if you remember we reduce benefits of social security by taxing social security benefits at 50% of social security benefits. dennis's reducing benefits. we also extended the age of retirement from 65 to 67 which is again reducing benefits to make it that more. if you looked at these programs, if we had social security kick in net 71 years old, there would be no unfun that liabilities whatsoever. it would just recognize the increase in longevity that has occurred in the population, the change of a 70 earl versus 65 enrolled and the same thing we can do with medicare. basically what happens is they do it only when they are forced to by the events that occur, but they are really easy to solve these problems. >> you agree with their colleague? >> he is a great guy. but not wrong in a nasty of the way. i knew his father very well in the nixon white house. his father was one of the finest people i knew, but i don't think demographics are serious with regard to the economy. i think what we did in the book, we mentioned demographics once. >> i will just add that it is not so much the demographics

the social security act passed in 1935 and it gave us unemployment insurance, social security and our welfare system which became aid to dependent children, which was originally designed to help the children of mothers who were let's to care for their children alone. these were mostly with us at the time. the fair labor standards act passed in 1938 set a 40 hour work week to prevent workers from becoming broken from exhaustion berkowitz at a minimum wage to insure they receive at least the minimum level of compensation. there was a ban on child labor and they created the concept of overtime pay in which workers who are asked to work longer hours can receive higher pay for doing so. but that is not all she did. she was a major supporter of fha insurance, which has provided housing over the years to millions of american families. she was a primary architect of the civilian conservation corps, which became one of the most popular early programs in the administration, universally popular. almost universally popular. [laughter] and she was the largest single supporter of the works progress

social security. who knows if that was the right decision then, but it certainly brought us a program that's mattered in the lives of all of our parents, our grandparents, our great-grandparents. harry truman was not able to accomplish medicare or any other kind of health care reform, significant health care reform in his seven years or so as president. fast forward to july 1965, president johnson passed legislation creating medicare. but leading up to that legislation, again it was the american medical association. it was really the most conservative members. i know an awful lot of doctors that want to see us move forward, including my doctor who was a general practitioner for almost 50 years, died at the age of 89 in the year 2000. i know a whole lot of doctors who want us to move forward on health care reform. the american medical association in 1965 said those who supported the creation of medicare, they called it socialized medicine, said it was too expensive, said it would lead to runaway, rampa

didn't use social security. the next year we did it by $284 billion. that was 2000. in 2001, we just took off. and we find ourselves where we are today. i'm going to be leaving this place at the end of next year. i have three children. i have seven grandchildren. and i happen to believe that just like the pages that are here today in this room, that they're going to have to look a lot harder -- work a lot harder than i did in order to maintain the standard of living that i've been able to have because the competition in the world today is a lot keener than it was 15 or 20 years ago. so they're just going to have to work harder than they've ever had to work before to maintain the kind of standard of living that we'd like to have for them and for my children and grandchildren. but if you think about it, if we don't deal with this problem i'm talking about today, we're going to lay on their back taxes that will break their back. put them in a position where they're going to have to work harder to maintain a decent standard of living, and then what we're saying to them,

social security was 15%, medicare had yet to be enacted. by 2007 defense spending 20% of the budget while social security makes up 21% and medicare makes up 16% and it is rising at an alarming rate. the u.s. has a commitment to health care almost double any country in the world from the standpoint of the overall cost. it is unsustainable. we can do a much better job but it can't just be by spending money. mr. chairman, the national health care anti-fraud association organization of 100 private insurers, public agencies estimates 60 billion, about 3% of the total annual health care spending is lost to fraud every year. but the figure is considered conservative by the new england journal of medicine. 2008 government why proper payments cost the united states treasury $72 billion or 4% of the total outlay for related programs. medicaid had an estimated improper payment rate of 10.5% or $18.6 billion for the federal share of medicaid expenditures. the highest rate of any federal program. and it is my belief that in the second half of the legisl

we don't receive social security. there is a huge issue and i hope it's resolved in your time in the house. >> host: who doesn't receive social security? >> guest: teachers don't, they don't receive social security even though ip into it through having wagers and all those kind of things i will receive it. and so i think i answered that question and when i did my interview, but they did come around and support me in the campaign which we were very happy with. they did give money to the campaign, they gave a thousand dollars. but, you know, i do think as much as i love my teachers union and what the attempt to do for educators i do think we need to think out of the box and sometimes if you challenge those clivias people get their feathers ruffled, and so that can put you in hot water with those folks but i happy to be in the hot water. >> host: how about the democrats? >> guest: the democrats unfortunately our relationship didn't start off very smoothly. all i had called because the kids said you should probably call a

-- what about raising the caps on social security? guest: wealthy people already pay much more in taxes than they get back in terms of benefits. if you would like to make it a complete welfare program, that is fine. one can talk about that. but you might as well raise some other tax. host: tenn., independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i wanted to ask the guy on the right, i cannot remember his name. host: my right, or your right? caller: the one that pointed to himself. host: all right. michael ettlinger. caller: michael, can you give me one country where this type of health care has done very well and the majority of people are very happy with it? and then i wanted to ask another question. guest: no country that i am aware of has follow the model being pursued here. other developed countries have systems much more like what john is describing, which is not what the president is proposing. john keeps saying that we will have a single payer, government controlled system. they have been explicit that that is not what they're

security that basically bought us 30, 40 years on social security. you know, maybe chuck grassley. i think he's very torn. i think he is working very hard with baucus right now. i just don't know if he can agree to what the majority of democrats in the house will demand. andt

medicare and social security will have begun its pathway a permanent deficits. are you concerned about these levels? is this a sustainable course? >> i am certainly concerned about that. we face a double challenge. one, we have to restore ourselves to a more balanced fiscal half after addressing the financial and economic crises we are facing. in addition, that is complicated by the retirement of the baby boomers and medical costs and rising entitlement costs. this is no longer a long-term consideration. it is extraordinarily challenging. my rule of thumb to the congress would be that given that we have civil -- seen this increase that we can overtime try to reduce. we cannot have a situation where the debt continues to rise. >> the path of the trajectory is what matters in the long run? >> id involved that essentially exploding. >> your colleague at the fed seems to concur, recently giving a speech in which they rely too heavily on the measures of the out were gap as the protector of inflation. they argue that inflation will remain low for some time. other indi

give it to everyone with a social security number. host: take a look at this story concerning president nixon -- he showed ambivalence on abortion, not where do. it talks about how he weighs in on the question of abortion. it reveals he was relatively ambivalent about what the decision and the supreme court would mean about the abortion issue. also, the house is set to vote on the crime bill. that might come on friday. this article is from "the washington post," where the house rules committee unveiled the latest version of the bill. it features new items such as $7.5 billion in the green bonds for the clean energy deployment administration, a new financing agency. so, before congress goes on its recess next week for the fourth of july it looks they're planning to tackle in the house the climate change legislation. the next call is from west virginia on the democrats' line. george, how do you feel about a public option in health care? caller: i absolutely feel we should have a public option and did we should entirely convert the syste

if we have a two-year 50% reduction in the social security and medicare tax, you would have an extraordinary explosion of small business, a dramatic increase in unemployment, the money available for businesses to invest without bureaucracy and without politicians. he would have a dramatic rebound. it would be much better than the theories of the left. i know what the impact would be of a two-year 50% reduction. if you want to compete with china for jobs, match the chinese in capital gains. their rate is zero. [applause] if you want to compete for profitable businesses creating good jobs, adopt the irish tax rate of 12.5% for corporations. if you want to build up capital for investment permanently, abolished the death tax. it is the single biggest hindrance to average people creating capital. 79% of the american people believe is wrong, morally wrong to require somebody to visit the undertaker and the irs in the same week. let me make a key point. "do not tell me it can be done." i just outlined for you the first four tax cuts that should be the heart of the republican party. [applause] this

just in medicare, medicaid and social security. this bill is suggesting that we add another $2 trillion to that. in my opinion, that is totally irresponsible. the debt we are putting into this country and on to the children's back is going to bankrupt our nation, bankrupt our children and make our nation a pauper. we know that. the president knows that. he has even said it is unsustainable and for us to suggest or bring forward language that would aggravate that problem by $2 trillion is absolutely fiscally irresponsible. now i have listened to the president this week, as he has been aggressive in promoting health care. he says he has three standards. the first standard is that everybody in america should have access to adequate insurance. second standard is that we should bend the outyear cost curve so that we can afford health care in this country, and the third standard is that nobody should lose their plan if they like their plan. i think that everybody agrees with those standards as purposes. i certainly agree with them, and i

they earned the social security while working here. we do not have such arrangements with any of the states with russia, ukraine, bell areuss and so forth. millions of people had no choice but to flee the oppressive former soviet union in the 1970's, 1980's and 1990's. several hundred thousands of these people now live in the united states and were forced to renounce their citizenship in the soviet union in order to leave. thousands of these people live here and they do not in spite of having worked 30 or 40 years earning pension rights in the states of the former soviet union, they do not receive pensions from any of the successor states. so i -- this amendment simply is a sense of the congress urging the state department to continue trying to negotiate such arrangements with the states of the former soviet union so that the former citizens of those countries who now are citizens of the united states and live here can receive the pensions that they earned while living in russia. this should be a no-brainer. it simply urges the state d

has spent every dime that americans have put in it and there's not a dime in the social security account to pay future benefits. the same with medicare, trillions of dollars. this is a commonsense solution that every american can see. if we don't listen to the misrepresentation that's we're starting to hear in this body. -- misrepresentations that we're starting to hear in this body. every american with a policy they can own and keep is available to us within our reach without any government takeover of health care. we just have to believe that what made america great can make a health care work and that is freedom. thank you, mr. president. i yield back and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: withhold the quorum call? mr. demint: i withhold. no quorum. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: thank you, mr. president. i thank my colleague. mr. president, i rise to speak on the nomination of harold koh whom the president nominated to be legal adviser at the state department. this is a relatively obscure, but very important posi

it took eight months to make sure they receive social security. for all these reasons, that is why we are in this situation today. i do not want to turn this into a long story. the people of hong doors have the right to participate in democracy -- of a honduras have a right to participate in democracy. there are people who have been elected and who have betrayed the same people who elected them. they are members of an elite, a small group. people have the right to express their views on the economy and on social programs, development, and to our surprise, last week the congress adopted the blaw that states that hon doris can be used by all for all except for examination of budgetary affairs, the school, or economic matters or other social matters. what is the point? is it about asking whether the temperatures is hot or cold at night? what is a point? i was engaged in an actor says in keeping with the law. it was the first legal act that my government approved on the very first day we entered into power. it was necessary to govern. many changes wer

you would not believe what some people said in opposition to the social security. it could not be done. it would not work. what about medicare? it was fought tooth and nail, i know, because i was here. now we have a obama's himself, you can elect, please faults, you can elect a person of color to the highest most powerful position on earth, it is impossible. it was all possible and it was done and i am asking you to consider the political necessity of bringing up a bill that they said was off the table, then they said it could not pass, i think the american people are watching very closely. and i am saying now was the time, and i thank you for allowing me to make this introduction and include the papers that i would like to be part of the record as well. thank you for this opportunity ladies and gentlemen. [applause] >> thank you, mr. chairman. as usual, you have contributed a great deal of substance and have given us a lot to think about which we will do right now with the witnesses coming up. i can assure you the principles you are putting forward will be very mu

at this point, if we chose only to use the social security and trust fund surpluses, it would take us maybe until 2011 or 2013, to do this. and the question was, you know, how could the fed conduct monetary policy, when all of the public debt was paid off? and the answer that most economists gave was that it wouldn't be a huge problem. because, the fed could conduct monetary policy by buying and selling fannie mae, freddie mac and gmac debt instruments! [laughter]. >> and as it turned out, the economists were half right. we haven't paid off the federal debt, but we are conducting monetary policy, by buying and selling freddie, fannie and gmac debt. so, this illustrates the fact that five, eight years from now the gloomy outlook i have just given might be very, very different, should health reform and a -- in a constructive way be enacted. thank you. [applause]. >> thank you, bob for those excellent and somewhat sobering remarks. and, for your very kind words about nihcm's anniversary, appreciate that. next we'll hear from cleve killingsworth from blue cross/blue shield of massachusett

medicare as we know it will be bankrupt within a few years after that the social security will be bankrupt. so we are relying on the federal government to pick up the tab yet we don't have money in the retirement accounts to take care of us. it will be a terrible shock. people were using a technique if i can use that term of saving money under what was called a 401(k). or a 403(b) program where they set aside a certain small amount the employer generally speaking matches the small amount and over the years that begins to grow. it became the savings vehicle of all of the baby boomers. and then came the recent recession and they have founded the 401(k) savings vehicles have lost about 50% of the value when the market went down. people were faced with devastating losses and the fear gripping america was probable. people were not only losing their retirement savings but also beginning to lose their jobs. we have laid off 78 million people in the united states and it is hurting all over the board. so what do we do and how do you regulate our finances so we don't get caught in the paise that may

could you reduce social security and ssi by promoving the dope pushers. >> in new york. go a head. >> yes, sir. and having to pay taxes on health benefits. my husband is not yet on medicare even working people having to pay taxes on the health benefits. is this part of the bill they are working on? i zont think this is fair to people. >> thank you for your call and all the people who have called in. on wednesday, the reagan statue was unveiled in the capitol. here is some of what the artist had to say as to how he chose the char acktur of the statue and nancy reagan's reaction. there's the personality and the memory of the man that he was. from all the snap shots you could think of in history, big in the expression. >> there's a lightness in his face. the hope was to try to get a little bit of personality in there. what was the former first lady's reaction? >> that was the highlight of my entire visit here was spending time with her last night and her reaction to the end result. it was possibly too emotional for me. can you share with us anything she said? >> just very s

they take to under dollars out of our social security costs, which leaves us very little. when we see a doctor, we have to pay a copayment. we pay the doctor if we get a cold or a shot, anything like that. we pay extra. it is not free. all of the news media keeps saying, "oh, medicare is stored to be free for everybody. but if it is free for everybody, what our senior citizens paying money out of their social security? >> she is right. she made the point i made, as well, that 90% of beneficiaries have some form of coverage, because medicare alone is not enough. so she is one of the 10% of seniors on medicare only and that coverage does not always fill the bill. clearly, just a government solution will not work. but obviously, having held for people of low and modest incomes to pay for their premium, making sure that those are at or near retirement having help with their health insurance premiums so they get the kind of care that can meet the needs they have. that is one of the concerns about an all-seven plan. the concerned about the option is that you'll end up with and o

security -- my spouse got a statement from social security saying they paid a claim to a physician in the illinois area. host: was this recently? caller: within the last month. we suspected a missed killin bir worse. we called, and the person seemed to be interested, but just gave my wife a phone number. it was a number in india movein. it was a disconnected number. host: have you talked to your member of congress? >caller: no. host: who is your representative? host: rep donnelly -- caller: rep donnelly. host: or call your senator. caller: we have two. how can we trust government to control the cost? the system is going to be so huge and the funds are almost unlimited, so it seems. host: thank you for your call. that will obviously be one of the many questions that come up. we have been watching the senate health committee. the debate is expected to be front and center as early as next week. in a story this morning on the front page of "the new york times" -- president obama is pushing to have a bill on his desk by october. joins us from virginia. she is the "slate magazine" senior ed

i would in note as with medicare and social security, medicare was mentioned on the editorial page on sunday of "to the new york times." it is only a short of the flag in his popularity. we are not courageous, we will have a field of this generation and generations to come. the country will suffer for it. i am certain we will pass comprehensive health care reform that will build on the existing system, keep intact that which is working, and give people a piece of mind that no matter what they face, they will always have access to health insurance. the american people deserve nothing less. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. dingell. he gave his opening statement yesterday. he did not have that opportunity. i was by unanimous consent, that everyone had the opportunity to submit a written statement for the record. >> thank you. thank you for holding this hearing and a series of panels today and tomorrow. i want to welcome all the witnesses who are joining us, especially to express my appreciation and welcome to dr. todd williamson, who is the president of the georgia medical asso

a social security number turn into a long lifetime secret. when we were a kid, we printed them on their checks. they do not require us to have authenticators. we have a big public infrastructure on the classified networks. we have a big one on one of the classified networks. we are ruling it out this year. those kinds of technologies have to become much more ubiquitous. the other thing we have struggled with, it is not just a technology problem point, as you drive it out, you still need to figure out how to establish an f q six so that people trust others that they have just discovered to our want to do business with him? do i want to interact with him? the other structures come with learning things about richard hale and a dependable way. it can not be easy to mess with that information. there are technology pieces that start to solve this problem. we have worried a lot about privacy as a part of doing this. i do not think we have solved all of the problems. i think that the pieces are there. we have not have the economic reason to do it exc

he said the law in place to the 1990's excluded social security and anti-party programs. it leaves too few options for real cutting. it also says that the pay-go was created as part of the 1990 budget deal with bush. let's go to the independent line. we have gone on from wisconsin. caller: hello. i feel that this is a grab by the government to grab the premiums from health care. i think they're trying to take the premiums and put them into the treasury. host: do you have caller: health care yes, and it is very expensive and only covers marginal things. to date what is wrong with health care is that we have gone to a business model instead of a health care model. -- today. we allow people to see the doctor and request a drug because the have seen it on tv. host: how do think we should pay for health care reform? caller: i feel that it is our responsibility, not a ride. if one of our family members is under the weather, that is why we were taught in the all day to save for a rainy day. -- it is a responsibility, not a right. host: let's hear from tyler, texas. caller: i thi

security. my father was so relieved that though we had private insurance to protect my mother should something happen to him that social security was his safety net. he believed in public options, but also what we invented also because of our genius because he could not afford private insurance, along came something which was a new approach called bluecross and blueshield which was insurance companies to be run by the non-profit sector. dad was thrilled. he could finally buy hospital insurance. it was called hospitalization which would have protected him or any member of his family if we did it. so my father then again had a public option, in addition to a private option for his income security, but he now had a profit option run by a non-profit, but the non-profits ran a skew. in maryland bluecross and blueshield flipped out. they went from non-profit to profit to profiteering. the ceo would sell the blues, get a $14 million golden parachute. the bluecross board in maryland was making more tha

my concern, obviously medicare and social security have got to be dealt with. we all know that. how we deal with it, there will be some debate about how you do it. the president realizes this is a high priority. the obvious question in my mind is one of the things we're trying to do with this whole section, or the whole bill for that are matter is to deal with people's health issues. obviously people end up on medicare with chronic illnesses and problems drive the costs up. to the extent we're able to induce the number of people who enter the medicaid, medicare age period whoit chronic illness or manageable illnesses that cost less, obviously we're reducing the pressure on the medicare system. so the question for me obviously that i'm raising is, and i think they are legitimate issues. the author of this section will be the first to tell you why we need the accountability and i appreciate john mccain's amendment. we need to find out whether or not these things are going to work. anyone who tells you with absolute certainty they are, is not being candid. because we don't know. we

payroll taxes and extended the discretionary spending caps and it subjected more of social security to the income tax. supposedly this sort of put the nation on a good path with respect to the deficit, and the order to those trying to develop health reform was, you know, don't screw up what we've already accomplished. you know, go out and do health reform, but, you know, it doesn't have to play a big role with respect to the budget. this piece of legislation that had dealt with the deficit, of course, was a very fragile and hard-fought accomplishment. it passed the house 218-216 with no republican votes. it passed the senate only after the vice president cast the tie-breaking vote also with no republican votes. so there was a lot of concern that this achievement not be undone by health reform. but no more burden was placed on health reform. of course, the situation has changed markedly over the last 15 years. while the moral imperative is as strong now as it was back then, there's a new and in many ways more urgent imperative for health reform, and that's namely the fiscal imperative.

things like social security can't be part of that. we also decided the technologies that involve life secrets and in social security number somehow turned into a long lifetime secret. when i was a kid we printed them on our checks. the privacy act made in secret. so we have pushed aggressively in technologies that don't require us to reveal authenticators, yet allow us to authenticate so we have a big public infrastructure on the unclassified networks and we are rolling it out and we have a big one on one of the classified networks and rolling out on the secret network this year. i think those kind of technologies have to become much more ubiquitous. we've got to drive out the anonymity. the other thing we struggle with and it's not just a technology problem, is as you drive on and a mehdi out, you have to figure out how to establish enough to use so that people trust the others that, you know, they've just discovered so now i know it's richard hale, so what. do i want to do business with him, to want to interact with him, so the othe

security and social security really isn't a driver in this. it's medicare. we than we're looking at a health care system where the cost of health care goes up to 20% by the year 2020 and 20% of gdp and that's not sustainable under any economy because it basically absorbs the entire productivity of the nation. so we have to get this under control from a standpoint of fiscal health and we have to get it under control from the standpoint of making americans insured. what's been the republican role in this effort? well, we have put forward the substantive initiatives. there are three or four major plans that are pending. >> we believe very strongly that all americans should have insurance, and it should be an insurance that's meaningful so that nobody is wiped out by a medical event or a physical event that causes them great injury. if someone in your family experiences some terrible cancer or is in a terrible car accident that should not threaten your financial wherewithal as a family. >> also, we believe that as senator harkin has stated that th

enactment ensures that veterans get a matching increase to the social security cola on that date. mr. speaker, this bill will benefit each of the nearly three million disabled veterans and their survivors, whether from the world war i era to the current conflicts in iraq and afghanistan. we would be derelict in our duty if we failed to guarantee those who sacrificed so much for our country reef benefits that keep pace with their needs. we fund the war and let's be sure we fund the warrior and his family or her family and the survivors. i urge my colleagues to support passage of the veterans compensation cost of living adjustment act, s. 407, without delay and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from arkansas. million boozman: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. boozman: i agree with the chairman in the sense that this is the perfect time of the year to bring these bills forward. these are excellent bills that will help our veterans and i rise

changes, social security and medical outlays will together increase from about 8.5% of gdp today to 10% by 2020 and 12.5% by 2030. with the ratio of debt-to-gdp already elevated, we will not be able to continue borrowing indefinitely to meet these demands. addressing the country's fiscal problems will require a willingness to make difficult choices. in the end, the fundamental decision that the congress, the administration and the american people must confront is how large a share of the nation's economic resources to devote to federal government programs including entitlement programs. crucially, whatever size government has chosen, tax rates must ultimately be set at a level sufficient to achieve an appropriate balls of spending and revenues in the long run. in particular, over the longer term, achieving fiscal sustainability defined, for example, as a situation in which the ratios of government debt and interest payments to gdp are stable or declining and tax rates are not so high as to impede economic growth requires that spending and budget deficits be well controlled. clearly

fiscal responsibility who thinks we need to cut social security benefits. suddenly he is voting for this pork-ridden bill in order to try to buy everyone's votes. he will have to explain how he squares this with the fact that he will not try to get money for hospitals in nash bill that are closing down because they cannot get funds. he says i don't believe in earmarks. >> we are living as recorded segment because the house is coming in for morning hours set aside for general speeches on any topic. legislative work begins today at noon. $106 billion for the wars in iraq and afghanistan. this includes $5 billion to help the international monetary fund increase its lending capacity. there is also $1 billion included to fight the flua dn $. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., june 16, 2009. i hereby appoint the honorable ed perlmutter to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of represent

medicare prescription drugs, $7.9 trillion and social security, $6.6 trillion for a total of $56.4 trillion and that doesn't include what's going on today. we are going into debt about $1 trillion to $2 trillion a year and it's going to continue like that because of the programs we're talking about. over the past few months since this new administration has taken office, we have seen proposed a socialized medicine approach to health, a national health care program that lord only knows how much that's going to cost, but it's going to be in the billions and billions and trillions of dollars and that will be added to the national debt because we don't have that money. the auto industry, there has been bailouts of the auto industry and hasn't worked. they still had to file chapter 11 and over $50 billion. the banking and financial institutions and there was a bailout in the tarp bill. and then the energy bill that they're talking about, the cap and trade, is going to cost a tremendous amount of money, not only for the taxpayers -- from the taxes we get here, but also the money they will have to

the money coming in to pay seniors for social security is not great enough to pay it. so we're tapping into the trust fund. and that will reduce the life of the trust fund. so we're actually talking about having seniors pay part of the bill now. before long, we even have to pay part of it. and i do have to comment on the taxing the rich. just because there's some landmarks, we have a big hero in governors. that's the governor of maine who happens to be a democrat, paul dachi. and he just said that they're going to have a flat tax up there which reduces the amount that the rich are having to pay and increases the amount that poor are having to pay on their income tax. and when he was asked why, he said, you know, it's the rich that create jobs. it's not the poor. wild statement these days. but it shows the way that there's change happening here and the way that, you know, that we're going to have to be careful with the money. and i think we need to have a little bit more specificity and that it needs to go to incentives that actually deal with changing behaviors. >> tha

, i believe that the bill that i worked on, h.r. 98, which would establish a smart counterfit proof social security card would end the magnet which draws people into the country illegally, but i think that e-verify is an important step in dealing with our security. under the process, madam speaker, as you know very well, we could address all of these issues, all of these issues from both democrats and republicans could have been considered but unfortunately it ain't going to happen. one of the most senior members of this institution once said, and i quote, we have gotten so far from the regular order that i fear that the house will not have the capacity to return to the precedence and procedures of the house that haveiven true meaning to the term representative democracy. the reason that we have stuck to regular order as long as we have in this institution is to protect the rights of every member to participate. and when we lose those rights we lose the right to be called the greatest deliberative body left in the world. now, that member was david obey. he said that in the fall of 2000. wh

security act. it was only 20 years later after president truman's comments that president johnson pushed through with huge democratic margins in the house and senate over the opposition of the american medical liz's negation again and the opposition of almost all republicans was able to enact medicare in july of 1865 president johnson signed it. we heard accusations than from opponents that it was socialized medicine and was too expensive and that it wouldn't work, that the bill was too long, it was too complicated, what ever. and we know the popularity of medicare and put me illustrate with a story i know senator alexander will particularly appreciate. my first year in the house of representatives in 1993 was a figure that this house and senate tried to enact serious health care reform and i remember getting at least half a dozen perhaps ten letters that read something like this from constituents in my ohio district and northeast ohio. people would say i'm against the clinton plan, i don't like so

social security has become a secret. when i was a kid, we printed them on our checks. i think those kind of technologies are uebick way tuesday. you need to figure out how to establish enough queues so that they trust wup another. the other structures that need to come about and making a better business. we have worried a lot about privacy as part of doing this. i think the pieces are there. we haven't had the reasons to do it accept in places like d.o.d. i think it is very important and somewhere you need more auge enter indication. i think that's important too. one of the things that is really unprecedented. there's a lot in this area that can be done to make us more effective. >> the point is that making progage enteration for places where it is aproment. on the internet, certainly not. and at the same time making it easier. it's not a public good problem, it's a big of a collective action prock. maybe some industry wants to use the authority indication, they have to move their own. government has not really provided the ways if you don't want to use things like a s

security, medicare and medicaid, to continue to grow on autopilot. it affects only new entitlements or tax cuts that could be created in the future and allows expiring entitlement programs to be extended without offsets but not expiring tax cuts. so it's clearly bias in favor of higher spending and higher taxes. in fact, if it does not apply to discretionary spending, and if, in fact, it does not in a meaningful way apply to entitlement reform -- in other words, it simply puts sort of a cap on how much entitlements can grow but doesn't get at the issue of them growing unabated it simply is one thing: that is, a statutory excuse to raise taxes. that's essentially what pay-go is. now, the new administration came out with the news bulletin yesterday this was somehow a bold new step and that they're going to really attack and take on this deficit and this debt we have. of course, what they didn't tell you is that the sort of expression that we use in my part of the country is it's like closing the barn door after the horse is already out of the barn. bec

he is a fiscal responsibility who thinks we need to cut social security benefits. suddenly he is voting for this pork-ridden bill, and he will have to explain how "squares this because of the fact that he will not get much -- will not get funding for hospitals and national that -- in nashville that will get shut down. host: anthony on the republican line. caller: have squared is --- 0 is she doing? host: we're going to leave it at that and ask questions to our guests. caller: jane hamsher, how are you doing? who is going to have the problems with the republicans not voting for this or the democrats voting for the imf or not voting for the mf? -- imf? i thought my party was strong on war spending. i am a moderate now. i was born in 1942. i have voted for republicans in all of my years, except in 2008 i voted for president obama. there is no war going on in afghanistan very seriously. -- there is a war going on in afghanistan very seriously. we have to look at this in a positive way as an attack on our soil. that is where i am confused. who is going to win this progr

security checks that were sent to people who are deceased. first, kitty kelley whether or not this report is credible and in your opinion, and if so, has the administration addressed this? >> i've seen parts of this report and i have seen parts of our response. i think there is a longer more detailed response that we would be happy to provide you, but a number of things looked to be an accurate in the quote unquote second opinion itself. there appear to be the assumption that projects are being funded using recovery money, which isn't true. i think the very first project that outline is a decision that ultimately is made by the state, not by the feds in terms of how particular revolving fund money is used. so i think there are a number of entries throughout this report that are just up the wrong. this president has taken historic steps to insure that there is adequate transparency, and that this money is spent the way it's intended to be used. there are projects within the report that haven't been funded and have been canceled based on our ow

i want to talk about social security, how they have broken all of it. the want to stick their noses to iran's business. i feel like obama is doing the right thing. thank you. guest: i think he has been pretty prudent about iran, both in try to make over jet -- overtures, and not letting himself become a factor in what is going on there now. i am sure he sympathizes with the democratic protesters, as do all americans pretty much. he realizes that pete cantus become -- -- that he cannot just become a factor in it. this kind of huge thing that goes on in washington where people like john mccain come out and criticize him for it. it has led to unnecessary wars and iraq, which have albrecht the budget for some time. host: you write, barack obama has been able to make his actions live up to his words. healthcare is being gunned to death. he has done nothing to pass card check provisions, he has capitulated uncap and trade from the budget outline. next call is from maryland. good morning. caller: basically, we have the senate and the executive and the judiciar

i remember when congress wanted to -- not congress -- but they wanted to social security income in congress, they said they cannot do that because if the stock market fails, then everyone would lose their savings. but they did anyway. host: st. louis on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have been a real-estate agent for 23 years. i am having a tough time getting my property's appraised, even though they are selling wholesale. it is like you cannot win there. i have a tough time with people on credit scores, because they are going down the tubes. host: the credit qualifications are tougher than they used to be? caller: 2 often credit scoring companies, and if we know that glass stiegel has caused the collapse, why don't they changed that. that $15,000 tax credit for all humboldt -- home buyers, -- for all home buyers by didn't they note that in to get the come -- the country moving? >> michigan on the democrats' line. caller: you have some really smart people out there in america. maybe congress needs to listen and pay attention to c-span in the morning. that coal

social security. the g.i. became. the civil rights act. reforms that fundamentally transformed american life all passed congress with huge majorities of members of both parties. my old boss ed muskie taught me about that. he had a rule. we could never introduce a piece of major legislation without having a republican as the principal co-sponsor. that doesn't mean we can't argue with the other party about whose ideas are best. we certainly can do that and i love to do it. but we also can do it civilly. so, in the end we can resolve our differences and hopefully both support solutions in mat interests. -- national interests. we all do live in the same country. as my friend jack kemp once told me, remember, we are political adversaries, we are not enemies. third, no value or idea we fault for at the d.l.c. was more powerful or more central to my being than our belief in the american dream. and how could it be any different? my father was an immigrant from eastern europe. my mother was a first generation american whose father came to america a

security and provide for medicaid and medicare which is actually a government-run health care program that is excellent. host: i am trying to put the editorial in "the new york times," which have you had a time to read? let's go to market and san antonio. caller: quick question -- do you think any of the stuff going on would be possible if we had not gone into iraq? guest: good question, i really don't know. guest: that is a fascinating question. we do not know the answer. one of the theories behind bush going into iraq -- he said it. for 60 years we have been dealing with the autocrats in there and look what we have. so, let's try to empower the people. it has been a bloody mess in iraq. tentatively it seems to be turning better, though. we had that in lebanon as well. hezbollah was defeated. you had that -- is this an example for the people? i do not want to assert that it is, but the theory of bush's iraq was first to get democracy there in the belly of the arrogance of non-democratic released, and hopefully it will spread. maybe, maybe not. the store might be 10 years from now. gu