representative barton command a few days and then the lame-duck sessions of the 112 congress, do you foresee any action on the issues of privacy? >> being handled? >> i've asked the chairman of the commerce committee to consider moving the do not track kids online privacy bill the congressman markey and i have introduced. i don't have a commitment from him to do that, but that bill is a possible, especially in the lame-duck. in the regular session we are probably not bring to have that more legislative days. succumb if we have one bill, though that would -- that is the one that i've asked the chairman to consider. >> would you like to see more comprehensive legislation? >> i would. i think the public is ahead of the congress of privacy and companies like microsoft building in their default positions to have more and more privacy, but in the congress we are still behind the curve. we have gained a lot of ground in the congress and our privacy caucus in the house the co-chair with me and the republican democrat we have got 30 members, not quite 10% of the house so that is a sizable numb

the congress did nothing about it. time and again, i recommended improvements in social security laws, including extending protection to those not now covered, increased the amount of the benefits, produced eligibility age of women from 65 to 60 years. congress studied the matter for two years but could not find time to extend increased benefits, but it did find time to take social security benefits away from 750,000 people. they passed that over my veto. [cheers and applause] >> i repeatedly asked the congress to pass a health program. the nation suffers from lack of medical care. that situation can be limited any time the congress wants to act upon it. some of the members of my party disagree with me, but they do it openly. the republicans profess to be for these matters. they had enough men to do that. there were enough people in that congress that could have voted. by the way, when tax relief can be given, it should go to those who need it most, not to those who need it least. they passed my bill on the third try. [

but in the congress there's still some give and take. i've had to sort of, you know, weave through i a little bit of the personalities within congress to find the right bill, and i think we have that right bill. but for a lot of members still they question the need for one federal regime or one federal law as opposed to all of the different states having their individual patchwork laws. this is probably one of those examples that something's going to have to happen that people are, you know, we're proving why we're trying to pass this bill before some lawmakers get us. >> host: do you see cybersecurity coming back in the next congress or potentially in the lame duck session? >> guest: well, i think the issue of cybersecurity's here to stay. i think it's the future of national security and our protections. the issue specifically on the table right now, i think, is going to be around a little bit longer yet. i don't know whether it'll be a lame duck session. i think in the senate there certainly is a lot of debate and discussion on how we m

but in the congress, we're still a bit behind of the curve. although, we have gained a lot of ground in this congress. our privacy caucus in the house, subcommittee chairman markey has cochaired with me, a republican and democrat. we have 30 members. so it does not quite to 10% of the house. so that is a sizable number, bipartisan, have to have, have republican and half democrat. >> let me ask a question about privacy. i think that is an issue you have been very involved in. tell me why that issue has resonated with you. >> we have the tea party now and they are really big on a strict interpretation of the constitution. but i was tea party before there was a tea party and i think the fourth amendment can be construed to be a privacy amendment. i strongly think that the privacy protections that our founders to grounded in the internet and telecommunication age, you cannot take for granted. need legislation to make it happen. the short answer is i just feel really strongly that the information about yourself is yours unless there is a law enforce

the least productive congress in a generation. caller: thank you, steve. you are doing a great job, as usual. i am tired of seeing all the illusion that is in the left and right politics of our country. anyone that ever does any real research as far as conspiracy theory and no matter what evidence is presented and what goes on from way back, everything that's happening along the way is ratcheting down on the rights of the american people. it's destroying the humanity of our planet. it is high time that the people really get a sober look at this thing and talk to their neighbors and really figure out how we are going to be able to get our representation anin government back into the people's hands and away from the criminals. host: thanks for the call. this story -- senator tom coburn, as the republicans blamed democrats for inaction in washington, yesterday. [video clip] >> what we have had, i would remind my colleagues, is a history in the senate of doing hard things. under the leadership of senator harry reid, the senate has not

should the congress to step in. there is the pressure they put on the guidelines the industry uses and the ftc is constantly evolving on privacy. i think over the past year we've done a good job slowing the need to regulate in the space we can stifle innovation if we come in heavy handed so i appreciate the ftc has taken this approach let's give them guidelines to follow. but the industries themselves well tell you and tell us it is in the best interest to provide something for the consumer that actually doesn't go too far so the issue is how much of it is guidelines yet how much of it is self industry regulated or government intervention. >> when it comes to the privacy issue, what is your philosophy? >> guest: >> to move slowly. there are a lot of things i know we talked about before there are a lot of things that yes, i called it last time the yuck factor that's gone too far. but to the day the american consumers recognize oftentimes they are giving up their privacy for their convenience. the consumer is choosing

where banks originated garber securities and sold them to their customers in the market crush the congress look to the said well this is simple from now on you can either take deposits and make loans in your bank where you can underwrite securities in your deal or that's fine but you cannot do both that's what the congress said one hundred thirty three that was good long term one nine hundred ninety nine somehow the congress in one thousand nine hundred nine thought they were smarter than the congress in one thousand nine hundred three they repealed it and guess what seven years later another crash it's really not a surprise and you know the supporters of the big banks the apologists for the. big banks will tell you think you owe it wasn't good if they were the cause of the crisis it was these you know lousy mortgage originations and re-invest who say didn't know what they were doing and radiates but there's enough blame to go around the responsible but the banks were a crucial ingredient they bought the mortgages securitized them and sold them to the investors the banks for the missing li

the constitution gives congress full control over the district of columbia. what congress has done, this was done in 1873, was to delegate some of its authority to a locally elected government to manage the affairs of the district, with congress retain oversight authority. up until then, we had various forms of government, a government appointed -- in mayor appointed by the president and a city council. at one point, we had appointed units -- they were responsible to the congress, but we in the city had no votes at all. not until 1973 did we get the right to vote for our own local government. that is what we still have now. this is what f isenty was referring -- mayor fenty was referring to. during the 1950's, we had a big transition. part of it was due to segregation laws. there was a movement of whit es out of the city. that was accelerated in the 1960's, not so much by race, but by crime. the crack epidemic, the struggles -- we had a lot of middle-class african americans moving out of the city as well, not just because of crime, but for better schools. we h

well the u.s. congress might not be able to agree on just about anything these days but canada's newly elected party qua sure seems to be getting the ball rolling the party has cancel university tuition fee hikes repelled laws to restrict public demonstrations closed only nuclear power plant put shale gas development in the province on hold and pledged to reimburse a two hundred dollar health care tax on residents last year that was just day one of the parliament session and the most astounding part of this is that this one hundred eighty degree turn is that the party is still building coalitions with other parties in order to pass these legislations now to remind you what the p.q. party is it rose to power amid the extreme crackdown on student protesters the longstanding liberal party had been in control of quebec for nearly a decade before the selection and now the province's first of all premier prop my ra has taken the reins so is this the first day of parliament is that a sign of things to come to join

representative barton, in the few days and then lame duck session of the 112th congress, do you foresee any actions on the issues of privacy being handled? >> guest: i have asked chairman upton of the energy and commerce committee to consider moving the do not track kids online privacy bill that congressman markey and i have introduced. i don't have a commitment for him to do that, but that bill is a possible, especially in the lame duck. in the regular session, we're probably not going to have that many more legislative days. so if we had one bill, though, that would -- that's the one i've asked the chairman to consider moving. >> host: would you like to see more comprehensive privacy legislation considered and passed by congress? >> guest: i would. i think the public is ahead of the congress on privacy, and i think, you know, companies like microsoft and some of of those guys are ahead. i mean, they're building in their default positions. they have more and more privacy. but in the congress we're still, in my opinion, a little bit behind the curve although we gained a lot of ground in

we very clearly again solve the problem if after this election come january congress instead and says ok we're going to put the deficit on a glide path to getting solved you know we get sort of all at once but over the next four or five years we're going to reduce the deficit one hundred two hundred billion dollars a year every year and this is our going to do it and this is the taxes they're going to raise and here's that the spending is going to get cut however that works out simpson bowles in even dozen ways to do it. then we can go on for essentially ever bigger than visually you could have a balanced budget and you could begin to have between growth and pain of the doesn't now which is where we were in the late ninety's but get away from that sixty five percent problem that ross perot's so long about and which is a little bit over that they had in the seventy's but resent range not counting the social security debt which i. think we used to go in that knowledge doesn't really exist and there is no trust was the. last march of the trust fund and we can get there but we have to hav

this job bill was put on the table out there in congress. there may have been one long lame-duck session forever knight is kind of wanted to state that for everything from all of the things that they work to pass on all the things they wouldn't address, and i just find it absolutely appalling. >> host: sarah, thanks for the call. your husband battling cancer, what was the outcome and was he able to get medical treatment? >> caller: i ended up in front of the judge to get, to continue on with his health care. he had a major surgery and a large tumor on his liver and still today -- this has been the three years ago. >> host: how is he doing? >> caller: he still has some health problems but he doesn't have this tumor on him any more. >> host: sarah, thanks for the call. we will get a response and good luck with your husband. >> guest: she is emblematic of what the problem this country is. we do not have health care security. we have social security and a lot of other things but most families are always living with the fear that they will lose th

well the u.s. congress might not be able to agree on just about anything these days but canada's newly elected party qua sure seems to be getting the ball rolling the party has canceled the university tuition fee hikes repeal the laws to restrict public demonstrations close quebec's only nuclear power plant and put shale gas development in the province on hold and even pledge to reimburse a two hundred dollars health tax credit credit to residents that passed last year and that was just one day of parliament session so the most astounding part of this is that the p.q. party still must build coalitions with other parties in order to pass legislation so they can't do it by themselves so is this first day of parliament a sign of things to come to discuss this earlier i was joined by jeremy the dard coast person for class here's what he's on to say. now and their tuition hike has been cancelled as was the repressive bill so that you you really like to call the government's just a few days ago this is stopping s

it's sponsored by the library of congress, and one of the exhibits at the library of congress tent will be books that shaped america. here's a little bit about that. well, there's a new exhibit at the library of congress, and it's called books that shaped america. booktv is taking a tour of that exhibit, and joining us is roberta schafer who is associate librarian for the library of congress. ms. schafer, why do you call it books that shaped america? >> well, we actually call it books that have shaped america as opposed to some the other words we considered like changed america because we think that books slowly have an impact on american society, and shaped seemed to be the better word to imply that kind of con connotation. >> when you think of the word shaped and what you just said, what book in this exhibit comes to mind -- >> well, actually, that's the fabulous part of this exhibit. no one book is shaping america. so many books have had such a profound influence on american culture and society and, indeed, the very essence of what america is. it would be impossible, and it really wo

not the united states congress, but to the republican congress and at congress fighting to take advantage of credit and when the next election. while that didn't happen by accident. and i believe in the free enterprise system and incentives. incentives work and we have created a political system in which every incentive is to not cooperate, to not compromise, to not talk to somebody who has different ideas than your own. you know, that's great. it's great to just be pure in your principle, but we are a nation of 310 million we have all different backgrounds and with all different life experiences. and we have different ideas that we feel strongly about. the way a democracy this site has to work is that no matter how deeply you feel about one issue or another, you have to sit down and somebody who has a different idea and side with the overlap is. you'll get a little. and the program, constitutional programs that government is responsible for and make it happen. by the way, just so you don't think i'm making all this stuff about how bad the political party system is, the first four preside

against the argument that they exceeded congress' enumerated powers. when i was first asked about it, i said this would come down to whether the government can articulate a limiting principle. if the government cannot committee limiting principle of why they could do this, why they could forced people to buy insurance, but then not force people to buy anything they want, then they will probably win. on the other hand, the challenge for the government is to be able to articulate why it is if the government can do this it does not mean the end of judicially enforceable limits on congress power. without having delve into the case, again, having played the role of the government lawyer, i knew this principle would be important. this case ultimately gets to the supreme court of the united states, and they divide it into four separate arguments. especially in light of the opinions that emerged, i think it is fair to say there are six separate issues the supreme court dealt with in this case. but first, and far away -- far and away the least interesting was th

the executive and congress had to step back a little bit. they pushed back. the supreme court pushed back and there were three rounds of decisions at guantanamo ending four years ago. it's now all dissolve into the lower courts and the supreme court has decided well, they said enough. they made their point. congress responded to some and they have nothing more to say about it at this point we so that conflict is sort of died down and now we have a new one coming up, we have a major challenge in the part of the health care decision that dealt with the congress authority under the spending calls to attach strings to the grant of the federal money. it's the first time when the court and now what they did the structure of the medicaid expansion as a part of the health care law. it was the first time in history that the supreme court ever said that the strings attached were to coercive. so the inter branch, but has shifted to a new playing field. i don't know exactly where it is going to go. you can make all kinds of arguments about it except to say it's a reminder

we all know that president harry truman famously dubbed the 80th congress in 1948 as the do-nothing congress. if the do-nothing congress of 1948 has nothing on this one. that congress passed over 900 laws while the 112th congress has passed over 14u7bd. among the countless laws blocked by the republican majority is the american jobs act, which economists say would create over 2.5 million jobs. it's a sad day when the main drag on america's economy is the house of representatives. you know, most americans actually have to earn their vacation days, mr. chairman. the only thing the republican congress has earned are abysmal approval ratings. the 112th congress puts harry truman's do-nothing congress to shame. and at a time when our economy should come first that, mr. chairman, is shameful. i rise in strong support of the gentlelady's amendment to a bill that prevents us from actually accomplishing the real work the american people expect from us. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from ohio is recognized. >> i continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman f

has been the most do-nothing congress in the history of the country. less hearings. less bills. but we have had 302 votes in this congress to reduce regulations on the environment. we found time for every fifth vote in the last two years has been to reduce regulations for protecting the environment. we couldn't have hearings on something like this because we were busy doing things like that. we spent 33 times trying to repeal the affordable care act. we simply have not dealt with the problems that face this country. there's another issue that ought to be before the committee. it's as important perhaps as this issue. perhaps affects more people. that's the debt forgiveness that comes by the money that banks reduce the principal of loans. now, if you have a lon for $300,000 and you have to refinance it and you go and it's -- your house is only worth $200,000, you're out of luck. your house is underwater. now, the bank can reduce the principal down to $200,000. they can grant you $100,000 forgiveness, but you know what happens when that happens? that $100,

that, in fact, in terms of the people in congress he doesn't like them. >> rose: doesn't like the people in congress? >> doesn't like them. and the people in the congress know that and there is this distance which obama's paying the price for. >> rose: paying a price for it because of the economic circumstances that we now face? >> and because they can't deal. you know, you've got to do painful things. reagan, the great tax cutter. you know, reagan raised taxes all the time. raised business taxes when people called him out on it you know what he did? he's walking down the driveway in the white house and he kicked himself with one foot in the ass. >> rose: (laughs) >> and everyone laughed, just like you're laughing. and, okay, necessity, compromise they had to raise business taxes. >> rose: how much has the president spelled out to republicans in a concrete way where he would be prepared to cut entitlements? >> he is not. i've seen this paper back and forth and it starts small and get big and says we're willing to cut medicare for $250 billion that's a lot of money. that's small, $25 bill

congress in history we're talking about the eighty eight congress which president truman called the do nothing congress productivity aside this congress is also extremely unpopular with barely ten percent of americans approving of the job it's doing perhaps senator michael bennet was able to put it into perspective best my goodness the digital revolution of a forty percent approval rating compared to or nine. percent approval rating at the height of the oil spill. nine percent there's an actor's fifteen percent more people should care do you know it is becoming obvious i don't for the record. i don't love him for that approval. and while a bitterly divided congress has lawmakers twiddling their thumbs it's not like they don't have a lot of work to do a government shutdown looms at the end of this month if they don't pass a budget the bush era tax cuts are set to expire at the end of december that's over one hundred billion dollars and automatic cuts across the board economists say of congress fails to act this will result and is still called fiscal cliff that will plummet the economy

in one thousand nine hundred nine thought they were smarter than the congress in one thousand nine hundred three they repealed it and guess what seven years later another crash it's really not a surprise and you know the supporters of the big banks the apologists of the big banks will tell you think you owe it wasn't good if they were the cause of the crisis it was these you know lousy mortgage originations and investors who didn't know what they were doing and radiates but there's enough blame to go around the responsible but the banks were a crucial ingredient they bought the mortgages securitized them and sold them to the investors the banks for the missing link without the banks acting as securities dealers this wouldn't happen so we've got to stop that and there are other criticisms heard jamie dimon for example say hey it wasn't as it was the big guys it was the lehman brothers it was the bear stirring so counter that when real quick who do you think was financing them i mean if you look at the balance sheet to lehman brothers a look at the balance sheet of bear stearns sure they had

i would meet with the leaders of the congress, with all the newly elected members of the congress and as many others with whom i could meet between the time of the election and the inauguration, and we would present a jobs program. then we would present a plan to control health care costs and phase in health care coverage for all americans. until we control health care costs, we're not going to control the deficit. it is the number one culprit. but first we must have an aggressive jobs program. i live in a state where manufacturing job growth has far outpaced the nation in the last few years, where we have created more private sector jobs since mr. bush has been president than have been created in the entire rest of the country, where mr. bush's labor secretary said job growth has been enormous. we've done it in arkansas. give me a chance to create these kind of jobs in america. we can do it. i know we can. [applause] >> president bush, one minute. >> we've got the plan announced for what we can do for small business. i've already put forward things that'll get this country working fa

and the congress. this is a nation of laws, laws are made here. it's not a nation of rules. and if the rules and regulations are going to have the effect on the future and going to have an effect on the american people, they should not be done by executive fiat, whether you like them or not they should not be done in that manner, it should be done here legislatively. that's the purpose of both of these issues tied together in this rule. that's the thread that comes together, whether or not we actually believe congress should be doing the job of creating the standards and rules or we're willing to simply abrogate our responsibility, our power, our options to some other body. i would hope that as congress we would be careful and considerate about what our responsibility is and we would take very seriously any encroachment on the role of law that is given to us by the constitution. it was the vision of the founding fathers that this should be the body that makes those decisions, not the executive branch. t

when the congress passes every year, their individual appropriation bills come in the spending bills, that is discretionary spending by and large. congress has the discretion to pass those bills or not passes bills. they do not have the discretion to refuse to-based social security and medicare or medicaid -- discretionary spending, which makes up a relatively small and slowly going part of the federal budget is going to take 100% of the ship we bought the fiscal cliff and sequester occurs. so you can see that just doesn't make sense. less than one third of the budget, taking 100% of the head, and that they're growing more slowly than almost any other part of the budget. >> i have a question. >> yes, sir. >> when it was adopted and the first-time sequester appeared in the language of the federal government and budgeting, they contemplate and pursue entitlements in their sequester? or was it only these annual recurring expenditures? >> mostly it was these annual recurring expenditures. we've negotiated out 77 programs in the domestic area that were not subject to sequester. most of tho

congress? i would love it to be the members of congress. let them have some forums like this. i would be glad to do anything they desired in order to encourage them, one, that it is a big problem, big enough to ruin us. second that it can be solved without wild things that have to occur that they're talking about in greece, as greece was trying to lure its debt. -- lower its debt. there are reasonable things that should be done. with that background i want to ask dr. rivlin, and let me one more time tell you how our understanding came to be. bipartisan policy committee asked me if i would like to co-chair with a democrat, task force to solve this, approach to how we can solve the stronger i said well, not just any democrat. i know a lot of them they would want to serve with me. i said if alice rivlin would do what i would be glad to. i had no idea somebody was asking a doctor britain, which you like to do this on a bipartisan basis with the republican? and she said not any republican, the gdp to domenici to do it, and look at there. we were far away and we agreed that this sho

i think the chief justice continues to suggest that congress could not do that. but we may need a case to litigate. [laughter] >> right back there in the middle-of-the-road. >> hi, derek mcmahon. i just want to say i find very persuasive all the things that you're saying, but i'd like to play devil's advocate against a single point and that is the intended impropriety in treating the affordable care act tax as an indirect impact by analogy. there is an economic rationale that says activities that create externality merits intervention. so i guess for example an 18th century carriage would do more damage than an average pedestrian. so you impose a tax that forces the owner to internalize the costs and raises revenue for the problem. i can see the repeal of treating the mandate more ads are more like a tax on people, but i think it's important to remember that not owning a carriage does not create externality and doesn't impose costs on society will not pay and insurance does. so i just want to know, what is the fundamental difference between action and inaction? be

something to create peace and security, but the congress -- the republicans in congress have gone homethey have left the work site. they are gone. i yield back. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentlelady for her comments and i yield to my friend, suzanne bonamici, who is such an effective state legislature -- legislator, was overwhelmingly elected in a special election and every day since that election has been working hard on behalf of hardworking men and women not only in oregon but throughout this country. i know she's disappointed we are walking away from our responsibilities. i yield to my friend. ms. bonamici: thank you very much, mr. hoyer, for bringing to the country's attention the work left undone. when i arrived in congress just a little more than seven months ago, i brought pretty strong message from my constituents back in oregon. and that's that they want us to overcome the gridlock. they want us to get our economy back on track and support policies that create new jobs. of course no one expects this to be an easy task that's why i was encouraged when people said that's why we are

the place where laws are made and decisions are debated but not this year the one hundred twelfth congress has been given the title the do nothing congress so how can washington govern in this partisan gridlock we'll dive into that topic in just a moment. and from email to skype texting and g. chatting we live in a high tech world but how can you keep your private information private so we'll look into cyber security and the trend of left oh parties. and sex sells porn is a multibillion dollar a year industry in southern california what should adult film performer a dull performers be required to wear condoms there's a battle brewing over personal freedom is off angeles we'll speak with an adult film actress to get her take coming up. it's friday september twenty first five pm in washington d.c. i'm megan lopez and you're watching r.t. . well topping the news this hour congress is officially wrapping up its last few days before in session before the november elections and short of a mathematical miracle the one hundred twelfth congress could go down in history as the least productive since

congress anymore. but john will tell you that this is the way i was in congress. so here's an example about how you change the reward system. >> when i was running, there was a banker who contributed to my campaign. i was very happy. i thought wow, he gave my campaign, that's great. it turns out that because of public reports, i later read in the paper that he had also given to my opponent's campaign. he said i'm really for you, when i asked him about it, but i want to make sure that whoever won, i would be remembered. >> and i said that i will. i will remember. that is basically what you have to do. you just have have to have to tell people that if they play the game in a way you don't like, they will lose your support. >> this will be the last question. >> okay. >> you must have some other power over your. >> i was in the restroom and didn't hear the cut off. i'm sorry. >> should never tire? remapped [inaudible] >> i heard it has mentioned a constitutional amendment to divorce the senate from space. so that each senator will represent 3.1 million people at the pr

if the republicans have controlled congress this would not have happened. one of the things you do get with divided government is greater oversight of the president by the congress so that the current house of representatives is spending all of its time besides voting to repeal obamacare, trying to investigate the obama administration, and this is exactly what would be predicted. so what we have been is separation of party some, not really separation of powers. we have unified government. we don't have oversight. and what we need to address is how we get the benefit of oversight that we do get when we have divided government without paying the immense cost which is the near impossibility that we in our time now pass responsible legislation. >> i just have a question. the amendment process. our constitution, some of the mark and a big like the fact that i can vote. and that i dislike the fact that i can vote, the fact that black people and no wonder considered property. i don't know if they actually even succeed to see how it's even -- it didn't really change

the last congress that passed a few bills that this congress passed, it was the 104th congress when republicans took control of this house for the first time in over 60 years. because they were elected then not to expand the size and scope of government but to improve the size and scope of government. to reform those processes. what my friend from florida says about 2005, 2006 unfunded priority after unfunded priority, i'd love to tell him he's wrong, but he's absolutely right. he's absolutely right. and the american taxpayer knew it and republicans in this chamber paid the price for it. in the very next election. that's the ace in the hole for america, mr. speaker. the american taxpayer. they are paying attention to what happens here. my colleague may believe we are on the wrong track. 18 months i have never been more proud. for what this institution has done. we are going to find out when the american taxpayer speaks out in that referendum come november 6. with that, mr. speaker, i'm very pleased, 87 new freshmen in this freshmen class, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to a freshman colleague

that the other party controlled congress. the other party decided whether or not you could get bills brought forward. they decided whether or not and the other party did it and somebody stood up in that room and said, i am sick and tired of hearing democrats this, republicans that, and everybody stood up and cheered and i never did it again. later, when i went off and i started teaching, the one thing -- it's not that you get potomac fever when you are in washington or charles river's fever when you are in cambridge , but you have to say, why is this not working? developing in congress, it doesn't matter what the issue is. it doesn't matter what the issue is. it doesn't matter whether it is a tax bill, a spending bill, a supreme court nomination, whatever it is. there is going to be a vote, and every democrat is going to be on one side and every public and will be on the other side. it's like we have two separate congresses. not a united states congress, but a very republican congress and fighting for it advantage in fighting

are going to take a break here and come right back in one minute. >> schieffer:. >> president, the congress is adjourned again until after the election. the best i can tell the only thing they did was pass a continuing resolution to keep the government from shutting down. there seems to be no end to this gridlock now. it was tough while you were there over the last couple of years, nothing seems to get done. it seems to me that is one of the issues here. president obama has been unable to get them to do anything. mitt romney says he knows how to get them to do something. what is it going to take to break this gridlock? >> well, i think the election will have a lot to do with it. we only had one really inactive year when i was president, that was 1995, after the gingrich congress came in, that sort of pretea party, tea party congress and not much happened and two government shutdowns, public had a very negative reaction to it so even in a presidential year we got a lot done in '96 and even with all of the troubles that we had in the second term we had 99 and 2000 were extremely productive ye

my comment is about the congress. it the first two years of president obama's time in congress, he had the congress and the senate and was able to pass a lot of legislation. however, most or a lot of that legislation was not very popular. so the second congress -- the second house under his administration was filled with those opposed to the things that he had passed. that's why we have this gridlock right now. i think it is very unfortunate that we would give a president that kind of power and then to see the results, because he made so many people unhappy with his obamacare and his cap-and-trade and other things that he forced through the congress without any republican backing or support. when you do that you are going to alienate a large population of. large population of this country. i don't know if people are still angry about what he did that he would not have support and congress once again would be divided because of his forcing through unpopular programs. my message to congress would be to do what the consti

the chamber of commerce testified against it. but congress decided to prioritize the rights of auto dealers to seek justice in our courts, and in november of 2002, congress passed this bill, passed, made it law. today, auto dealers cannot be bound by mandatory arbitration provisions in their contracts with their manufacturers. this change didn't result in a flood of litigation. it simply provided some equal footing for small auto dealersship to bargain with the large manufacturers. once congress determined that this particular industry was subject to abuse, it took action to protect the vulnerable party. congress again acted in 2007 to protect members of our armed services. congress heard from military leaders that predatory lenders -- let me say that again. predatory lending targeted at our nation's service members was impairing our country's military readiness. in response, republican senator jim talent from missouri along with his colleague, senator bill nelson of florida, a democrat, introduced an amendment to the 2006 national defense au

the congress has the discretion to pass those bills or not po pass those bills. they do not have the discretion to refuse to pay social security, medicare, or medicaid. so are discretionary spending, which makes up a relatively small and slowly growing part of the federal budget, is going to take 100% of the hit if we go off the fiscal cliff and sequester occurs. so you can see that that just doesn't make sense. less than a third of the budgets taking 100% of the hit, and that third growing more slowly than almost any other part of the budget. >> i have a question. >> yes, sir? >> when gram redman was adopted in the first time sequester appeared in the language of the federal government budgeting, did they contemplate and pursue entitlements that are sequester? was it only these annual occurring expenditures? >> mostly it were these annual recurring expenditures. we negotiated out 47 programs in the domestic area that were not subject to sequester, most of those were a variety of entitlements and . >> those were negotiated mainly -- they were not actual result of

the 112th congress looks even worse when directly compared to the democratic-led 111th congress which boasted a productivity level on legislative records during the era of franklin delano roosevelt and johnson in the 1930's and 1960's respectively. the landmark legislation enacted in the two year period 2009 and 2010. to put meager output of this current congress to shame. further, beyond these big three at least a dozen bills were passed during that time period, including legislation addressing fair pay, student loans, consumer protection, national service, stem cell research, and food safety. the american people are tired of business as usual. they are tired of congress waiting until the last possible moment to avert yet another disaster. and they are certainly tired of this house returning from a 37-day summer vacation only to hold a couple of votes this week before rushing out of town again next week leaving in their wake a sea of critical work that remains undone. our country faces serious, daunting challenges that demand action now, which is why i advocated canceling the august

in the congress, there is still some give and take. i have had to sort of weave through the personalities in congress to find the right bill. some questioned the need for a federal regime or federal law as opposed to all of the different states have in their own patchwork laws. this is one of the examples of things that will have to happen for law makers to gt it. -- get it. >> dec them coming back in the lame duck session? -- do you see them coming back in the lame-duck session? >> the issue on the table right now will be around a little bit longer. i didn't know whether it will be in a lame-duck session. in the senate, there is a lot of debate about how to move forward. in my view, i support senator mccain and his philosophy. it is the best way to do it. we should not stop private industry to the government and let the government to mandate what its technologies are. the government, especially congress, it tends to be much lower in the space than in the private industry. the government is finally passing what is antiquated. it can be