one federal in one state. on the federal level, whether we like it or not, we really do not have the monies for some of our huge projects. one of them being the central subway. now, it's okay for people to come here and state the process about the funding. but what is important for the supervisors to know is what is going on at the metropolitan transportation meetings where some companies are not getting paid. and also to listen to the comments of the businesses who are impacted. it all ties in. while these deliberations are going on here, someone stating to you that this will happen, that will happen, this board has some responsibility to give feedback to the businesses in nob beach. things are not too rosy. this board has the responsible the not to kill those businesses. suffice it to be to speak on the federal issues with that statement. for the state it is the same. we have to figure out a way how we can have an interaction with our colleges and universities and other small groups. send them to sacramento.

>> guest: i describe my role as being the chief -- for federal cybersecurity. it's my job to oversee the policy development process is in the white house and related to cybersecurity and to work on and ensure that agencies are actually implementing their present policies and directives. there is also big chunk of my job that is really outreach to the private sector and our reach to industry and academia and think-tanks in the state state and there isn't also an aspect of my job is international in talking to my counterparts and in other countries from great britain to canada to germany and other parts of the world as well >> host: also joining us here in "the communicators" is gautham nagesh who is the editor of cq role tall -- roll call brief. >> guest: how will the executive order improve cybersecurity and what would the standards due to operationally affect security? >> guest: would be look at what we are trying to do instead of taking the best practices from the leading companies that really do cybersecurity well ,-com,-com ma and spreading those out to the

we expect the federal reserve will start to raise the federal funds rate in 2016 and start to sell assets out of its portfolio in 2016. under current law and budget projections, economic projections that we have, that would amount to an extraordinarily long period of extraordinarily low interest rates. that is what the fed says it is trying to do in order to provide as much support to the economy as it can, and we expect it will continue to provide that support. the interest rate on 10-year treasury notes will start to rise sooner than we expect because those rates reflect not just current short-term rates but expectations of future short-term rates, and we think financial participants will begin to look more and more at the period after the federal reserve has brought the rates back up to more normal levels, so we have a long-term rates hitting sooner than the short- term rates. that is not typical. we get a short-term rates heading up where we think the other up with a writ will be coming down decisively, and it will be working its way back, and inflation will be coming up towards the r

it is not federal space. and the clinton library, i believe that the clinton foundation controls part of it. there are some libraries that are totally federal. they are owned completely by the federal government. but the new ones, and the nixon library because it joined the system as one of the new ones, there is a tree between the foundation and the federal government. there is a demarcation mark. in the nixon more--- in the nixon library, you can see the mark. the foundation did not like the mats that i selected. they did not like the logo i had selected. so when you go into the library, you have the national archives logo. and they have mats in front of the doors for the foundation and different colored ones for the national archives. that's why i say that i was running west berlin. it is working this way because congress and i guess the executive branch decided that there is only so much the federal government should spend money on. look, i am not a big government person. i am progressive, but mainly on s

chaffetz, in federal properties. i want to give you a real clear example of federal properties that have a problem. we just got back from a codell in regards to the state department looking at our embassies, and in particular i want to highlight morocco. here we are spending over $150 million building a new embassy in morocco, and we have yet to assay and look at what the value and possibility of sale of our current embassy. right there to me it seems like in looking at properties -- i'm not a real estate expert, but it seems to me when we're making a transaction like that, we're looking in the neighborhood of somewhere to $60-$80 million in assets that need to have some assaying. do you know that they had to beg and as of -- there were about, i would say, wouldn't you say it's about 50% completed, that embassy, chairman? >> that sounds correct. >> yeah. they have yet to have an assay of the current buildings and inventory of properties that they had in morocco. i find that disdainful. this is an instant turn around

one is the defensive marriage act, section three about federal benefits that the federal government has to give certain benefits to people who are lawfully married in their state who are gay. you can see justice kennedy making the deciding vote but on the federalism grounds. without talking about fundamental rights or equal protection. then there is california's prop 8 thing. i think the most likely thing there is there is some technicality of who will can stand in the room to respect your case. that is one way to hand it on the federalism grounds while not enshrining on the constitutional rights. they are not ready to do that. moving on the what is right now, what alex is going to talk about the hottest issue and that is gun control. president obama's executive actions, there were 23 of them. they were a pleasant surprise in a certain extend. he wasn't legislating himself a ban on assault weapons or confiscating guns or anything like that. i printed out the white house statement and drew a chart and tried to tick off where their potential second amendment problems and where there are o

yes, all federal laws they disagree with would be neutralized. it's like legal febreeze. [ laughter ] and i think he might want some febreeze after those two tempura shrimp are done mating on his upper lip. [ laughter ] folks, each state picking and choosing which laws to obey finally realizes the vision of our forefathers. as lincoln said, "a house divided against itself-- sounds fun! what's the worst that could happen?" [ laughter ] here to tell me the worst that could happen is former associate white house counsel and co-author of "the great decision: jefferson, adams, marshall, and the battle for the supreme court," cliff sloan. friend of the show. cliff, thanks so much for coming back. [cheers and applause] you got the book here. "the great decision" you know what you are talking about. there's this word i hear tossed around and states saying we're not going to obey the federal government. they call it nullification. what is that? is it a legal technology i don't know about? >> nullification is when state and local governments say a federal

it's money that the federal government owe these federal retirees.uld make two comments about it. number one, as you know, you covered this, the federal pensions are so much more generous than the pensions that any private-sector worker gets and that's a big part of the problem. they made these promises they can't keep. the second point is a point you make all the time. why are we bringing any additional new workers into the federal workforce under a pension program that is defined contribution or define benefit. everything should be moved 2401 k for all federal workers. >> on that last point, they pay according to this report 0.8%. that's all they pay. >> unbelievable. >> if you have a defined contribution, you know, they would pay 30%, 40%, something like that, maybe 50%. that's the problem. very low interest rates has reduced the return on these pensions so i don't know what they are going to do. i think the taxpayers have to come up. >> i live in washington, d.c. i'm in the belly of the beast. i live among federal workers and federal retirees. th

federal employees. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member on the committee of government and oversight reform and two, one motion to recommit. section two, in any recess or adjournment if not -- of not more than three day, if in the opinion of the speaker, the public interest so warrants then the speaker or his designee after consultation with the minority leader may reconvene within the time previously appointed under clause 4, section 5, article 1 of the constitution and notify members accordingly. . for the speaker to entertain motions that the house suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule 15 relating to a measure condemning t

i am as much of a federal deficit hawk is anyone in this chamber. arizona's medicaid program access is not the problem. it is part of the solution, as the nationally recognized old standard for cost effective care in this country -- gold standard for cost effective care in this country. i will weigh the evidence, and do the math. with derail it is facing us, taking advantage of this federal assistance is a strategic way to reduce pressure on the state budget. we can improve arizona's ability to compete in the years ahead. [applause]i am committed to doing this, and i want you on my side. let's work together in an atmosphere of respect, and do what is best for arizona. [applause]of all the subjects we tackle at this capital, we must recall the facts and figures and spreadsheets never tell the whole story. for that, we must go back to the people we serve. maybe things happen in arizona when we work together as leaders. marshal available resources, and encourage innovation and partnership. for someone special i would like you to meet today. her name is

speaker, federal workers, the same federal workers who care for our veterans, the same ones that clean our offices, the same ones that find cures to diseases, devastating diseases at n.i.h., the same ones that secure our borders, the same ones that regulate our drug supply have already contributed more than $100 billion towards reducing the deficit and funding unemployment benefits for millions of american workers. no other group of americans have contributed more to reducing the deficit. no other group has contributed more to ensuring our government remains strong. no other group has worked harder to ensure with securing our nation from threats. no other group has worked harder to provide the services on which our fellow citizens depend. if h.r. 273 becomes law, the same middle-class hardworking workers would be required to contribute another $11 billion towards deficit reduction for a staggering total of nearly $115 billion. these are the same workers who have had their pay frozen tore years, and these -- for years, and these are the same workers who are facing the now threat of furl

and this is where federal is positioned.and we think that they are positioned to do well in the future. >> tom: okay. >> office depot and officemax are not within their top 25 tenants. >> tom: gotcha. and that's something you like for f.r.t. do you have position in the fund in that stock? >> yes, we do own federal reality in our mutual funds newberger fund. >> tom: and you help manage that. it is brian jones with us, from newberger, berman. >> thank you. >> susie: it's macy's versus j.c. penney in a high stakes fight over bed linens, cocktail napkins and kitchen tools. at issue: who will be allowed to carry product's with martha stewart's name on them. macy's has been the selling stewart's merchandise since 2007. it claims it owns the exclusive rights to carry her home furnishings. but rival j.c. penney argues it has the right to sell other stewart-branded products that macy's doesn't carry. ruben ramirez reports. >> reporter: martha's in the middle, as two of the nation's best-known department stores fight in new york state

there is a federal recognition process that tribes go through to become or be recognized by the federal government. some tribes have gone through the state and are recognized by their state governments. it's a very difficult process, a tenuous process of the federal recognition process that i'm talking about. ncai does support that process. i can just tell you we are working on that. we have a federal recognition task orders at ncai the work specifically on that issue. there are members here it's in the audience that serve and i know they'll be glad to meet with you at the conclusion of this to maybe have her direction for assistance, but were obviously willing to help. thank you. >> addict to take a question out for whenever a online viewers, who of course is a well-known journalist for indian country. his question his friends in congress were indian programs, but not medicaid come a funding source is growing. how to get them to look at the big picture? >> well, medicaid and medicare is one of those issues can be very sensitive topic in america, not just indian country, that medicaid i

federal government says so.ut the colorado government begs to differ and is proposing a package of gun laws that could open the door to civil lawsuits for makers and sellers of guns. really? judge, and our senior legal analyst jeffrey toobin, a former federal prosecutor, and joey jackson, defense attorney and college law professor, what a smart bunch today. joe, i want to start with you. people might be surprised to even know there has been these protections for manufacturers of guns and sellers of guns. they have enjoyed these protections on a federal level for quite some time. >> you know what happened was in 1994, ashleigh, briefly there was an assault ban weapons that went into effect under clinton. it expired in 2004 and was not reinstated. furthermore not only was it not reinstated the federal government in 2005 under president bush said guess what, you cannot sue these manufacturers under theory of strict liability, defective product unreasonably dangerous thereby making them immune. there are some except

we should not balance the federal budget on the backs of our federal employees. my amendment would have allowed us to take that vote. sacramento county, my home county, has over 26,000 federal employees. these are hard-working citizens in the defense department, many of them are veterans who have served our country admirably, and there are other dedicated public servants keeping our country safe. we should not ask them to make sacrifices without asking ourselves to make the sacrifice a first. now was a time to set aside the partisanship and start working together to serve our country. however, achieving fiscal balance on the backs of our hard-working federal employees is not a solution. i urge my colleagues to vote against this rule, to represent our hard-working employees and maintain a responsible budget. >> the gentleman's time is expired. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. >> i yield myself to, nats. -- two minutes. my colleague from california gave an informative presentation to the rules committee last night. i am in favor of open rules. i would say

no federal prosecutors?nk there is always a question of what this developer of you at the federal government. again, government is a tool. we should always question what should the federal government be doing, what should the state be doing at the local level? we limit the department of education and department of energy? they have made things worse since they were created. caller: the obama administration ihas continued quantitative easing and has not increased in the bank lending. that is a problem. we have bill gross from him co claiming we are in a self-consuming fire storm. the problem is with retirement. h r 129 would return to predict spending act. i was wondering if you would co- sponsor that? that is the classical -- glass- steagal. 85 billion per month to bail out banks. guest: thank you for the call. i would tell you that before i came to the congress, i was a financial analyst, financial adviser. i was in the bond market and putting together instruments of credits. i would tell you that i am a co

the ate of growth within the federal government by 2.4%. this is possible, everybody in america has had to tighten their belt a little bit and it's time for the federal government to do likewise. we've seen record increases in spending under this administration. >> so you talked about these cuttings about 2.4% of spending, so are you saying basically that the white house is kind of blowing this out of proportion when they say this is going to be such a terrible impact on the economy and people. >> it depends on how the white house, how president obama actually implements hits sequester and how he finds these saving, for him to say within the defense part, the first place we are going, we are to the going to send the second carrier into the persian gulf, i really question that decision. there is other areas within the defense department where we request find the savings. that needs to be the goal, the smarter spending reductions that will actually help get our budget where it needs to be and ultimately help get our economy growing again. whi

federal transportation the reauthorization and what will the success or to map 21 look like? the current zone map 21 just basically continued at appropriate levels as seen underpass federal appropriation bills. if we are going to be supporting the expansion and state of good repair programs that their local transit agency and departments need, we will be need to be seeing additional revenues, of course and we will be continuing to monitor and advocate on that behalf and also continuation of the transit pretext benefit. map 21, proposed and inincludes rather an increase in the tifia loan program. and by about ten found and increase from 100 million a year to 1 billion dollars a year and allows for programs of projects as opposed to stand alone projects. in the state of declining revenue and highway trust fund moneys, exploring alternative ways of delivering projects is a must for the locals and so public private partnership and design options for another alternative finance approaches are things that we will monitor and bring to the board for recommendation, and also, tracking

if federal dollars come in, you'd pay a draw on cp. if [speaker not understood] you'd pay your draw on cp, et cetera. and then back to the third grant anticipation notes. the sole purpose is to better align your federal dollar receipts with your construction expenditures. and as noted, the credit quality is a little weaker, but the final maturity is only 5 to 7 years. so, your all-in interest costs will still be fairly competitive at 2-1/2, 3% rate. i'm going to reemphasize that last bullet on page 6. this will not currently as contemplated involve the agency's revenues. investors will simply look to the federal government for repayment. and you're not alone in doing this. here's a list of other grant anticipation note issuers. i'll note that with math 21 being limited to a two-year horizon and we're in the midst of sequestration discussions and the federal government is in the midst of challenges, securitization of federal dollars is a challenge these days. that said, many agencies have the need similar to you. bart has done it. portl

federal, state and local governments all deal with this issue. and it also involves the private sector. and really this has to be a collaborative approach from all the different parties that are involved working together to tackle the problem. so we're stressing the voluntary part of it because we really believe that it's the leaders in the industry that we want to come together, um, that really have the expertise and the skills to make the difference that we want to make. >> host: what are some of the concerns that you have heard as cybersecurity coordinator from private companies such as banks, electric companies, etc. >> guest: well, you hear a lot of different concerns. interestingly enough, i think, you know, one of the concerns that we hear and you see it reflected in why we set volume, quality and timeliness, okay? great, you've shared information with us about stuff that happened three months ago. yeah, but what about now? so that's one reason why we're trying to increase our timeliness so that we're out ahead of the issues. and we're mak

when we talk about bullying and harassment there is no federal definition of bullying. in fact, one of the things we're working on is getting a common definition so we know what that means. and tom and i have an enormous amount of jurisdiction and team support to help ensure that when it comes to race, when it comes to color and national origin and sex and disability that there is some real teeth behind that, but it also is about students that are bullied and harassed because they are short, because they might act differently or unique. that's where we have to provide the kinds of tools and supports and training to superintendents, like -- i see another one over there, tony smith from oakland, the sort of heroes that are deeply trying to transform their communities and recognize that this is also a community issue, that it is not just a school issue. >> tom, why don't we have a federal definition? >> well, we're working on it. i mean, i think there's a, when we had the white house conference there was a conversation about what is the federal role and there continues to

there are basically a dozen federal union groups in the federal government, with their affiliates. estimated 80 federal union groups and workers associations. interesting stuff coming out right now with this analysis at a time when the federal government is fighting over spending cuts. back to you, jon. jon: yeah, seems like there are some places they could find some savings. liz macdonald, thank you. >> reporter: sure. jenna: we're taking you to arizona now. an arizona courtroom is heating up. murder suspect jodi arias is taking the stand for the fourth day today. she is accused brutally killing her boyfriend, travis alexander. the prosecutor is cross-examining her and getting visibly frustrated. take a listen. >> how is it you just happened you can't even remember what you just said? >> i think i'm more focused on your posture and your tone and anger so it is hard to process the question. >> the answer is again the pros prosecutor's fault because you perceive him to be angry, right? >> it is not your fault. >> is somebody asking you whose whose fault it is? >> you did. >> seem to

it separates powers among branches of the federal government and preserve state power and federal power pretty framers believe the structures would adequately control the government so as to protect individual liberties but the american people disagree. they fear the constitution gave the federal money government told so much power, it could be tyrannical and violate individual rights of the bill of rights was added. each of those rights, including the second amendment, was adopted to further limit government power and protect individual rights. president obama's remarks turned the constitution on its head. he said "the right to worship freely and safely, that right was denied to sikhs in oak creek, wisconsin." the right to assemble peacefully was denied to those in oregon and moviegoers in colorado. that fundamental set of rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or rights that were denied to college students at virginia tech and high school students in columbine an elementary school students in newtown. this is not so. except for its prohibition on slavery, the constituti

the federal government views these to be taxable income. therefore city employees and others with same-sex spouses or domestic partners are taxed more than other city employees simply because their spouses are the same gender. this discame nation has caused same-sex spouses and domestic partners thousands and thousands of dollars each year and the city and county active members is approximately 386 as of the end of last year. san francisco always has been uni hope always will be a leader in supporting our lgbt community. following the example of other municipalities such as cambridge, massachusetts and google and could i hope we will do the same. this legislation will ensure same-sex domestic partners who work for the city and county of san francisco will not be burdened with these taxes. ultimately this is an issue of equality. the additional taxs is one of the many results of defense of act act or doma. married lgbt committees are already denied many rights and this additional tax adds another sting to the injustice of doma. this brings g

that is not what the federal government is in business to do. it is supposed to represent all of the people. not just the far left. i mean this guy is off the chart. mexicans have a right to violate immigration law because of the mexican american war in the mid 19th century? is that what the guy is saying? yeah, that is what he is saying. and we are paying for are it. just another add on to the $17 trillion national debt. i now pronounce the federal government officially out of control. that is the memo. now, the top story tonight, reaction joining us from washington, tom fitten, president of the aforementioned group judicial watch and here in new york city alexis, the executive director of the american values institute. why should my tax money be going to this guy to say those things? why? >> i think it is very forward looking for the u.s. government to be doing this and i think we are quite behind where corporations have been doing for many years in terms of promoting cultural awareness and diversity training in the name of changing demographi

i'm talking about the federal government, jim. >> federal payrolls outside of post office have gone up about 12% since the recession began. outside the post office, they're up about 10% to 12%. >> that's a big number. state and local government workers have shrunk, have they not? >> they have balanced budget requirements action so when the stimulus ran out, they've had to cut back, but the federal government, we're putting about 40% of the budget on the credit card. so no real economy there. >> thanks for reminding me. james, thank you very much. we appreciate it. >>> now, 50 million in diamonds stolen in brussels. how about that? a braising robbery that looks like an inside job. what could be the heist of the century. that's next up on kudlow. (music throughout) why turbo? trust us. it's just better to be in front. the sonata turbo. from hyundai. for over 75 years people ...with geico... ohhh...sorry!. director's voice: here we go. from the top. and action for over 75 years people have saved money with gecko so.... director's voice: cut it! ...what...what did i say? gecko? i said geck

first is federal funding and basic research. even in tough economic times, we must protect the investments in the future. second, is we must make a priority for world class stem education, that's k-12 in the u.s. this needs to be a national imperative implemented on a local basis. three, high-school immigration reform. i appreciate the leadership that, mr. chairman, you have shown, ms. lofgren, on the issues and we look forward to hopefully a resolution. and fourth is comprehensive tax reform for u.s. companies to be able to compete globally. the world has changed considerably since 1986, the last time taxes were considerably reformed. we must have an environment where u.s. headquartered companies can compete effectively on a global basis because that's where 95% of the world's population is. so my conclusion, investing in basic research at our universities has been critical to america's success over the past 50 years. and i believe it will be more important going forward. and i'm certainly happen to -- happy to answer any quest

federal employee years -- federal employees as seek no cost-of-living increases, to keep pace with the cost of living, for two years, and that was a corporate and they are willing to do their share creek but they are not willing to do re and, and enti that has been the republican strategy. i want to remind people who these employees are. these are the nurses, in hospitals around the country, who are taking care of our would it warriors, the fbi agents who saved a young boy in alabama, these folks are helping track down al qaeda to run the world, the air traffic controllers that help make sure we have air safety, the people who do meat inspections. these are people who teach our kids in terms of the funds that will go to education. these are middle-class families, and they deserve to be treated with dignity. congressman bera to the rules committee last night and asked that an amendment put in that would freeze congressional pay, which i support. they would not allow that as a separate vote on the floor. mr. connolly has also introduced a bill to extend i support that. it is one thing to

from the federal government? if so, how?st: taking down these barriers for economic development, allowing tribes to develop the national resources that they have -- the natural resources they have without going to the federal government for permission. energy development. we are not just talking about oil and gas. there is enormous potential there. host: you talk about some of the challenges that indian nations faces. what are some of these excesses? -- what are some of the successes? guest: tribes were allowed to begin the process of contacting some of the federal jobs and have aligned in to achieve their own direction. it allows tribes to make decisions for their own governments and communities without going directly to the federal government. probably the most glaring success would be gaining. there have been tried that have been very successful with gaming. it is about entertainment and tourism. the success of that, and what that has done, is allow tribes to use that revenue stream to diversify their own portfolios. ther

the federal employees and federal government withdraws money from the general fund to pay their employees. when the employees pay back the so-called taxes, which is nothing more than returning the same money to the syntax fund, you do not have that much more new revenue going into the general fund. it is across the board. it is regular employees, and government employees, military and police. that is why we face the deficit we are facing. the private sector has been so downgraded and cut apart we are in an upside down period. the government is top heavy. we are teetering on a thin point. until they can bring the private sector back and get something going, there will not be that much more new tax revenues going into the general fund. the sequestration cuts are simply a real cut and not just manipulated numbers on paper like the $2 trillion they have talked about. guest: the defense budget has grown a lot. it has doubled over the past decade or so. after major conflicts like vietnam, now again you are seeing a drawdown after the cold war, if you are seeing one-out after afghanistan and ira

federal government actually, the growth in federal government increased at the slowest rate under this president than since the korean war. so first, you got -- second, it's not just the unions who are opposed to sequestration. other people are all the republicans in the armed services committee who understand that you do this, you're going to plunge the country back into recession. you already have military being cut, civilians being laid off from the military time and time again. >> tracy, julie points something out. the increase is slowing down burks it's still increasing. >> it's still increasing. it's still unnecessary. and it's still selfish. it is beyond selfish. it drives me insane that so many households have gotten their act and unions are asking for more. you know with a? you can't get more. the thing with big labor, which really interests me, eric, is that memberships are shrinking. it's almost like they're getting louder to make up for the fact that they're just not enough representation out there. the only people listening to these unions these days are the president. oth

of government employees says federal workers have suffered enough. after three years of pay freezes. >> it needs to stop. they need to quit treating federal employees as an atm and deal with the tax loopholes and other changes that are going to balance the budget. >> if federal workers get furloughed, it's not just their budgets at home that will get cut, but every place else they spend money, also. >> restaurants, new clothes, entertainment, even lunch at a food truck. >> everyone is going to hurt from this sequester. >> you guys are worried in. >> yes, we are worried. >> some federal workers say forced furloughs imply their work is not valued and their pay not important. and that makes them angry. >> we are just like everybody else, whether you are in private industry or the federal government. we all need our paychecks. >> we all work real hard. >> we may be cut one day a week. that's going to hurt. especially the lower grades. i feel bad about that. >> the union says the average federal worker makes around $60,000 annually. they are trying to les

let's see what the federal worker and the federal politician feels about getting a haircut. to be that would solve the problem. if you saved 20% instead of the spending cut back, let's get some real cuts going here. it is out of control. host: thank you, jim. we will have more segments on the impact on the states and for federal employees. we will also focus on defense and homeland security specifically in the last hour of this program. as you know, defense will take a significant cut and john mccain, the senator from arizona was out there all over the weekend talking about that. [video clip] >> we have already cut, and now you lay on top of that he's enormous reductions as well, and, by the way, defense is 19% of the overall discretionary budget. defense is taking 50% of the cuts. if we do not believe military leaders, who in the world do we believe? i think what we are doing now to the men and women better serving is unconscionable because they deserve it predictable life in the military, and also these federal employees who did not know when they are to be laid off or not