Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]  CSPAN  June 24, 2009 6:30am-7:00am EDT

6:30 am
the same way federal employees do. we call it an exchange, but you can call it a marketplace. you have a bunch of different plans. if you like your plan and doctor, you do not have to do a thing. you keep your plan or doctor. if your employer is providing you with good health insurance, terrific. we will not mess with it. if you're a small-business person, the insurance being offered is something you cannot afford, if you want to shop for a better price, you can go to this exchange or marketplace, and you can see what the different plans cost. you can see with the coverage is like and what it's for my family. for us to say here is a public auction that is not profit driven, that can keep down administrative costs, and
6:31 am
provides you with good quality care for a reasonable price as one of the options for you to choose, i think that makes sense. >> would it drive private insurers out of business? >> why would it do that? if they say the marketplace, the best quality health care -- if they tell us they are offering a good deal, then why would the government drive them out of business? that is not logical. i think there is going to be some healthy debate in congress about the shape this takes. there can be some legitimate concerns of private insurers about if any public plan is subsidized by taxpayers and leslie, overtime, they cannot compete with the government printing money. there are going to be some legitimate debates to be had
6:32 am
about how this plan will take shape. but the notion that all of these insurance companies who say they are giving consumers the best possible deal, but they cannot compete against a public plan as one option, with consumers making the decision, that it defies logic. that is why i think you see in the polling data overwhelming support for a public plan. >> some republicans have set that up to this point, your response on iran has been timid and weak. today it sounded stronger. it sounds like the speech that john mccain has been urging you to give. you referred to an iron fist in
6:33 am
iran. were you influence by john mccain accusing you of being timid or week? >> what do you think? [laughter] i think john mccain has genuine passion about many of these international issues. i think all of us share a belief that we want justice to prevail. only i am the president of the united states. i have the responsibility in making certain that we are advancing our national security interests and that we are not used as a tool to be exploited by other countries. you have seen the reports. some of the comments i have made
6:34 am
have been mistranslated in iran, suggesting that i am telling writers to go out and write some more. there are reports suggesting the cia is behind all of this. all are false. it gives you a sense of the narrative that the iranian government is trying to plant. the members of congress have their constitutional duties. i am sure they will carry them out in the way they think is appropriate. i am president of united states, and i will carry of my duties as they are appropriate. >> [unintelligible] >> if you look at the statements that i have made, they have been very consistent. i made a statement on saturday
6:35 am
about the violence. in the hothouse of washington, there may be all kinds of stuff going back and forth in terms of republican critics versus the administration. that is not what is relevant to the iranian people. what is relevant to them is are they going to let their voices heard? a lot of them are paying a lot of attention to what is being set on capitol hill and not thinking about what is being said here. they need to focus on how to make sure justice is being served in iran. >> u.f. avoided spelling out consequences twice. -- you have avoided spelling out consequences tries. >> web when a young woman gets shot on the streets when she
6:36 am
gets out of her car, that is a problem. >> why will not use spell out the consequences? >> we do not know how this thing is going to play out. everyone here is on a 24 hour news cycle. i am not. >> [unintelligible] >> i answered the questions. we do not know how this is going to play out. >> is the public plan non- negotiable? >> is that your question? [laughter] is that your question? >> it is a two-part question of. [laughter] i appreciate your language about the logic of the public plan,
6:37 am
that seems logical to a lot of people that if the government is offering a cheaper health care plan, lots of employers will want to let their employees covered by that cheaper plan, which will not have to be for profits and may benefit from some government subsidies. in a nose? so that could violate what you are promising the people that they will not have to change health care plan. >> you are pitching and i am catching. i got a question. >with the reference to spot, is that a crack -- spock, is that a crack at my years? i want to be sure? [laughter] we are still in this process. we are not drawing lines in the
6:38 am
sand other than reform has to control costs. and has to provide relief to people who did not have health insurance or who are underinsured. those are the raw parameters that we discussed. there are a whole host of other issues. i may have strong opinions and will express those two members of congress. it is too early to say that. a public plan makes sense right now. let me go to the broader question you made. as i said before, been met think there is a legitimate concern if the public plan were simply eating of the taxpayers' trough. but it would be hard for private insurers to compete. on the other hand, if the public plan is structured better they
6:39 am
have to collect premiums and they have to provide the services. , then if what they insurance companies are is true, and they are doing their best to help their customers and keep people well and give them security, they should be able to compete. if it turns out the public plan is able to reduce administrative costs significantly, then i would like the insurance companies to take note. if the public plan can do that, why cannot we. that is good for everybody in the system. i do not think there should be any objection to that. part of the reform that we suggested is that if you want to be a private insurer as part of the exchange, we will have
6:40 am
different rules for all insurance companies. one is that you cannot preclude people from getting health insurance because of a pre- existing condition. you cannot cherry pick and take the healthiest people. there are going to be some ground rules that will apply to all insurance companies. the american people understand that insurance companies have been spending more time thinking about how do we take premiums and avoid providing people coverage and that have been about making sure the insurance is there and the health care is there when families needed. i am confident -- i take those advocates of the free market to heart. this say it is going to compete on service and their ability to deliver group care to families
6:41 am
-- if that is the case, this becomes one more option. if it is not the case, that is something the american people should know. >> what about promising the american people they do not have to change plans even if their employers change them? >> if you have a plan and you like it and your doctor has a plan -- or you like your doctor , what i am saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform. are there going to be employers right now -- as a man we do lead to anything. if we take the advice of some people up there and say this is not the time to do health care. we cannot afford it and it is too complicated. let us assume that nothing happens. i can guarantee you that there is the possibility for a whole lot of americans out there that
6:42 am
will not end up having the same health care they had. as costs go up, employers will make decisions. we have to raise premiums on our employees. we can now provide health insurance at all in some cases. that is why health reform is so important. >> as a former smoker, a understand the frustration in quitting. with the new law regulating the tobacco industry, i'd like to ask you a few questions. >> a few questions? >> how many cigarettes a day do you smoke alone or in the presence of other people? to you think the new laws will help? >> the new law is not about me but the next generation of kids coming up.
6:43 am
you think you want to ask me about my smoking as opposed to it being relevant to my new law. that is falling. it is an interesting human interest story. as a former smoker, a costly struggle with it. have fallen off the wagon sometimes, yes. i am not a daily smoker or a constant smoker. i do not do it in front of my kids or my family. i am 95% cured. there are times when i mess up. i said this before. i get this question about once every month or so. i do not know what to tell you other than the fact that like the people who go to a egg, once
6:44 am
you go down this path, it is something you continue to stroke with -- to struggle with. that is what the legislation we find is so important. we do not want children going down that path in the first place. >> you said you call la and american countries -- you call on latin american countries to do certain things. [inaudible] >> i am looking forward to seeing the colombian president. i think he is one of the finest
6:45 am
leaders in latin america. if you look at how chilly has handled the recession -- chille as head of the recession, it has been good. they have the resources to deal with the downturn. it is a good lesson for the united states when we have surpluses. they anticipated. we think we can make progress in latin america generally. one of the things i will be talking about with the president there is the coordination and cooperation between the united states and them on clean energy. we will have an announcement when we do our first press conference after my bilateral meeting. we are making important progress
6:46 am
when it comes to the exchanges on cancer research. we continue to have a robust regime with them. they have entered and to 7 inches in partnerships with the federal government and with state governments like california. i think the relationship that we have with them -- but that's not all in line with u.s. foreign policy on every issue. is a respectful policy. they are an important partner. that is the model we want. partnership -- the united states does not dictate how they should view their own interests. we have achieved a great corporation. i will be looking at the president giving us further and
6:47 am
advise in times of how we can take our relationship there and expand it to our relationships throughout latin america. >> about less and american countries giving you land -- about latin american countries giving you a hand. >> the same is true in brazil. the president that came in there as a different political orientation than others greenback he was perceived as a strong no. leftist. in is a very practical person as it turned out. he has instituted also it's a
6:48 am
smart market reforms that make brazil prosper. the united states has a good working relationship with them. that points the way for other countries where the democratic tradition is not as equally embedded as we will like it to be. we can make common cause of showing those countries. the respect for property rights, rule of law, and all of those things that affect or lead to greater prosperity. that is not just the u.s. agenda. that is a smart way to increase the prosperity of your own people. >> if i can turn to the economy more generally, when you were
6:49 am
selling the stimulus package, you talked about keeping the unemployment below 8%. it is likely to reach double digits however. >> it is important to see how the economy evolves before having another stimulus. it is fair to say -- the stimulus package is the first thing we did. nobody understood the depth of this recession. it was only later that we got a report that the economy had gone down. it is not surprising that we
6:50 am
miss the mark in terms of our estimates. if you look at the pattern, unemployment will overton% because of the fact that -- will go over 10% because of the fact that even as investors and jobs start hiring again, it takes a while for that employment number to catch up with the economic recovery. we are still not at actual recovery yet. i anticipate this is going to be a difficult year. >> i do not have a crystal ball. since yeutter back our last prognosis, let us not engaged in another one. -- since you throwback our last prognosis, let us not engage in another one.
6:51 am
without the recovery act, we know for a fact that states would have laid off a lot more teachers, police officers, firefighters -- those individuals whose jobs were state as a consequence, they are still making their mortgage payments and shopping. we know the recovery act had an impact. we also know this was the worst recession since the great depression. people are going through a tough time right now. i do not expect them to be satisfied. as i glanced at the various news outlets here, i know there is reporting of the administration is worried about this.
6:52 am
the american people have a right to feel like this is a tough time right now. what is incredible to me is how resent the american people have been. they are still more optimistic than the facts alone would justify. this is a tough time. i do not feel satisfied with the progress we have made. we have to get recovery act money out faster. we have to make sure the programs that we put in place are working the way they are supposed to. on mortgage programs, they have helped to modify mortgages for a lot of people. it is not in keeping pace with foreclosures that are happening. the bank is still not letting people modify mortgages and people are losing their homes. i have to find out why it is not
6:53 am
working for these people, and can we make it more aggressive and improve it. this is a very difficult process. i have to make sure that we focus on the short-term. have weakened provide families with the immediate relief and just gut the economy as quickly as possible. i have to keep my eye on the long term which is making sure that by reforming our health care system, has a serious energy legislation, revamping our educational systems, giving the financial regulatory reforms in place necessary for the 21st century, by doing all of those things, we have a foundation for an atomic -- long economic growth. we do not want to get these bubbles strategies that got us in this position in the first place. i have time for two more questions.
6:54 am
>> back on the economy, mr. president, people are criticizing the recovery plan. the african-american unemployment rate will go to 20% by the end of this year. you're chairman of economic and buzzers said -- economic and pfizer's made another statement. >> -- economic advisers made another statement. >> we know the african-american and latino unemployment rates are higher than the national average consistently. if the economy as a whole is doing poorly, you know the african-american community is going to be doing poorly. they will be hit even harder. the best thing i can do for the
6:55 am
african-american or latino or asian community is to get the economy as a whole moving. hold on one second. let me into the question. if i do not do that, i will not be able to help anybody. that is the first priority. it is true that in certain inner-city communities, the unemployment rate was very high before the recession. the letters available for people to enter into the job market are even worse. we are interested in looking at proven programs that help people on a pathway to jobs. there is a reason why right before father's day of went to a program here in washington which has a proven track record of taking young, mostly minority people, some of whom have graduated from high school or have just gotten their ged, and
6:56 am
train them on computers and other technical skills, along with how to carry themselves in the office, right in e-mail, some of the social skills that will allow them to be more employable. they have a terrific placement rate after a one-year program. if we can duplicate some of those programs, then we will do so. we want to find tools that will give people more opportunities. the most important thing i can do is lift the economy overall. that is what my strategy is focused on. >> we shot socking video of a woman who was shot in the chest in iran over the weekend.
6:57 am
what is your reaction? >> it is heartbreaking. it is heartbreaking. anybody who sees this knows there is something fundamentally unjust about that. >> we have people on the ground who are saying the streets are quieter now. they have a fear of people going missing, violence, this could be a movement that has gone underground. are you concerned about that? >> i am concerned about how peaceful demonstrators and people who want their boats counted maybe spiteful from expressing -- stifled from expressing those concerns. there are international norms of freedom of speech and freedom of expression --
6:58 am
>> [unintelligible] >> it is important for us to make sure that we let the iranian people know that we are watching what is happening. they are not alone in this process. what is. to be most important is what happens in iran. we have been struck by the carriage of people. i mentioned this in a statement i made a couple of days ago. some of you the ad been covering my campaigns, you know this is one of my favorite expressions. it is from data -- dr. martin luther king. we have to believe that ultimately justice will prevail.
6:59 am
all right. >> "washington journal" is next with today's news and your phone calls. today's agenda in the house includes spending for homeland security and the defense authorization bill. members are back in session at 10 eastern. . we will discuss the economy in federal reserve with


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on