doctor holtz-eakin? >> if you're making a comparison between private and government, if you move more people in government coverage whether it is more cost effective in national health expenditures you have to raise taxes to finance it. you have to move the resources from the private-sector to the government and we've seen this in medicare for all debates, when people say if we nationalize healthcare, health expenditures might fall. even if true if you move $32 trillion from the private-sector to government you have to come up with a $32 trillion tax to go with it and at this point no one has come up with attacks that would move it all. when talking about moving more people to government healthcare even if it is cheaper for the individual you have to come up with attacks and that will have an effect. >> i want to be on record that someone is paying for the differential and it is the american people no matter how it is disguised. we voted on a balanced budget amendment last year in congress and that is so

holtz-eakin: i'll promise you a full report. why don't we did it that way because we've had this conversation. we do have proposals and i'm happy to share them with you. >> time of the gentleman has expired. chair recognizes gentleman from washington. >> thank you, sir. dr. bernstien, i want to ask you about business investment. so to preface this. there were some of us that it have hadld like a tax reform measure that we could have embraced and there some of us who actually believed that it was fair to deep dive analysis about the competitive nature of our corporate tax rate, as well. would like rates to have gone down. they went down way more than i was prudent from a fiske fiske -- fiscal standpoint. and all along we were assured that this tax cut would pay for itself. hasn't,prima fascia it notwithstanding assertions here today. because in part i think it wasn't terribly well designed to actually achieve that. i would have much preferred that more powerful incentives for business investment or nonresidential investment. now,

director eakin, go ahead. [inaudible] >> -- significantly extend the due dates for projects, so just as we're going to approve the capital improvement program later today, i would just wonder if someone from the staff wants to comment why we're seeing these cost overruns, project delays, and what can be done to mitigate against these types of situations in the future. >> okay. thank you. >> so i guess i can speak to that. a couple of things. first of all, we have been seeing very significant cost inflation in terms of bids that we're getting on all kinds of construction work. traffic signals is one small example. we're getting bids that are double maybe just two or three years ago, so that's one of the factors that we're seeing and that we have tried to take into account as we've provided the estimates for the upcoming work in the capital budget. in terms of the schedule, couple of these projects that were related had some extraordinary schedule delays that were -- came from a number of reasons. what we haven'

president of american action forum, douglas holtz-eakin, from the "washington examiner," tiana lowe,p, beverly haul berg. beverly, we talk about that. we're angry at both parties. if you do the voting parties we're all independent or more and more americans considered themselves independent. what is farfetched from independent run from howard schultz. >> he is self-described long-time democrat this is coming out of nowhere. he knows he would have no shot if he was in the democratic primary but he brings up good point in the "60 minutes" interview. he talked about fundamental issue with how much republicans and democrats, how much money they spend. our debt is the big issue. republicans have not dealt with the two years they had the house. you have a point. a lot of people wonder why not change the democrat party? they're moving so far to socialist platform these days. if he really wanted to have a reason to approach to try to change the trajectory, don't go for independent bid, try to change the democrat party. charles: although, tiana, like look it will be a donnybrook on the democr

we have kristin tate and douglas holtz-eakin. douglas, let me start with you on this.ou have got democrats, who are saying hey, we need to restore this tax deduction. we want to make sure we help people in her district, one of the wealthiest in the country. i think average household is over $100,000 or $90,000 a year. >> this is interesting moment. they are radically different approaches but they're actually both wrong, charles. i mean if you want to raise money, you ought to broad the base. if you want to start having efficient government stop subsidizing it with local taxes. this is wrong direction from basic tax reform as everyone knows what we've begun and continue to do. charles: kristin, your thoughts? more than unlikely she cannot hear me. as they work on that, douglas, on that note, we're seeing bifurcation in the democratic party. media says the conservatives are out for alexandria ocasio-cortez. i see it as more of a party problem for her to be quite frank with her. how she came on the scene, beating an establishment guy who felt he didn't have to campaign. s

, let's bring in the former cbo director who knows a thing or two about cbo reports, douglas holtz-eakinknow, increasing the corporate rate to the extent that they are saying wouldn't begin to pay for that. i mean, this is obama care on steroids. would a cbo report reflect that? >> cbo is going to give them a very very straightforward reading of the kolss of their proposal -- reading of the costs of their proposal. that's the important thing here. so far in this debate, we have had a lot of great names, single payer for all, medicare buy in, medicaid buy in, medicare plus x, no one has had a proposal. what does that mean? if you look underneath the hood, it's ranged everything from little expansion of obama care to take over the entire healthcare system like the british national health service. what's interesting, for the first time somebody is going to have to write it down and say this is what we are going to do so the cbo can give them back the answer, how much will it cost. but i'm with you, if they do anything on the scale of the rhetoric, 800 billion dollars which is about what the