mr. van hollen was just explaining how upset he is that governor bush is here with us today. we see things a little differently i guess. >> you want to tell him how excited you are that i'm here? >> i'm very excited to have you. some of us wanted to have a brief opening state and get to the witnesses. why don't we go with governor bush, mr. edwards and congressman waxman. governor bush, please. >> governor ryan, ranking members van hollen. it is a joy to be here. i didn't come to criticize anybody, just for the record. i came to share my views. i'm not used to the 9:00 food fight that starts bright and early around in washington. i'm from florida where we don't start that way in life but it's great to be here. i'm here to talk a little bit about what i think is an important subject as we try to recover. the may job numbers were anemic at best. no one could be satisfied with that. we do have an l-shaped recovery and it's the first since world war ii where we've not had a robust recovery. there's a cloud over our country, i think, that relates to this growing pessimism that we

mr. van hollen. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i do believe that there's a lot of agreement but let me just start with what sort of got me going here. the chairman's opening remarks talked about the obama administration and cronyism and continue to talk about the auto rescue. how does the government intervention that saved millions of jobs. i want to ask you, governor bush, i believe you supported as did a lot of us, not all of us, the effort that president bush took to help rescue the financial sector, which in part precipitated the crisis. and many of us believe that it was also appropriate to take the actions that president obama did to help rescue the auto industry and a million jobs. did you support that effort? >> no. >> okay. >> okay. i understand. >> do you agree with governor romney's position that we should have let them go bankrupt? >> they did go bankrupt. it just was in a way where the government -- it was a government-induced bankrupt that allows now, for example, tax laws to carry forward that never under normal ban

mr. van hollen. -- ranking member. >> two weeks ago, you and your colleagues at the congressional budget office released an analysis of the economic impact of the so-called fiscal cliff, painting a very somber picture of what might happen if congress fails to address inspiring tax cuts and the looming automatic spending cuts that occur at year's end. you predicted a possible recession early next year and millions more out of work if we were to actually go over that fiscal cliff. yet, your long-term outlook, cbo's long-term outlook, which we are discussing today, also confirms that continuing to do business as usual, extending all current tax and spending policies, will produce unsustainable deficits and debt, which will also hurt the economy in the long run. taken together are the two cbo reports that reinforced the fact that congress must adopt a two- track strategy of, one, acting now to boost our fragile economy and helping put more americans back to work, and number two, acting now to put in plac

mr. van hollen. >> i thank you, mr. chairman. two weeks ago, you and your colleagues at the congressional budget office released an analysis of the economic impact of the so-called fiscal close, painting a very somber picture of what might happen if congress fails to address expiring tax cut and automatic spending cuts that encourage your son. you predict that a possible recession early next year and millions more out of work if we were to actually go over the fiscal cliff. janet, your long-term outlook coming cbo's long-term outlook, which were discussing today also confirms that continuing to do business as usual, extending all current tax and spending policies will produce unsustainable deficits and debt, which will also hurt the economy in the long run. taken togetherare committed to cbo reports reinforce the fact congress must adopt a two track strategy of one, enough to boost our fragile economy and help more americans back to work and number two, acting now to put in place a balanced approach to long-term deficit reduction

mr. van hollen. i also ask unanimous consent legislators have five days to insert their comments into the record if they choose to do so. mr. elmendorf. >> to all members of the committee i'm pleased to be back today with you to talk about the long-term budget out look. in the report cbo released yesterday we set a two very different sets of assumptions about future tax-and-spending policies. the extended baseline scenario reflects the assumption that current laws generally remain unchanged. that assumption imfliz that lawmakers will allow tax-and-spending policy changes to occur will actually do so. in contrast the alternative fiscal scenario incorporates the assumption that certain policies that have been put in place for a number of years will be continued and some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period will be modified. thus the scenario maintains what some analysts might consider current policies as compared with current laws. the budgetary and economic outcomes un

mr. van hollen's chart back on screen. this chart i found to be interesting. there were two factors in play that were not discussed. in 2001 where the chart starts, we have an exhausting factor coming to play when the wall on terror started beginning with the attacks on 9/11. the fact that was conveniently left out if you move to 2007 led a political change that occurred and that was when the other part of the same control of congress and both houses saw a huge increase in spending that occurred and the impact on the economy with changes to the regulatory environment. parter elmendorf -- dr. elmendorf, when the stimulus was pastor was believed unemployment would go down because of the stimulus program and here we are three years later with a peek at 10% unemployment. the other side of the aisle is proposing another round of stimulus. they change the name to investment and saying that is going to be the panacea to solve our deficits and debt problems that you have done a great job explaining. my question is can you explain in 30 seconds or less why this didn't

mr. van hollen, the ranking member of the budget committee, did in fact have a plan. presented that plan. and was voted on on this floor of the house. it did not prevail, by that is a plan which frankly was a more balanced plan from our perspective, obviously the house did not agree with that, balanced plan that in fact would have reached balance, in fact, more quickly, i belie than the ryan plan. so we do have a plan. we presented that plan. we offered it on the house floor. i voted for that plan. the overwhelming majority of party on this side of the aisle voted for that plan. so there is plan. i think the gentleman's not correct in saying we haven't offered a plan. we have. the plan has not passed. the gentleman is absolutely correct on that. senate and house have not agreed on a plan. i'm not sure they are going to be able to agree on a plan. i think that's unfortunate, but perhaps can agree on the appropriation bills. we are hopeful that the appropriation bills will be agreed upon consistent with the agreement that we felt we had at the funding levels of $1.047 t

mr. van hollen was just saying how excited he was that governor bush here today. we see things a little differently here today. some of us wanted to -- why don't we go with governor bush. pleas. >> -- please. >> it is a joy to be here. i did not come here to criticize anybody for the record. i came here to share my views. i am not used to the 9:00 food fight that starts early in washington. we do not start that way in florida. it is great to be here. i am here to talk about what i think is an important subject as we try to recover the may -- to recover. the may jobs numbers were any leaks. we have an l-shaped recovery. there is a cloud over our country that relates to this growing pessimism that we cannot restore the vitality of our economy in a way that creates opportunities. more and more people are becoming more and more dependent on government at every level because of its pick is important for this committee and for policy makers in washington were to reflect on that and to figure out how to gather republicans and democrats can restore their right to rise in

mr. van hollen. >> thank you. mr. chairman.at -- sir? that make going you. the chairman is opening remarks again talked about the obama administration crony capitalism but they continue to refer to the auto rescue. an example of an important government entity that help millions of jobs, but an example of crony capitalism. i just want to ask you, governor bush. i believe you supported as did a lot of us, not all of us, on a bipartisan basis the effort that president bush took to help rescue the financial sector, which in part precipitated the crisis. and many others believe it was also appropriate to take the actions that president obama did to help rescue the auto industry and a million jobs. did you support that effort? >> no. >> okay. so -- [inaudible] i understand. do you agree with governor romney's position that we should have let them go bankrupt. >> they did go bankrupt. it was just in a way whether government, it was a government induced bankrupt that allowed them, for example, tax loss carry forward never under any nor

mr. van hollen, the ranking member of the budget committee, did in fact have a plan.lan. and was voted on on this floor of the house. it did not prevail, by that is a plan which frankly was a more balanced plan from our perspective, obviously the house did not agree with that, balanced plan that in fact would have reached balance, in fact, more quickly, i believe than the ryan plan. so we do have a plan. we presented that plan. we offered it on the house floor. i voted for that plan. the overwhelming majority of party on this side of the aisle voted for that plan. so there is plan. i think the gentleman's not correct in saying we haven't offered a plan. we have. the plan has not passed. the gentleman is absolutely correct on that. senate and house have not agreed on a plan. i'm not sure they are going to be able to agree on a plan. i think that's unfortunate, but perhaps we can agree on the appropriation bills. we are hopeful that the appropriation bills will be agreed upon consistent with the agreement that we felt we had at the funding levels of $1.047 trillion for

mr. speaker, well, what do we do between now and when we pass the constitutional amendment? when thing we could do today is pass the disclose act. this is a piece of legislation by representative chris van hollen, very die madamic leader, a gentleman from maryland, and it requires -- has where you have a situation where some billionaire takes their personal money, dumps it in the superpac and the superpac spends the money and we don't know who is spending the money. under the disclose act we find out the identity of some of those people. by the way, some of the money we are creeping into american elections very well could be money from foreign sources. senator mccain very correctly pointed out that there's one wealthy individual who has been putting a lot of money into election campaigns and is a billionaire and owns a casino in china and is getting -- he's using his wealth to influence american elections. so that's foreign money if that's the way it is. the thing is we do not want people outside the united states trying to shape the elections in our country. and so this is the thing we are moving forward. overturn citizens united. amend and disclose. amend the constitution and disclose secret