success. >> what is the cbo mission? >> it is to provide nonpartisan information on the economy and the budget to the congress, and really increasingly to the public as well. that was not as anticipated when the cbo was formed, not this lots of access that individual members of the public and the median now have the cbo products that they didn't have before because of the internet and other sources. and i think increasingly its mission has broadened really to include serving the public in addition to the congress. the nonpartisan nature of the cbo's work is very crucial, and the law that created the cbo, it said only that the director and the cbo step should be appointed without regard to partisan affiliation. but the first director who was alice rivlin was a giant of public service and one who still is strong at the age of 80 really created a culture that was very much moved from just the drug stepping up when without regard to party affiliation to doing their work in a nonpartisan manner. >> who appoints the director?

the cbo has been under a lot of fire. i think we'll have a lot to talk about. >> i'm glad to be here and to have you here. >> this whole event is about the economy. i wanted to start off with a broad question. five years since the start of the recession, are you surprised they where we are at this point in the economic recovery? >> yes. we have been surprised and disappointed by the pace of economic recovery. the people who were more ripe are the one to look at more carefully the experience of other countries and earlier point of the u.s. experience. crises of housing and the financial system. ofy found that these sorts recoveries are very prolonged. in retrospect we put too much weight on not just the postwar experience. we understand this is a different sort of event. is a rapid monetary policy response. that would be enough to fit the economy fairly not in a v-shaped recovery but a fairly quick u-shaped recovery. we marked it down our projections for economic growth. that this point there is still considerable slack le

. >> host: when was the cbo formed? >> guest: cpo was formed in 974 and it was, in fact, a reaction to some of the perceived excesses. well, there were actual excesses by the nixon administration. it was part of an effort by the congress to try to reassert its role in the budget process. and as a part of that, they also created the budget committees and the budget resolution that if they were going to be equal players in the budget process, they really needed to have their own budget agency as opposed to relying on numbers that came from the executive branch, and that's really the reason for the cbo. >> host: and if you had to say yes or no, has the cbo been successful? >> guest: i think it's been phenomenally successful, and i think its success is mostly measured by the fact that i think if you talk to most people in the media and, indeed, most people if they're being honest with you on both sides of the aisle in the congress, they would say that the congressional budget office -- at least concerning the budget -- prob

>> our goal is to first out reach to the cbos. because we want this opportunity to be successful. and so, we are advertising through the cbos so that their client base would get the technical assistance ongoing technical assistance, so that we have a successful opportunity. >> but we could make it broader if that is your direction. >> i think that you should go both, i mean that it seems like you could say that if somebody had less experience, they should work with the cbo, but if they are qualified as an lbe and have experience, why would we force them to go through a channel that they may or may not need. it seems like, that since you have a panel that could evaluate this, they would be able to evaluate but maybe, we are assuming that, if you go through a cbo it is because you need their help. in some way in terms of the ongoing technical assistance and there may be a qualified lbe that could apply and should be evaluated and i don't see why we would close that door. >> so we will include that and we have a network of publications that go out to small business entities and also

and for staff, thoughtful approach in involving our cbos that work with small businesses to assist in the out reach for this opportunity. and to provide ongoing financial, and operational technical assistance, which will insure the success of the selected participants, thank you. >> thank you. >> any other public comment? commissioners? >> yeah, i think that it is a great idea. and it is a really nice space and you are not going to need enough of a lot of expenses to get it up and running. and i also think that the reasonably priced and the only, other concern that i would have is where we are going to advertise in order to let all san franciscans know about it? >> our goal is to first out reach to the cbos. because we want this opportunity to be successful. and so, we are advertising through the cbos so that their client base would get the technical assistance ongoing technical assistance, so that we have a successful opportunity. >> but we could make it broader if that is your direction. >> i think that you should go both, i mean that it seems like you could say that if somebody had

and revised estimates and i can point you to cbo for the cbo's figures. what i can tell you is since the very very rocky start that this enrollment period endured, we have seen substantial interest rewarded with an ability consummated to enroll in insurance coverage through the marketplaces. that's a good thing. the purpose of the law was to make sure that americans across the country had options available to them for quality and affordable health insurance and that is being realized. we have a lot of work to do. we are 13 days out. a lot of people can and will still enroll and we are doing a multifaceted campaign to reach as many people as we can so they know what their options are and they know that march 31 is the deadline and they need to enroll by then or they won't be able to until next year. >> is there a possibility that 7 million could be met especially this week in the present told u.s. si that he is anticipating large numbers to come in on the site and through the other sites that are linked to the federal government to register. >> we have all

if cbo is right, what is the increase to the deficit? >> in terms of the direct translation, when one looks at those numbers and you look at where we are with cbo in the front years, it flips in terms of when we're above and below cbo. the question of the last five years in terms of where we are -- >> how much though? how much money? >> specifically, i do not know the exact number. >> think 0.1 as about $300 billion. so if in fact omb is not correct and cbo is correct, then your projections would be off by $600 billion after the deficit. one more minute and i want to visit one more topic. i've got ten more topics. i think i'm going to get to one. the independent payment advisory board. i can tell you the doctors out there are shuddering about how they're going to be able to care for patients. last year your budget projected that $4.1 billion in savings would be able to be arrived at because of the independent payment advisory board. that's decreasing services to many seniors, we would suggest. that number, i thought, was fictitious. this

if cbo is right, what is the increase to the deficit? >> in terms of the direct translation, when one looks at those numbers and you look at where we are with cbo in the front years, it flips in terms of when we're above and below cbo. the question of the last five years in terms of where we are -- >> how much though? how much money? >> specifically, i do not know the exact number. >> think 0.1 as about $300 billion. so if in fact omb is not correct and cbo is correct, then your projections would be off by $600 billion after the deficit. one more minute and i want to visit one more topic. i've got ten more topics. i think i'm going to get to one. the independent payment advisory board. i can tell you the doctors out there are shuddering about how they're going to be able to care for patients. last year your budget projected that $4.1 billion in savings would be able to be arrived at because of the independent payment advisory board. that's decreasing services to many seniors, we would suggest. that number, i thought, was fictitious. this

most importantly is what everybody at cbo does. everybody comes to cbo knowing that this is a place where we will to really high-quality objective work, where our own value of judgments and policy , do not enter the situation. in the entire organization in the culture of the place, it is all most 40 years old. when we've really some studies and they get some attention, sometimes they get less, people are happy or unhappy. to testify,call send tweets, or write letters. that's ok, that's their role. our role is to work on the analysis for the next project. you ever worry about cbo's of validity to maintain a nonpartisan environment or its mission in such a partisan environment moving forward. >> don't be worried about the ability to do objective work. that is so ingrained in the organization and the people there. i worry about the perception of our objectivity. i think in an environment that is as highly partisan is ,ashington is, especially now things can be viewed through partisan lenses. viewedn be fused -- he to suggesting. we ca

in health care costs in the cbo baseline. in the period from now until 2020 you see a 1 trillion-dollar change in the cbo baseline which are reduce health care costs. how those in directing how the numbers change. the issue of long-term deficits and entitlement reform we see that as an important way to control those costs. >> ms. castor. >> thank you mr. chairman and welcome. i was very pleased to see the president's budget a very substantial investment in america's infrastructure our roads, our bridges, our ports the airports and transit systems. this is very important for job creation and important expansion of distances across the country but it's also important because america's infrastructure is in need of great modernization. everyone across every district in this room has a bridge a transit system something happening at their airport where we have fallen behind. so we have great challenges ahead here. i would like to know in greater specificity where the administration through this budget is placing the priority for in

cbo is what congress relies on, the gold standard. dobson used cbo data and averaged the medicare per beneficiary growth rate from 2010-2013. then he applied that rate to the most recent cbo baseline of medicare spending. his conclusion, medicare spending of the next ten years could drop by as much as $9 billion beyond the cbo current forecast. this means something, especially after we look under the hood and closely examine the moving parts driving the data. we are now entering the fifth year of record low growth in national health expenditures. the projection for just 13 -- 2013 growth is just under 4%. health care expenditures are continuing their historic slow rate of growth in spite of a slow, but still recovering economy. many are unaware of that dated trans that really hammer home that the -- the spending trend and offers further evidence that the slowdown will be sustained. this stated trend is reflected in a stunning drop in health care prices. health care prices have fallen 6% in 2009 to a near record low of just under 2% la

and for staff, thoughtful approach in involving our cbos that work with small businesses to assist in the out reach for this opportunity. and to provide ongoing

and for staff, thoughtful approach in involving our cbos that work with small businesses to assist in the out reach for this opportunity. and to provide ongoing financial, and operational technical assistance, which will insure the success of the selected participants, thank you. >> thank you. >> any other public comment? commissioners? >> yeah, i think that it is a great idea. and it is a really nice space and you are not going to need enough of a lot of expenses to get it up and running. and i also think that the reasonably priced and the only, other concern that i would have is

so, you know, with the cbo has been doing in that process is what the cbo always does is have the congress consider legislation. if, you know, it provides an information on the effect of that legislation. it doesn't really have any role to play in terms of trying to force the congress or get the congress to do something that the congress does not want to do. one very important thing when she set up the organization, and this really was the working definition of what it means to be nonpartisan, is she said the congressional budget office will not make recommendations. and that was described to me once someone said if you ask how much something costs that they will tell you how much it costs. if you ask them if it is a good idea they will tell you how much it costs. and so, you know, even though i would agree with you and anybody else who says the budget crisis is dysfunctional, i'm not sure how much they can do about that. other than to try to illuminate the effects of the failure to engage in various kind of policies whether it be deficit reduction or something else. stomach to watch the e

and for staff, thoughtful approach in involving our cbos that work with small businesses to assist in the out reach for this opportunity. and to provide ongoing financial, and operational technical assistance, which will insure the success of the selected participants

in a way that cbo actually scored immigration. what cbo did was they scored a title of the bill, every specific title of the bill that had growth and population. while they did not, they did supplemental efforts in terms of the scoring that would be ready to what you would call dynamic scoring. i think it's a distinction. >> something i want to get into with congress and with the administration and get to using dynamic scoring. but that's not what i want to use the rest of my time on. you also said you had in terms of the offsets, mandatory spending cuts. i believe your number there is $402 billion in reductions in spending, correct? >> that is only for health care changes. so that number does not reflect other mandatory changes such as those that are used to pay for the opportunity for growth and security initiatives, things like crop insurance and other things. >> do you have a rough estimate of what the total would be for all mandatory programs you are accounting? >> i think what we're trying to do is put together, i think the

the port is proposing a pilot program that would distribute this rfp on a targeted basis through the cbos. the port will require that the respondents to this retail opportunity be clients of within of the city's cbos and continue to reach ongoing technical assistance. the cbo, will not have any obligations for the lease other than providing the ongoing technical assistance to their client. the port desires a retail use that serves the water front visitor and neighbor and local workers, locally made foods and goods for sale will be ideal. there are no cooking or venting amendties available in this facility and so the full service restaurant would not be practical here. and this is a warm shell, which means that the facility is improved to the walls and floors, and ready for tenant-funded improvements. and there are two spaces available, and you can see them here. the one on the left is 512 square feet, and that the other adjacent facility is 1430 square feet and these are open and i will show you pictures of facilities that can accommodate, actually more than one, 2, or 3, tenants if they

>> i haven't examined the cbo's model but i think the cbo tends to be as accurate as these kinds of estimates the fact is whatever the impact of the minimum-wage the pentagon conditions in the overall economy. the cbo assumes those are normal conditions, you get more abnormal conditions, the implications change. for example, if we started growing and 4.5%, you can put an increase in the minimum wage and wouldn't have very much of an employment effect because the demand for workers would be so high. melissa: when you look at the numbers you see by doing the math no matter how many numbers you look at it doesn't make sense even if you think it would help 900,000 workers and taken out of poverty the same study says there are 45 million workers right now that are living below the poverty line which is an enormous number so you are talking about whatever it is, 2% of the folks you are talking about. >> the problem is the minimum wage is an inefficient way to address the problem. the issue of the working poor. much more efficient way is the earned income tax credit and the president has proposed to

about cbo. the cbo is there -- other people -- i'm glad it is there. i love what you say and i always agree with what you have to say but there is one thing that concerns me about the dynamic scoring. i am all for dynamic scoring, and what martin talked about in terms of science-based research that acquires -- requires application and investment. my difficulty is this. this is my second problem. the ngo is a lot of this. we have little program, the wic program. i was told to put one dollar in the wic program, i would get three dollars from the same program. there is not an advocate in this town that won't argue to invest more. that is what surprises a little bit about what jim has raised. if you go down the tax policy route, the dynamic route that we will increase revenue by cutting taxes, but the same time, what you are talking about is increasing spending because someone will argue that it will be a return on the investment. i am all for that, i just don't think policies established on capitol hill are science-based enough to make a decision, and for

james, i think that goes towards your employment liaison staff to really work with some of the cbo's particular lau -- the yc to be able to provide additional services maybe to the people that come out of those programs. before there was a lot of construction going on. >> we are coming off a deeper session and we have some focused efforts specifically ycb has been charged with a role and outreach with recounty -- reconnection with this place and county workers and the return of construction workers and there are resources set add for burial removal and other things of that nature. >> thank you. any other questions? >> yes, on the administrative side of it when you said that the mou would support one fte, my reaction was is that enough? >> well, we have two additional positions employment liasons which we have been recently where positions will be funded through the on going obligations for the mission bay development group. we do receive some resources through them for these employment liasons. in our office because we do provide these work force compliant for construction projects c

james, i think that goes towards your employment liaison staff to really work with some of the cbo's particular lau -- the yc to be able to provide additional services maybe to the people that come out of those programs. before there was a lot of construction going on. >> we are coming off a deeper session and we have some

there are some things that the cbo's do very well, not everything. one of the things that cbo's do well is they connected with the families really well and the families trust them because they don't feel they necessarily a part of the establishment. when i was trying to get them to work together, people wanted to but there were always barriers to it and i can't share my information. my database doesn't work with yours and i thought, this is bullshit, sorry. [ laughter ] this is ridiculous to listen to the excuses that we had because we weren't aligned. also. another example, early childhood education, we had a great program huge. but the community also have when you take them into totality is huge also. and yet, there is hardly any discussion between the two groups. and part of it is the kids that we serve, the low income children that we serve in the community, they are going into public schools. why aren't we talking to each other. i'm all for this alignment and the shared vision and so forth. you know, part of what i'm hoping for is we go beyond s

what theubtedly is head of cbo meant in the quote you see here. you see he references beneficiary and provider behavior as driving the slow down. discount financial turmoil and the recession. i am sure this is no surprise to any of you. all of you know this. all of you are creating change every day in hospitals. reduce readmissions, building integrated care networks, deploying sophisticated information technology systems in expanding the use of electronic health records. it is all about efficiency and enhancing value. down should be to stay the course with the structure and innovation that is driving the slow down. in so doing, we will keep within reach the $900 billion in additional medicare savings that he cites. i amis why this morning sending the docs and report to the house and senate budget committee leadership. i will also send them a letter urging congress to exercise caution and avoid burdensome policy mandates and new hospital payment cuts. enough is enough. absorb 117.5t billion dollars in cuts imposed just since 2010. at the same time,

is notength of the cbo in me or the other directors.he it is in the entire -- it is in the entire institution. we get some attention and sometimes less. some people are happy or unhappy. they will make speeches. or they will testify. or they will send tweets or letters. or they will do whatever they do trade that is ok. do you ever worry about cbo's ability to maintain the nonpartisan environment or the mission for a nonpartisan environment moving forward? >> i do not worry about our ability to do objective work. it is so ingrained in the organization and the people who are there. in an environment that is highly ,artisan, as washington is things can be viewed through partisan lenses. they can be viewed as subjecting partisanship. even if a particular estimate is viewed as nonpartisan, there could be questions about why we estimated effects of this proposal and out that proposal. why did you write it this way and not that way? why did you release it on this day of the week and not that day of the week? we were a lot about making sure th

after that, as you said, cbo is belaw us in terms of potential forecast. the blue ship is above us at 2.4%. federal reserve is 2.2-2.4% and we are at 2.3. so there is a range and the differences are much smaller than the uncertainty all of us face. >> question, zack? >> discretionary spending is implemented at the lowest rate in 50 years. i was wondering if you consider that an achievement or failure? >> we think the proposed president's budget is the right level over the ten-year period. we believe they are the correct level. i think it is an argument per why the president's budget as proposed and the levels we proposed in discretionary spending. >> you listed discretionary totals and are those fund dollars or are those not included? >> the totals are what we would do under meeting the 15 level of the ryan-murray agreement. >> there has been debate on whether the affordable care act is bankable savings and health care cost over the long term. can you describe how you calculated the long-term affected of the affordable care act and aca in terms of deficit?

let me make one quick observation about cbo. there, other is people would do away with the senate budget committee and house budget committee. i love what you say. there is one thing that concerns me about dynamic scoring. i am all for dynamic scoring, i dm all for what martin talke about in terms of science-based applies toat i science-based research of what we're going to invest in. my problem is the ngos, the lobbyists. women andrun wic, fits in children. i was told if i invested one dollar in wic, i would get three dollars in medicaid. there is not a lobbyist in this town that would not argue invest more. route,wn the tax policy we are going to increase revenues by cutting taxes, fine. what you are talking about is increasing spending because somebody is going to argue it is going to return as an investment. i am all for that, i just do not believe that policies established on compo hill -- on capitol hill are science-based decision.make a i am all for investment, i am at ie same time, with maya, think investments should be

the cbo gets their forecasting wrong all the time. weathermen get it wrong all the time. we should shift the conversation away to help our coastal cities and that would be the way to go. call it making our coastal cities safe. call it infrastructure spending. maybe that's the way to go. >> it's not only the government, by the way. some people in the private sector -- apple ceo was just getting flak because he's spending a lot of apple's money on it. defended it by saying ifu only want roi reasons, you should get out of the stock. they said, you shouldn't be spending our money on climate change because it's not a settled science. >> what i mind is the government doing it with taxpayer money and they don't use cost benefit analysis. there's no ed out there that any of this money that you cited at the start of the show is there to reverse it. the president getting up there and says, he's the model of the future, and a year later, the company's bankrupt. certainly the private sector is the way to go, not the government sector. >> steve, i want to go back to you. you've got th

according to the cbo but the vast majority enrolling would be previously uninsured deterrents out is previously insured and that is the key difference between but the cbo projected in what has happened. lou: what was projected as a ratio was inverted from the actual projections. and maryland is now shutting down its steel, it's insurance exchange because it is so screwed up. to get the software to start again adding another 30 million. >> and many other states also. massachusetts, hawaii, minne sota that have spent several hundred million dollars of taxpayer money to build the web site that has blown up and to enroll anyone to process the applications by paper but when you cannot even run a website our people supposed to have confidence they can reengineer 1/6 of the american economy which is what they are trying to do. lou: one other aspect is the effort of obamacare to register voters that people have talked about it. it turns out it is of major motivation. >> a story today in california of a couple that was a registered republican who got a notice in the mail after signing up that

you just quote of the cbo number which assumes no policy.he president's policies would reduce the deficit by 1.8% of gdp in the last year of the budget window and as a result, the deficit would be better with deficit reduction which is what we are showing in our budget than if you did not have deficit reduction which is what a budget baseline would show. there is some other technical differences between our out your forecasts that are mostly on the revenue side come and not on the spending side. aca is the law of the land. >> do any of the discussions about tax revisions vary from current law? maybe certain expired tax revisions? >> obviously, we have a set of proposals in their. one of the places that is in our -- that is assumed in our budget is that in the 2010 and 2012 budgets, the president extended his increases for the refund ability in the child tax credit the increases in the earned income tax credit for families of three children and more and the marriage penalty and one of the president's innovations was that a portion of that was

report,ok at this cbo it will reduce the amount of work done in the u.s. economy tremendously compared to previous estimates. it will kill all of these jobs. it will not kill the jobs, people would choose to work less or give up their work. there healthcare would no longer be tied to their employer. is this good or bad? >> it is probably a good thing. many of us over the years pointed out as a reason for having a different kind of healthcare that would cover the uninsured that there were significant people who are stuck in jobs because they needed the healthcare and they might have a highe or a child that had healthcare costs. if could not leave their job. they would lose their healthcare. they could not get more because there was a pre-existing condition. the affordable care act has changed that. there is no more concern about the existing conditions. you can go to the exchange and buy health care and get a subsidy if you have low income. it is not surprising that some of those people will give up those jobs. >> on the one hand, the long-term demographics

the affordable care act according to the cbo is a $1.8 trillion expenditure? what is it that is sacrosanct that says they should not be subject to that brought jurisdiction? by your own admission, you don't know the answers to these questions, do you? >> i could not answer dr. price's question because i don't have the information from the insurance companies yet. we will have it and -- >> right. >> this is not treasury. this is private insurance companies. 300 -- [talking over each other] >> your inspector general can't get to it. >> this is not an inspector general issued its private insurers who are selling plans to their customers. they can tell you how many -- >> its ongoing and you don't have the information and you don't have the capacity. >> i would just say, madam secretary, part of the frustration is you did have the answer to the number of injured children and that is also private sector insurance information but yet we were trying to get further information -- >> that can directly, mr. chairman, from the insurers and until you as soon as we have thi

so senator, what happens if they don't get that 40% that the cbo says obamacare needs to work? big-time financial problem. what you see is people going into medicaid, costing more money, putting a real burden on them, and you're not having young people sign up and go into the program and providing that revenue base. you need to make it work. >> so what do you think will happen bottom line. millions are being covered, at least jurs oemp a million, or so they say, like 11%, one statistic shows that only 11% did not have insurance, but how about those who are covered, that it's a success for them? >> there's something like 6 million that have been covered from their coverage. often. republicans don't have a problem, we absolutely have an alternative, but it empowers people to pick their only insurance. that means pooling for small companies, that means tort reform, competition across state lines t. so you give people choice rather than this big government-run program. >> but the senate is not going to go for that, and at the president is backing his law. >> that's where i say the

we are proud that the cbo has said for this year are premiums are less than what cbo estimated for this year. that is a significant accomplishment. that is very important in terms of thinking what a consumer sees. the premium tax is going up by 40% next year. the revenue that is being raised as a result of the legislation will have an implication on how people look at the cost of their project. now that people are beginning to focus on how you build the premium, this is something that will get a significant amount of community. individuals are purchasing. it adds the cost of medicare advantage. $20 per member per month is going to this. it adds to the cost of medicaid. states are having to subsidize the cost. i would say i want to go back to this whole transition area. it was allowed to say because there was a plan being expressed about the categories of coverage. in general the market has very high deductibles. that is what people prefer to buy because they want to keep their premiums low. if you have a giant step up, that is a bridge too far for some individuals. that was being teleca

the cbo report to basically agrees with everything that we have been saying on our minimum wage bill. it has been an increase in net lift people out of poverty. they said about 25 and people would get a raise. we estimated 28 million people. -- 25 million people would get a raise. we estimated 28 million people. they looked at studies on job loss. here's the kicker. that givenaid was these dynamics, the job loss perd be anywhere from zero million so we will pick 500,000. if you look are there at the data in the cbo report, there is a chance they would be a million job losses and a one in six chance there will be no job loss and actually more jobs. i am just saying. they took this. it could be 100 jobs. jobs.ld be 1000 we could gain some jobs. we will have a hearing like this in a couple of weeks. this will come out. they picked one thing like that to say we cannot do this. there may be some minor job loss. again, compared to 20 million people getting a raise, 14 million kids live in families that would get a raise. think about what that means to families over america. wanted to ask yo

there are some things that the cbo's do very well, not everything. one of the things that cbo's do well is they connected with the families really well and the families trust them because they don't feel they necessarily a part of the establishment. when i was trying to get them to work together,

departments yet have not enrolled to be officially certificated but they partner up with their either cbos and for example, we have excellent coverage by our jail medical health and jail psychiatric services and through the health right 360 in the jails they would be a likely partner with us to help and then because of the compensation, by the federal government, by the government to those actually signing up we would not be able to receive that as a government entity and it is only non-government entities that will be able to receive, there is a $58 dollar fee for how many applications are successfully signed up. and that may then go potentially to the cbo but that is what a lot of the other county sheriff departments are doing. >> i wanted to thank you and the chief for walking me around the jail, and meeting some of your health staff, and i wanted to know, if we designate, the sheriff's office as this entity, what kind of assistance would you provide to inmates and you said 90 percent of them are not or don't have access to healthcare, but what kind of assistance would we provide to the

do you worry about what the cbo projections have been saying? >> i want to salute dr.elmendorf because he has a tough job being the umpire of who calls the balls and strikes. there will be times where one party or another does not fully agree with this assessment. if members of congress could to make up their on projections you can imagine -- as crazy as the budget process is now it would get that much worse. when dr. elmendorf pointed out the economic recovery helped save millions of jobs in this country, republicans did not like it. there is some of his analysis that democrats may not always love it. on the two issues you raised i did want to point out the fundamental misunderstanding that surrounded one of their proposals. if you go to work for your employer you get a tax break. your employer gets to provide you with health care tax benefit. people who go to work with employers who provide health insurance are essentially getting a tax subsidized health insurance. that kind of tax benefit was not accessible for people who do not go to work within employer. we have a

the cbo projection was that it point 0.6 off our gdp. >> the government shut down that was un-necessary, that it cost us about $24 billion in lost economic productivity. i think we can all agree that it was harmful to our economy. yes, the estimates are 0.2, to 0.6 gdp. was the ceconomy hurt in anyway createded by what i would term serial flirtation with a default on our nation's debt? >> i believe we had fiscal drag that was being created by unseru uncertainty and the shut down last year. are we hurt by the failure? >> yes a drag on the economy. could you tell us why that would be a positive thing for the c econo economy? >> i think it is in two ways. in terms of what these projects are ready and able to move but what it does to roads and infrastructure which is providing that for our nation's economy. having come from a retail organization that uses the roads to transport goods. these are the important parts of the backbone whether it is roads or rail. >> can you speak about the earned income tax credit as it relates to low income individuals and or working individuals in this country

further. >> cbo, dynamic scoring for change, lower tax rates, more incentives to work and invest. they actually said you could get 1 to 1.5% more gdp growth per year, per year which would put us in the 3.5, 4.5% zone we ought to be. i'm impressed with that. they wouldn't have made that if camp's plan was as bad as hugh says it is. >> push be cbo to recognize growth comes from taxes and so, again, this sets the stage for real reform. what will happen, larry is what happened in '86 one the sense when they started to attack tax shelters, they realized if you attack one you have to attack all of them. when they go to preferences they realize they have to sweep all of them out and get a radical tax reform. >> hugh, it could be a building block. you mentioned homeowners and i think you mentioned wall street. you're talking about the private equity guys. you know, hugh, loopholes for the well connected, let's start with that on wall street, and this whole housing deduction and other deductions, a few people take advantage of it, the vast majority of the middle class pays tax rates that a