempt anybody from these efforts. >> reporter: on the senate floor, minority leader mitch mcconnell warned again that republicans are not about to accept tax hikes. >> americans know that we face a fiscal crisis not because we tax too little, but because we spend too much. they do not support the reckless washington spending that has left us with record deficits and debt, and they will not support raising taxes to preserve an unsustainable status quo. >> reporter: the tax divide is just one of the key differences between the two sides. on the overall deficit, house republicans plan $4.4 trillion in reductions over 10 years. the president proposes reducing deficits by $4 trillio

last year, senator alan simpson, and earn skin bowles led a bipartisan commission outlining a smart, long-term credible strategy tore cutting debt and spending. senator simpson and mr. bowles say they had 14 reasons for volunteering their reasons on the debt commission. between them, they have 14 grandkids. while i may not embrace every component of their plan, i applaud their hard work, their leadership, their patriotism. and their hard work is a solid blueprint that we are already building from. i'm ready to join them and so are many of us in this chamber with you just need to do it. montanans are patriots, mr. president. they are ready and willing to follow our lead in providing a fair tax code, that provides certainty and fairness. they're willing to share in the pain of responsible spending cuts that won't take our economy backwards. and they know that we can afford to make cuts in defense. they know we need to fix but not dismantle or privatize our entitlement programs. what's the alternative? well, we may find out the hard way if folks aren't willing to work together to reach

that first sentence in that statement from erskine bowles and alan simpson is that our plan was simple, straightforward, and honest. let me say it again -- the cochairs said that it was credible, straightforward, and honest. they believe that to get a political consensus with the democrats controlling the senate and the white house, and i am not saying that they're wrong, if you have to have a mixture of tax increases and spending reductions to get a political balance and a political compromise. this does not meet that test of what they think is necessary for a political compromise. but with respect to a plan, they say it is credible, straightforward, and honest. >> thank you for helping us understand what unbalanced means. to democrats it means it is not going to raise taxes. we cannot just cut spending. mr. goodall, i believe you are next. >> i have the great pleasure of being the rules committee designee to the budget committee and i have enjoyed working with you both in that capacity. let me ask you, you be in a newer member to the committee as i am, may have a better answer, to de

the one that was referred to by erskine bowles and alan simpson had a serious, honest straightforward approach to addressing our nation's enormous fiscal challenges. it's long term. it deals with medicare, social security, discretionary spending. don't -- i'm optimistic about the future. if we were to put ourselves on that course and send the word to the american people, the american business community, the world financial community that we've gotten our house in order, is that the kind of budget that could unleash growth that we hadn't seen in years now? mr. isakson: it is because it will instill a degree of confidence that we've been finally willing to deal with our long-term deficit and also spending. i want to refer back to statement you made in your previous remarks before you recognized me. challenging the president to bring a budget in this speech that he's going to make in an hour or so, bring it, put it on the tabaka, put -- on the table, put the commission's recommendation on the table, put the group of six who are working on another document, put all those on the table. let

yesterday erskine bowls and alan simpson stated that the republican budget falls short of the balanced, comprehensive approach needed to achieve broad bipartisan agreement mess to enact a responsible plan. -- necessary to enact a responsible plan. indeed, republican budget is the same tired formula of extending tax weeks from the rich and powerful at the expense of the rest of america except this time on steroids and dressed up with what we'll hear as a lot of nice, speet talk about reform that masks the damage that this budget will do. to zpwoverpb to choose. and the choices made the the republican budget are wrong for america. it is not courageous to protect tax giveaways to big companies and other special interests while stashing investments in our kids' education, scientific reform and critical infrastructure. it is not bold to provide tax breaks to millionaires while ending the medicare guarantee for seniors and sticking seniors with the bill for rising health care costs. it is not visionary to reward corporations that ship american jobs overseas while terminating affordable healt

erskine bowles and senator alan simpson, former senator simpson, they have told us that we are facing the most predictable debt crisis in our history if we don't change, and they didn't say it's for our children and grandchildren. they said it could happen in two years. senator -- mr. bowles said earlier than two years, a little later. senator simpson said i think we could have a debt crisis in one year. so i don't know, hopefully this won't happen, but we've got to get spending under control. there are two ways to do it. one is to work really hard, do what we are paid to do, identify a less productive, less defensible spending programs and eliminate them and try to protect as much as we can the programs that are more productive and doing better good for america. our other way to do it, just sort of take everything across the board, just eliminate everything on a same percentage basis and reduce spending that way. you could do either. i think most people would say we should eliminate the programs that are least defensible first before we have to reduce spending in programs that are mo

the report by alan simpson -- by alan cranston was released.he work four senators who backed the proposal. that was tom coburn and mike crapo. and so chambliss and warner asked those four if they would form them and form this gang to hammer out a bipartisan deal. they did this informant on their own. they have been meeting regularly since december. they have been holding secret meetings in offices at capitol hill. they had a conference call yesterday and they have spoken regularly in broad outlines about where they are going. i have seen no details. one of the things that makes them so interesting is that they have really -- there have been no leaks from the group, which has increased confidence in each other. host: we are going to try to piece together what they are thinking as far as tackling the deficit. they have not been giving specifics. a few of them have been doing interviews and talking a little bit about their thought process in all of this. police information about senator saxby chambliss and senator warner. senator chambliss was ele

the chairman -- co-chairman of the debt commission, erskine bowles and senator alan simpson have told us we're facing the most predictable financial crisis in our nation's history. and when asked when we could have a financial crisis, which we're talking about another recession, a double dip, or maybe worse, maybe a worldwide cataclysm from excessive debt. hopefully not. but that's what they told us we're facing the most predictable crisis in history. we've gone 714 days in this congress without passing a budget as we're required to do. the budget act requires congress to pass a budget by april 15th and we've not achieved that. and that's particularly problematic at a time of national crisis. i see my colleague, senator corker from tennessee, here. he's worked very, very hard with some constructive bipartisan efforts to do something about the debt trajectory we're on. but i guess i -- i want to first ask him as a highly successful mayor of chattanooga, received great applause around the country and in the state for his leadership, he had to deal with the real numbers, real expenditure

there was a call from alan simpson who was concerned about the partisan nature of the speech and how unnecessary and how on productive and help on it wouldn wednesday -- be. guest: boy, oh, boy. have they been listening to themselves? i was watching that speech. i was thinking that the president is being so gentle. i would of said that i will to my right arm off before a sign any part of it. this is a competition of ideas. my republican friends are saying when it fifth grade math student can tell, that their idea -- their math does not employ up -- does not add up. to my republican friends think it will be invited their, "this is a terrific idea, to drive up the debt even more"? of course not. if you don't want your programs criticized by the president of the united states, maybe you should think about the tone in this town. the present is being eviscerated -- the president is being in eviscerated. i thought his tone was measured. president anthony weiner would not be as measured. host: is there going to be a president weiner? guest: just to important people in america get to see it.

you just have to hear the comments that were just made today by both alan simpson and erskine bowles. bowles. i read from there's demand. : the republican plan falls short necessary to enact irresponsible plan." republican plan largely exempts defense spending and would not apply any of the savings from eliminating or reducing tax expenditures as part of tax reform through deficit reduction." as a result, that the german's plan relies on much larger reductions in discretionary spending while calling on savings in safety net programs, cuts that would place a disproportionately adverse impact on certain disadvantaged population. so we have already had the verdict rendered by the leaders of the bipartisan commission, that the republican plan in the house fails the simple test of balance. in fact, if you look at the republican plan, it is simply a recycled, rigid ideology that says we need to provide a tax breaks to the very wealthy and a very powerful at the expense of the rest of the country. it is dressed up in a lot of nice-sounding rhetoric about four, but it is the same tired old pl

bipartisan fiscal commission, cochaired by north carolina's own erskine bowles, and former senator alan simpson, made important progress in beginning to diagnose and attack the root causes of our nation's fiscal crisis. the bipartisan work of the fiscal commission is evidence that common ground is possible. reducing spending will absolutely be a part of any comprehensive solution, but we must begin to have a broader discussion to create meaningful deficit reduction. and for that reason, i am supporting senate 211, the biennial budgeting and appropriations act which was introduced by my colleagues, senator isakson and senator shaheen. this bill would take the washington-as-usual politics out of the budgeting process. the bill changes the budget process from the current annual spending debate to a two-year deliberative process that allows us to work together on commonsense cuts coupled with sensible investments. similar to what is done in north carolina, which balances its budget every year. and right now congress rarely passes the 12 government funding bills by the end of the fiscal year, and th

further into the story, alan simpson, the co-chair of the commission on the deficit, all former dot -gop senator, saying that the speech would be a mistake if the president does not outline in detail. one of the points in the "wall street journal" peace, many house republicans say -- next is edwin from chicago. good morning. caller: president obama has really disappointed me. this is a city that sent him to washington. i was out there beating the bushes for him as a senator, and also to be president. but since he has been in that office, to meet i feel that he has allowed the republicans to set the agenda, and then he comes in afterwards. he is the president. he is supposed to take the lead and continue to lead with all the problems we are having, until they are settled, he cannot come in afterwards and then start showing things. now he is planning to come back to the city here in april, but he has lost a lot of support here, and i'm really having some serious thought in reference to whether i will support him again. in his reelection, he seems to have forgotten the singers who are im

guest: they did, particularly the two co-chairs, erskine bowles, and alan simpson.found that military pay and health benefits, specifically retiree health benefits that are , that theorking age growth of those costs are not sustainable on the path that they are on, like in the larger national budget was medicare and medicaid. host: let's look at what the commission proposed when it comes to the military's spending. it requires an equal percentage you cuts from defense and non- defense spending. did they give a number? guest: for security spending, which is interesting because it is different than defense spending, it includes the department of veterans affairs, the state department, usid -- over a 10-year period, $1 trillion in talks. they required equal from both sides in security and not security. host: we have a graphic. defense spending, not war but the department of homeland security, the department of veterans affairs, the state department, international affairs -- that is what constitutes security spending. why is there a distinction between the two? guest: i

commission that the fiscal commission brought forward, having both republican and democrat support, alan simpsonfrom the republican side, erskine bowles from the democrat side and then we had a hearing here. i think there was to republicans and two democrats that actually or were perceived to be at a hearing, and my simple question, is there anything out there that everyone kind of agrees to or would be the best piece of legislation you think we could ultimately get to the final day? and to a person of the death of the commission. now i didn't go into full detail on the deficit commission but i did take some framework. within that framework, this would be the largest deficit cut in history by 2014, the largest. it would cut the deficit by $4 trillion over the next 10 years. it would stabilize the debt and maintain a debt to racial of 60% of gdp by 2024. would return to 2008 spending levels, will reduce the deficit to a 2.3% of gdp in four years, will reduce the size of government. it will achieve deficit reduction with two-thirds spending and want their tax reform, something we all agree we have

president obama's own commissi commission, simpson-bowles commission, i think is alan simpson that said this as their issued their report, he said there's no more they can to bring home. the biggest day. i think is exactly right. -- the page is dead. when they see these numbers they see the stickers on fox and cnn about the interest payments, and just rolling by thousands of dollars a second, type of thing. we got to make some change. >> you mentioned scott walker. what is the situation in wisconsin mean to you? wisconsin, virginia, very different states, but what does the experience we've been watching in wisconsin mean to you? >> it means that there really are big battles in the country between the left and the right. and for there to be significant results gained and restoring fiscal responsibility at both the state and federal level don't have to be some very tough battles. and there were two issues really in wisconsin. one was the walker budget to address the $3.7 billion deficit similar to what had in virginia, and i think largely the citizens were with him. they got it he was ver

the president's debt commission chairman, erskine bowles, and alan simpson, gave a written statement to the budget committee a week or so ago in which they said this nation faces a most predictable economic crisis in its history. so where are we? the budget act requires three budgets to be submitted. it's at this point in history, i say, that finances, budget, and debt are the greatest issues before our country. and they dwarf anything else that we're doing. so the -- the budget act requires the president to submit a budget. he is to submit a -- has submit add budget that raises taxes -- submitted a budget that raises taxes by $1.5 billion and increases discretionary spending every single year for the next 10 years, that increases debt every year, doubling the debt, causing the interest on our debt to go from $200 billion last year to $940 billion according to the congressional budget office. that will crowd out spending for things like highways, which is $40 billion, education, $70 billion, we're going to $940 billion in interest? this is why we're on an unsustainable path is every

erskine bowles and alan simpson, the cochairman of prison obama's budget debt commission signed a jointis is the most predictable economic crisis this nation has ever faced. the debt is growing out of control. so, i would say that the greatest thing we could do for our economy, the greatest thing we could do to put this country on a path to financial success and growth and vigorous strength in the future is to get our financial house in order. this will do it. i think those who have worked for it so much, and i do believe it is not a hopeless task. one vote short in 97. i believe we can pass at this time. i thank all of you who have worked so hard. >> like my colleagues i want to thank senator hatch for his leadership and everybody else for their leadership. this is a team effort, all 47. i know that you all like to write about the times we had 45 and maybe not 44. all 47-cent above most amendment. they think this is one thing to consider. the second thing, i know some of the people in the poli-sci goober department say wait a minute, this is not going to work. somebody talks about is t

obama to head his debt commission, came before the budget committee just two weeks ago, and he and alan simpson, his co-chairman, issued a written statement, we are facing the most predictable economic crisis in our nation's history. predictable crisis means we could be thrown back into another recession or a depression. when asked by chairman conrad, our democratic chairman, when this might happen, what did president obama's chairman say? two years, maybe a little before, maybe a little later, allealan simpson piepped up, i k one year. -- piepped up, i think one year. hopefully we're not going to have a debt crisis in a year or two years. but these people who took testimony for weeks and months and provided their opinion on how to fix our debt say we're facing a debt crisis that could put us into a recession and surge unemployment, even though it's just beginning to come down a little bit. this is not a republican-democratic squabble. these are democrats, leaders, that warned us. alice ribling with pete domenici, now retired from the senate, said, i've never been more afraid for my country. on

erskine bowles and alan simpson, the cochairman of prison obama's budget debt commission signed a joint statement before the budget committee, and they said this is the most predictable economic crisis this nation has ever faced. the debt is growing out of control. so, i would say that the greatest thing we could do for our economy, the greatest thing we could do to put this country on a path to financial success and growth and vigorous strength in the future is to get our financial house in order. this will do it. i think those who have worked for it so much, and i do believe it is not a hopeless task. one vote short in 97. i believe we can pass at this time. i thank all of you who have worked so hard. >> like my colleagues i want to thank senator hatch for his leadership and everybody else for their leadership. this is a team effort, all 47. i know that you all like to write about the times we had 45 and maybe not 44. all 47-cent above most amendment. they think this is one thing to consider. the second thing, i know some of the people in the poli-sci goober department say wait a minu

president obama's own commissi commission, simpson-bowles commission, i think is alan simpson that said this as their issued their report, he said there's no more they can to bring home. the biggest day. i think is exactly right. -- the page is dead. when they see these numbers they see the stickers on fox and cnn about the interest payments, and just rolling by thousands of dollars a second, type of thing. we got to make some change. >> you mentioned scott walker. what is the situation in wisconsin mean to you? wisconsin, virginia, very different states, but what does the experience we've been watching in wisconsin mean to you? >> it means that there really are big battles in the country between the left and the right. and for there to be significant results gained and restoring fiscal responsibility at both the state and federal level don't have to be some very tough battles. and there were two issues really in wisconsin. one was the walker budget to address the $3.7 billion deficit similar to what had in virginia, and i think largely the citizens were with him. they got it he was ver

bowles and cochairman alan simpson said the president's budget doesn't go nearly far enough in addressing the nation's fiscal challenges. chairman ryan's budget would return federal spending, specifically known as non-defense discretionary spending, to 2008 levels. that's the level before the massive spending unleashed by the obama administration. spending cuts proposed in ryan's budget total $5.8 trillion over ten years. in a recent article, john taylor, an economics professor at stanford; gary becker, nobel prize winner; and george shultz, former secretary of labor, treasury and state, quote -- and i quote -- "credible actions that reduce the rapid growth of federal spending and debt will raise economic growth and lower the unemployment rate." end of quote. and then they say it again, higher private investment, not more government purchases, is the surest way to increase prosperity. end of quote. so, madam president, we duesing government spending can increase -- reduce being government spending can increase government productivey and jobs. president obama sought to stimulate the econom

he had alan simpson, former senator, and erskine bowles, who was the chief of staff for president clinton, and they joined with 16 other people to figure out how to get out of this morass, and they came up with a plan, a good plan. now, their 18-member commission had to have 14 members in favor of it before they could actually put it into a forced vote for us, and they didn't get that. they came close. they didn't get that. of course, i -- i would have liked them to have broken that down, promised that they would do all six parts, but break it down into six different parts because different people objected to different parts. there have been plenty to pass each part, and we may have to do that in order to get the same thing done here on the senate floor, and i hope we will pursue that, we need to pursue that. it's an absolute must. now, the president did the right thing appointing the commission, but we had the state of the union speech this year, and i really thought he would take what the commission said and make it clear to the united states. the president is very good at making things