medicaid funding. additionally, the 2,005 medicare and medicaid program spent an average of $20,000 per deutsch eligiblealmost five times greater than the average amount spent on other medicare beneficiaries. these individuals who have fewer resources and more complicated health care needs face the added struggle of trying to neck deep connecticut medicare and medicaid. medicare covers the basic acute care services and prescription drugs and medicaid fills in the gaps. redican generally pays the medicare part b premium and the cost sharing for medicare services. for some, medicaid also covers various benefits not covered by medicare including long-term care support and services, dental care, eyeglasses and other benefits. each state determines its own eligibility standards and which benefits will be provided to medicare beneficiaries. so we are able to watch various states experiment with different models and designs to better align the care of the will eligibles. currently 15 states have been selected to receive funding and data and technical assistance from cms to develop a more coordinated middelkerk

>> i think -- >> anyone feel free to answer. >> i think medpac is counting when medicaid and medicare are putting funding together it's an integrated approach which the pace model is an example of both medicaid and medicare funding the care of that individual. our program, which serves over a million, is still a fee for service system, so none of ours are count inside the medpac report. so the delivery system is integrated, the financing is not. >> and what are the barriers to -- or is there a problem with being a fee for service system? does that work well for you? >> well, i think that you have to align the incentives. there's still silos, and there's cost shifting that occurs. so i think aligning the financial strategies and having, you know, medicare and medicaid sharing in those responsibilities, taking care of in this instance the duals is really important. so i think that's why we wanted to be one of those 15 states to develop that integrated model which aligns the integration with financing in addition to delivery. >> do you think more federal control is necessary? >> i mean,

medicare. they want to cut medicaid. they want to cut social security, and they certainly do not want to ask the wealthiest people in the country to pay a nickel more in taxes. well, that's one poll. let's look at another poll. in fact, poll after poll has more or less mirrored what new hampshire voters are saying. a "wall street journal" poll found the following -- 81% of the american people believe it's totally acceptable or mostly acceptable to impose a surtax on millionaires to reduce the deficit. let me repeat that. 81% of the american people in that "wall street journal" and nbc poll believe it's mostly acceptable to impose a surtax on millionaires to reduce the deficit. 81% of the american people think it is a good idea, and yet we can't get one republican to ask the wealthy to pay a nickel more in taxes. talk about being out of touch with what the american people want. 74% in that same poll of the american people believe it's mostly acceptable to eliminate tax credits for the oil and gas industry, and on and on i

$468 billion. >> off a $3.8 trillion budget. >> most of it coming out of social security, medicare, and medicaid congress fails to act. >> so you would be eliminating social security, eliminating medicare and medicaid? i want to make sure that's what you're saying. >> if the congress and president can make the cuts necessary, if not, it will be across the board. >> and no loophole closings. we saw a list today of all sorts of company making billions of dollars in profit and not paying a penny in taxes. you're not saying, we've got to simplify the tax code and make them pay something? >> of course with we need to simplify the tax code, but what i'm talking about is spending. if we cut 1% a year for six years and cap it at 8% of gdp, we'll balance the budget. >> and by 2018, about $1.1 trillion, the vast majority of which is going to come out of social security, medicare, and medicaid. >> i would say the congress and president better start working together. -- >> but your default position, when you're talking that much, there's no place else to take it. we both know only 12% of the budget is nonde

there's structural fundamental problems or social security medicare and medicaid liberal socialist ponzi schemes that are crushing the the budget and consuming all of the federal spending but what about the u.s. economy you know what would you say about the joblessness about the current events in the last thirty. years government experience the private sector contracts because it eats up more money it's pouring more money it's. more all of which that is not very common but yes it's absolutely not at all what's happening right now and i can't. have stockpiled more money than they've ever had caroline i want to give you is likely to respond to what they ingest said about what's really the problem and as economy what stifling growth what do you think it is. well if it was stifling if social security and medicare were stifling growth so i want to say seen the zero zero deficit spending that we had under under bill clinton and you did say that those were the driving problems and i don't know that's where we should cut yes because the baby boomers are twenty years older than out and then they'

programs that are stupid wasteful abusive and demonstrably ineffective what do we cut medicare medicare medicaid social security let's start with the constitutional unprescribed duties of the federal government it mentions the national defense it does not mention medicare medicaid or social security all right professor help me get in here what do you say to that we cut. well i would say we actually look at what caused the problem which is not this one time spike in spending as a result of tarp and the economic stimulus but rather look at the structural deficit problems nine out of ninety percent of our structural deficit problems can be attributed to policies passed in the bush administration mostly having to do with cutting taxes on the wealthy and getting into wars we can't afford and about ten percent are due to president obama spending and the stimulus package so we can't go in with this big sword and start cutting things that didn't actually cause a problem do you think that that's fundamentally untrue because the deficit bush had was four hundred billion well obama's going over one point t

medicaid program, they said no. we need to and the tool management of medicare and medicaid, shut off the spending increases, decide what we can afford, make congress to appropriate the money each year, and you will see amazing and positive results on reform. on medicare, which is the program for health care for seniors, we will have a medicare plan out in the next couple of months or less, so make sure you check that out on the internet, but the parts of it will say if you are near retirement, that is great, and in the future we may now -- we may allow that as an option. there will be other options and we are or to give people financial incentives to use the system wisely for people on the program. we have to switch the way we pay for health care in medicare and more broadly with this principle in mind. right now medicare pays providers based on volumes of procedures performed. guess what -- there are regional disparities between those charges based on historical costs. if you do a knee replacement in minnesota, the reinvestment -- the reimbursement is different than if he did it somewhere else in country. it is no

big as our economy plus over $50 trillion in unfunded liabilities on popular programs like medicare, medicaid and social security, what else do we need to know? this is the time to come together and hopefully in connection with the debt ceiling, we can do that. >> schieffer: let's talk about that just a little bit because that's the next big deal you've got to do here is figuring out whether or not to raise this debt limit. do you think that the two sides are going to come together and raise that debt limit? because talking about political courage, most people don't really want to do it. the experts say it has to be done. people say they're not sure we ought to because the spending is out of control. will you be willing to do that? >> well, i think what they're really to see what we'll do is to do something about the debt. what they're wondering is not whether we're going to raise the debt ceiling but whether we're going to do something about our annual deficit and the debt. i mean that's the real test. that's what standard and poors and moodys, the rating agencies are looking for. you know,

the vast bulk of our problem -- medicare, medicaid, social security. that is about 70% of the problem going forward. that is where you have to look. host: texas, democrat caller. people why don't you let cash out if you cannot get medicare later, much like corporations let people buy them out when they let them go. guest: that is similar to what we suggest. it is a take on the idea of having a payment every single year -- i am using a number hypothetically of 7000. you pay every year and give to medicare patients. if you can get the best deal you can, it may be the government deal, due to the best deal you can. in essence, we will give you $7,000 this year and increases by 1% by each year to the end of your life. you are almost like a buyout plan that a corporation would give. host: republican, vista california. caller: i would like to bring up something that very few people know about. i retired from the military in 1975. a shipmate of mine says, hey, do you know what? if you had a retired last year, you would have gotten more money. he said, they chan

in the money owed to cover future liabilities fifty trillion when you look at what's owed for medicare medicaid and social security and the future do you agree with that. i really don't agree with that when you talk about medicare and social security going broke in a kind of liability set her own boat on it you still have to put it in the context of the unemployment situation in the united states there's almost thirty million americans who are not paying social security taxes or medicare taxes because they're simply out of were when you have thirty million people out of work in the united states social security and medicare will go broke really think that's the problem is we've been dealing with symptoms and not the root causes of the problems for the past three years it sounds like you're arguing that this has been a revenue crisis which is something that a lot of people do but we are not seeing major moves to add jobs we're not seeing any kind of major hiring by the private sector in the pipeline or public jobs program so at this revenue crisis continues then according to your logic it seems

dlauz mean medicare, medicaid must be on the table? should americans be told to expect some changes to their benefits in the future? >> well, before we get to that, it just seems to me that only in washington could taking away $21 billion in tax breaks to the top five oil companies is somehow raising taxes. average americans don't get those tax breaks and certainly to t oil companies will make $144 billion in profit this is year alone don't need that from the american taxpayers. ethanol, which an overwhelming number of republicans and democrats supported in a vote about a week ago in terms of eliminating those subsidies to the tune of $2, $2.5 billion, is another opportunity to stop giving tax breaks to an entity that doesn't need it and give the american taxpayer relief. so as we talk about sacred cows, it seems to me that those need to be on the table as well if we're going to be talking about medicaid and medicare. >> brown: senator barrasso, what about that? why are those kinds of targeted tax hits that the president is talking abo

medicaid is a badge of shame. if everybody had a medicare card, we could eliminate medicaid. every major economist agrees to this. and we can't seem to get the message across. >> but if you got that -- >> only western nation -- >> if you got that message across -- if you got the message cross, if everybody is in the same program, still you have that problem. how do you attract enough doctors with the pay being what it is compared to specialists, attract enough people into primary care? >> well, one obvious way is that the subspecialists are going to have to give up some of their income. this has been done in other countries. there has to be some control over the number of physicians that go into various specialties. in other countries, 50% of the physicians are in primary care. i think in the united states it's going to be down to 16% to 17%. >> but they come out of med school at -- they have $200,000 in debt at least when they come out of med school. you are telling me you are going to cut the salary and they have that kind of debt? >> well, what they should be doing is, to

often we pay for our own medicare, medicaid, whatever it comes out of our salaries when we need some> bill: again, that's not the problem. the problem is the mentality of people saying, monica, the government owes me. how bad a problem do you think that is? >> yeah, well, look, entitlements are narcotics. this is why the left loves to expand the entitlement programs in america. this is why barack obama and the left instituted a massive new entitlement program called obama care, which is essentially socialized medicine. because once people get addicted to the narcotic of the entitlement, whether it's social security, medicare, medicaid, you name it, we have got a whole array of entitlements out there. you get addicted to it, it's very, very difficult to take it away. >> bill: what is the government's responsibility in bad economic times to feed people through food stamps? food stamps have exploded. >> yes. we have got 47 million americans now on food stamps which is a record breaking number. that is heart breaking. look, the government. >> bill: is that a narcotic or is that something

similarly with the remarks about medicaid cuts or medicare cuts. they are things that slow down the rate of growth and didn't really cut things. when you put that on top of the recovery, vigorous by today's standards in the early '80s, was still disappointing then. and it really did create a lot of frustration in the congress. because they had done these hard things. they had changed the tax trajectory. they had slowed spending, they thought, and yet the deficit continues to go up. that's what brought us graham-rudman was ultimately the frustration. i've been reading a lot about the british austerity program. they don't have the same notion of baseline. they compare everything to last year. it's so refreshing. and so easy to understand. i just wish we could do that in a country. >> thank you very much. we will return to -- for more questions later. now i have another question to ask. and i'm sensitive to doug's plight. i'm going to ask him to respond first. the question is this: we have heard a lot of people make arguments recently, perhaps having

second, i am concerned with the cuts in medicare, medicaid. his father is dead, so the insurance is gone, but his stepfather was a successful builder and now he is not. she finally got him on medicaid, but if that gets cut, he dies. and this is a smart kid, a kid who has been in advanced placement classes and things like that in high school. he is fit. you cannot teach an inch on that. he just doesn't stand for what our politicians think it is or what the public thinks diabetes is. host: dr. insel, address again -- we started it decide when talking about the differences, but go through the differences and addressed her concern about the perception between the folks with type 1 diabetes and folks with type 2 diabetes. guest: type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disorder with the beta cells in the pancreas are destroyed. by contrast, type 2 diabetes, which occurs in adults and predominantly adolescence -- we are seeing more in adolescen ts. we do need to make this distinction, and we are doing our best. whether it is tied one or -- type one or type

and i don't people to die either and that's why i think we need medicare reform because medicare reform medicaid medicare reform that will be there for those people if you don't if you don't address growing all those holes the republicans drilled into it three hundred twenty eight billion dollars is the amount that the federal government's going to spend that they wouldn't have to spend if they were able to negotiate the price of drugs that was something that was put in there by billy tauzin the republican majority so that so that the pharmaceutical company would get billions of dollars in thousand got to know your job it's not we need we need riders who are willing to make some hard why we can all just take on even that we don't want issues that are three hundred return to one issue billion i think all of his refusal is because. we're talking about it is right i think it's more complicated than that because the question is who is drug manufacturers if you if you go and get your marriage drugs that the drug manufacturers have invented and lifesaving drugs save people in the first place if we don

we have to have structural reforms to social security, medicare and medicaid, all three of those bigs are bleeding red ink right now and won't be around for future seniors and future poor americans. that's a disservice. so fix them. i'm not so worried about cutting near-term spending. i think you have to cut discretionary spending. i think you have to get the deficit under control quickly and i don't think i've ever seen the congress cut so aggressively that it endangers the economy. i live for that moment. >> let me ask you about moody's investor service which this week put out a press release which said moody's investment service said today that if there is no progress on increasing the statute debt limit in coming weeks, raising the debt ceiling congress has basically signaled it won't do, at least republicans, unless there is some spending cuts, moody's expects to place the u.s. government's ratings under review for possible downgrade due to the very small but rising risk of a short-lived default. >> that's like saying we've run up too much debt on our credit card so we're just n

we bring in enough tax revenue to service our debt, pay for medicare, medicaid and social security and have about $300 or $400 billion left over. why have a debt ceiling if they continue to raise it? by raising itilus gives them power... >> stephen: i'm with you on we have enough revenue, but we don't actually have enough revenue. >> we need to stop spending. >> stephen: we have enough revenue for what i want the country to do. we don't have enough revenue for what the country is doing right now. i believe we build a wall at the borders and tell the world... [whistles] and then inside basically you need nothing for the government to do. >> no, i mean, we have to rein in the spending. >> stephen: i agree. is there any situation in which we should raise taxes? >> when you start talking about raising taxes, you're talking about spending more money. stop the spending. >> stephen: we have debt to pay off. how do we pay off the debt? >> we have enough revenue. >> stephen: why are we $14 trillion in debt then? >> because they're spending more than we're bringing in. they keep spending and spe

come in the last 23 years -- 22 years, medicare and medicaid spending growth was below spending growth in the private sector. as i emphasized earlier i don't want to pick -- >> in 1990 with 1.6 medicare 1.5%. >> history. over the last 17 years, medicare has been slightly above all other. medicated and below that. so what i'm suggesting instrument conclusions about which is better -- you can't draw those straightforwardly with just a look at historical tabulations and that what makes this analytic challenge we face difficult. >> anatomist trying to draw a conclusion about what is better. i'm trying to draw the conclusion were efficiencies are. would you say we have the government purchasing a must-have for health care in the country, we could just tell folks are going to pay less. that doesn't create inefficiency. does your modeling suggests efficiencies is why you see these numbers changes or is it just a legislative change it says were not going to pay you for their successes they are not experiencing on the efficiencies i pay a price controls clearly successful if done by the governm

they got their medicare and medicaid your john boehner say this is what the people want. it is not what the people want. it is with the big businesses want. i am a strong supporter of the republican party, but i'm seriously thinking of switching over to the democrats. in guest: if you're going to change tax policy for corporations, do it in the context of revising the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, so we could be more competitive with our international competition. do not until in the context of raising more money so that covers -- do not do it in the context of raising more money so that congress spends more. he talked about medicare. republicans want to save medicare. it is part of the social fabric of america. it is not just a government program. he is a government program, but you have to remember, when people retire from john deere in prior -- iowa, they get health care paid for by the corporation. after they become 65, medicare is dovetailed in with their corporate health retirement plan, and their john deere plan becomes a supplement to medicare. i

medicare? medicaid? veterans benefits? those firms that are supporting our war in iraq and afghanistan? i.r.s. refunds to individuals and businesses? all of these would have to be brought into question because we cannot pay them all if we fail to extend the debt ceiling. well, this group, this bipartisan policy center, said let's consider one of the options. let's protect the biggest programs. let's pay interest on america's debt so we don't have any further default. let's of course pay social security. many folks have no other source of income. we better pay medicare and medicaid because hospitals and doctors across america are taking care of sick people who are elderly and poor. we better pay those defense firms because if they withdraw their services, it could endanger our troops, and we'd better pay unemployment compensation because for these families there's no other source of income. so if we just pay those, the ones i just listed, we would be unable to pay the salaries of those in active military service we'd be una

it ends medicare and medicaid, puts our seniors at risk. stand up for our current and future seniors. they is a -- say no to the republican attack on medicare and medicaid. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, we found out last week -- mr. hensarling: we found out last week that new business creation is at a 17-year low and the people are asking, where are the jobs. unemployment has languished at the highest level since the great depression and americans are asking, mr. president, where are the jobs. one in seven families are now on food stamps and americans are asking, mr. president, where are the jobs? the bureau of labor statistics released that the time it takes to get a new job is at an all-time high and americans are asking, mr. president, where are the jobs? house republicans have a plan for america's job creators to put the nation on a fisc

agreed $2 trillion is possible over 10 years if we cut stuff, cut farm subsidies, defense, medicare, medicaid, other things. to get to $4 trillion you have to have revenue. and we're not -- clearly not talking about raising income tax, but knows kinds of tax leels like they did on -- but those kinds of tax deals like they did on ethanol, billions of dollars of tax breaks that people get. home mortgages, small like commuter subsidies, can now be conceivably addressed. probably not in the next three weeks but a change in sort of the scale of what they might be able to accomplish. >> speaking of the timing, house speaker john boehner had said he would like to get this done -- this deal done before july 4. the administration has obviously sent the signals we would like to get it done, too, before armageddon comes, sometime in early august. but i was talking to a member of congress this week who said, you know, deadlines are kind of like alarm clocks. around here. how realistic is it that this deal is going to get done -- gwen: alarm clocks you take it and throw it across the room and -- >> wake u

medicare beneficiary would increase by 40% under the republican plan. so the cost would go up for all of us. the budget cuts over $700 billion from the medicaid program. so not only is the medicare problem substantially affected, but so is the medicaid program. i do not know whether any of you here access medicaid, and you do not need to tell me, but i want you to know almost two-thirds of every medicaid dollar is spent on seniors and disabled. furthermore, in our district alone, medicaid pays for the care of 64% of all nursing home residents. so that almost two out of every three nursing home residents is on medicaid. now why is that? because having nursing home care is very, very expensive. what happens? most of us do not have enough resources to pay for more than one, two, three or four years of nursing home care, maximum. then you run out of money. now, we're not when a tree on the streets, so what happens? medicaid comes in. in effect, you pay yourself down to the medicaid eligible. this would turn republican -- the republican proposal would turn medicaid not a to a guarantee program, the so- called grant program where states would get a designate

that is what while the leaders of the tea party here in washington are fighting to dismantle medicare and medicaid, it turns out that in another poll done by mcclatchy, 70% -- 7-0 percent -- of those people who side of themselves with the tea party opposed cutting medicare and medicaid to reduce the deficit. that is the tea party. mr. president, here's the last poll i want to highlight -- there are many more out there. it was done by "the washington post" and abc news. here's what that poll says. it says 72% of americans support raising taxes on incomes over $250,000 to dries the national debt, including 91% of the democrats, 68% of independents and 54% of republicans. so here you have in congress, surrounded by lobbyists and powerful special interests, a congress heavily dominated by large campaign contributors, ems of the senate moving in exactly the opposite direction of where the american people want to go. the american people want shared sacrifice. the american people believe that when the wealthiest people in this country are doing phenomenally well and the gap between the rich and everybody

come in the last 23 years -- 22 years, medicare and medicaid spending growth was below spending growththe private sector. as i emphasized earlier i don't want to pick -- >> in 1990 with 1.6 medica 1.5%. >> history. over the last 17 years, medicare has been slightly above all other. medicated and below that. so what i'm suggesting instrument conclusions about which is better -- you can't draw those straightforwardly with just a look at historical tabulations and that what makes this analytic challenge we face difficult. >> anatomist trying to draw a conclusion about what is better. i'm trying to draw the conclusion were efficiencies are. would you say we he the government purchasing a must-have for health care in the couny, we could just tell folks are going to pay less. that doesn't create inefficiency. does your modeling suggests efficiencies is why you see these numbers changes or is it just a legislative change it says were not going to pay you for their successes they are not experiencing on the efficiencies i pay a price controls clearly successful if done by the government. >> wh

one-third of the entire health care at dealt with medicare and medicaid and how we could save money in the process. much of it was not scored in the final analysis. in the report of 1997 brought about some very interesting things -- the beginning of medicare advantage, the beginning of the process to start to privatize the system. now, we pay 12% more to these private plans. seniors are going to pay much more if we move to privatize the whole process under the guise of trying to straighten out medicare. look, all of these reports from 1970, as the gentleman from california pointed out before, now talk about the dire position in which medicare is in. everyone of those reports said the world is coming to an end as far as medicare is concerned. that did not happen. as for my friend from wisconsin, this is what a bank account is all about. you take the money out of the account as you need it. you do not take it all out. it is very analogous to the funds in a bank account. when money is deposited, the money is used for other purposes until they are withdrawn. what is so different about what

president but there's anything the bush tax cuts tax cuts are not the problem with the economy medicare medicaid and social security are the republicans are trying to address those issues now and. it's not going to do you know i have something else to be done and i'm doing it also if a slightly different position here that i think people would accept the fact that yes we need to make some changes in the way we're spending and the way that when frankly even speaker boehner admitted that we need to bring in revenues and then he sort of flip flopped on that just about a month later the point being i think people would be more willing to accept this if they felt there was a fundamental some effect sense of fairness but it's not it's more trickle down economics that we already know does not work you know work and this is how i try to figure out where some truth is on this matter paul ryan coming out with his plan he could issue that is not generally popular but usually usually loses votes this is not something he did to win elections he did it because it was necessary it's called political courage wh

starting to come out but what do you think i mean is it to be actual cuts to social security medicare medicaid actual spending reductions here that will get people to wake up or something that's outside of our hands for example getting too close to the debt default and an economic crisis that's more cost from global issues and policies here but then. you know one big thing is going to be the last jobs are staring programs are starting to be implemented on the state local levels throughout the united states and start u.b.s. investment research projects that four hundred fifty thousand state and local government jobs are going to be cut next year so the american people can if you don't families that you have paid the mortgage they're going to get. you're going to hear more cutbacks bloated federal government and so on and so forth as we try to do something about this horrible budget crisis and people are going to get really angry or yours and it's not a promising future we're looking for yeah let's hope it doesn't come to that michael thank you so much for your time as michael to snyder founder

you have to do something to slow the great of medicaid and medicare, and to put social security on a firm foundation. there's lots of ways of doing that, and we may get into a discussion of what's the best way later, but you have to slow the rate of growth of those big epa titlement programs, -- entitlement programs or you cannot get there. you are immediately driven to the discretionary spending side that can be controlled faster, and both the commissions froze discretionary spending for quite a number of years. when you get through all of that, even if you start with an ideology that says that the spending program, not a revenue program, you realize that you've done an awful lot that you have not solved the problem, and you have to move to the revenue side, and that drove both commissions to substantial tax reform that would improve the efficiency of our tax system and allow us to raise more revenue with lower rates. i think the arrhythmia tick drives you there that that basically is the outline of a credible plan. >> rudy? >> well, thanks, phil, and thanks for organizing this, and

it makes no sense to me what ever to go after medicaid -- rather medicare until we have rectify the situation with rectify the situation with i know from personal observation here in texas that virtually every illegal alien in the country is on medicaid things in large part to efforts of organizations like catholic charities that provides three -- free paralegal services to illegal aliens to sign them up for virtually every benefit this country has to offer knowing full well that these people are illegal aliens. what do you think about that? guest: i understand the great concern about that. we don't want to create circumstances where we say to someone if you sneak into this country or come in illegally, the full range of benefits will be available to you. the other side of that discussion, though, is one i expect you will feel the same as i do -- let's talk about a six- year-old child desperately ill presented to an emergency room coming from parents who came across illegally. should that six-year-old child be able to avail themselves or should the parents be able -- should be -- should they

right now, if you look at the federal government and pull aside medicare, medicaid, social security, and defense, the remainder is not close, even if you cut all of it, to balancing the budget. are you willing to commit to a major cut in spending on one of those four programs, or would you characterize your fiscal plan as waiting for economic growth to balance the budget for you? >> it is an excellent question. let me tackle the spending side and then the growth side. the federal outlays, as you probably know -- the federal government takes in $2.20 trillion in revenue from all sources. it now is spending $3.70 trillion a year. they overspent last year and this year by about $1.50 trillion per year. there are a trillion dollar deficits program as far as the eye can see. if you look at a pie chart of federal outlays and color the red part, what this gentleman described as non-discretionary outlays -- social security, medicare, medicaid, interest on the national debt, and a few other entitlement programs -- that read part would be over the halfway line on the pie chart. at the rate at

medicare, medicaid, social security. we're now $61.8 trillion -- who's counting. it might be seven.ind. can anybody give an idea of how much money that is? you take every dollar, every yen, anything that anybody produces, sells, buys, anything, for an entire year, not in the united states, and canada, and mexico. but the entire world for a year. it's about $55 trillion. that's how far behind we are. who thinks we can pay for that? who thinks we can come up with a flying car that is going to pay for that? nobody. james carville said this. there will besism unrest over the economy. tiffany, do you have the actual quote from him? the civil unrest on the economy? did anybody see this? of course not. he was on a network nobody watches. he was talking about and he said civil unrest is imminent. imminent. who thinks civil unrest here is imminent? why? >> just look what went on with the protest from the -- sorry. >> glenn: wisconsin? >> yeah. wisconsin. >> glenn: don't be nervous. just you, me, and 2 million friends. >> you hear people the sense of entitlement. i was going to make a comment

one-third of the entire health care at dealt with medicare and medicaid and how we could save money in the process. much of it was not scored in the final analysis. in the report of 1997 brought about some very interesting things -- the beginning of medicare advantage, the beginning of the process to start to privatize the system. now, we pay 12% more to these private plans. seniors are going to pay much more if we move to privatize the whole process under the guise of trying to straighten out medicare. look, all of these reports from 1970, as the gentleman from california pointed out before, now talk about the dire position in which medicare is in. everyone of those reports said the world is coming to an end as far as medicare is concerned. that did not happen. as for my friend from wisconsin, this is what a bank account is all about. you take the money out of the account as you need it. you do not take it all out. it is very analogous to the funds in a bank account. when money is deposited, the money is used for other purposes until they are withdrawn. what is so different about what

i think somebody needs to put medicare and medicaid on the table. we are being bankrupt because of health care. businesses can't afford the cost of the rising expenses of health care. and at some point there isn't going to be medicare and medicaid, if we don't fix it. that's all paul ryan is saying. >> rudy, if i can move you to sarah palin, she's obviously the big celebrity card here, potentially the one that everyone it most excited by because of the way that she conducts herself. if she does run, it could jeopardize the republican chances of winning an election. do you stand by that now? >> no, i never said that. i don't think that sarah palin would jeopardize the republican chance of being elected. i don't know that she would be the best candidate to win for the republican party but i think her presence in the race because i think she has a lot of good ideas and the reality is -- >> would you ever consider running with her, rudy? >> i wouldn't consider running with anybody. i'm trying to decide whether to run at all. and i'm -- part of trying to