the base-broadening in 1982, enabled the lower individual income tax rates to continue to be indexed for inflation. while also reducing the deficit. it was clearly a tradeoff between base bradening versus lower tax rates which continued in 1984 and thculminated in the 1964 act. and a recent study by two treasury comments found that 50 to 60% of corporations and only 30 to 40% of pass-through businesses took advantage of the recent bonus depreciation rules. the study notes that while accelerated depreciation in theory reduces the cost of investment, quote, in practice, various factors limit the use of bonus depreciation and its relative value. financial statement accounting is one of those factors that influence the company's business decisions and which economists generally don't include that their tax modeling. in addition to financial accounting, tax risk and uncertainty, compliance burdens and other nonincome taxes will affect business decisions. financial accounting is one of several reasons why in corporations may prefer a permanently lower corporate tax rate to more target tax

we're willing to put all base broadeners including expensing or accelerated depreciation on the table in exchange for a materially lower tax rate. doing so, however, would come with a cost. both macroeconomically and to our company. strong capital costs incentives like expensing generate new investment and new productive assets in the united states. and it's reflected in the chart i attached to my written testimony. there's an almost perfect correlation between new investment and jobs in this country. the from our company's perspective, we would generally expect is lower tax rate to increase our tax flow, bottom-line earnings and earnings-per-share and to the contrary, reducing capital incentives would have a generally greater adverse affect on our cash flow. this is important because as is often said, cash is the life blood of any business. our investors paid close attention to our cash flow as well as to our bottom line earnings and earnings per share and they routinely quiz our ceo and cfo about all three. one of our biggest cash outflows that gets a lot of attention is capital exp

it was only 60% of the base broadening. 40% of the corporate base broadening was not from tax expenditures. i think the tax treasury and elsewhere, if they look hard will be able to find additional base broadeners beyond just the tax expenditure list. >> do you have that list? i mean, the $195 billion you talk about. can you tell me what are the pieces in there that we would have to get rid of? >> i don't have those with me, but we've gone through the entire gtc estimating list and they have rots of provisions that were not yet estimated and we've linked that to the tax expenditure list. and 40% of the estimated tax expenditures have not yet been estimated. >> i think i would appreciate -- everybody on the committee would appreciate if you give us what your estimate is. anybody else have any ideas how to do this? >> i would just like to echo the comments, you know, sort of a quick fix answer is difficult to give. i do think we have to look line by line at each of the expenditures and weigh it against tax rate reduction. and certain expenditures are going to be more important to tax growth.

it was only 60% of the base broadening. 40% of the corporate base broadening in 1986 was not from tax expenditures. i think the tax, treasury and elsewhere if they look hard will be able to find additional base broadeners beyond the tax expenseture list. >> do you have that list? that $195 billion you talk about? can you tell me what are the pieces in there that we would have to get rid of? >> i don't have those with me. we've gone through the entire jct revenue estimating list and they have lots of provisions that were not yet estimated. and we've linked that to the tax expenseture list. 40% of the estimated tax expenditures are not yet been estimated. >> i think i would like to echo the comments. sort after a quick fix answer is difficult to give. you have to look line by line at each of the expenditures and balance that. we need to weigh it against the be

you talk about base broadeners as a trade-off. there certainly is as i mentioned in my prepared remarks. that's something we take into consideration. cash flow effects are detrimental, there's no question about it. but lowering a tax rate overall to something around 25%, i think, would be well received. >> mr. schichtel? >> i agree with mike. resounding yes. i think if we can get to a 25% rate or something close to that that's in line with the rest of the developed world, you'll find the vast majority of the business community coming out in support of it. i know it's a challenge to get there. from our perspective as a company, our health and growth is tied inextricably to the growth and health of the overall economy. no question about it. that's the biggest driving factor in how well we do over the long run. our view is that a significantly lower rate and a simpler tax code will -- be done to the benefit of the entire economy, will encourage overall -- more growth and development, and that will, in turn, increase the returns that

there will have to be base broadening, that governor romney talked about.his plan is revenue neutral. the governor also cutting spending significantly, so that spending is a share of gdp falls back to 20% by 2016. that's how the plantain together really reduces the deficit. >> glenn, ballpark me on the spending cuts. various numbers out there. 500 billion from the baseline, by 2015, 2016. i don't know if that's right or wrong. you are the guy. what will the spending cut look like? >> that's about right. about $500 billion. when people say we can't cut government spending like that. yes, we can. we're going back to a spending share of gdp that prevailed before the financial crisis and before the real buildup in government. the president's budget by contrast wants to continue to elevate government spending and let's be clear. that means higher taxes. >> the 20% solution, coauthorized by glenn hubbard of the columbia business school, governor romney's new position. we'll hear about it in tonight's debate. thank you very much. >> my pleasure, thanks. >>> all ri

you have to think of how do you broaden the tax base, and how do you broaden the tax base without affecting economic growth or minimal impact on economic growth? that is the key issue. raising marginal tax rates can be politically attractive, politically popular. in this country we have 50% of u.s. voters that don't pay any income tax. 60% receive more from the government than they pay in taxes. raising on the highest 20% or 30% can be politically expeditious. you have to broad any meaning -- it would require a broadening of the tax base. raising tax rates will not help it. >> even though they don't pay political taxes, it's aa historical distinction. most other countries don't make that distinction. you fund social security and medicare out of the payroll taxes. that is an important federal tax obligation that most voters actually do pay. >> i would raise a quick point on that. i view medicare and payroll taxes. those are pension funds and health care costs. those are not taxes to pay for general government expenditures. >> i agree. >> let me make this point, because this is where we have

how do you broaden the tax base? and how do you broaden the tax base without affecting economic growth, or minimal impact on economic growth. and that is the key issue. raising marginal tax rates can be politically attractive. it can be politically popular. in this country, 50% of u.s. voters don't pay any federal income tax. 60% receive more from the government than they pay in income taxes. so raising taxes on the remaining highest 20 or 30% can be politically expeditious. but i think you have to any meaningful reduction of the deficit is broadening the tax base. raising tax rates will not help it. >> even people don't pay what is called federal income tax, they pay payroll tax. it's historical that we make this distinction. most countries don't make that distinction. you're funding social security. you're funding medicare out of the payroll taxes. that is an important federal tax obligation that most voters actually do pay. >> i would raise one quick point on that. i view medicare and payroll taxes, those are pens

and even if you went with a base-broadeners you talked about chairman camp, if you got down to a rate of 25%, no doubt that would also increase growth. >> i would love to keep our tax incentives like accelerated depreciation. i would love to see expensing extended as part of an overall tax reform that lowered the rates to 25%. but i don't see how that's possible in a revenue-neutral fashion. i think for the short term, until we have corporate tax reform, i think expensing, extending bonus depreciation is tremendously important and impactful. certainly from our vantage point and the vantage point, it's tremendously important. that being said, if we all put everything on the table and we start working toward a targeted and a simpler code, i think we'll see more growth and for us, that will definitely result in more jobs and more investment. >> all right. >> i've got a question for ms. hanlan and mr. neubig. in congress we measure by looking at cash stackses over a ten-year period without using a discount rate. and that's very different from how public companies calculate under gaap and

not the first in the administration to say those words since i been here, get rid of loop holes, broaden the base. it's music to my ears. why isn't it in this year's budget? >> we talked about this in some detail in the spring, we put together a pretty comprehensive plan and we had to take a lot of time trying to convince -- the supercommittee wanted to take a run at it, we gave them a bit of time. >> listen, i'm mildly encouraged by your answer because i was fully expecting you to blame president bush for it so i'm glad it's my fault. >> you know, we have got a limited amount of time. >> with this rationale, if we're trying to keep attract american -- that philosophy concerns me because that same philosophy could be -- i work in a state that works very hard to lure business to south carolina with a favorable tax environment and i'll be very concerned if the administration starts using this language not only internationally but domestically as well. >> there's no risk of that. >> mr. chairman, first of all i want to associate myself with the remarks of my colleague from florida, ms. kcas

it is illustrating a narrowing of focus, and i find that really troubling, and hopefully, we are broadening, and there will be a lot of advocacy. this will show it is not capable of being the small business commissioned it was chartered to be. cracks seeing no commissioner's comments, we didn't have public comment -- >> seeing no commissioner's comments, we have no public comment? >> public comment is opened. >> seeing none, thank you very much. much appreciated. public comment is closed, and back to you, chris. >> as with previous rounds, we will go in order of those nominated. commissioner kathleen dooley was nominated. on that motion. commissioner clyde: yes. commissioner dooley: yes. >> unfortunately, you cannot of spain. you need reasons for it -- you cannot abstain. >> the motion fails, 3-3. commissioner o'brien was nominated. [calling votes] that motion failed, 3-3. >> the you say the rest of the meeting is adjourned or just this item? >> without being able to take a formal action on this, we are required to close the meeting. if we are not able to continue this through a formal moti

the basic elements will lower rates and broaden the base. so let's talk about -- >> individuals as well? >> absolutely. so let's talk about what i think separates us still in terms of basic strategy. the dominant plans out there that have bipartisan support, simpson-bowles, domenici-rivlin, the senate six share in common with us a basic recognition that you need through tax reform to find a way to generate a modest amount of additional revenues. so in our proposal, in our budget, revenues this year of gdp would rise modestly back up to around 20%. that's slightly lower than where they ends up in simpson/bowles. higher than you're going to get through current law. 1% gdp higher. i think in your framework last year you showed revenues rising to 19% of gdp. >> right. >> although, you don't necessarily xpris explicitly em rate reform. i think the two main differences between how we think about this today, we have to test this when we start to get serious about it, is a explicit commitment you need from both sides. it is part of a balanced plan,

you talked about lowering rates, broadening the base, eliminating the special purposes and so on. and the president had a good statement in the state of the union, talked about an economy where everyone gets a fair shot as their fair share and everyone plays by the same set of rules. that's the basic premise here. how does the proposal in the budget meet this test when it eliminates the manufacturing deduction for certain tax payers, but then doubles it for certain other taxpayers, but not for other manufacturing? >> good question. i'll be talking about this in more detail. >> obviously not everybody is going to be playing by the same set of rules there in terms of tax charges. >> good and fair question. let me set the basic framework we think should guide corporate tax reform although we will say more in the next couple weeks. we are going to propose a broad reform that will lower rates, broaden the base and eliminate and wipe out a very substantial fraction, dozens and dozens and dozens of special tax preferences for businesses. >> while creating a whole bunch of new ones. >> no

to do that, you have to lower the rate, broaden the base.he good news is we have a way to do that on the corporate side. take it down to 20%. it can be done. it can be bipartisan. we worked on this with regard to the individual rate. there is a little more, i would say, political controversy because the 2001-2003 tax code is ending at the end of this year, so the so-called bush tax cuts are ending. most of which no one wants to see happen. my many. but why don't you put together a code that are more. we not only want enough for -- >> so the tax reform

that's a way of a broadening the base.nating the carried interest rule is a way of broadening the base so that hedge fund managers who are simply earning income don't pay a capital gains rate, they pay at an income tax rate. so i think this president has put forward both on paper and through speeches quite a bit of information about his approach to individual taxes. laura. >> on corporate tax reform, are you comfortable with the idea that while you are closing certain corporate loopholes, this -- your proposal does in its own way pick winners and losers in the sense that there are new advantages for manufacturers and clean energy makers? >> we are comfortable with an approach that eliminates a huge amount of the complications, loopholes, special provisions, subsidies from the tax code, and focuses the tax code on growing the american manufacturing sector, growing the advanced manufacturing sector, and assisting small businesses, which are, after all, an important engine of economic growth and a hugely important engine of j

this is no way to broaden and build a party. the republican party has a core problem and it's this. barack obama won the white house in 2008 having lost the white vote by 11.6 million voters. the reason he won anyway was because he won non-white voters by 24 million voters. if john mccain had the same electorate that bill clinton had in 1992, just that same composition of the electorate, john mccain would have beaten barack obama, they can't broaden out if they appear to be too close with racists, insensitive to minorities and just mean. >> there is no effort, hey we have the best policies for minorities, we have the best policies for those who are income-challenged right now. they make no effort. >> ed, you're hitting on the crucial problem, that is who is mitt romney? tomorrow he will be attending cpac as we know and the engagement party that nobody wants to attend. he's turning up hoping that he will receive that diamond-gilded engagement ring. they are not sure if they want to marry him. mitt romney started talking about his mormon faith. he talked about experiences as a mormon

broaden the base, lower the rates.ur budget last year said top rate of 25% for businesses and individuals, a territorial tax system so we don't get into this repealing, deferral and double taxing american companies and get rid of all the loopholes and deductions. you can raise the same ref newspaper for the government in a far more efficient way. that combined with spending cuts, spending controls and entitlement reforms dodges the bullet of debt and gets us back on a path to prosperity. >> are you going to come back with a new round of paul ryan and now senator ron widen, democrat of oregon, are you going to propose that art part of your package on reform. knowing they'll come after you, will you put it in your budget again? >> i don't know about that. i haven't written my budget yet and it's a collaborative effort with my colleagues. we're trying to show there's room for a bipartisan consensus and strengthen medicare, keep the guarantee for the current seniors and have a problem that young people can rely on. right n

i think we need to get the story about that and broaden it. the aging population, you know, why is it that -- why is it that we think once someone is over the age of 55 they can't be -- why are universities focused on 20 to 30-year-olds? maybe we're going to have to start thinking about educational institutions focusing on 55-year-olds if you look at the world and where that's going? so i think our mind set on education needs a reset fundamentally. >> if you look at this question back and forth, how many folks in the room have either read the book moneyball or seen the movie? so brad pitt, right? and it just seems -- the whole premise is you've got to measure right. it's about baseball and the oakland athletics and the general manager would insight from a young statistician basically decided there was a better way to measure baseball performance than just rbis and the traditional measurements. we're measuring the right thing and it's a little bit more comprehensive. we do these cartoon measures and we need to have a much more textured view of

that would lower rates and broaden the base. and if you meet the other tests we have laid out in the president's principals you could generate a reasonable amount of revenue and allow a fair and balanced deficit plan and have something better for economic growth, you can do it either two ways but now we have a problem because we do not have this muc debate now, we need to start doing the foundation laying. >> one of the sort of frame works that we all seem to have bought in to around here is that the notion that at the end of this year, we ought to have the payroll tax go back to where it used to be, 6.2%. it seems to me that if we are concerned about reforming the tax code, it would make a lot of sense to find a way to continue in the future, in future years with a lower payroll tax as an incentive for more people to be hired in jobs and i know we have ourselves into this by saying we will fund social security through a payroll tax, but if we had another way to fund social security that would allow us to cut the payroll tax per

it was only 60 percent of the base broadening.a 40% of the corporate base broadening in 1986 was not from tax expenditures. i think the tax treasury and elsewhere, if they look card will be a will to find additional base runners beyond just the tax expenditure list. >> net 195 billion you talk about, can you tell me, what other pieces and that you have to get rid of? >> i can't. we have a link that to the tax expenditure less. 40 percent of the estimated tax expenditures have not yet been estimated. >> i think that we would appreciate it because everyone would appreciate if you would give us what your estimate, at this anybody else have any ideas how to do this? >> i would like to echo the comments, sort of a quick fix answer is difficult to give. i think we have to look line by line that each of the expenditures and balance that and weighed against the benefits of tax rate reduction. certain expenditures will be more important for growth, and that will equal jobs and we will want to retain those. others we can look at a pro way.

that is the base broadener.u start equalizing the rates of nonlabor income like -- >> i'm not going to -- >> that broadens the base. >> i think what we're talking about is truly wrod broadening the base not strictly after going just after the wealthy americans. i'm not suggesting that you shouldn't but to really change the equation, to change the plot, if you will, you need to broaden the base and go much further down the food chain. >> so you're talking about raising taxes on 0 people below $250,000. i agree with that. i don't think now is the time. the bush tax cuts should fully phase out. i go further than the president. but not for a ynumber of years. >> doug, where are you on that? >> i think the great tragedy is on the other side, on the spending side. we have a social safety net -- medicare, medicaid, social security. crucial programs that americans rely on that is frayed -- social security 23 we're at 25 and we do 20, we have to start there. and that gets frustrating for conservatives. >> i don't -- i de

. >> plus san francisco broaden the ban on bags. it will cost >> plus san francisco broaden the ban on bags. it will cost you to take one >> accu-weather forecast center winter weather paid us a one day visit and now i'll show you what is coming next in the day visit and now i'll show you what is coming next in the accu-weather forecast coming u >> from paul to john. poet song writer and certain truth thought to be he feel evidence. now scientist will see if they are right. stay with us. news sweetheart. we need to talk. i've seen your stunts online. i can explain... jumping a ramp in a shopping cart. so 2005. wait, what? and only 3 likes? honey, it's embarrassing. carol's son got over 12 million views on that dancing squirrel video. don't you want that? i...i suppose. now go make your dad and me proud. try something funny. [ male announcer ] now everyone's up to speed. get high speed internet for $14.95 a month for 12 months with a one year term. at&t. >> in a major bay area city tonight, new resolve to fight the seamingly endless

loopholes, broaden the base, simplify the tax code. it's music to my ears. why isn't it in this year's budget? >> as your cleeolleagues know, had to spend a lot of time trying to talk your colleagues out of defaulting on the country and the government. we lost a little time. the supper committee wanted to take a run at it. we gave them a bitter time. >> i'll reclaim my time. i was mildly encouraged by your answer. i was fully expecting you to blamement bush for it. i'm glad it's your fault. >> i'm saying we've got a limited amount of time. >> if we're starting to talk about preventinging other countries from attracting american businesses through unusually low tax rates, that philosophy concerns me. that same philosophy could be applied domestically as well as internationally. i work in a state that works very hard to lure business to south carolina with a favorable tax environment. i'd be very concerned if this administration starts using this language, not only internationally but domestically as well. >> i can assure you no risk of that. >> ms. wasserman

corporate tax reform -- lowering the rates, and broadening the base. these are things i noticed administration has talked about doing -- i know the administration has talked about doing. it will be talking a political year. there is growing consensus on the tax reform side, and the energy side. my hope is we will be able to make progress if not this year, then right after the election, regardless who is collected. >> -- elected. for>> and not a lot happens at this level. what are you all pushing for and the end of this day, what do you want on the priority list? >> i still think like a business guy. i do not know about you, but i just happen to be mayor right now. you own a company. you have these competitors. you're dysfunctional your competition loves it. if your china or germany and you are watching us bicker over all of these things, they loved it, especially when it comes to manufacturing and manufacturing policy. the have federal industrial policies were they're not playing with the same rules we are, and they say that is not fair. well, guess wh

that's why we're about a broad rate lowering, base broadening tax reform with safeguards that prevents people from shifting investment overseas. >> you're not the first member of the administration to say those words in e

in numerous in the them means the rule would broaden and elmore this arrived here in dade 409624 um and his diamonds and the roughly 351 unchanged and more just arrived in europe and of the magazine's as an immediate seven of diamonds and meant to them in 14 k gold mountain and the scene green using champagne using the yellow but it's very different because of the rough and the carat weight 71 points and this is natural the severity of the will find in that case on a course of the horse they ask and raise the the real but i found with these to defend their and fan them earing and look on monday weekender at each week and it's the biggest jim kinnear this weekend with the three amigos and rose one of our models jessica witnesses should be greater should to paris to 2¢ and rose in it to me on the fears and again in as can be as vigorous vs and then we ended up with the sick horses from to kids store and right of it yet again common herd your salon early in this is gonna be gone laminated drought this morning when the glue them and see all diamonds me a half-dozen totem and beatrice invisi

you have to think of how you broaden the tax base. how'd you broaden the tax base without affecting economic growth, or with minimal impact? that is the issue. raising marginal tax rates can be politically attractive. it can be politically popular. in this country, 50% of u.s. voters don't pay any federal income tax. 60 percent and receive more from the government than they pay in income taxes. raising taxes on the remaining 20% or 30% canopied -- can be politically wise. raising tax rates will not help. >> even though people don't pay, they pay payroll taxes. it is a historical accident that we make this distinction. some countries do not make that distinction. your funding social security and medicare out of payroll taxes. that is an important federal tax obligation that most voters do pay. >> one question. i view medicare and payroll taxes, those are pension funds and health care costs. those are not taxes to pay for general government expenditures. >> let me make this point. this is where we have a disagreement. when i look back a

. >> coming up san francisco broadens its ban on bags. it will cost to you take one. >> and a household pet giving you another reason to help spare the air. stay with us. abababababababababb >>> san francisco toughening up a ban on plastic bags. the board of supervisor as proved broadening its 5-year-old ban to include retail stores and restaurants. just like san jose started doing stores will be able to charge 10 cents for a type of paper or reusable bag they provide. >> the cost of providing plastic bags and paper bags people don't know is factored into the cost of our groceries and goods purchased so this is just making that cost more obvious. so you're able to pay for a paper bag like a carton of mic. >> the bags will be allowed in san francisco to carry bulky items or food the ban takes affect next year. >> wood smoke is not only dangerous to people but to pets as well. that is why the animal rescue foundation is asking pet owners to be more consensus about sparing the air. they recommend monitoring how your pet is breathing. >> if y

pulitzer has broadened the impact of the arts in our national life by bringing great works into the publicartin puryear. [applause] the 2011 national medal of arts to martin puryear for his reflections on history culture and identity through sculpture. mr. puryear's mastery of wood, stone and metal, and his commitment to manual skill offer a stirring counterpoint to an increasingly digital world. [applause] mel tillis. [applause] the 2011 national medal of arts to mel tillis for his contributions to country music. with over 1,000 songs and more than 60 albums to his name mr. tillis's unique blend of warmth and humor distinguishes him as one of the most inventive singer-songwriters of his generation. [applause] accepting on behalf of the uso united service organizations sloan gibson. [applause] the 2011 national medal of arts to united service organizations for lifting the spirits of service members and their families through the arts. the uso continues to support members of our armed forces by bringing iconic american artists to share the sights and sounds of home with troops stationed aro

that is a way of broadening the base. eliminating carried interest is a way of broadening the base. hedge fund managers who are earning income do not pay a capital gains rate, they pay in income tax rate. the president put forward, both on paper and three speech is quite a bit of information about his approach to individual texas. >> are you comfortable with the idea that what you are closing certain corporate loopholes your proposal gets winners and losers in the sense that there are new advantages for manufacturers and clean energy makers? >> we are comfortable with an approach that eliminates a huge amount of the complications loopholes, special provisions, subsidies from the tax code. it focuses the tax code on growing the american manufacturing sector. growing the advanced manufacturing sector. and assisting small businesses which are, after all important to economic growth and hugely important to job growth in this country. yes. we believe that we need to eliminate a lot of the existing complexities from the tax code. then, we need to identify very clearly what our priorities

friday, crews broadened their search. looking in this area as well.u look cloechl, they went -- closely, they went in with their own dogs searching the area neighbors say is very large. >> around the hill, on a whole 'nother hill after that. the roads are all over the country side. and shermantine would have had free access to all that. >> reporter: investigators would have left these woods mid-afternoon after scouring it for eight hours. >> reporter: one of the big questions, will investigators search through the weekend? and it's hard to say at this point. you murder in that story -- you heard in that story, a lot of people think there are bones to be found. >>> a norovirus outbreak is hitting some sections of the bay area harder than others. reggie kwu marbreaks down the -- kumar breaks down the counties. >> reporter: in contra costa county, there have been 54 comprehendeded cases of the -- confirmed cases of the illness confirmed. 24 schools, 25 long-term care facilities, nursing home, reported the illness. in alameda county, there are reports of

i think you say a better way to do it is to lower rates and broaden basis broadenbases -- borade -- broadenses. i could not agree more. we have had all of these bipartisan working groups. this is for my friends. go to slide 10. a lot of folks think that if we lower tax rates, the rich will just with everybody else off that they will get away with murder. take a look at the facts -- when we have lowered tax rates since 1980, the share of the tax burden for the wealthier people has gone up. 1986 is a good example. the shares shot up so the wealthy actually pay a higher proportion of the tax burden as those tax rates go down. why? three reasons -- we provided middle and lower income relief for families throughout that time. cutting top rates actually increased economic growth, but for mobility, and prosperity -- >> not so much, actually. >> i will get to the next one. we will show you an adjustment of that. third, we have taken away loopholes that benefit the well- off. >> also not so much. >> that is the point i'm trying to get to. in 1986, we closed loopholes. we went to a 21% rate in the de

it can broaden the impact building off this settlement.ney that can be put back into the homes of those folks who were saving money on the refinancing, helping to build their equity back up. they may decide to spend that money on local businesses. either way, it's good for families and it's good for our economy. it's only going to happen if congress musters the will to act. i ask every american to raise your voice and demand that they do. because there really is no execution for inaction. there is no excuse for doing nothing to help families avoid foreclosure. that's not who we are. we are americans and we look out for one another. we get each other's backs. that's not a democratic issue, that's not a republican issue. that's who we are as americans. the bipartisan nature of this settlement and the outstanding work that these state attorneys general did is a testament to what happens when everybody's pulling in the same direction. that's what today's settlement is all about, standing up for the american people, holding those who broke the

he broadened the reach of african-american culture with music, dance and style. train began in 1970. it aired from 1971 to 2006. gladys knight performed on the show's pilot episode. >> was a pioneer like you would not believe. he is an unsung hero. means so much to me. he really did. >> so many of us enjoyed that program so much. music producer quincy jones also calls cornelius a pioneer. he said before mtv, there was soul train. >>> pfizer is recalling one million packs of birth control pills after uncovering a packaging error that could lead to accidental pregnancies. the packets have expiration dates between july 31st, 2013 and march 31st, 2014. a company spokeswoman says the problem has been corrected but if you have the packages pfizer advising women to start using another form of contraception, immediately. >> state department of water resources conning its second snow survey of the year right now. like the first manual survey january 3rd, at echo summit the water content measurement is expected to be small 19% of normal then. the latest readings indicate w

we have to look at broadening our leadership. it is time that both sides of city hall have representation at the top leadership. i have great respect for commissioner o'brien's service. he brought himself very well, and his advocacy along with the work of every commissioner and the work of the small business community that didn't turn out in force with the very important issues -- when the small business community gets a b and thereby, they turn themselves out just fine. -- gets a bee in their bonnet, they turn themselves out just fine. i have to give the credit to the broader hong small business community and business community there. from retail, we have not had a business leader at the top, the executive positions, as you would say, is from ground-floor retail. we really need to look at that and we need development in city hall. the liquor lobby is very strong. there is a lot of money there to have that advocacy. little retail stores don't have the same power. they don't have the same resources. they don't have the same organi

typically more male soe voters, and the party, if it's going to be a long-term majority party, needs to broadenhat base. the concern is that the 2012 election has taken a turn that makes that task of modernizing the party and broadening its base, makes it more difficult. the sort of sprint among the candidates to sound toughest on cracking down on illegal immigration risks offending hispanic american voters who are here illegally, but don't necessarily like that rhetoric. the discussion about contraception and some of these social issues don't help with independent voters and many women voters, who either are opposed to the republican positions on these issues, or feel that they're really a distraction from what they want the party talking about, economy and jobs. so a lot of people in our story in politico today were, you know, on the record, voicing concern about the tone of the race. >> is that one reason why you think that bob mcdonnell, who some would say, is on the short list to be vice president, the vice presidential running mate, backed off on what many republicans in virginia are tell

. >> this broadens into what is going on here? there is the side that says this is a war on religion which it isn't. then there is the statement that there is a big war on contraception. in fact, we can't even find out how many people are employed by a catholic employer in the united states. we don't have an entity that seems to know the answer to that question which tells you it's a wicked small number. and so we're not talking about, you know, taking birth control availability through a health care plan away from anyone else except that. the numbers on that get -- let's look at the poll onz this. i have a big, big graphic worked follow up tore tonight over here. here's the poll that everyone talks about. americans generally in favor. this but at 55% which is not some overwhelming majority. it's a workable majority. catholics, the idea that an employer has to provide birth control within your health sppl is supported by more catholics than the population in general. once you focus to the actual issue that they're looking at now w