clinton administration >> every administration is different. what we are seeing here is the president is taking an acute, personal, interest in this. again, i think it is related, at least in part, to the fact that there are americans who are among the hostages. moreover, he sees that this is an important respite, at least, for the moment. this pause. i think he very much wanted to see this as a way of getting all of the hostages out, not just the americans. i think he is taking a very direct, personal, interest. during the clinton administration, certainly after the suspicion of prime minister vermin, prime -- president clinton's involvement one up directly. he was always interested. after the assassination, he had said to her been, you take risks. my job is to minimize those risks. if you came in the mission for him. i can tell, you even during the course of the election in 1996 hours negotiating what became the head-on agreement. he was in the midst of the campaign. he was calling me all the time. notwithstanding the fact that he was in the

since the clinton administration nevada national economic council. we have seen more or less role with that as the coordinator you had a center pulling all the pieces together on funding and on management. it is a reflection of how all of the different interests are presented for decision. on the domestic side. let me offer a vignette for each chair. at omb that year this was perhaps an unusual year 2011 when i was there. there's a grand bargain negotiation was speaker weiner awas the year when we are facig a potential shutdown or crisis. the entire time at omb and that chapter was around those issues. the engagement between the white house, the president, and congress was at theer most sensitive level was a very small circle of people directly involved. the challenge, this is my perspective from omb was for the white house to remain coordinated so the present have hadall the views the president needed while the fewest possible people were in the conversation. which is not normal in a domestic issue. it's normal and a national security issue. it's no

since the clinton administration we've had a national economic council. we've seen more or less role with that as the coordinator. you've always had omb as a center pulling all the pieces together. the funding and on the management, but it's really a reflection of the president how all of the different interests are presented for decision on the domestic side. let me make an offer then e for each chicken i don't know how much i'm going to take. at omb the you this was pern unusual year, 2011, when i was there because it was a year when there was a grand bargain negotiations with speaker boehner. it was a year when we were facing a potential shutdown or debt limit crisis. the entirety of my time at omb in that chapter was around those issues. the engagement between the white house, the president and congress was at the most sensitive level. it was a very small circle of people directly involved. theom challenge, this is my perspective now from omb, was for the white house to remain coordinated so the president had all the views the president needed while t

you know and i would have the same thing in the clinton administration. the second term operates in a different way, and you tend to see people promoted who, in the first term, you may be looking for people had elected office in, a cabinet position or in the most senior white house staff position. in the second term, you tend to see a focus on who's proven they can get things done, not either is right or wrong. you need some mix. both, but time is so short in the second term, you're conscious from the of the second term that the hourglass is down and you just use the time as much as you can. secretary lew, just a quick follow up. would say that the risk taking that can happen a second term. is that perhaps part of the reason why doca and dapa or separated doca was june of 2012. and i think dapa. was 2015. yeah, it be part of it. i mean, i know that in 2012 there was a very strong view that you didn't want to count on pieces being separated and litigated separately you wanted to have it be a different action so that you weren't putting jeopardy the piece t

when you contrast this approach of the biden administration to the clinton approach to the internet, the clinton administration on the early internet, they came out with a set of principles in 1997 that said, we are going to let private industry lead. where government does intervene, it is going to be minimal and it is going to be focused on addressing harms. here, this is airy much a government first approach instead of a innovator first approach. i think that has the risk of stifling a lot of benefits we could get from artificial intelligence. host: if i am an innovator, i see these recommendations from the federal government. what is the typical response of someone specifically in the ai world, do you think? guest: there are going to be dozens of government actions taken here, so dozens of reports. innovators are going to have a tough time keeping up with the activity the federal government is doing in this space. it will depend if you are working in health care or drug discovery, for working in transportation. the executive order has charges to all these different agencies that r

administration did that was the clinton administration. so we're talking about more than almost 30 years. and biden decided to do it again after the trump administration, by the way, revoked, you know, decisions that were made by the clinton administration about possible sanctions on settlers who engage in violence against palestinians. and i think that this might be a first signal for a dramatic shift in the way that the biden administration is looking at settlements. not only statements, but also action. >> barak ravid always with the important reporting on this, thank you. >> thank you very much. >>> there are deep divides in this country about how president biden is handling israel's war with hamas. and age seems to be a factor as well. cnn senior data reporter harry enten joining us this morning with this morning's numbers. so harry, when we look at the numbers, this is a major divide as we've been talking about all morning, what do they show us? >> it's not just a major divide amongst americans, it's a major divide amongst democrats.

used to be open to the public and for traffic uh in the early 90s, but i believe during the clinton administration, they shut this down uh, particularly in the wake of the world trade center bombing in 199 3 they shut down this patch of 1600 pennsylvania avenue right in front of the white house and so this has also been a source and sight of many protests over the past several years and uh it looks like they may be walking uh towards another area, possibly freedom plaza, because that's another area where people also tend to mess and they tend to talk about various issues that are important to the american public and important to geopolitics as it stands, so i'm going to see very shortly where they are going, where they are headed, but as it stands right now, it's a lot quieter on 1600 pennsylvania avenue because protesters have started to walk in a different. i noticed that uh there weren't any cops or any type of security around, of course it was peaceful rally, uh, nevertheless, you would think that there would be some, unless we didn't just have it in our shots, and i you know, if that's uh my

it's interesting because again the history is from the second folding of the clinton administration he directed his cabinet to bring -- i'm old enough to remember that the term more than mifepristone, to give those to be u.s. entity. the whole u.s. entity at the time that was willing to take on the drug was the population council that submitted the application. they are the ones that obtained the approval and this random cayman islands company whose ownership is only becoming there's another article that talks about the history of this drug, companies and it's not a very good to see how it is coming about but that is the origin of the drug. it's not your average pfizer coming along asking for this. it's actually population council that sought the approval. it begs the question. it's definitely not women's health. that's for sure. other questions in the back. >> we recently had a case where there was a clinic in colorado offering epr with medical malpractice so i'm wondering do you think those type of cases are going to start to pop up around the states more into do you think the ruling

i'm sure your stewardship letter you hold positions in the clinton administration at treasury and that state. mr. barr has an undergraduate degree and a law degree from yale university which as you in ann arbor we refer to as the michigan of the east. [laughing] so let's talk about cra. this rule, why is it so important, a law that was passed in 1977 and i think you actually work on the last time we revise in 1995. tell us all a bit about why we need cra and why this particular new regulation is so important. >> thanks, david. i think that you and reinvestment act is really one of the foundational piece of legislation dash to unity reinvestment act -- to deal with redlining and discover nation in housing markets. it's really designed to help ensure that banks are serving their entire community, including low and moderate income communities. as you mentioned the last major revision was 1995, and it's really important that we update community reinvestment act to serving its is purpose, that it is actually helping banks to serve all their communities, that is overcoming redlining and disc

episode, and that's probably relevant because cause in the 80s uh- before i worked in the clinton administration, i worked in the reagan administration. and henry kissinger was a big critic of ronald reagan's policy toward the soviet union, which is what i worked on. he thought we were being duped and that we were weakening american influence, that gorbachev was going to trick us. and he came in to see the president several times to try to talk him out of his treaty ideas, his overall approach to personal diplomacy with the with mikhail gorbachev in the end, you know, i think reagan looks pretty good. and kissinger looks as though he kind of got it wrong. but but he was definitely active in trying to cement his own influence. so while out of office, quickly, for those who aren't familiar, because it was a while ago, like which presidents did he serve? >> i know his republican and democrat. and, you know, what were his chief pieces of, i guess, both accomplishments and failures? >> yeah. um, you know, he's being described as the most powerful secretary of state of the post post-world war two era.

taylor, the former ceo of salesforce and larry sumners,he former treasury secretaryor the clinton administration. it's also possible someone from microsoft or another major investor may also join the board. joining us now is dr. priya, a dean at school of business. she spent two decades studying ceos. nice to have you on the program. correct me if i'm wrong, but this seemed like a five-day mess. what were the lessons learned here? >> absolutely. it is one of the most well-known stories i think in the tech world in this decade, if not for in the past two years. some of the lessons learned are what is their power and why you have to be careful before firing them or rehiring them back. >> so sam altman is back. what is the benefit here? because you've been studying this for a couple of decades now. what's the benefit of keeping a ceo like altman who has been with openai since the very beginning. there is a downside. what's the upside here? >> the upside is that keeping a founder ceo at the helm enhances a firm's innovation performance. that's why if you see all the big companies where there is meta

and you held various positions in the clinton administration. he has an undergraduate degree and a law degree from yale university which in ann arbor we were referred to as the michigan of the east. this rule, why is it so important. a law that was passed in 1977. i think you actually worked on it the last time it was revised in 1995. tell us about why we need cra and why this particular new regulation is so important. >> i think the community reinvestment act is really one of the foundational pieces of legislation that congress passed the deal with the redlining and discrimination in housing markets and it's really designed banks are serving their entire community including low and moderate income communities. the last major revision was in 1995 and it's really important that we update the community reinvestment act to make sure it is serving its purpose, that it's actually helping banks to serve all their communities, that it's overcoming redlining and discrimination issues, that it's updated to meet the needs of the current environment that w

over a long career in the park department of defense us of the carted ministration come the clinton administration the obama administration cut back on the bones andf muscles of the defee department the maintenance in the training. and then when the next republican administration gets in the democrats insist on increasing the spending on social problem exactly equals the amount of money required to get the department of defense back to the point where it is useful. that has added a huge amount of money to the spending. we need to d link of those two and only spent on the things our constitution requires and then add onto the extras. >> okay we will leave it there. >> i agree with the caller, thank you for that point it does not make sense to tight defense and non-defense spending the obama administration particularly guilty of this that every 1 dollar increase of defense needs to be matched by 1 dollar increase on non-defense make a lot of non-defense spending i would argue are for things that should be done any state, local or private level they don't need to be involved with to begin with. there

this happened across administrations but really during the clinton administration where there was a policy choice to spur consolidation and we see 50 major defense contractors wheedled down to 5 today and for major weapon systems oftentimes the government is dependent on one or two or sometimes three contractors and that can be a problem both from the perspective of the government paying more but also perspective of just challenges and scaling up at moments when you need. take another example. a couple of years ago there was a factory in louisiana that blew up and as a result of that one explosion the u.s. production of particular type of gun powder, black powder which was input that has hundreds of military uses, we no longer had any factories in the u.s. that produced that gun powder. that factory is still offline and just another example of how concentrated of production can concentrate risk in ways that leave us vulnerable from a national security perspective and so, you know, those two examples strike me as areas where more competition and more antitrust is really what's going to prom

policy and initiatives in the obama administration and as white house chief of staff under the clinton administrationso jon, thank you for your continued service and dedication to the nation. we are truly honored you could find time and you're very busy schedule to be with us today. the agenda for the remainder of the day or the half day will hear first from jon and his remarks will be followed by a fireside chat with david victor who is one of our claimant experts and senior fellow in our foreign policy and global programs. afterl words jon will depart to attend to business of the nation we will begin a panel discussion. the first panel will focus on the domestic implications of the ira for the u.s. economy clean energy e and equity. we will then take a 10 minute coffee break for you to recharge and we will resume the second channel on the global implication of the ira including its impact on trade, markets, and claimant ambition. we are indebted to lisa freedman is a "new york times" reporter on the claimant desk focusing on climate and environmental policn washington. she's discovered several inte

last time that happened was the clinton administration. look at it, simple task of about one fourth of what we spend we can't even get within 15% of making it balance. it's 17.8% off. that's pitiful. you know what happens in the real world? you go through chapter 11. if you are a state that runs like this, you are going to have trouble borrowing money. and a lot of the states that roll like this place deal with the same consequences. paint you a picture how this turns out. first of all been on the budget committee all five years. it's a useless abendage. we have never -- appendage. we have never used it. we don't even get a top line out of it. i'm a senator that gave up a spot on the appropriations committee because when i was on it, we didn't do one meeting. with appropriators. then what did we get? not even a top line until after the end of the fiscal year. you get that monstrosity of an omnibus bill that's cooked up by the firm that gives us that result. what is worse, the way this plays out, medicare trust fund, goes broke. in about fi

endless, endless, real-life examples, you had to deal with it, the clinton administration has had to deal with it, and now the biden administration. prime minister netanyahu is going over the head of the president, talking directly to the american media, talking about potential, this is my word, occupation, but whatever it is, a military encirclement, a security supplement of gaza, the president doesn't want that, america doesn't want that. he's not saying a thing about the day after in his reaching out to, i guess american public opinion. is that troubling? >> don't underestimate, on one other point, which i think it has been covered by cnn and by yourself many times, president biden is also quite popular with the israeli people. using and establishing the friendship that the president was very clear on, on the day, on opctober 8th forward, has given him a tremendous amount of political credibility with the israeli people when it comes to making some hard decisions. and i don't want to speak for the israeli government, my guess is they are very aware how popular the president is, be

this has happened across administrations but it was during the clinton administration where there was policy choice to spur consolidation. we have seen 50 major defense contractors whittled down to five. from major weapons system, often times, the government is dependent on one or two or sometimes three contractors. that can be a problem from the perspective of the government paying more but also from the perspective of just challenges and scaling up at moments when you need to. just a couple of years ago, there was a factory in louisiana the blue up. as a result of that one explosion, the u.s. production of a particular type of gunpowder, black powder which is elementary input that has hundreds of military uses, we no longer have any factories in the u.s. that produce that gunpowder. that factory still off-line. it's another example of how concentration of production can concentrate risk in ways that leaves us vulnerable from a national security perspective. those two examples strike me as areas where more competition and more antitrust is really what will promote our national intere

. >> bill passed in 1996 under the clinton administration was massive public outcry about the lack of deportations so republicans and democrats got together in '96 and passed a bill speeding accelerating and mandating deportations. that's the law on the books. that's the law that joe biden is breaking every day. the law that mayorkas wants is amnesty. that's not a solution. it's an accelerant to every single aspect of the border calamity occurring today. making illegal aliens into citizens. if you walk through some of those numbers, laura, they are beyond stunning. i think your audience would be shocked to know that in l.a. and new york now half, half of public school students come from immigrant households. in cities like charlotte is 40%. in nashville, tennessee, 100 languages are now spoken in public schools. 30% of students need help speaking english at all crash every aspect of american society which, of course, is the point. allen, new york's mayor was discussing the cost of sheltering the people who are walking right across the border. and within 72 hours, most of them are just

one of the places they go for ideas is the clinton administration.y change in their recommendations that they sent over to congress earlier in the process. so this idea actually came over from the clinton department of education. - the department of ed-- i knew it. - in sort of asking around, okay, so, like, who was at the administration? one name that's come up is-- it's got david longanecker-- he was the assistant secretary of education-- would have been involved in the discussions between congress and the administration, so. - so i got to talk to david longanecker? - yeah. - well, david longanecker was the person in higher ed policy. he was a huge player, high integrity, ethical, and incredibly smart. - david longanecker, l-o-n-g, a or e, n-e-c-k-e-r. he'd be a great guy to talk to. he's terrific. - we do think the system can work a lot better. so let me present to you at this time david longanecker, who is assistant secretary for post-secondary education. - thank you, mr. secretary. what i'll do is... - i watched hours of longanecker video. he se

house who instead of back in my day, you know, when i was a young white house staffer in the clinton administration, you would argue your case with your superior, right? you would present some evidence, talk about your concerns, then your superior was sort of either you convince them to go along with you or they had a different position and that would be the position that they would take. today that's not what's happening. you're seeing young people taking on and having their own say and you get the white house chief of staff, anita dunn, others coming together to talk about what's happening. so that's a very different thing and i think we're going to see the president wrestle through this. let me just say this, the democratic caucus, the democratic party writ large seems to agree with where joe biden s which is that israel is our ally, we stand fast with israel, then they're going to argue with israel about what to do about how to minimize the damage that may be taking place. >> is that not a generation m issue as well, though? i think younger democrats, younger progressive-leaning members of the

other thing happened yesterday, sheryl sandberg who used to be with facebook and part of the clinton administrationvideo asking women to think about for one second speaking up on behalf of the women who were raped in israel in the raid on the terrorist attack. it seemed like me, that is just something that should happen. the u.n. women's group still have not said anything they still will not do that. i look at some of these people, we have a block on iran coming up. for women who have been successful, to just turn such a blind eye to the suffering of other women, regardless of who they are, what they look like, or where they live, is really appalling to me appeared >> brian: jessica, your thoughts on the dropping of susan sarandon and the continued craziness on campus? >> jessica: i think it was definitely the right decision. retracting your apology, whether you knew she espoused crazy views, which everyone does know, doesn't make a difference, it is important what she said. it will unfortunately for anti-semites just continue to fuel the "jews run hollywood, jews r control the money closed within.

administration, this administration no longer exists, and he believed that the new administration, the clinton administration , could do whatever they wanted about this, so this was not some admirer, not some ally of the soviet union or russia. it seems to me that it would be naive and unfair to expect this from one of the american leaders. on the other hand, precisely because kissinger was an american patriot and because he was a strategic thinker, he always wondered what kind of relationship he wanted the united states to have with the soviet union and then with russia. and for him. russia was a great power, including after the collapse of the soviet union, for him russia was a very important factor in international politics, he neither in no case did he want to quarrel with russia, and most importantly, he in no case wanted american policy to push beijing and moscow closer to each other, so he not only... did not consider it possible to ignore russian strategic concerns, but also more specifically, after the first stage of nato expansion took place, which covered those countries that were not part of the

served as a negotiate in the clinton administration. he also did a stint in the obama administration. ambassador ross, thank you for being here. what do you think of the outlines of this tentative deal? >> well, i think, look, this is something that has been out there for a while. hamas from the very beginning was conveying that they would release 50 hostages. they were -- there were rumors it could be 100. i think hamas all along has viewed this as a vehicle, as a means to try to get the israelis to stop or at least to give them respite. the israelives, i think the report is very accurate in terms of saying not just the impact of the hostage families, but i think one of the things we have to understand, the israeli military supports this not because they want to stop the pressure and momentum they have now in gaza on the ground, and they have quite a bit, but because they feel as an organization, as an institution, they failed. the reason they have ohio state annals is because they failed. the leadership of the idf says they have hosta

and the effect was forcing public discussion of this before the clinton administration was organized.retty bad footing right from the jump. - those people who opposed it got on the committee that was examining it. the chairman of the senate armed services committee, sam nunn, literally went to the field to ask questions. posed them in a way to say, do you guys want to serve with queers? - let me just get a show of hands of everybody who would be in favor of keeping the policy like it is now, which is keeping your private life private. - sam nunn was running around the country going into aircraft carriers and going into bunks and submarines and saying, we can't have these people close together. you know, it's going to be terrible for unit morale and discipline. and the word got out. and once it did, there was an uproar over it. clinton, i think, wanted to do it, but he understood. he was a brand new president. he was taking on a really big institution right out of the gate, so to speak, to take on the military. you know, that's why he had les aspin set up this group to take a look at i

brett taylor, former ceo of salesforce, larry summers, former treasury secretary for the clinton administratione someone from microsoft, i would expect that, or another major investor might join the board as well. >> 5:10. right now, we will take a live look in san jose. christmas in the park. all dark right now, chilly out there. let's see what we can expect on this thanksgiving day, with meteorologist kari hall. 9 am, it never takes a day off? >> i will eventually take one during the holidays but yes, it is a great morning. and, why not? the weather is nice and quiet. we will see our temperatures in the 40s after getting started, and that dark picture of downtown san jose, we will see the tree lit up, starting tomorrow day. today is the turkey trot, we talked about that. as the runners get to the starting line, it will be in the low 50s, a chilly morning. then, going throughout the morning, our temperatures make it to the low 60s. and then, as we are getting ready for dinner, our temperatures will head for the 70s. so, a really nice day. as we get a look at some temperatures around the east b

admission of china from the wto in the 90s, the favored nation trading session status in the clinton administration, of the increasing economic activity between the two countries, the two largest economies in the world. over the last few years, we have seen what many people have called a decoupling, untangling of the economic connection between the two nations. we've seen a decline in foreign investment in china. we've also seen increasingly adversarial and nationalist rhetoric on both sides, both from u.s. politicians, particularly under donald trump, and from others, you see it in public opinion, and from the chinese government and its spokespeople, as well as from chinese foreign opinion on chinese social media sites and the like. robert gibbs is with us. he served as white house press secretary for president barack obama. john berner is the former director of the cia, and they both join me now. john, let me start with you, because this is the largest country in the world, it is the largest economy in the world, in aggregate terms. it's been one of the most important trading partners for the u.s

the history from the second full day of the clinton administration -- he directed his cabinet to bring -- i'm old enough to remember that term and remember that more comment to give those patent rights to a u.s. entity. the only u.s. entity at the time willing to take on the drug was the population council, so they submitted the new drug application and obtained the approval. then this new company whose ownership is only coming out now -- a mother's joan -- a mother jones article talks about the history of the drug and it is not good to see how came about. that is the origin of the drug. it is not your average pfizer coming along. it is population council. it has that history as well. it begs the question of the purpose behind chemical abortion drugs. it is not women's health. sarah: other questions? >> i'm with the becket fund. we recently had a case where there was a catholic clinic in colorado offering apr and they were accused of medical malpractice. do you think those cases are going to start to pop up around the states more? do you think the ruling in the fifth circuit, depending

msnbc foreign affairs analyst, he was the -- on the peace process in the clinton administration, and was instrumental in assisting israelis and palestinians to reach an interim agreement in 1995. ambassador, thanks for joining us on, this inflation. i have wanted to speak to you, ambassador, throughout this entire conflict. i'm so happy that you are joining us this hour. i want to talk first about this new op-ed out from the president. we know last weekend, prime minister benjamin netanyahu essentially said indefinitely, israel will control the security of gaza. the president now has a new op-ed, out in the washington post, that says the epa should have governing power over gaza. what do you make of this step being made by the president and his administration, to speak out about the future of gaza, and who will govern? >> well i think the president is focused on the reality that the israelis don't want to stay in gaza, and they don't want to stay in gaza, so someone has to be responsible for governing it. and there's a simple reality, the palestinian authority at this one has a hard

both occasions this had adverse effects and the delayed reaction between the bush and clinton administrations led to the vulnerability to terrorism and 9/11. and trump's challenges in the election culminated to the january 6. how do you think this recent trend of challenging election results should be interpreted and addressed. do you think the solution might involve a bill or constitutional amendment? bill: well, elections are run by the states under the constitution. it's the state function though these are federal offices, so the running and policing of an election is done by the states. that's something i tried to explain repeatedly to president trump that the department of justice can look into fraud, criminal fraud but we don't have some kind of general commission to go around validating election results. that's the state's responsibility. and the court's. but given the closeness -- you know, how close the divisions in the united states are and how consequential they are, we have to come up with procedures in the states that are above reproach. now, the good thing about florida is that

i'm old enough to remember when saddam hussein and iraq under the clinton administration, he would takeournalists into iraqi hospitals and he would tell everyone that president bill clinton and secretary of state madeleine albright are murdering iraq's children through the sanctions. it is the same playbook. this is a dictator, an extremist group, hamas, telling the world, oh, look at the terrible israelis, what they're doing, no, this is being done by hamas who first and foremost set up a military facilities, their bases, their tunnels, their rocket launching sites underneath the hospital, a subterranean terror network. and they're the ones who have endangered the hospital while we're doing our best to try to safeguard the people in the hospital. >> if that's the case, can hamas be eliminated if those hospitals aren't completely evacuated? >> the answer is yes. we are eliminating hamas. what we're doing is our soldiers are on the ground, acting in a very, very surgical way, trying to be as pinpointed as they can, microtargeting hamas. it is difficult, but not impossible. of course we w

government policy and something that is continued to the present even during the last years of the clinton administration host: please go ahead with your question or comment. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. looking at the philosophy i think time has proven and it was a complete failure. in the american dream -- >> host: thank you very much. talk about the issues that alan mentioned. one that prevents friedman's position and as opposed to offer critique of it and what i guess my view is the strength and his fault and also great weakness. i think that with respect to monetary policy, he was accurate with of the importance of low but not necessarily no inflation. the lack of focus on deficits would not be helpful to our society. with respect to did reagan economics lead to the decline of the american economy, i think that we were talking earlier about the late 1970s were a period of high inflation in the united states, high unemployment in the united states, high interest rates in the united states and that at the time it was considered a relative boom in the economy in 1890s as deflation decelerat

there was opposition by the clinton administration and the going to read you something this is sector and madeleine albright a speech that she give at catholic university. but the record show, i love madeleine albright. madeleine albright but in my district. she had a farm up in loudoun county so this is not meant as a criticism of madeleine albright. but administration at the time was supposed in the state department and she said at a speech which interesting was october 23, today, back in seven -- 1997 and here's what secretary albright said at a speech speech at catholic university. she said, it would establish a new and unneeded bureaucracy and deprive u.s. officials of the flexibility required to protect the overall foreign policy interest of the united states. they were opposed to it. the state department was opposed to it. i am very grateful and associate public, i am grateful that resident clinton signed it in spite of the opposition by some in the administration. secondly, the business community opposed it. i mean, the chamber of commerce and some of the high-tech companies?

got here, over a long career in the department of defense i saw the carter administration, clinton administrationnistration cut back on the muscle of the defense department, the maintenance and training. and then when the next republican administration gets in the democrats insist on increasing the spending on social programs equal to the amount of money required to get the department of defense back to the point where it is useful. that has added a huge amount of money to the spending. we need to delink those two and then we can add onto the extras. host: let's leave it there. romia: i agree with the caller. thank you for that point. it does not make sense to tie defense and non-defense spending. the obama administration was particularly guilty in calling for parity that every one dollar increase needed to be matched on the non-defense spending. a lot of non-defense spending is for things that should be local, state, or private level. there is no reason to link those together other than for political leverage. i think the caller is right. ben: i do not fully agree. i think a lot of these discret

that builds on the clinton administration guidance with respect to cost-benefit analysis which built on the reagan administration guidance from the omb. stakeholders from all corners of the market have voiced oppositions to these proposals. one exception is to update rule 605 which has not been substantively updated since its adoption in 2000. supporting this proposed update and believes it is a natural starting point for the path forward. we support some of the commission's proposals, we believe others fail to identify market failure and lack clear direction from congress. lacking prioritization and significant cost-benefit analysis particular the cumulative impact that i mentioned. the commission has a duty to ensure fair and orderly markets. rushing to do too much will result in poor outcomes. thank you. >> miss class, you are now recognized for five minutes to give your oral remarks. >> thank you. i appreciate the opportunity to testify today. i am testifying at my personal capacity. before joining the firm i was a global head at blackrock. prior to that i had the honor of serving

and over 20 years of going all in on green energy since the clinton administration the u.s.'erature has changed by three degrees. why is that? host: ok. thank you to eric. let us see if we can get into. pennsylvania, republican line. caller: good morning. a quick comment. i wish i could save the earth and all of that. but as regards to the debt ceiling, that crisis. i have a