economy to come back.n that respect, our actions to prevent the collapse of the financial system, including the entire global system, was essential to avoiding a similar economic outcome in this decade. a big problem was that we did not have all the tools we needed to wind down ailing firms and a safe way that would not affect the broader economy that is why it is essential for congress to give tools, not to the federal reserve, but to the government in general to avoid these types of situations in the future while not creating a moral hazard and other problems associated with preventing the failure of large firms. >> we have to question from the organs. -- from the audience >> >> i want to assure the audience that i am not [unintelligible] >> one question. >> i have one question. [laughter] as you know, mr. chairman, [unintelligible] there is a meeting next year. i am prepared to take on the federal reserve on the systemic risk issue. i asked you to participate in that session. there were key questions re

economy to come back.to prevent the collapse of the financial system, including the entire global system, was essential to avoiding a similar economic outcome in this decade. of course, a big problem was that we did not really have all the tools that we needed to wind down systemically critical firms in a safe way for the broader economy. that is why it is so essential for congress to give tools not to the federal reserve -- i think it would be better managed by the fdic and the treasury -- to avoid these situations in the feature was not creating moral hazards and other problems associated with the failure of large firms. >> let's go to the audience. with a former member of the federal reserve here. >> [inaudible] >> one question. [laughter] >> [inaudible] our plan to address several key questions, including the role of the federal reserve in combating the current federal crisis. this deals with bear stearns, lehman, an aig. why did the federal reserve not save lehman's? who made that decision? why was it

the economy grew -- then the economy grew and it fell again and did not start growing until 1983.es a major policy mistake or something like that to send us into nw. there is no real reason to go into eight w unless you scare consumers to death or use of the else that drives down spending, business spending, and then you can get a w. but we should not really be looking at a w. host: the president was meeting with business leaders and economists at the white house, and minority leader john boehner was holding his own summit and met with reporters after his conversation. >> the nation's largest organization representing employers, and the fact that they are not at the white house, gives some indication that they are considering policies that are not going to help employers be more competent about the future of the economy, and therefore, but employers in a position where they are not going to hire more people. i used to run a business before i stumbled into this political arena. i'm beginning to scratch my head and wonder why. but i know what it takes to meet a payroll, what it mean

this is a $13 trillion per year economy. we are one-quarter of the world's economy.what we are saying on the left is to keep the money in our country, the world will want to continue to come here. we will teach you the pledge of allegiance, check your citizenship. when i left in 1977 to join the marines, my grandfather was president of the national league. he was also a union coal miner. when i left we had john deere, caterpillar, farm supplies, general motors. i was a hell of a marine. i was a leader, not a lieutenant, but a working-class marine. i did not know what we were fighting for. our middle class jobs were being shipped overseas. we are saying put americans to work and americans will take care of everything and health care should be afforded to every american. have a great day, put americans first, bring back the middle class. host: that was marked calling from florida, just off of the night shift. we have a twitter -- tax breaks for u.s.-made goods, tax credits for families under $120,000, fast turn infrastructure projects, credit for real small businesses.

and foreign economies. having acted promptly and forceful forcefully, we are keenly aware to ensure longer-term economic stability we must be prepared to withdraw the extraordinary policy support in a smooth and timely way as markets recover. we confident we have the necessary tools to do so. however, as is always the case, even when the monetary policy tools employed are conventional, determining the appropriate time and pass for the withdrawal of stimulus will require careful analysis and judgment. my colleagues and i are committed to implementing our exit strategy in a manner that promotes job creation. a financial try crisis of the serverity we experienced means unsparing self assessments of past performance. we have been engaged in identifying improvements. in the realm of consumer protection, during the past three years we have comprehensively overhauled regulations, aimed at insuring fair treatment of mortgage borrowers and credit card users among numerous other initiatives. to promote safety and sou

bigger than the chinese economy, the japanese economy, the british economy and the french economy put together. we got there with faith in the individual, not in the government. and that is what's wrong with this bill. and you can clearly look and no more is it more evident in this bill that not only do we not have faith in the individual and the individual responsibility and in individual's right sometimes to take risk, but we also give individuals the right in this country to succeed. but when you do that, unlike in other countries, you've given them the right to fail and this bill clearly establishes a bailout fund and it says, when the largest companies in this country, when the largest companies in in this country, when they fail we're going to establish a $150 billion fund, a permanent fund, a permanent tarp . the democratic gentleman from california, mr. brad sherman, said tarp on steroids and where do you get this money from? well, actually it's $200 billion. $150 billion you get not from the companies that are failing but from their competitors who are succeeding and you tran

we have stimulated the economy to grow.the first quarter of this year, as a result of the failed economic policies, we were down -6.4%. the gdp growth was -6.4%. we are up 2.8. a swing of 9.2%. we are very proud of this. there is much more that needs to be done. we will measure the success by the progress that has been made by the american working families. until we have health care for all americans, as the right, not a privilege, and jobs for the 21st century to enable people to succeed, which is what the legislation will do when this is signed by the president. we are pleased with the progress that we are making here, as reflected in the lives of the american people. i want to talk about the leadership of this congress, the first that we have had with a democratic president, with my partner, steny hoyer, the house democratic leader. [applause] >> thank you very much. we came to congress in january, confronted with the worst economy in 75 years. we had already made some tough votes at the request of president bush, to sta

economy. digging ourselves out of this whole is not going to be easy. the job loss this past year and the months preceding it were as severe as anything we have seen for a long time. generating the kind of economic growth that leads to the kind of hiring that gets our employment base back up to where it was is going to be hard. it is going to take a lot of work. host: that was the president yesterday. inside of open "the washington post" there is a story pointing out the top options for mr. obama. barbara, wisconsin. good morning. how long have you been out of work? caller: i am retired now. i was one of the lucky ones. but i have five childrenÑi that have no hope. one of my sons is 46 years old. there is no way he can get a job. i have some in their 30's. i feel that when i die, i do not know what to do with them. i have sold the house, but where are they going to live? i want to put them all in the house and make them babies again. host: are your children working at all? caller: they worked,

you need to put the japanese economy, the chinese economy, the french economy and the brittish economy together, and our economy is bigger than all of those. we didn't get there by the government making decisions and managing healthcare. we didn't get there with the government making financial decisions, and really, i think shifting responsibility. i heard a caller earlier that said i bought a house and put down a 20% downpayment. i'm not behind on my mortgage. why am i having to pay for someone who, you know, isn't able to pay? for whatever reason, and i think that is a valid question, and in this country we have always allowed individuals to succeed and sometimes to fail, and the same ought to be true of corporations, no matter how big they are r if they fail, the taxpayer shouldn't underwrite them. host: how does republican legislation differ? glenn: well, guest: well, it differs in many regards. we don't impose a tax. the democratic plan imposes a bailout tax. it is $150 billion tax on large corporations in this country. $150 billion out of our economy right now is going to cost jo

economy. and it took him a while to figure out his diagnosis was wrong. in january 2008, he catches a. he cuts interest rates dramatically by one and have put that there is this remarkable bear stearns episode where we have an institution that is not supervised by the federal reserve. one for which they have not been responsible. it's about to go down. bernanke decides that it has to be saved for the good of the system. and there is no one else in the country who can save it, except the federal reserve. the president of the united states can push a button and launch a missile against north korea or iraq or iran, or mexico if he chose. but he doesn't have the money to fight a financial panic. only the federal reserve does, and so they use that power in march 2008. and they say they're bear stearns from bankruptcy. they settle into jpmorgan chase, and they buy $30 billion worth of stuff off the bear stearns balance sheet that jpmorgan chase didn't want. and for the next six months, things sort o

economy to come back. in that respect, our actions to prevent the collapse of the financial system, including the entire global system, was essential to avoiding a similar economic outcome in this decade. of course, a big problem was that we did not really have all the tools that we needed to wind down systemically critical firms in a safe way for the broader economy. that is why it is so essential for congress to give tools not to the federal reserve -- i think it would be better managed by the fdic and the treasury -- to avoid these situations in the feature was not creating moral hazards and other problems associated with the failure of large firms. >> let's go to the audience. with a former member of the federal reserve here. >> [inaudible] >> one question. [laughter] >> [inaudible] our plan to address several key questions, including the role of the federal reserve in combating the current federal crisis. this deals with bear stearns, lehman, an aig. why did the federal reserve not save lehman's? who

economies in the whole world. we wouldn't have any unemployment. we would be going gang busters if federal spending was a thing that was going to make the economy good. but most people, with a little common sense, if your family budget is in trouble, the thing you're going to do is not run down to the local store with your credit card and stack up a whole lot of debt and spend like mad, unless you're a little bit nutty or had too much to drink. anyway, we were told that the thing to do is we've got to pass this $787 billion stimulus bill. we were told, if you don't pass it, you know what's going to happen, america, and you congressmen representing americans if you don't pass this stimulus bill, you may see unemployment go up to 8% if you don't pass the stimulus bill. this is the president's forecast of the -- of what's going to happen if we pass a stimulus bill right here. this is 8% unemployment he says, we're going to keep it under 8% if you get this $787 billion into our hands to spend. and this is without the

economy was beginning to slow precipitously. but even a year ago, it seemed very unlikely that we were about to tumble into anything that resembled the great depression. and then in september and october of 2009, we came closer

and in the case of health care, faster than the economy when the economy grows. choices. on health care costs, on social insurance reforms, spending constraints, tks reforms, tough choices are unevidentible. >> did you see any of those choices made while you were here? >> no. they won't be made in my opinion, senator. they won't be made in the regular order because the regular order is dysfunctional. . there is nothing like a free lunch. at some times, this seems to be. there is the physical world out there, that is responding to all of this. what often like to do when you talk about the budget is forget about finance, think about this in real terms. how much do we have to start with, and how much do we see a demand for these resources to see the total. every single thing that appears before you is desirable. what you passes something -- and there is the need to do this. but if you add up everything, these exceptional needs, you have the physical requirements that are much larger than the capacity to produce this. there has to be some form in which the total dema

he could see the entire economy taking. i obviously admitted to him but did not know how to go about this. he arranged for me to send some experts to jam who is the editor of the big money which is part of the state's grip on it by the washington post. jan ran some of these experts. the next day i received a call from the new york publishing house asking if i would be interested in working with them on a textbook. so i did not have to handle that one. i called my son and said, why don't you find out what i am supposed to do next. long story is brought very quickly to an end. i was able to get an agent in new york. he looked at the various entries and said you really have to do a lot of research. my father wrote them helter-skelter. so jim and i had already started off working together. i said would you be interested in and joining me in this endeavor. thank goodness he said yes. it started to work together. we were very happy when a we got a particular publishing house. we have a great group. this is the end result, and the

can we grow this economy? can we create jobs and help struggling families without further mortgaging our children's future? is there a no cost jobs plan? as mike said, i chair the economic solutions working group for the house republicans. this group of members has a meeting all year on ways to improve the economy. and lately our focus has been on a no cost jobs plan. so if the president kicks off his job summit tomorrow, i would like to highlight some common sense proposals that we have had under discussion that i believe are worthy of serious consideration by the president and the democratic majority. now, i know that there are philosophical differences between the parties, but surely we can agree on a few common sense things to help get america back to work. let's begin with a simple premise. an overactive government did not make america the land of promise, prosperity, and opportunity. why have our small businesses, entrepreneurs and workers been so moat indicated to work hard and innovate over the years?

and foreign economies. having acted promptly and forceful forcefully, we are keenly aware to ensure longer-term economic stability we must be prepared to withdraw the extraordinary policy support in a smooth and timely way as markets recover. we confident we have the necessary tools to do so. however, as is always the case, even when the monetary policy tools employed are conventional, determining the appropriate time and pass for the withdrawal of stimulus will require careful analysis and judgment. my colleagues and i are committed to implementing our exit strategy in a manner that promotes job creation. a financial try crisis of the serverity we experienced means unsparing self assessments of past performance. we have been engaged in identifying improvements. in the realm of consumer protection, during the past three years we have comprehensively overhauled regulations, aimed at insuring fair treatment of mortgage borrowers and credit card users among numerous other initiatives. to promote safety and sou

we can't suppress the economy, we need to stimulate the economy. but if we put in place pay-go, we will give additional confidence to those who are prepared to invest their capital that we will continue to have sound fiscal policies. it's unlikely that we will have the votes to pay for this extension of policies which bipartisan support. i choose to support the strongest persian of pay-go possible. that's the pay-go provision in this bill. so on the one hand we bring in this bill estate planning rationality, substance, and confidence. on the other hand we adopt once again in this house the premise of statutory pay-go which got us to four years of surplus. during the clinton administration. the only four years of surplus in the lifetime of anybody in this chamber. i hope that the senate will join the house in taking this essential first step out of america's deep fiscal hole. my friend, mr. brady, thinks they will not. perhaps he is correct. if he is correct, it will be unfortunately. my friend, i know, has been a proponent for the years he's been h

government has to protect the economy from itself, keynes thought.cted, do a better job. >> what markets do is they punish you if you systematically make the same mistakes over and over again. when you destroy the punishment system that markets naturally perform, you're going to see more myopia, more hubris, more overconfidence. >> it's interesting, the word "you." they punish you. if it was just that you made a mistake and the markets punished you, because you were out of a job that's fine, but they actually punish millions of people for the mistakes of a quite a few people and no government, no democratic government is going to allow that degree of punishment. >> reporter: unemployment for long periods of time? >> unemployment and the bankruptcy of lots of companies who are not making mistakes, they're just affected by the people that have made the mistakes. >> reporter: so then lord skidelsky, what do you think keynes would actually have us doing now? >> i think he might have wanted a bigger stimulus, actually, because the stimulus hasn't actually

economy. and our final guest is elizabeth warren, who has been tapped by congress to be the chairman of the tarp oversight panel. they released a report that rates the effectiveness of the program eason -- even as we learn the treasury secretary decided to extend it. also talking to congressman scott garrett from the jersey, member of financial services committee, about republican concerns as the financial risk -- regulation bill works its way. kevin hall will start today with us, mcclatchy newspapers, and then we will hear from vali nasr of the state department about u.s. policy toward pakistan and afghanistan. we will start on the role of executive pay in our economy as an engine of growth or if you think it works against the economic direction of the country. we were having this in light of the "the wall street journal" story that the payç czar plansa $500,000 cap for salaries for companies taking government money. that is the debate, the role of executive pay in our economy. host: a good

because of this new direction to deprow our economy, the stock -- grow our economy, the stock markethe first of the 2009 we are at 7000, we're over 10,000, an increase of over 3,000 points in the stock market. economists tell us that some of this change is directly related to the recovery package that we passed in january. a fiscally sound budget that we passed 100 days after the president's inauguration, which was a blueprint for the future, a statement of our national values that talked about how we could create jobs, lower taxes for the middle class. over 95% of the american people got a tax cut. and how we could reduce the deficit. all of that, job creation and reducing the deficit. the terms of changing in that budget was in health care, in climate change and energy, to create new innovation. it begins in the classroom. andi sention to our competitive -- and essential to our competitiveness with that innovation is to reduce the cost of health care. to families, to businesses, to our budget and through our economy. to make us competitive and keep us number one in the world econom

first, where is the economy headed? second, what is the reserve doing to support the economy and the financial system? third, will the federal reserve's activity lead to higher inflation down the road? fourth, what can we do to avoid a similar crisis in the future? first, to understand where the economy might be headed we should take a look at where we have been. one year ago, our economy, indeed all of the world's major economies, were reeling from the effects of the devastating economic crisis. policy makers here and abroad undertook a series of actions aiming at stabilizing the financial system and pushing prices. critically, these interventions succeeded in preventing a meltdown that could have put the world into a second great depression. although a global cataclysm was averted, the crisis and never left its consequences including the recessions in the world's economies. in the united states, the unemployment rate which was as low as 4.4% in march 2007 currently stands at 10% periods recently -- 10%. we have seen t

we're a consumer driven economy. a bunch of consumers are on the sideline trying to keep things together as best they can. a whole bunch of other consumers worried about losing their job. as you look out there over the next 12 months. what is your expectation when it comes to unemployment numbers? and is this going to get worse before it gets better is kind of the bottom line of where i'm headed with that question? >> the unemployment rate is very high. it's tremendous problem. it means a lot of hardship for a lot of people. and some very long-term scars in the laber market. the rate at which the unemployment rate comes down defends on how fast the economy grows and how much confidence empoiers have to bring more workers on. we have an employment number tomorrow. we'll get a near-term reading of what is happening. i do not know what the number is. at the most forecast right now are for job loss. but as the economy continues to grow, we should begin to turn that corner and see job creation. however, because we have pe

economy. it is sensible, it is balance. i think it is thought fully thought out in terms of a time line, again, dealing with both the economy and the budget problems. it is a very good start on what i think we need to do to move forward. it is not easy to do the kinds of things it will to -- take to achieve the goals, nor is this a group of people anybody would describe as politically naive. they know what is involved and it came up with a balanced plan. i will turn this over to the capable and knowledgeable david wessel, who is just off of a plane from europe. i want to thank again the peterson foundation and the pew charitable trusts for supporting their work and the work of fiscal policy. both of these organizations are taking leadership roles in dealing with these issues. and i want to thank the commissioners that really went above and beyond the call in terms of what they went into -- put into, the hours of work and writing and rewriting. and i would like to thank the commission is tremen

so actually, as a fact of the economy, as the holiday, december sales as a share of the economy fluctuates year to year but is a clear downward trend. now, if you think about this for a second, we have gotten richer but we are spending proportionately less on christmas. that tells something about the kind of good christmas is and i will talk more about this soon but it's not a luxury, this is the hand, it is a necessity. okay. let's talk about that now. so, we need to stay very brief economic lecture here. you probably thought you are already having won but just a quick introduction to some concepts. you know, we have these goods, spam, chicken and caviar, sort of very stereotypical examples. and you can see it's christmas, likes ban should be called interior good, chicken, normal good or caviar which is a luxury good. so how do we define those goods? i think fairly intuitively, but the formal way we define those goods is we ask how does the share of expenditures, some think of like a household, how does that share of a household expenditure on that good fairy as the household gets richer

bigger than the chinese economy, the japanese economy, the british economy and the french economy put together. we got there with faith in the individual, not in the government. and that is what's wrong with this bill. and you can clearly look and no more is it more evident in this bill that not only do we not have faith in the individual and the individual responsibility and in individual's right sometimes to take risk, but we also give individuals the right in this country to succeed. but when you do that, unlike in other countries, you've given them the right to fail and this bill clearly establishes a bailout fund and it says, when the largest companies in this country, when the largest companies in in this country, when they fail we're going to establish a $150 billion fund, a permanent fund, a permanent tarp . the democratic gentleman from california, mr. brad sherman, said tarp on steroids and where do you get this money from? well, actually it's $200 billion. $150 billion you get not from the companies that are failing but from their competitors who are succeeding and you tran

the economy. the idea was if the government would just spend enough money, it's going to create demand and therefore the whole economy will run. it appeals to me as an engineer about just as much as the idea of grabbing your boot straps and lift yourself so you can fly around the room. the idea is, when you have a bad economy, the government should spend money like mapped and quote, stimulate the economy. that was one theory. another theory that was developed, get your foot off of the spending and the taxing, leave enough money in the economy and particularly with small business owners to allow them to invest. when they invest, they create jobs and you allow the free market and you allow markets in the ingenuity of americans to motivate and build america bigger and stronger than before and individual citizens, not the government, are the ones that create the jobs. that was another formula. that was tried by j.f.k., also by ronald reagan and g.w. bush. all got off the taxes, left more money in the

it is the economy is composed of married entrepreneurs. it is composed of a private sector that utilizes the skills of its workers and the pat hickey relation -- [inaudible] >> and those capacities are the core of our economy and we choose to measure and exchange them in dollars which is the currency that federal reserve is ultimately trying to guard. and i think one of the point is important here is that there is an interplay between what the federal reserve can and wants to do and the enormous deficit that federal government is about to run and we should try to minimize that interplay. >> i am eric with the fiscal times. a digital start of focusing on the budget and fiscal issues. i have a specific question for alice rivlin and jim nussle. all the panelists have said that it's essential that all issues be on the table trying to figure out what to do with the deficit and debt. for alice rivlin, on the question of medicare savings, what are areas that you would look at that congress hasn't looked at already to try to finesse health care re

because of this new direction to deprow our economy, the stock -- grow our economy, the stock market was the first of the 2009 we are at 7000, we're over 10,000, an increase of over 3,000 points in the stock market. economists tell us that some of this change is directly related to the recovery package that we passed in january. a fiscally sound budget that we passed 100 days after the president's inauguration, which was a blueprint for the future, a statement of our national values that talked about how we could create jobs, lower taxes for the middle class. over 95% of the american people got a tax cut. and how we could reduce the deficit. all of that, job creation and reducing the deficit. the terms of changing in that budget was in health care, in climate change and energy, to create new innovation. it begins in the classroom. andi sention to our competitive -- and essential to our competitiveness with that innovation is to reduce the cost of health care. to families, to businesses, to our budget and through our economy. to make us competitive and keep us number one in the world

you need to put the japanese economy, the chinese economy, the french economy and the brittish economy, and our economy is bigger than all of those. we didn't get there by the government making decisions and managing healthcare. we didn't get there with the government making financial decisions, and really, i think shifting responsibility. i heard a caller earlier that said i bought a house and put down a 20% downpayment. i'm not behind on my mortgage. why am i having to pay for someone who, you know, isn't able to pay? for whatever reason, and i think that is a valid question, and in this country we have always allowed individuals to succeed and sometimes to fail, and the same ought to be true of corporations, no matter how big they are r if they fail, the taxpayer shouldn't underwrite them. host: how does republican legislation differ? glenn: well, guest: well, it differs in many regards. we don't impose a tax. the democratic plan imposes a bailout tax. it is $150 billion tax on large corporations in this country. $150 billion out of our economy right now is going to cost jobs. we do

weakened economy. instability in the credit market and he missed a clear chance to take action when he would not have required a massive commitment of taxpayer resources in considering chairman ben bernanke real appointment we need to be mindful that the christ sis of 2008 was not day or weeks in the making. it took years mapped of those years chairman ben bernanke supported actions that contributed to the ultimate scale of the problems we encountered. an ascale not seen since the great depression. many of the fed's responses amplified the two large guy nanl institutions because the fed also made other forecast in error. it identified possible spill overs from the housing market into the general economy and financial system. consequently the fed took actions that appeared piece-mealed and to quote doctor anna schwart disease fed delivered plenty of rhetoric an about the importance of transparency. the market was bewilders when the fed rescued certain firm assed not you there's. they failed convince the

unfortunately, it is part of the economy. we have to think about the economic dimension, and i say with regret that of the two objectives that people had going into health care before -- reform were on track to do a good job on number one and a poor job number to -- #two. if we do not do a good job on #twnumber two. i am in favor of a narrow, exclusionary process. i immediately at a disadvantage. regular order in the congress of the united states has not produced terrific results. i see no reason that regular order will produce a better result in the next decade. i have come to the conclusion that we need what james madison suggested. >> senator, thank you for your important questions. the first question is a tricky one. you cannot have a group that is so large that it becomes unmanageable. you can't have it so small that there is not that broad of a group of people. there is no perfect solution. one of the problems that i have is that so few people have been willing to put forward policies that would move us in the right dir

the economy is in a mess and in a downward spiral. we have to fix the economy. this is the president's philosophy. and you can't fix the economy unless we first fix health care that costs too much money. that is the rationale. it is threaded through his speeches. it never seemed rationale to me and i couldn't follow the logic, the economy's in a mess and have to fix health care to straighten out the economy and spend too much money on health care and therefore, we have to fix it. i can get that far, but then the rationale on my side of the i'll would be, if we are spending it too much on health care, where are we spending it too much where we don't need to. in medicare, that would punish many of the senior citizens in america led by aarp. so they have come out to support this bill. but the president said we are spending too much money, let's spend more. and he wants to keep the bill down under $900,000 but it throws $243 billion as the original number and takes it over $1 trillion. and if you look at some of the other numbers and look at how senator judd gregg d

♪ >> reporter: a mern economy simply doesn quickly adjust to a shock, keynes gued.sumers willuy again; people are loa to sell their homes at steep dcounts; woers, unwilling to take deep pay cuts. that's why prices d wages are called "sticky." government has tprotect the econy from itself, keynes thought. but roberts thinks marts, unprotected, do a tter job. >> what markets do is they punish you if you systatically make the same mistakesver and over again. when you destroy the punisent system that markets naturall perfor you're going to see more myoa, more hubris, more overconfidence. >> it's interesting, the wd "you they punish you. if it was just thayou made a mistake and the marketpunished you,ecause you were out of a job that's fine, but ty actually punish llions of people for the mistas of a quite a few people and no governme, no democratic government is going tollow that degree of punisent. >> reporr: unemployment for long periods of time? >> unemployment and e bankruptcy of lots of coanies who e not making mistakes, they're just affected the people that ve mad

what open a the economy was the federal reserve.a government institution deciding if needed to help the economy by printing too much money. it is the equivalent of an automobile. you can have a fine vehicle, but if you don't put in enough fuel you will stall, and if you put in too much will flood the engine. the fed flooded the engine. it first went to commodities in 2004. oil, copper, gold all shot up. in the housing market it put the booming market on steroids to banks with lower lending standards. you got to the time were you did not have to make a downpayment on a mortgage. experience says that is a formula for disaster, and it was. if we get the policies right, there is no reason why we cannot resume expansion again. host: republican column next. he is from bloomington, ill.. caller: on the mark to market accounting you are suggesting that the financial institutions should be able to assign arbitrary values to the assets they hold. that is what got us into this mess. i cannot go to a bank and sit at my house is worth $200,000 a

we're looking at a really depressed economy.the kind of number that if it really is $170 billion, you know, they're doing stuff that might give a fairly big bang for the buck in job creation but it will still leave unemployment almost surely above 8% at the end of next year, almost surely above 7% at the end of 2011. those are not things we should be accepting. we should be not saying, "well, that's all we can do. we've got arbitrary limits set by congressional notions of what's responsible." we're just not doing enough. i'm much more heartened at $170 billion than some of the numbers i've heard earlier this afternoon which may or may not have been right. it's not nearly big enough. >> woodruff: if you had to put a price tag on what you think the government should do, what would it be? >> as i said before i think we've dochb enough. we ought to wait and see what happens. i just don't think that the case for rushing forward in a crisis situation with a lot more money right now is quite justified. i think we can wait a little whil

and in the case of health care, faster than the economy when the economy grows. make tough choices. on health care costs, on social insurance reforms, spending constraints, tks reforms, tough choices are unevidentible. >> did you see any of those choices made while you were here? >> no. they won't be made in my opinion, senator. they won't be made in the regular order because the regular order is dysfunctional. . desirable things. in other words, you don't frivolous bills. what you pass is something in which there's a need to do something. the trouble is if you add up all the needs, all of which are exceptional needs, you got a physical requirement that is much larger than our capacity to produce it. so there's got to be some form in which the total demand is available supply. one of the points i made in my prepared remarks is that this notion that we can somehow just expand the economy at will or do increased productivity, the history of productivity in this countryçó -- which means you can't go faster than we think. and indeed, what we have seen over since the

the economy is turning around. last friday i joined president obama in allentown, pennsylvania, to talk with and hear from business leaders and veterans about how to create new jobs and to grow the economy. the president laid out a jobs plan that will spur small business hiring, improve infrastructure and encourage energy efficiency. we need to take action on this plan that builds economic opportunity for the long term. new jobs are sustainable for years ahead. and rebuilding our infrastructure, creating new energy sources and developing new technology and innovative product and services that we and the world want to buy. we are committed to rebuilding america's economy, putting americans back to work and resuring our nation's economic future. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. burgess: thank you, mr

frustration about the economy.i think what is also interesting is fundamentally this comes down to if we are talking about this decade, to me is just a breakdown in how people felt about institutions. institutions basically failed americans. and it started off with things, september 11th was different but i think it started off this decade with things like the enron, and you ended it, of course, with bernie madoff and the collapse of wall street. and so i think fundamentally what we are seeing politically too is sort of the rise of the individual, that institutions now are no longer as trusted, including politicians. >> i was going to say, the beginning of the decade coincided with the most condition tested election of our lifetime. >> that's right. and so you started off there, you know, but what i thought was really interesting too was when you look at party identification in 2 thousand and now compare it to where we are now, looking at the pew, poll, of course, the number of people who identify themselves as ind

and, of course, the entire conversation was about the economy and what is the future of the economy? there were a number of people who had a conversation about the past. but i wanted to focus on the future. and i pointed this out to the chairman and asked for his comments with respect to future of our economy. most of my constituents don't understand what i'm about to say. frankly, most of the people in the press don't understand it and maybe some of you, even members of this body, don't even understand it. when we talk about the federal budget, two-thirds of the federal budget is beyond the control of this congress. two-thirds of the federal budget is on autopilot unless this congress changes entitlements. somebody says, well, what does this word entitlement mean? why do you talk about entitlement? entitlement means by law these individuals are entitled to this money whether we have it or not. the federal government has made a contract with them. all right, it's a social contract rather than a legal contract, but it's just as binding politically, where the federal government has to

collapse of the economy in 75 years. and so indeed mr. obama and the majority party in this congress spent money to try to prime the pump to keep the economy going because we were losing 700,000 jobs a month. the last three months of the bush administration. . we have not got that done last month. it's not good enough but it's certainly a lot better than the situation was when we inherited it. the gentleman squawks about the debt ceiling. the debt has already been rung up and now the question is, when the bill comes in the mail, is it going to be paid or not? the fact is, other than $1.8 trillion debt increase, $1.4 trillion of that is directly traceble to policy actions that were taken by the previous administration in the previous republican congress and $400 billion of it are directly traceble to the actions we've had to take to try to bail the economy out of the mess that you folks got us into. so if you want to start comparing records, i'd be happy to. i'd much prefer to talk about the contents of this bill in the i

the economy of the south converted from tobacco to coffin.tobacco plantations had depended on skilled hands to grow, harvest and treat the tender crops which force planters to foster worker continent by providing adequate care for the worker families including nonproductive children and the elderly and crippled. coffin changed all that, it changed the economy and sleet existence dramatically. cotton fields require no skills. no skills to planned or harvest. they observe women, children, the elderly as long as they can stand, walk or crawl. coffin opened also eckert culture to a new class of growers. almost every white man could join. all he needed was a patch of land, a whip and enough money to buy a slave. white laborers and craftsmen who have traditionally opposed slavery as free labor that deprived them of jobs suddenly became its champions. bodying their own small pieces of land and sleeve to work it free of any cost of the than subsistence nourishments and living quarters. cruelty replaced paternalism across the south. the crack of the w

financial system but our economy as a whole. our financial system and stabilize. the stock market has sprung back to life. the economy is growing, and our banks are once again reporting profits. a year ago people thought we would never recover these investments, but we have managed the program well. this morning another major bank announced it would be repaying taxpayers in fall, and when they do, we will have collected 60% of the money owed with interest. we expect other institutions to follow suit, and we are determined to recover every last dime for the american taxpayer. my main message in today's's meeting was very simple, that america's banks received extraordinary assistance from american taxpayers to rebuild their industry and now that they are back on their feet, we expect an extraordinary commitment from them to help rebuild our economy. that starts with finding ways to help credit worthy small and medium-sized businesses if the loans they need to open their doors, grow their operations, and create new jobs. this is so

it's going to be the small businesses in our economy. in my state of south dakota there about 96% of the game when it comes to employment in south dakota. and so here we are debating a health care reform bill which in addition to spending $2.5 trillion to create this new health care entitlement raises taxes on small businesses, cuts medicare and that the end of the day according to a the experts the congressional budget office, the chief actuary at the center for medicare services, which is the so-called referee and all this that tells us what these things are going to cost and with the impacts are going to be. they've all said that premiums are going to stay the same or go up. the best in small business can hope for under this is the status quo. so i hear our colleagues on the other side coming down here day after day after day, making statements about this is going to be good for small businesses. this is going to help small businesses deal with the high cost of health care. the problem, madam president, with all their arguments is one

economy tanks.ow do you balance the call for more lending with the desire to not repeat past mistakes? >> thank you. you know, right now, as you know, we are still looking at an environment where there is not enough lending to small business. we know that there are still good companies out there that cannot get the credit that they need. our credit scores on our loans have actually gone up in this environment. they have gone up. so we are not making riskier loans. we are seeing more great companies out there, and this is why today across the administration we have urged banks to come back in this market and make the loans to those good companies, because without the credit, as the economy perks up and they need to expand their inventory and higher than next worker, they are going to need that capital to grow. >> so how does the sba protect itself against people who are irresponsible in getting loans, like the mortgage borrowers who cannot meet their obligations? >> it is very important, as you know

that is good news for the economy. . ood news for the economy but there are a lot of people still struggling. and so, yes, we believe that we need to have a jobs bill and we think it's appropriate to address the funds that we've already authorized, not new funds, that we've already authorized to try to bring this economy back, to not just look at it globally but to look at individuals who are hurting, who individuals who are hurting, who want to apply t those folks who are hurting and try to keep them in their homes, get them a job and get their families more stable. mr. cantor: mr. speaker, i appreciate the gentleman's recognizing that there are differences. absolutely. on how we believe that we can work on getting this economy going again. i do believe that we have some similarities which is why we pose the no cost jobs plan. so i ask the gentleman again, are we going to see the three trade bills come to the floor? because in my estimation i believe at least one if not all of the bills can garner a majority of the vote

>> work on the economy. how many say work on the economy? yeah, a lot of people. okay. health care and the economy. great. let me turn -- and -- and do something just quickly here. and i'm going to read you a number of people's names that you probably know. and have some sort of -- of some sort of attitude about. and get you to just essentially give me a word or phrase to describe, to describe your feelings about each of these people. okay. i don't want you to tell me -- that this person is a senator, that this person -- don't describe their titles. i want a feeling. so anything that you feel about that person, so -- if i were -- i were, if i were to say madonna, you would say -- >> trashy. >> interesting. >> rock star. >> rock star. >> okay. i'm looking and thank you so much, i needed one of those. exactly. that's right. stay with you. >> okay. >> okay. >> okay. here we go, barack obama, word or phrase? pamela? give me a feeling. >> a feeling. >> doing, doing a good job. >> give me a feeling about him? >> handsome. >> william, word or phrase? >> intelligent person. >>

it comes under the category of the economy and of spending. great concern about our long-term spending path and there's concern about what that will mean for the economy. so this is a way or addressing both of those. it won't reassure a lot of people who are most focused on jobs.

your economy would do that. no different than if you were a banker outside detroit michigan not surprising that you're probably concentrating on people who build things in the car industry. >> woodruff: karen petrou, if that's what's going on, if you do have clearly some banks doing well but others in hot water, what is the remedy here? the white house is saying, lend more. we'd like to see the regulatory agencies lean on you a little less. >> it's a balancing act, as i said. it's important to remember that banking isn't like any other business because we back it with the fdic and with other supports through the federal reserve. so when banks take risks we as tax payers take risks along with the rest of the economy. and the president, i think, recognizes that to encourage more lending needs to be very carefully done so that banks don't go out too far and expose themselves to losses which they can't absorb. >> woodruff: is that something that a bank like yours is able to do? >> i think that never before, you know