mr. flores. >> i do want to follow you up on your offer. would you send me a followup of what percent the top 2% would pay? >> absolutely. >> i yield back. >> secretary geithner, always good to see you. i want to ask you about something i don't believe you've been asked about. i want to talk about a global minimum tax, a concept raised just recently for -- i believe the first time was earlier this week when jean sperling, director of the white house economic council said, we need a global minimum tax so that people have the assurance that nobody is escaping doing their fair share as part of a race to the bottom. and then yesterday i believe in milwaukee the president said something similar, but not exactly the same when he said that from now on every multi national company should have to pay a basic minimum tax and every penny should go toward lowering taxes towards companies that hire in united states of america. this is a concept that is new to me. i'm curious as to whether or not you can shed any light as to what they're talking about, w

mr. flores, last but not least. >> certainly not least. thank you for your testimony today. this ipad cost about $600. that's the same as about six barrels of oil that exxon produces. who makes more profit? >> i don't know the answer to that question. >> apple makes substantially more profit on that ipad. so the question is this. let's say that apple's making too much money on this, so let's go to apple and raise their taxes. now, are we to assume if we do that that apple's going to make more of these at a cheaper cost for the international community? >> i don't know what specific tax expenditures -- >> you know the answer like i do -- let me get in the rest of my question. >> i do know there are outdated tax breaks and expenditures for oil and gas companies that no longer -- >> we expect apple to be able to reclaim its intellectual property investment and its investment in plant property equipment and people. the same thing that we allow energy companies to do. and to somehow come up with a fact that there should be a differential between these two is not fair to use the ad

mr. flores? >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, chairman bernanke for joining us today. i want to follow-up on some of the questions we've had earlier today, and to talk about policy responses. as you said you're worried about the federal government's fiscal sustainability as we move forward. looks to me like we don't have to re-invent the wheel when it comes to policy responses. look it's a the chart on the screen. you can see the differences in recoveries during the 2007-2011 time frame, versus 1982 to 1986. there was an article -- an op-ed in the "wall street journal" by phil greene and mike slong saying if we just followed the same policies reagan followed when he inherited a really bad economy, we would have about 17 million more americans working today, and that our gdp per family would be about $23,000 higher. the bake question, we all recognize that the constitution says the federal government has certain basic responsibilities. it's explicit we have to provide for national security. some people feel we need to provide for basic research, funding, and i agree wit

mr. flores? >> thank you secretary geithner for joining us today. i want to continue the conversation that my colleague reed ribble started. i came from a perfectly good job in the private sector, but things were happening that i thought would damage the futures of my children. every decision i make, not only affects next year, the next five years, the next ten years, it affects her when she's 75. so let's put figure 12 up now if we can. now it's 265. -- 2065. and i know you think that these projections are no good. if you want to, we can go to figure 3, directionally, is it -- >> after two or three -- >> even what omb says that after 2022 we have got a problem. that things begin to deterior e deteriorate. >> i'm in violent agreement with you, just because it doesn't start to grow in the second or third decade-- >> that's where i'm going. >> why would a budget be prepared that would kick the can down the road. let's say it's 2065 and your granddaughter has just been elected to be secretary of the treasury? how are you going to tell her to finance th

mr. flores seemed to be pressing the notion that it is only private market incestments that we should have used to help the economy or a recession turn around, are there times when you think public investment like the recovery act is necessary? >> to answer your question directly, as you say, the cbo calculated some effects on gdp unemployment. obviously, that required some assumptions about the counter factual it would have happened otherwise. but the fed, in our analysis and our modelling, we're basically comfortable with the cbo's conclusions. we think it did have some positive effects on growth and employment. so yes. >> thank you. then just shifting gears. there's also been a raging debate over the course of the last year over what is the best way to reduce the deficit? clearly we all share the goal of reducing the deficit as significantly and as quickly as possible. would you agree, though, because our friends on the other side of the aisle believe and have tried to enact only spending cuts that they deem wasteful as a strategy to -- towards deficit reduction. you would agree that wa

mr. flores. and i would like to let the chamber now he has great experience in job creation, putting people to work. mr. flores: i do have extensive experience in the oil and gas business and i know firsthand the impact on jobs and energy security that having a robust supply that oil and gas can have. i highlight another missed opportunity by the obama administration to address rising gasoline prices, to promote job creation and provide for american energy security. while the president may claim his administration supports an all-in approach to energy, the facts, however, tell a different story. here are four examples of rhetoric versus reality. example number one, last november, the department of interior released a draft five-year plan that fails to open any new areas to energy production in the outer continental shelf through 2017. this proposal will send american jobs overseas. forfeit new revenue to the federal government, cause higher gasoline prices and deny access to american energy resou

mr. flores. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. flores: thank you, mr. price. mr. chairman, although the obama administration may tout science that the economy is improving, we are still way below past economic recoveries. the reality is, the economy is growing too slowly and not creating enough jobs. economists agree that legislation considered by congress can have significant impacts on economic growth. both positive and negative. in fact, the congressional budget office reported this week that we are on track to have our fourth trillion dollar deficit in a row despite president obama's earlier campaign promise to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. at such a critical time we should ensure that all lawmakers have as much information as possible about the effects of proposed legislation on economic growth and job creation. the pro-growth budgeting act of 2012 would require c.b.o. to provide lawmakers with macroeconomic impact analysis for all major legislation reported by house or senate committee. the economic an

mr. flores seems to be pressing the notion that only private market investments should be used to help an economy or a recession turnaround. are there times when you think public investments like the recovery act are necessary? >> to answer your question directly, the cbo calculate the effects on unemployment and gdp. that requires assumptions about what would have happened otherwise. in our analysis and our modeling, we are comfortable with the cbo's conclusion. we believe it had some positive effects on growth and employment. so, yes. >> thank you. shares the gears, -- shifting gears, there has been a raging debate over what is the best way to reduce the deficit. we all share the goal of reducing the deficit as significantly and quickly as possible. our friends on the other side of the aisle believe and have tried to enact only spending cuts that they think are wasteful as a strategy toward deficit reduction. would you agree that wasteful spending also exists and is created in the tax code? >> you are pushing in areas that are the province of congress. i would support the law of our ari

mr. flores: recently the obama administration released its controversial contraception mandate and americans got a glimpse of the looming disaster that the health care law will produce once it actually goes fully into effect. this mandate is one of the first prescribed by the democrats' government health care takeover but it will not be the last. unfortunately the h.h.s. ruling that ignores religious freedom is just one example of the many disastrous provisions of a top-down government controlled health care system. if americans did not like this provision, they certainly won't like the ipad, the independent payment vidsery board, a group of 15 un-elected, unaccountable bureaucrats who will control virtually every health care decision. i urge my colleagues to support commonsense legislation that will protect the rights of all human life including the unborn and continue working to fully repeal the democrats' government health care takeover as a whole as well as the harmful individual provisions that violate our constitutional rights. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what