but that type of activity ends up hurting the fed, an institution that, like judd gregg and others, i respect. you i respect. and i guess over the last 45 days ago or so, i've become very nervous about that activity. and i just want to tell you that. and i'm nervous about us and what we might do. but i'm also beginning to be nervous about the powers that you at the fed want to take on, that treasury is encouraging you to take on, and i wonder if you might respond to that, knowing that i'm somebody who -- unless the sky falls in, i'm going to support your nomination, and i respect your abilities and intellect, and i appreciate what you have tried to do on behalf of our country. but i'm concerned about what that's actually doing to the fed itself. i don't know if you're understanding -- i don't know if i'm expressing myself well. >> you express yourself well, senator. i would like to respond briefly, if i couldment and first of all, i thank you for the conversations we've had, and very good to work with you. first, your point on fiscal policy. i have tried to stay out of fiscal policy.

judd gregg is going to try to add a smaller increase. would you vote for that as well? >> absolutely. i think it would be hugely beneficial if we would pass our commission idea. but we are not going to let the debt of the united states be defaulted on because we do not get their way. we have indicated that we are not going to support any long- term extension of the debt without our approach being adopted or something like our approach. >> if you're commission gets attached to the smaller increase, then the house will have to come back and be there agree on it or reject it before the new year. as you know, time is running out. is that not a game of brinksmanship? >> i do not think so. we're talking about something that fundamentally threatens the economic security of our country. that is my belief. to offer our commission an extension, even short term, it would require the house to come back before the end of the year. i do not think that is too much to ask given the extraordinary seriousness of what we confront as a nation. >> realistically, do you think you're better o

the senate's going to act on this and your partner, the republican judd gregg, is going to try to attach the smaller increases. will you vote for that as well for attaching it to the smaller increase? >> absolutely. i think it would be hugely beneficial if we would pass our commission idea on any debt limit increase. but what i have said and our group has said is we're not going to -- we're not going to let the debt of the united states be defaulted on because we don't get our way. we have indicated we're not going to support any long-term extension of the debt without our approach being adopted or something like our approach. >> ok. but if your commission gets attached to the smaller increase, then the house is going to have to come back and either agree on it or reject it before the new year. because as you know, time is run out. isn't that sort of a bit too much of a game of brinksmanship there or do you want to attach it anyhow? >> i don't think so. look, we're talking about something that fundamentally threatens the economic security of our country. that is my belief. and to offer o

to the profound and eloquent statements of my friend and colleague from new hampshire, senator judd gregghe has frequently invoked the name of the ponzi family, and although i'm not personally familiar with them, i believe they have had some skeletons in their closet by virtue of the references that have been made, but i will tell him that what he said about the class act is just inaccurate. i know that the senator, i see he is leaving the floor and i hope he doesn't miss out on this conversation. mr. gregg: i was just wondering if the senator would yelled for a question. mr. gregg: is the upon did i family from -- is the ponzi family from chicago? mr. durbin: no, they are not. i think they are from new england. patriot fans.

but that type of activity ends up hurting the fed, an institution that, like judd gregg and others, i respect. you i respect. and i guess over the last 45 days ago or so, i've become very nervous about that activity. and i just want to tell you that. and i'm nervous about us and what we might do. but i'm also beginning to be nervous about the powers that you at the fed want to take on, that treasury is encouraging you to take on, and i wonder if you might respond to that, knowing that i'm somebody who -- unless the sky falls in, i'm going to support your nomination, and i respect your abilities and intellect, and i appreciate what you have tried to do on behalf of our country. but i'm concerned about what that's actually doing to the fed itself. i don't know if you're understanding -- i don't know if i'm expressing myself well. >> you express yourself well, senator. i would like to respond briefly, if i couldment and first of all, i thank you for the conversations we've had, and very good to work with you. first, your point on fiscal policy. i have tried to stay out of fiscal policy.

you mentioned earlier the memo from senator judd gregg.as the minority to force -- i believe it will take a date to read it, just to read it out loud. -- take a day to read it, just to read it out loud. a time to come up with more plants, to exercise their right. democrats call at stalling. -- will call it stalling, republicans call it exercising their rights. i like to see the fact that folks are paying attention. this legislation affects every american. you should go online, go to c- span on line, or my publication, "politico," on- line, or to the library of congress. i've read the congressional work every day since i've been here, within 15 years. it is important to the amendments -- read the congressional archive ever since i've been here, more than 15 years. it is important to read the amendments. you can look at what is going on and write a letter to your congressman, senator, send an e- mail, send a letter, make a phone call, and it is important to be involved in this debate. host: this you were asked, from a policy standpoint -- vi

judd gregg says it is $2.5 trillion once you look at the math and at the accounting. if you look at actually 10 years of expenses and 10 years of revenue, about $2.5 trillion bill. so if the president, his statement is, we spend too much money on health care, 14.5% to 16%. we spend too much money, therefore we have to spend a lot more. this or wellian logic is something that the american people are breathlessly amazed that a president and leaders in this country can get by with in this country. we will spend maybe $3 trillion more and that will solve the problem. we spend too much money, let's spend a lot more. another one of the points, there are too many uninsured in america. over the last three or so years, there has been an intentional effort to confuse the words of health care and health insurance and the effort has been on the part of the people on the left to blur the subject matter, the difference between health care and health insurance. they will say we have too many people who don't have health care in america, but don't take into account is, do you get tre

judd gregg, mitch filling that role. thinking strategically. such tremendous respect for him. i admire what you're doing now. the minority leader, i know the majority leader is much better. keep thinking positively, match. and be nice, harry. [laughter] let me say how much i appreciate the artist. steve, where are you? they're your. i thought you were going to be on the end. stand up. [applause] i actually have not seen the finished product. he was surprised at that. i said -- he asked why not, i said, what can i do now? i only had one request. make me look better than i actually do. somebody observed the twinkle in my eye was not there. trisha took that out. [laughter] i think he did a great job. i did not realize what a long and detailed evolutionary process -- i thought he would take a few shots and there would be. -- there i would be. i appreciate what you have done. i appreciate the work they didn't -- that you did. there really make that -- make this a special occasion. we had these portrait unveilings for tom daschle. i appreciated his c

the amendment was sponsored by budget committee ranking member judd judd gregg. he talks about the measure on the floor before the vote. >> well, the senate? wyoming always raises an important point. that is the this is the largest expansion in the history of government. let's begin right there. $2.5 trillion expansion the side of the government with the massive growth in size of the government. and most of that growth comes from the expansion of government in two areas, the expansion and creation of new title and medicaid. how is that paid for? how's the huge explosion in the size of government paid for? well, a large part of that is paid for by reducing money in medicare that's paid to medicare providers, and that is available to medicare recipients. $460 billion in the first ten years, $1 trillion in the second -- in the ten years from the program is fully implemented. that would start in five years. and $3 trillion by our estimates, which are linear, i suspect it will be more over the first 20 years. reduction in medicare benefits, now we heard arguments from

judd gregg, the republican from new hampshire, is one of them. generally supportive. host: how did the bank of america plan set the stage in the hearing room? >> the truth is that banks have been repaying their money. one thing about bank of america is that day receive the more extraordinary assistance. what they found, apparently, is that having to control from a government that comes with that has made it harder to find a new ceo, so they cannot pay as much as they would ordinarily do. it makes people glad to not have that much more money invested in banks. host: how does the concern over the nation's unemployment rate affect the ben bernanke hearing? >> it hangs over everything. many questions will be asked about what mr. chairman is doing to help the job situation. there will need to be persuasion. the question with the interest rates is how long they will sustain that. host:neil irwin covers the financial sector and financial regulation for "the washington post." thank you for starting your day with us. >> you got it. host: our question is what should washington

senator judd gregg of new hampshire is a friend of mine and he and his wife kathy and my wife lorettaaveled together on official business of the senate. i like him. he's a smart guy, he's going to retire. and he and his wisdom decided to give a flavor to the republican side of the aisle, which they shared and go through page after page of ways to slow down and stop the united states senate for mac team. senator gregg was entirely within his rights as a senator to do it. but i read in his memo is accurate, the intent and motive for clear. he wanted to stop this bill from moving forward and that became the real cause on the republican side of the aisle. they took a page out of senator gregg's playbook today with senator coburn's demand to that the amendments be read. but it didn't work. i'd like to ask unanimous consent now to add a statement at this point in the record of a colloquy between former senators adams and packwood on the floor of the united states senate on september 24, 1992. >> without objection. >> .incidentally, madam president, is a colloquy i referred to earlier where

in new hampshire, judd gregg. in north carolina, richard burke. in ohio, george voinovich. in oklahoma, tom coburn and james inhofe. in south carolina, jim dementhe and lindsey graham. in tennessee, alexander and bob corker. in texas, john cornyn and kay bailey hutchinson. in utah, robert bennett and orrin hatch. in wyoming, john bo rah sew and michael enby. please remember these names. these are people who have stole health care for this country -- who have staaled health care in this country. they watched as day after day, month after month, people get sick and even die because they have no health coverage. i assure each and every one of you that have done anything to obstruct health care, people will remember. maybe not the people who die, but the people who loved them. the people whose names i read at our website, namesofthedead.com. these are people who are gone but the names, the list grows every single day until we solve this problem. then in the end, when we do solve this problem, and it's inevitable, every other industrial country in the entire world has health ins

what you think that judd gregg and amid mcconnell and others, what tools they have?ller: the democrats have a filibuster-proof majority as long as they stick together. as you said it is a matter of slowing things down and taking more time to do that. senator gregg, the top republican on the committee, put together a list of budget related points of order and other tactics that republicans could use to slow down the debate. republicans are saying that they are not trying to be obstructionist, but that date view this as a big and important bill and i want to use their limited our to provide adequate time to look at what is in the bill and debate it. forÑi their part, democrats want to get this through before the end of the year. they are going to do whatever they can. host: the other issue, this is a 2007 before page bill and there have been talks that senator colburn is one to read every page. the latest is that he may have a signed a pledge from each senator. what are you hearing on that front? caller: he said before thanksgiving that he was going to ask the senate c

senator judd gregg of new hampshire is a friend of mine and he and his wife kathy and my wife loretta and i have traveled together on official business of the senate. i like him. he's a smart guy. he's going to retire. and he in his wisdom decided to give a playbook to the republican side of the aisle which they shared and go through page after page of ways to slow down and stop the united states senate from acting. senator gregg was -- it's entirely within his rights as a senator to do it. what i read in his memo was accurate. but the intent and motive are clear. he wanted to stop this bill from moving forward and that became the real cause on the republican side of the aisle. they took a page out of senator gregg's playbook today with senator coburn's demanding that the amendment be read but it didn't work. i'd like to ask unanimous consent now to add a statement at this point in the record of a -- of a colloquy between former senators adams and packwood on the floor of the united states senate on september 24, 1992. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: that, incide

. >> new hampshire senator judd gregg or letter this week to republicans recommending a slow debate on health care legislation. senators discuss the communication on the senate floor for about ten minutes. you can read the letter at c-span.org/health care. >> madam president, this is the fourth day on this bill. and we are only late this morning coming to her first vote. even for the united states senate, this is a slow pace. i note that some have made plans for delaying the spell even in a more extreme fashion. as the majority leader noted earlier today, on tuesday, one senator circulated a list of delaying tactics available under the senate rules. i presume that all senators know the senate rules already. so i've decided that letter to meet leaves the impression that senator would like to urge senators to use some of those delaying tactics stated in that memo. but i urge a more cooperative course. out of courtesy to other senators i urge my colleagues to allow us to reach unanimous consent agreements to order the the voting of future amendments in a more timely fashion. that's simply

i think about the kind of things that senator mccain ran on as president, that judd gregg and i and many others have looked at, trying to make sure that people in this country ha have choice. we create a market system that allows people to have choice, but they cannot do that because the unions don't want them to do that. so the unions don't allow them to cap the exclusion, which many of us have talked about. the unions keep them from doing appropriate health care reform. and instead what happens is, in order to make this work -- again, they're so twisted up -- and remember that peter orszag, the major guru within this administration regarding health care, has say the say said thatg that would help bend the cost curve down is these exclusions. i am so glad that senator gregg which has the integrity and long standing knowledge to deal with this is offering an amendment that absolutely makes sure -- and i know that yesterday i was challenged by senators on the other side of the aisle. but there's no doubt that bill throws seniors under the bus. we have an insolvent program that money is be

it builds up after the actuarial, frankly, thanks to judd gregg in the committee who offered the amendments, that depended on the actuarially soundness of it. here it is. i have it behind me. assisted transportation, in-home meals, help with household chores, adult day care. but it allows them to function and work. and there's $2 billion in medicaid savings. there are many provisions in here that almost instantaneously do that. the dollars have to remain just for this purpose. you cannot raid this purpose for any other -- raid this fund for any other purpose, which was a concern raised by some that this $75 billion may be used for other purposes. and so we have written into the legislation that protects these moneys from being offered for any other purpose. in fact, senator gregg, when he offered his amendment, said i offered an amendment which was ultimately accepted that would require the class act premiums to be based on a 75-year actuarial analysis of the program's costs. my amendment ensures that instead of promising more than we can deliver, the program will be fiscally solvent and we

the main thing i want to talk to today, is to rise in support of judd gregg's amendment which would preventdicare cuts in the reid bill from being used to pay to create new entitlement programs to cover the uninsured. yes, i want to have the uninsured covered. i don't oppose covering the uninsured, nor do i oppose reforming the medicare program. we need to do those things. we absolutely need to do those. but, we shouldn't do it on a system that's going broke. we shouldn't take the money from a system that's going broke to do new entitlement programs. and i know the senator from montana this morning admitted that if we don't -- if the gregg amendment were to pass that it would limit some of these entitlements, that they wouldn't be able to do them. again, we're not opposed to do those new entitlements. we're just opposed to paying for them with medicare money because medicare is going broke. everybody agrees with that. they do say that if we put these extra burdens on medicare, that we will extend the life of it. you can believe that or not, but we could extend it even more and we could solv

unless we pass something like the judd gregg amendment. we have to protect that medicar money to make sure it goes to medicare and only medicare if we're going to make sure that medicare stays solvent. and we've got to make that as a promise to the kids that are paying into that system now. they and their employers, and the amount the employers pay in, is money they could have in their own pocket if the employer didn't have to pay it. they're paying that so that seniors will have the medicare benefits. we want the medicare benefits but we shouldn't at this point take money from medicare, build new entitlements that we're going to expect the same young people to pay an increased amount on. while they pay an increase in their insurance premiums. and their insurance increase is going to be a lot more than 27%. in wyoming it was estimated that it would be somewhere around $300%. i think they'll notice. i think they'll be upset. if this bill passes, there will be a revolution in this country when people realize what has been thrust on them in

what you think that judd gregg and amid mcconnell and others, what tools they have?aller: the democrats have a filibuster-proof majority as long as they stick together. as you said it is a matter of slowing things down and taking more time to do that. senator gregg, the top republican on the committee, put together a list of budget related points of order and other tactics that republicans could use to slow down the debate. republicans are saying that they are not trying to be obstructionist, but that date view this as a big and important bill and i want to use their limited our to provide adequate time to look at what is in the bill and debate it. forÑi their part, democrats want to get this through before the end of the year. they are going to do whatever they can. host: the other issue, this is a 2007 before page bill and there have been talks that senator colburn is one to read every page. the latest is that he may have a signed a pledge from each senator. what are you hearing on that front? caller: he said before thanksgiving that he was going to ask the senate

when he went after judd greg for secretary of commerce who for religious agree with them, we thought this guy was stupid or he mean something about bipartisanship. i think greggnot want the country fell but the one obama to fail. they were very strong opposition. the idea of not having one vote on the stimulus bill on the house side is really quite amazing in a body of 435. they were quite united to see this kicking game down. -- this thing came down. host: there is a viewer that is disappointed in his presidency. guest: i guess you have to know why. republicans have for years of practicing being in the opposition and they are very good at it when it went to big. how they held the party line so dramatically is beyond my comprehension. they do have some moderates and they're not all conservative and they are not all the same page but the work in this case. host: we interviewed the president and we asked whether he had time to contemplate the issues he is dealing with. >> try to make time during the course of the dead. usually, i have some desk time where i can review materials that i think are important for decisions i will have to make later in the day. i ten