elmendorf, for your testimony. frequently mentioned is increased spending, and your testimony certainly reinforces that as well. traditional approaches to addressing rising costs have included cutting people from care, cutting provider rates, cutting services. in my state of oregon we've come together in order to take a new approach, particularly regarding the uninsured in our medicaid dollars. it was quite refreshing to see business, labor, republicans, democrats, educators all come together and work on this health care transformation that is with a goal of improving care while cutting costs, integrating and coordinating services, including physical and mental and oral health care. the modeling that's taken place involves coordinating physical and behavioral health care, better preventing and managing chronic diseases using patient centered care homes and aligning care for individuals who are dual eligible. so the establishment of these care organizations is projected to actually improve care while reducing costs,

parter elmendorf -- dr. elmendorf, when the stimulus was pastor was believed unemployment would go down because of the stimulus program and here we are three years later with a peek at 10% unemployment. the other side of the aisle is proposing another round of stimulus. they change the name to investment and saying that is going to be the panacea to solve our deficits and debt problems that you have done a great job explaining. my question is can you explain in 30 seconds or less why this didn't achieve its desired outcomes and what impact it had on our debt and deficit? >> the economy performed worse than many forecasters expect a few years ago. in our assessment and the assessment of most economists recovery act created more output and more employment than what happened without it. the underlying weakness of the economy not unusual in comparison to other countries that had financial crisis in future sessions. the underlying weakness of the economy has offset the efforts of fiscal policymakers -- >> that ta

elmendorf. referring something to what the ranking member mentioned about tax revenues as a percent of gdp, in 2007, i believe, under the current tax rates, revenues were 18.5% of gdp, and they are down now into the same tax rates so my question or point of this is that the amount 6 revenue as a percent of gdp is affected not just by rates, but by economic conditions. >> absolutely, congressman. >> okay. so if we had a better economy today, you would have a a larger share of revenue even under the existing tax rates? >> yes. >> 18.5% is fairly close to historic avenue since world war ii, is it not? >> when the cbs talks averages, we use the last 40 yiers. last 40 years, revenues averaged 49% of gd. >> right, under the existing tax rates and a good economy in 2007, we had a larger revenue as a share of the economy, actually larger than the average over the previous 40 years. >> yes, that's right. >> thank you. next question relative to what we charitably call obamacare and on the other side they

elmendorf on health care. health care is mentioned as significant factor in increased spending and your testimony certainly reinforces that as well. . .

elmendorf. two weeks ago you and your colleagues at the congressional budget congressional budget office released an analysis of the economic impact of the so-called fiscal cliff, painting a very somber picture of what might happen if congress fails to address expiring tax cuts and the looming automatic spending cuts that occurred at years and. you predicted a possible recession early next year and millions more are out of work. we would actually go over that fiscal cliff, yet your long-term outlook, cbo's long-term outlook which we are discussing today, also confirms that continuing to do business as usual, extending all the current tax and spending policies, will produce unsustainable deficits and debt, which will also hurt the economy in the long run. .. super low interest rates, should should be a no-brainer. we call upon speaker boehner to president put the president's jobs proposal a vote on the floor of the house. the second step is for lawmakers, the congress, the president to adopt a pl

but it's also about the president, steve elmendorf, talking about the things he has accomplishes, talkingng the auto industry, talking about health care, people may be divided about health care but ask them about the specifics do you want your 24-year-old, 25-year-old college student to be on your policy? that they want. talk about bin laden, has the campaign, has the president done a good enough job about talking about what he has accomplished? >> yeah, i think they're doing a very good job. there's a long way until november and lot will happen between now and then. i think barack obama on the economy and foreign policy and defense has a terrific record. and e-i think it's interesting, republicans are conceding his leadership on foreign policy which was a weakness of democrats and that's a positive going into the election. again, i think he needs to lay out what he's going to do in the second term. we have five months until the election. first he's got to lay out what he wants to do between now and the election to show the american people he's working every day to make the economy better

there are f-15s located and f-15s located at elmendorf and they felt it was better to unify those and i just want you to know that i've shared this with your colleague as well that we have no intention of closing it down. it's a very important base for us and it's important in terms of refuelling and it's important in terms of the role that we want to be able to play with regards to the pacific and so nothing that is being recommended here in any way is intended to impact on ileson itself as a future base for the air force. >> i know you're in contact with the air force. i won't commit to going back and talking them out of their plan. i will commit to you to go back to make sure i understand their plan better and then i'll engage you on it personally and senator begich. >> i do recognize that and i understand that the proposed savings that the air force is proposing is demolishing buildings, and the replacement value of these is $150 million so it puts it in a situation where it would appear to be a back door break and that is the concern and consideration. so again, if i can ask you

douglas elmendorf, the highly respected director of the congressional budget office has told you that all of this will produce another recession. so the number i'd like you to remember here is 2% of the gdp. this is the difference between the federal revenue of 17% of the gdp in 2011 which is the last year for which we have real numbers and 19% which is the long-term average of federal revenue in the gdp for the last 30 years. this is the minimum that i think we can expect that revenue will contribute to closing the budget gap that looms ahead of us. third issue is comprehensive tax reform. ranking member hatch has reminded us that is the subject of these hearings. the number there i'd like you to remember is seven trillion. to paraphrase that great u.s. senator after whom this building is named, a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money so what is the seven trillion? this is the cumulative impact of a carefully designed system for comprehensive tax reform. seven trillion is more than sufficient when added to our national wealth of 60 trillio

elmendorf, thank you and your team for all your hard work in putting this very insightful, very harrowing report together. this hearing's adjourned. >>> on wednesday, jpmorgan chase ceo jamie dimon testifies before the senate banking committee about the company's $2 billion trading loss. live coverage of that hearing on c-span and c-span radio. and the house financial services committee will hold its hearing on the public policy implications of jpmorgan chase's recent trading loss on tuesday, june 19th. live on c-span 3 and c-span radio. >> we're going live now to the

elmendorf, as you said, all this involves a very difficult trade-offs. to the extent that we keep that low and we reduce revenue, that means that we have to cut much more deeply into other areas. is that right? >> yes. >> and given the fact that health care costs are increasing rapidly, especially medicare, it will mean that we have to come up with another way of dealing with medicare costs. is that right? >> yes. >> and, just to go back to the cbo analysis of the house republican plan, with respect to creating and medicare voucher, a premium support, whatever you want to call it, my recollection is that the cbo analysis showed that you are really just shifting a lot of the rising health-care costs off the medicare program and on it to seniors. is that right? >> looking at your door the plan, we did analyze and try to offer some rough estimates of the shift to beneficiaries. this year, we were not able to do that kind of analysis. the plan was more complicated. we were not able to do the comparable analysis yet this year. >> that is right. i think in the

elmendorf on health care. health care is mentioned as significant factor in increased spending and your testimony certainly reinforces that as well. . . better preventing and managing chronic diseases, using patient-centered primary care and improving and allowing care for individuals who are dual eligible. so the establishment of these chordata care organizations is projected to improve care while reducing loss and increasing access. by courting services, they project 4.9-9.7% savings in the second year of implementation, compared without the transformation to a 10% increase. this savings is expected to build over time, and i wonder if you could talk a little bit about how this type of change would impact the federal budget a similar approach was implemented in other states as well. >> i think that are tremendous about of experimentation going on in different states, and different private providers of care, private insurers, in effort to get more value for health care dollars. and i think the experimentation

john feehery, steve elmendorf, great to talk to you guys. thank you. >>> after hundreds of complaints about voting are, egypt is delaying the release of results in the recent presidential election. the once-banned muslim brotherhood says its candidate won and is threatening more protests. meantime, protesters gathered last night in cairo's tahrir square, calling for an end to military rule. at the same time, the health of former president hosni mubarak is not totally clear. yesterday, he was reportedly near death. today, his supporters say he has been taken off a respirator and is doing much better. summer in new york state has something different for everyone to love. discover what you love. visit ilovenewyork.com to plan your summer trip now. do you really think brushing is enough to keep it clean? while brushing misses germs in 75% of your mouth, listerine® cleans virtually your entire mouth. so take your oral health to a whole new level. listerine®... power to your mouth™. yoo-hoo. hello. it's water from the drinking fountain at the mall

elmendorf said it's double counting the money, you can't simultaneously benefit medicare and fund a new health care program, although the conventions of accounting might suggest otherwise. and so the real smart financeiers, what did they do? they figured out how to use the conventions of accounting in a way that obscured the fact that they didn't have the $400 billion. and it was borrowed money, in truth. mr. president, i see my colleagues on the floor and would yield the floor. mr. inhofe: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: i just have a couple of comments to make for clarification purposes. i first of all i don't think anyone is going to question my conservative credentials over the years that i've been here, and i've been -- i've been really offended by a lot of the things that have happened, structurally in this institution, over in the house, but insofar as this bill is concerned, let me kind of clarify a couple of things. it sounds real good when you stand up here and say we've only had a matter of minutes to look at something that's 500 p

you look at the economy, whatever you say about obama's policies, a very broad consensus -- doug elmendorf of the congressional budget office said this to congress last week, there's a very broad consensus that the stimulus created somewhere around three million jobs, probably kept the economy from going back into recession. i would have had a bigger stimulus at ha time. i think the sluggish growth suggests we needed a bigger one. but a lot of times when republicans say government doesn't create jobs, i think that progressives should say back, oh, yes, it does. it not only creates jobs directly by support being local governments that are laying off people, but it puts money in the pockets of people who then spend it for private sector jobs are created. so i think liberals just have to stop being so fearful of polls. and, look, if i could close on this, there's been a real discontent with government going all the way back to vietnam and watergate which is a long time ago. it's not as if all of this anti-government sentiments is just created by politics. and, yes, you've got to deal with tha