. >> and more than we did during the reagan administration adjusted for inflation? >> yes, senator. >> and more than the cold war average? >> yes, senator. >> which is the highest since world war two? >> during the reagan administration, it was higher than in the vietnam war and korean war. >> let me nail this down -- the budget control act had two separate caps for 2012 and 2013 but no separate caps for security/non-security thereafter? >> yes. >> congress could decide to spend more on security than is allowed under the caps in the first two years? >> yes, they can pick any allocation under those total catch it chooses. if the committee does not achieve any additional savings than the enforcement procedures established separate caps for defense and non-defense discretionary spending. >> they are based cabs in -- they are based caps. are there any caps and more spending? >> they would be adjusted upward by any amount of spending designated by the congress. >> there are caps specific for security and non-security for two years and no caps in the subsequent years and n

mean, you can look at the '60s, charlie or you could look at the economic strength during the reagan administration and the clinton administration when crime rates did go down. i was bipartisan about that, neil, it's worthwhile to point out. this happened-- >> what ben said before, an economist, who knows about correlation, there's no correlation here. the '60s was a time of increases in crime. it was a time of very good, it was a good economic period. and-- (laughter) >> we know what ben was doing during the '60s, and adam, if this helped deal with crime, we'll answer this, after the 80 billion dollar boon dogles, we should have no crime. >> neil: and show us about the '60s to assume that building more roads and bridges helps prevent the kind of calamities like that, the fear, isn't that a stretch? >> it would have to be high on something. >> and that's the why you use scare tactics when logic doesn't work. you want to talk about crime being high. 1.3 million more burglary than when obama came in office and more murders and we had a smaller population, there's something about the aura, the office

that said we will keep the tax collection as a shared national income no higher than during the reagan administrationi was shocked. i sent a note to them, what are you doing? they tell me a few months later that i was the only person that wrote to them that way. i know as an economist, if we don't tax the rich so that we can rebuild schools, so we can rebuild neighborhoods and focus on real infrastructure projects over a decade, we are not going to be able to rebuild. we will not have the skills. we are not going to create good jobs. i was asking, what are you saying? this is how politics plays in america. both parties cater to the rich. that is why when push came to shove, in december to -- in december 2010, the bush era tax cuts were about to expire, 60% of americans were saying let them expire at the top, but that is not what happened. all of a sudden there is a deal between the white house and congress to extend them for two more years. that was not because the president's back was to the wall. the political adviser for saying you cannot do that, you are running for election. you need a campaign

within that the top one percent turkey and ten percent of the national income and during the reagan administration it was a shift so that by the time that he left office in one nine hundred eighty eight the top one percent were then taking in fifteen and a half percent of the national income and the other ninety nine percent were sharing the remaining eighty four and a half percent but then it even accelerated beyond that so if you look at the ten years from one thousand nine hundred ninety nine through two thousand and eight which is the end of this dataset. the top one percent during that period took in twenty point zero four percent of our national income twice as much and the point i make in the piece is that they didn't become twice as smart or twice as hard working or twice as good looking it was a result of a series of very specific policies that led to a redistributed redistribution of the national wealth upwards so you know we could talk about trade policy the various policies of the federal reserve the dollar policy the union labor laws a very big part of the story but the real the real

my feeling is that in college, especially during the reagan administration, i thought that the democratic party in the united states had essentially vacated the left. and fused i think a little too much with the political right. there had n. my opinion, been insufficient advocacy for people who were left of center. and so that reality, coupled with the fact of the growing environmental crisis and denial that this country was going through and in seeing the inspirational movement of the green party's blossoming in europe, especially germany, i went to germany in the late 1980's. i spent time with the green party of germany in the parliament over there, learned everything i possibly could. came back to california. i was 1 of 20 people who co-founded the green party here in california. i have been a member of the green party, co-founder, for about 20 years and then less than two years ago i decided it was time for me to shift directions and i became a democrat. >> looking back a few years to your campaign for supervisor, what lessons did you learn from that experience? was there anything tha

the reagan administration was the writing on them. as long as there were some supporting them nothing other than the us with their support. almost instantly a prototype of what they're saying it's in israel's best interest and i support the us to allow this palestinian un membership to say ok folks for thirty five years the kind of sincerity the chancellor is now that it's been in for almost forty years there's a choice between security and expansion are very clear to us israel because like other states prefer it what for since you're always so well belongs it's have a choice between security and expansion and have to use but not with experiment with terrorism which incidentally is recognised criminal but everyone including his or or they can get away with it as long as think the most powerful state in the world backs them and as long as you're opposed want europe is remarkable in tahrir but they're not like this but they don't like to step on the pony and also the masters so they will also you know it's the court that i was back in t

the reagan administration was backing them. as long as the us was supporting them and nothing happened then the us withdrew support. almost instantly apartheid collapsed saying it's in israel's best interest and the us still allowed this palestinian un membership saying look i thought for thirty five years that censoring the chamber is a smell that has been for almost forty years there's a choice between security and expansion very clear choice israel is like other states is preferred for since the early seventy's it's had a choice between security and expansion can have peace but not with expansion into the territories which incidentally is recognized to be criminal but everyone including israel. they can get away with it as long as the most powerful state in the world backs them and as long as europe goes along and europe is remarkably tolerantly them out like this but they don't like to step on the opponent also the masters so they go along so you know it's the court that has backed the united states they picked tony blair yo

oberstar: but even a decade after it was enacted, the reagan administration came in and cut the grant program to a loan program. and funding diminished over a period of time. now, we still have 1/3 or more of the nation's streams and lakes that don't meet the standards of the clean water act. we have to advance the cause. that is the big challenge ahead of us. you just don't think of raw sewage in waterways in a developed country, and yet, that's what we have, and not just in pittsburgh, but all over. narrator: pittsburgh is situated at the confluence of the allegheny, monongahela, and ohio rivers. these three rivers are vital for industry, recreation, and drinking water. and each year, billions of gallons of combined sewer overflows discharge directly into those rivers. hecht: we're now having to face the consequences of the choice that was made to put in combined sewer systems. narrator: in 1994, the government adopted a combined sewer overflow policy to reduce csos nationwide. cities with combined sewer overflows now face an enforcement action called a consent decree. under a conse

the planet. he worked with president reagan during the reagan administration. he is currently head of his own company. i'm talking about dr. art laffer. he's currently head of laffer associates and the laffer center for supply side economics and author of "return to prosperity," and he wrote an article published in the "wall street journal" the other day that refuted all false claims made against 9-9-9 the other night during the debate. before i say what he concluded was his own analysis, it never felt so good being shot at. never felt so good being shot at because as aveda king says, they didn't think of it first, and they don't have a credible plan. to the activation that a new sales tax could be raised in the future, dr. laffer responds so could any other tax. what makes that one any different? to the accusation that it is not revenue neutral, dr. laffer concludes, i believe his plan, herman cain, would indeed be stat tick revenue neutral and with the boost it would give to the economic growth, it would bring in even more revenue than expected. two, -- to th

the reagan administration was biting them. was long as it was some support to nothing. when the us was going to support. the most instantly point of corruption saying it's in israel's best interest and the us still allowed this palestinian un membership and see what the thirty five knew that was the sensory change in serious well that is for them for the almost fourteen there's a choice between security and expansion are very clear to us israel is like other strips third and since you're always so the problems it's had a choice between security and experiment and have for years but not with expansion implement their records which incidentally is recognized to be criminal what everyone including israel. get away with it as long as things let's put our faith in the world back home and as long as europe will want europe it is remarkable that target women are like this but they don't like to step on the opponent also the master so they go along so you know stick with it i was back and it states that i picked tony boyer. off the part of him but i might as well think that we'r

the reagan administration i think. it was long as the u.s. was supporting them and nothing then the u.s. withdrew support. almost instantly apart from the problems saying it's in israel's best interest and asked us to allow this palestinian un membership to say what they thought for thirty five years the sensor in the chamber is now that it's been for almost forty years there's a choice between security and expansion or a clear cut which is europe was more like other states. since the early seventy's and it's had a true it is becoming secure an expansion kind of peace but not with expansion of the perth that is rich yes whatever it is recognised as a criminal but everyone including israel so they get away with it as long as the most powerful state in the world backs up and as long as you are those want europe it is remarkably cowardly going out like this but they don't like to step on the point also of the master so they will want to let you know if the quartet has backed the united states to put pony boy or you know i want to compromise with

the reagan administration was back when. i was long as the us i'm supporting him nothing. and any of us was to support. almost instantly or prototype to watch you saying it's in israel's best interest and the us still allow this palestinian un membership the same for thirty five years that was censored the teamsters well that was for them for almost forty years there's a choice between security and expansion a very clear picture which is really what it was like other students put it since early so the billions it's hard to trust between security and expansion can have teams but not with the expansion of the board territories which incidentally is recognised to be criminal but everyone including news for a leader with his longest standing on its powerful sleep in the world but i can't understand his europe because i want and europe is remarkably tolerant like when i'm out like this but they don't like to step on the pony and also the master so they do a lot so that you know it's the court that has backed the united states they picked tony blair and i don't want to come out

the reagan administration was but i think. that as long as the us i'm supporting nothing up there any of us with her support almost instantly the perfect about saying it's in israel's best interest at the us still out of this palestinian un membership and see for thirty five years with sincerity that chamber's interest now that it's been in for almost forty years there's a choice between security and expansion very clear to us that israel is like other states is preferred it for since the early syllables it's had a choice between security and expenses from after years but with expansion it will the terrorism which incidentally is recognized in the criminal but everyone including israel or they can get away with it as long as thing and most powerful state world backs and as long as your players want europe is remarkably tolerable to them out like this but they don't like to step on the pony tails of the masters so they go along with what you know it's the poor play it has backed the united states they picked tony blair and him o

the reagan administration was woman. as long as he was from supporting nothing when the us was going to support almost instantly approaching a corruption free saying it's in israel's best interest the us still allow this palestinian un membership see the full of thirty five years since entering the chamber it is well that it's been for the almost forty years where the choice between security and expansion are very clear to us israel is like other slips for and hope for since we're always so the bombs let's have a choice between security and expansion for nothing else but with experience from the planet earth worms which incidentally isn't recognized to be criminal what everyone including israel where they can get away with it as long as the most powerful state in the world backs them and as long as you are opposed want europe it is remarkable that it probably will not like this but they don't want to step on the planet also the minister so they go along so you noticed that i was back in the united states sort of pick tony

the reagan administration was backing them. and as long as there were some spring about nothing when the us withdrew support almost instantly the perfect he's saying it in israel's best interest possibly so loud that ousting the annual membership would prefer thirty five years the same story which a military is now with has been forced on us for the choice between security and expansion very clear to us israel is like other states is preferred for it since the early seventy's it's had a choice between scaring expansion and have peace but with the expansion of the territories which isn't every is recognised i'm a criminal but everyone including us are they get away with it is wrong the single most powerful state world backs up and it's always europe there's a lot of europe is remarkably powerful but they're not like this but they don't like to step on the tunnels of the masters so they go along so you notice the quartet has backed the united states tony blair. but i want. to. bring the muscle to work once we expose. those books t

the reagan administration was right on them. as long as they were some support and nothing happened when the us was supported. almost instantly or perfectly up there saying it's in israel's best interest at the us so while this palestinian un membership will confirm it for thirty five years since very much a family where is well that it's been for almost forty years there's a choice between security and expansion or a clear pure israel because like other slips prefer since we're always so forms it's hard to troops come in spirit and expansion and have these but not with us from the front of the earth words which incidentally is recognized to be criminal but everyone including yours are or they can get away with it as long as the most powerful state the world backs up and as long as you are opposing the war in europe it's remarkable that they're not like us but they don't like to step on the tone and also the master so they go along you know it's the court i was back in the united states they picked tony blair. off to come but the

the reagan administration was right with them. as long as you are supporting them nothing. in the us which were support. almost instantly a prototype put out there saying it's in israel's best interest but the us still allowed this palestinian un membership to say ok for thirty five years the sensor in the chamber is now that it's been for almost forty years there's a choice between security and expansion or a clear choice israel is like oh there are strips of preferred since there are certain forms let's have a choice between security and expansion for nothing else but not with expensive medical terrorism which incidentally is recognized to be criminal what everyone including newsreader or they can get away with it as long as thing that's part of his faith in the world back home and as long as you are those want europe it is remarkable that privately they're not right but they don't like to step on the pope and also the minister so they go along with what you know it's the court that's back in the united states that tony blair and. all of the caught up with him but they're

the reagan administration was but i don't. know as long as he was supporting them and nothing happened in the us which were supported. almost instantly the person i put up there saying it's in israel's best interest to us. this palestinian un membership will stay with us for the thirty five years since entering the chamber is now that it's been for the last four days there's a choice between security and expansion or a clear purpose israel is like other states and. since you're always sort of the balance let's have a choice between security and expansion the mouthpiece but not with experience and implement earthwards which incidentally is recognized criminal like everyone including israel where they get away with it as long as the name the most powerful state in the world perhaps i'm a muslim as you are those who want europeans remarkable that i want to live there not like this but they don't like to step on the opponent also the master so they do a lot so you know it's important that i was practically united states they pick a

the reagan administration was backing them up either so long as he was for support and nothing then the us wants to support. almost instantly reportedly pull ups are you saying it's in israel's best interest and that the us still allow this palestinian un membership to stay with us for thirty years that i've since heard the chamber is now that it's been for almost forty years there's a choice between security and expansion very clear choice is really what it was like a lot of students prefer it for them since they're always so that once it's had a choice between security and expansion can have peace but not with expansion into the territories which incidentally is recognized as a criminal but everyone including israel. get away with it as long as thing for most powerful state world backs and as long as europe goes along and europe is remarkable it cowardly them out like this but they don't like to step on the pony and also the master so they go along with something else the corporate i was back on about it states that tony blair an. awful lot of them but then i wonder what was picked to

the reagan administration was right on. i was long as he was from supporting nothing not when the us was going to support. almost instantly the president to pull out there saying it's in israel's best interest the us still allow this palestinian un membership see the conflict for the thirty five years since certainly changed interest now that it's been for the almost forgotten there's a choice between security and expansion and very clear to us israel is like other states. since the early seventy's it's had a choice and some scattered experiment can have peace but not with expansion of the planet earth areas which incidentally is recognized to be a criminal well everyone including israel or they can get away with it as long as most powerful state in the world back home and as long as you are others want europe that is remarkable but i don't like going out like this but they don't like to step on the planet also the master so they will want some universal planet as back to the united states they picked point but they are you

the reagan demonstration. it forced -- from the reagan administration. it forced congress to support by sanctions black south african workers. it prescribed the emergence of new legal doctrines, including the corporate and organization of duty to divest their stock in corporations that were doing business in apartheid south africa. it prescribed the legal doctrine that trade with systemically a racist country is indeed to give assistance, prohibitive assistance to that country. and if prescribed the sullivan principles. the sullivan principles, which set standards -- rev. sullivan is a member of the board of directors -- and it would set the first standards to regulate corporations along a human rights set of standards for treatment of their overseas workers, which led to further growth in international law along the lines of greater liability of multinational corporations for human rights violations. the sullivan principles became a template for an opening of international law to regulate human rights standards. we have now and we have had, because of t

up to a billion a year to a 49% tax rate although that is lower than the high tax rate in the reagan administrationhat happened last night in the senate wasn't that bill defeated in part because there aren't the votes to raise taxes in this country right now? >> i, again, part by part, 81% of americans i saw last night support i think -- it was on msnbc, support the idea of taxing millionaires and billionaires. this is wildly popular not because people are mad at rich people but it is fair. they want a fair tax system. and so you know i think it's at the peril of the republicans to reject that notion. >> we have talked about those polls here on this station and read about them as well. the mood in the country to support something like that they say they do. why hasn't that translated into action on capitol hill? what do you think the reason is behind that? >> i don't know if the republicans to go home on the weekend if they go to the grocery store or if they go to school events with their children because i hear it everywhere. people feel a sense of unfairness deep in their hearts that the banks ar

my first day working at the department of justice that during the reagan administration, my office was on the fifth floor with all of the great paintings and sculptures and there was an interesting thing on the wall with a brown plaque that said in this room were tried that a to nazis saboteurs. city would not believe that the office across from me put them on trial. i said i want to write about those eight nazis and he said the good news there is no author out there shortly after september 11 when there's a great resurgence of terrorism, there is none of their out there who is in the middle of writing a book but there are three authors simultaneously writing three books on the same subject.y# you have to give that up. i said i remember when i was a little boy. [laughter] my grandfather who was on the chicago police force from the 1930's al capone era through the us civil-rights protests and anti-vietnam protests told me many wild stories. one day he came home and he whispered to the family don't let gdp the newspaper to night. of course, the boy that i was i had to read the sun-times

in introducing romney, talk show radio host, former secretary of education during the reagan administration, excoriated them for the remarks, listen up. >> i would say to pastor jeffers, you stepped on and obscured the words of perry, and santorum, and cain and bachmann and everyone else who has spoken here. you did rick perry no good, sir, in what you had to say. >> romney, as you also heard, criticized remarks without jaming the pastor nor his rival perry by name. it will be interesting to see how it plays out in the next couple of weeks and months and the perry campaign issuing a statement reads in part, the governor does not agree with every single issue or everyone he knows that supports his candidacy. he's getting it on track and keep in mind this thing may resonate with yvonne gel cal voters especially in states like iowa and south carolina, one out of every two g.o.p. voters identifies themselves as an evangelical or a christian conservative, jamie. >> jamie: he no question about the importance of those faiths. let me ask you about ron paul. i was watching his interview carefully. w

at the beginning of the reagan administration, we were the largest creditor nation in the world.point we had money we could use to give to nations for one purpose or another. we're in a completely different world today, greta. we have to borrow 43 cents of every dollar we spend. it makes no sense to the american people for us to borrow money only to give it to other nations. that's why right now foreign aid is something that quite frankly is something that in many ways we can't afford. >> but then we have sort of the complex problem like for instance, pakistan who has been nothing but nasty to us in so many ways. they have horrible floods or earthquakes, we want to go give them humanitarian aid and have them attempt to at least like us so another rogue nation doesn't move in and help with al-qaeda and afghanistan. it's a terribly difficult and delicate balancing act, would you agree? >> it is a very difficult balancing act, but i think you hit the nail on the head when you talked about emergency relief versus actually united states being a part, a base part of a foreign nation's

in the reagan administration, september, 1983, we created a 1.1 million jobs. obama's socialist politics policies, class warfare and socialism, we created zero. i believe with leadership, we can balance the budget. diit for four consecutive years. >> two things i took out of that -- humor worked in a big way and going after the president and his failed policies seemed to resonate very well. >> i are right, sean. i am waiting for one of these candidates to look the camera straight in the eye and to say to all of their colleagues, stop attacking each other. no 30-second ads against republicans. abide by ronald reagan's leaveningth commandment and focus on the president. he's coming after you. it's time to respond. >> the one person who seems to have done that in every debate is newt. he keeps saying, you know, we all up here on this stage would do a., b., c., d., and e. >> there is a simple challenge for him, who do you want to stand toe to toe with barack obama in september and october of 2012? who do you want to be that person that goes face to face and challeng

. >> we've tried it for the last generation, martin, since the beginning of the reagan administrationese numbers show. 275% increase over that period of time for the very wealthiest. now, the advantage the republicans have, many americans still think they can make it into that top 1%. but increasingly, they're wrong. it starts at birth, really. the prospects for upward mobility. but if the government doesn't have the resources to invest back and education and nutrition for poor children, and their mothers, and to the decent kind of security safety net programs that we need, then there isn't going to be adequate upward mobility. let me give you one example if i could to show you the disparity. >> please do. >> we've got a program to provide nutritious meals to low birth weight children and their very low income mothers. the republicans have proposed cutting $833 million from that program. and they would eliminate 200,000 children and women from the program. in doing so. for one week, the cost of extending the bush tax cuts for millionaires alone is $860 million. so here we have a budge