. >> before we go, the administrative officials have said that peter orszag is going to be leaving sooncan you assess his tenure, and who should replace him? >> we have some cable choices right there in the white house. -- capable choices right there in the white house. i think it is important that you have an economist of orszag's ability. secondly, you need somebody who is very capable and understands the budget, which is not something you can do on the job. it needs to be someone who has a good grasp of the budget process. many would fit that bill. i think the president has several tauruses and all of them good. >> i want to -- several choices and all of them good. >> i want to talk to you about your own race. republicans seem to be going for your district. i wonder if you could talk about the political battle back home. what is the environment when you go out and talk to folks? what are they asking you, and what is your sense of this election season? >> jobs, work, and the economy, no question. i have 14 counties just south of charlotte, n.c. and the unemployment rate in all 14 has

we will cover the peter orszag speech on all of this on tape today. we will show it to you a bit later. we want to get your thoughts on this latest proposal by the white house to cut 5% of the budget across the agencies. we will read more but here are the phone numbers first -- the post goes on to say that republicans have that leslie hammered obama and congressional benefits for their role driving budget deficits to record levels. they go on to put this quote from rahm emanuel -- water down, massachusetts. curt on the line for democrats. what do you say? 5% budget cut across the board. a new proposal from the white house. caller: does not seen it is actually accomplishing much. i don't know, i really don't see the point in 5% cut on this. i think what we need to do is we need to raise taxes. we are way over due to raise taxes. host: what kind of taxes? caller: corporate taxes need to go up. maybe not so much raise taxes but more on lines of stop tax cuts we have had. there are too many exemptions. even tax cuts for married people. i'm married myself

speaker, last week the president's chief budget advisor, peter orszag, said that the administration was unwilling to send a package of deficit reducing budget cuts to capitol hill. even though the president's party's in control of both houses, or scomblag didn't think that administration budget recommendations would be considered. just a few days later, however, the president announced that he wants congress to pass a $50 billion bill to bail out states regardless of whether that increases the deficit. so the administration's perfectly willing to dictate to congress that we should increase our already burdensome national debt but wholly unwilling to recommend sensible cuts to existing government programs. we just can't go on like this. this week greece just had another debt rating agency slash their bond rating to junk. now, europe is putting together a bailout package for spain. ireland and portugal may not be far behind. the warnings are numerous but i fear that they are being ignored. we have to get control of our federal budget or there's not going to be anyone big enough to bail us

director, peter orszag, the federal government has 69,000 buildings and structures that meet this criteria. the total value of this excess property is nearly $19 billion. . the one time sale would generate reve news. the long-term savings would be more substantial. our real estate portfolio would allow the federal bureaucracy to function more effectively and efficiently and most importantly the taxpayers will not be on the hook for underused, sometimes vacant federal property. current law prohibits the disposal of wasted federal property and cashing in on the savings. the property must first be offered off as no cost to other government agencies to state and local governments, to nonprofit organizations, and others. only at the end of this process is property offered at a competitive public sale. federal taxpayers have missed opportunities to generate revenue and to reduce the deficit. for example, the federal government has conveyed at no cost a building in los angeles for a mob museum. a mob museum. one in massachusetts was conveyed for a public high school where tuition is over $29,000

a white house spokesman confirmed budget director peter orszag will exit before the next budget is written. orszag is the first high-profile member to leave the administration. during his tenure, congress passed the most expensive economic stimulus program in u.s. history. senior members of the u.s. military defended efforts to prevent suicides among the armed forces. but at a senate hearing, they did acknowledge a shortage of health specialists to diagnose and treat mental illness. the u.s. army's vice chief of staff, general peter chiarelli warned the kinds of stress facing soldiers are growing. >> it's not only combat stress. it's individual soldier stress and family stress. when we look at those across the continuum, what we're seeing in the army with the high tempo we're on today that a soldier in the first six years he or she spends in the united states army has the cumulative stressers of an average american throughout their entire life. >> sreenivasan: in the u.s. army alone, 163 active duty soldiers have committed suicide through may of this year. 245 army soldiers committed suici

. >> peter orszag says that he is going to be leaving soon. can you assess his tenure, and wwo should replace him? >> i don't get into what the president should take. i know gene sperling would be very much in the wind and do the job. it's important if you have an economist of or side stability in that job. he tends to become one of the chief economic spokesman for the administration. secondly, you need someone who is very capable and understands the budget, which is not something you can do on the job. we need somebody who has a good grasp of the budget process. sperling would fit that bill, others would fit that bill. i think the president will have a full slate of choices and all of them good. >> i want to talk to you about your own race. you have won comfortably in the past, but republicans really seem to be going for your district. can you talk about the political environment back on? you're in a tough southern district. what is the environment like when you go out and talk to folks? one of the "new, and what is your sense of this electio

i am privileged to introduce peter orszag. i want to speak about building more effective, efficient government agencies. government can produce better results and save money in two main ways. the first is by focusing on things in order of importance. the second is eliminating or reforming misguided spending programs. think about health care. we just enacted landmark legislation to bring affordable coverage to all americans. president barack obama and the congress deserve great credit for this. we should celebrate the accomplishment, but the legislation alone, as good as it may be, does not guarantee success. the policies may be smart and well crafted, but they will fall short of the government is not ready to execute. the story of the veteran's health administration underscores this point. when president clinton took office, the v h a provided substandard, and some would say woeful care to our veterans. the administration quickly put in place reforms and adapted open source software to manage patient records. today, the vetera

we will cover the peter orszag speech on all of this on tape today. we will show it to you a bit later. we want to get your thoughts on this latest proposal by the white house to cut 5% of the budget across the agencies. we will read more but here are the phone numbers first -- the post goes on to say that republicans have that leslie hammered obama and congressional benefits for their role driving budget deficits to record levels. they go on to put this quote from rahm emanuel -- water down massachusetts. curt on the line for democrats. what do you say? 5% budget cut across the board. a new proposal from the white house. caller: does not seen it is actually accomplishing much. i don't know, i really don't see the point in 5% cut on this. i think what we need to do is we need to raise taxes. we are way over due to raise taxes. host: what kind of taxes? caller: corporate taxes need to go up. maybe not so much raise taxes but more on lines of stop tax cuts whave had. there are too many exemptions. even tax cuts for married people. i'm married myself but

[unintelligible] host: peter orszag will be leaving this administration. what does that mean? there are reports regarding how long rahm emanuel may last. guest: [unintelligible] as for the rahm emanuel question, it is amazing the degree to which the story always becomes about him. in the inauguration of bill clinton, i was here. rahm emanuel had his own car with his own name on the side in the parade. i am not criticizing him. that is impressive. it is very bold. he instinctively calls attention to himself. it is amazing he can get away with that. his job is to serve the president. he is a servant. yet he is on the front page of politico today. you wonder if the president looking back thinks this is a wise choice to pick someone who would divert the attention to himself. he has been saying this for quite some time. he has made it very clear through the press where reporters go out of his way to keep those ties. he is a great source for workers. he is liked by a lot of reporters. he lost his middle finger in a meet slicing incident when he was 12. the president said he would me

earlier this morning, my budget director, peter orszag, laid out a budget to cut spending in governmentncluding asking all agencies to identify their worst performing programs as we put together a budget. some folks are against health reform in congress. they still think that none of this trip have happened. they do not think that we should be getting these -- none of this should have happened. they do not think that we shall be getting these rebates. in fact, they want to repeal. they want to roll back all of these reforms. they say they have their own plan, but over the last 14 months of debate they never seriously advanced it. when you look at it, you can see why. they would roll but the doughnut hole, -- rollback the doughnut hole, and also a roll back all of the insurance provisions that would make sure that insurance companies are not cheating folks on their premiums. they would put insurance companies back in charge. and some wood and medicare as we know it, giving every -- and some would end medicare as we know it, giving every senior a doctor. -- a voucher. we're not going to d