mr. sterns, mr. rodanovich, for working in a bipartisan fashion to protect the privacy and security of every american's personal information. i'm glad that we are working on this in a bipartisan way. i especially appreciate chairman roush's agreement to act on the republicans' data security bill. that bill has implications for the broader privacy discussion, and i hope that that bill will move forward in the full committee. along with congressman markee, i cochair the congressional privacy caucuses. so i'm glad that we are working on these issues in a bipartisan way. i myself every few days hit the delete button and clean out all the various cookies on the computers that are in my office and at my home. it's amazing to me how many of those accumulate. and most of the time without absolutely any knowledge of myself or anybody else for that matter that they're being put on our deal if somebody tracks where you go and what you look at without your personal approval. we wouldn't like that in the non-inte

mr. sterns? >> thank you, mr. chairman. madam secretary, just i note that you earlier said that with the donut hole that the benefit stop and the payment continues. but you understand that that's for a small amount of time until they get above a certain amount and then almost 100% of the benefits are paid for. i think you understand that. so it's not incorrect to say the benefits stop because the benefits -- >> they stop for a substantial period of time depending on how fast you budget. >> yeah. but anyway, i have two questions, madam secretary. the president has indicated that if you -- he said, quote, if you like your health care plan you can keep your health care plan. no one will take it away from you, no matter what. i have here the luen group did a bipartisan study, 120 million people, 67% of nonmedicare americans would lose their current coverage and be forced into a government-run insurance if a government plan was included. do you have any evidence that if a government plan is offered that 120 million people will b

again, i want to welcome mr. stern. he will make some introductory marks and take questions. >> thanks very much. welcome, everybody. i thought i would give you a little background on the trip to china. i think we had a very constructive set of meetings there. we went to china with the intention of having in-depth conversations about climate change and the copenhagen negotiations as well as to pursue our mutual interest in developing a dynamic partnership. this is something that secretary clinton talked about in february when she went to china on a trip where i accompanied her. we were looking to start fleshing that out. i think we did both of those things on the trip. i was joined by the president's science adviser. also, the secretary for policy of international affairs at the department of energy, as well as colleagues from the treasury and the epa. i had particularly in-depth conversations with the vice chairman of the ndrc in china and their chief climate negotiator. also a very useful meeting with vice premier lee

mr. todd stern, will take a look at spain and i would refresh the memory of the speaker and yourself, judge, that -- take a look at spain because president obama said, we should learn from spain, we should emulate spain, they have led into this green revolution and i'm convinced that the climate czar had to have taken the oath to be supportive of such an idea or he wouldn't be the climate czar. and as he i -- and as i listen to the secretary of agriculture testify last thursday, of all of the logical questions we asked from both sides of the aisle, it looked to me like he had to take the oath to support the president's agenda on this marky cap and tax legislation, no matter how bad it is for our economy. i wonder if all these people believe you can grow the economy by increasing the expenses of business in america because that's what cap and tax does. so put the climate czar together with the economic czar together with the executive pay czar. i wouldn't worry about cyber security. i'd like to penetrate that, know what they all have to say and how they're thinking about this approach but th

. >> host: saul stern wrote that mr. ayers is not a school reformer. he is a school destroyer. he still hopes for revolutionary upheaval that will finally bring down american capitalism and imperialism, but this time around mr. ayers sows the seeds of resistance and rebellion in america's future teachers. >> guest: wow. that's pretty heavy. i don't know what he means about this time around. i've been a teacher since 1965, so it's a long time, and i've always thought that teaching is, you know, teaching at its best is geared towards, as i said, democracy and social justice, and i also think that it's, that progressive education -- and i consider myself a progressive educator -- stands as, you know, as it ought to against the status quo. because the status quo is unacceptable. in the city of chicago, we still have close to a 50 percent dropout rate. that's unacceptable, and that's a system we need to change. and, you know, in the quote you read i think it's also true that schools do serve social systems. that's why, you know -- and when i talked a few minutes ago i said, you know

stern. -- is a girl's turn. >> thank you, mr. president. you talked a little bit about the government plan and the competition with other insurance companies. we all know that in the insurance business, everything is about managing risk. i would like to know what your vision is for how we would better manage the risk, especially if there is going to be a government program. what is your philosophy about primary-care and the role of primary care? do you subscribe to the medical home theory? how did you engage patients in this model so the risk can be better managed and ultimately result in a population that has better health at a lower cost? >> you sound very knowledgeable. are you in the health-care system? >> yes, i am. >> in some ways, you answered your own question. i think that the more we are incentivizing high-quality primary care, prevention, wellness, management of chronic illnesses -- it turns out that about 20% of the patients account for 80% of the care and cost of the health-care system. if we can get somebody, first of all, who

stern words. my point is simple: it's not the right direction for our country, mr. president. we must start to make spending decisions today that paint a realistic and a candid picture of the impact on the middle class. and if it is the purpose of our nation to hold them harmless, then we have to cut spending and we have to smart size our government. working families across our nation in my state deserve an honest debate. it's time for washington to take responsibility. the people at home i believe are demanding it. i often say nebraskans have great wisdom to convey. i couldn't agree more with the gentleman from north platte, nebraska, who wrote me a letter recently, and he said this -- and i'm quoting -- "it's important to remember that while government consumes wealth, transfers wealth, sets the ground rules for the generation of wealth, it is the private individuals that create it." as a final note, the president today rightfully acknowledged the reckless fiscal policies of the past have left us in a redeep hole. i would add to that, and the present. digging our way out wil