forget but occasionally asking how many members of congress actually go to the library of congress. i will answer that later the books for england chosen by members of the joint committee on the library with a history law and things that you would administrator topics the congress needed after the british destroyed the washington, d.c., the capitol and the little library of congress was about 3,000 volumes in 1814 jefferson who loved this library offered to sell his personal library, the greatest personal library in our country at the time back to the congress to recommence the library of congress. that's what he wanted to do. but he also said why should congress take this collection that had architecture, art, art, books and five languages and previously had the smaller scope and the answer is one we use today because there was the subject of which a member of congress identification to occur where there's the government brought country unique to have a knowledge base of as much broader than law and history. it was and philanthropic he needed the money. he had a bookseller given th

he's no longer in the congress now he wants to live in there and he goes to the congress and says i'm going to push it through the congress what jane seed pits the lead attorney for years in your lawsuit states i quote a lawyer a close reading of the amanda and shows that congressional action is not necessary to remove rush permanently fell from these outdated cold era provisions the president has all the authority he needs and we respectfully held this seat in the will and tell him to use it and quote so why then go to the congress if the president if biden can just advise a bad guy and he can just put his signature this playground for this to happen parents people who didn't read this law i have to admit that i didn't read it myself very obvious that they wrote because you thought this is very has to be done because congress saying they believe that congress has to vote and leave this amendment and this happened in the past for example ukraine was created and this amendment in congress voted to do that so we thought this is the way to do in this house until richard perle remember i

and only congress can declare war. mr. speaker, we saw in the president's address to the nation on march 28 how mismatched elements are being hastily stitched together io a new war doctrine. let's review them. number one, an executive privilege toage war. number two, war based on verbal threatses. number three, humanitarian war. number four, preemptive war. number five, unilateral war. number six, war for regime change. number seven, war against a nation whose government this administration determines to be legitimate. number eight, war authorized through the u.n. security council. number nine, war authorized through nato and the arab league. and finally, war authorized by a rebel group against its dess penny-wise and pound-foolished government. -- against its despised government. but not a word about coming to the representatives of the people in this, the united states congress, to make this decision. mr. speaker, at this very moment thousands of sailors and marines are headed to a position off the coast of libya. the so

it is really conservatives in congress and liberals in congress. communities of interest are communities of interest. i know we can do a better job in georgia with health care than washington, d.c., can. i know my governors in georgia have a better understanding and care more about our health care needs of our most vulnerable populations then the department of health and human services and the white house in washington, d.c. it is not a knock on what those in washington, d.c., aspire to do. we can make everyone in this country poor, but we cannot make everyone in this country rich. you have to provide opportunities for people to succeed. if the congress gives the opportunity to the georgia legislature and governor, you will be wowed by the results. host: good morning. caller: i want to ask him about this unfair tax and how it relates to equity of taxation, particularly low income people and how they would be able to pay this tax and not be hurt by it. guest: i appreciate that. bill comes from one of the most beautiful parts in my district. i am pic

on the fcc decision and congress decided to negate that decision what would your view be? >> you raise a good point which is some of these things are outcome based. just because someone likes the outcome, the policy outcome of a particular order by an agency you still have to respect the process so since i would love to see the federal government have a balanced budget the fcc doesn't have the authority to impose a balanced budget on the federal government. we have a vote yesterday which is important for the consumers to be able to make sure the phones can now on other carriers' networks and want to encourage carriers to reach agreements, contracts will with each other but i didn't feel the fcc had the legal authority in fact there is an explicit statutory provision section of the communications act that prohibited the fcc from doing what it did yesterday so we may like an outcome but you have to respect the process. that's why it's there. we can't exceed authority even if it's a good idea. >> following on that idea now that a rule is in place whether it is data or the net

is not -- like getting an act of congress. when you are trying to get a constitutional amendment passed out of congress it requires two-thirds and it is difficult. i'm not going to stand here and tell you i'm absolutely certain that we will have two-thirds of those houses locke up by tomorrow. i am telling you that the mood in the country is right, and it is sufficient i believe so that people are listening to their constituents. they will vote for this the senate will vote for it by a requisite margin. [inaudible] well, we have 11 or 12, maybe 13 webb indicated that they would vote for a balanced budget amendment. as for this proposal we live and we have been working on getting republicans on board in establishing republican unanimity. [inaudible] sorry? [inaudible] well, look. it is not my inclination. i doubt is the inclination of any of my college to signal what would or wouldn't be on the table in terms of negotiations if this were not to pass. right now we are focused on getting this passed and we believe anyone who beli

doesn't want to do it congress so they blame it on congress so when president vice president biden already mentioned was he when he was in congress he was against lifting this amendment now he's saying he's for it and of course he did it because president obama talking to so you lose it doesn't he is he is no longer in the congress now he wants to live in that and he goes to the congress and says i'm going to push it through the congress but james seed pits lead attorney for years in your lawsuit state i quote a lawyer a close reading of the amanda and shows that congressional action is not necessary to remove rush per. we fell from these al gated iraq perversions the president has all the authority he needs and we respectfully held the seat of the will and tell him to use it and quot so why then go to the congress if the president if biden can just advise a bad guy and he could just put a single show that made record this to happen apparently people didn't read this lot and i have to admit there i didn't read it myself very early yesterday wrote because you thought this is a has to be don

bipartisan majority of congress. those are words we don't hear strung together very often these days, about 302 members of congress by my count who wrote to the fcc and in one form or another either said don't do it or don't do it this way or have congress handle it. so if this is going to be a public policy issue, it really should be addressed at the congressional level, and so i think congress is trying to address it -- at least the house is -- through the congressional review act. >> host: so if you were in a majority on an fcc decision and congress decided to negate that decision, what would your view be? >> guest: well, you raise a good point which is some of these things are outcome-based. just because someone likes the outcome, the policy outcome of a particular order by an agency you still have to respect the process. so, for instance, i would love to see the federal government have a balanced budget. but the fcc, obviously, does not have the authority to impose a balanced budget on the federal government. we

there were 3 02 members of congress who wrote to the fcc -- 302 wrote to the members of congress. if this is going to be a public policy issue, it should be addressed at the congressional level. congress is trying to address it through the congressional review act. >> if you are in the majority on an fcc decision and congress decides to negate that decision, what would your view be? >> some of these things are outcome based. just because someone like the outcome, because the outcome of a particular order by an agency, you still have to respect the process. i would love to see the federal government have a balanced budget. the sec does not have the authority to impose a balanced budget -- fcc does not have the authority to oppose a balanced budget on the congress. they can make sure there are 4g follows that can run on a network. i did not feel the fcc had the legal authority to do that. there is an explicit statutory prohibition in the communications act that prohibits the fcc from doing what it did yesterday. he may not like the outcome, but you have to respect the process. we ca

. -- 100 told congress. -- 112th congress. from the american enterprise institute, this is an hour and 20 minutes. >> i am a senior fellow here at the american enterprise institute. i would like to welcome all of you and our c-span viewers to this session. an early look at the new congress. this morning, and i promise you that this is no april fool's joke, the research center released the results of one of their periodic quizzes and a reported that 30% of the americans know that the republicans control the house, but not the senate. current politics in washington are a mystery to many and i am hoping better panel this morning will solve some of the mystery about the state of washington politics. john has been at 8 shai 4 12.5 years and then that time, he has added greatly to the work of our political -- aei 412 1/2 years. he recently updated the indispensable volume after the people vote. he has worked tirelessly to get people in washington to focus on continuity of government issues. john is going to be leaving us in a few we

we need to focus more on congress. we can look at what they make compared to what our military people make. it is not even a comparison. they're making cuts in the wrong places. in the business that i work in, we manage apartments and i see people cheating the system every day. one of the things that i think would help with the deficit is -- everyone taking advantage of the system, for instance with food stamps or any kind of government benefits -- they should require mandatory drug tests for anyone who is going to receive benefits from the government. i think that would help in the long run. host: thank you for calling in. another one of our regular twitter users -- next call from harry, 58 years old, the suburbs of chantilly, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: i am good. caller: there are a lot of ideas popping up, some valid, some not. it is just nibbling around the edges. these ways to cut back are just not going to fix it. what we have is a war against mathematics and we're going to l

we don't know what congress willing do down the road. shouldn't we take some sort of precedence -- >> certainly, i think it's appropriate for the court tor find out what's happening right now. first in december of 2009, they found significant pollutants. >> suppose that tepa decided not to issue the endangerment find and would your argument still imply. it would be like the one the petitioners make which is the clean air act alone wlafment the states themselves acknowledge and what the language of milwaukee -- ex-cousin me milwaukee 1 happened. it made happen that new federal regulations may preempt the federal common law of nuisance. we think that both together presents the best and easiest case for displacement. you have that here. you not only so the enchangerment foungeed. -- >> could you answer the hypothetical i gave you? >> i think that it's a difficult case to make for displacement but it could be made for the reasons mr. keisler -- >> why sit that much more difficult? it's sort of like the negative commerce clause. the balls has

well called little rock or low key to give us his perspective on yet another war and on capitol hill congress held meetings on libya with admiral mike mullen and robert gates today so have details on what was discussed and we'll find out if a clear mission with clear goals has finally been created and we'll have details on the latest court of appeals ruling which justifies keeping a good mo detainee without any proof that he was actually involved with al qaida so bring you details on this ruling and will determine if it's just another glaring example of obama going back on his promise about closing guantanamo bay next we'll look into how the mainstream media is covering libya when m s n b c hosts a very strong statements on the show last night which lead us to ask if the mainstream media is choosing partisanship over analysis and then could there really be a silver lining to the budget bickering in congress the democrats and republicans may have finally reached an agreement about probably won't make the tea party very happy considering that they took their anger to d.c. to protest today so wh

now he will say presumably because we had a republican congress. but of course the republicans not only took the congress but they took the presidency. in 2001. and they ran up $2.5 trillion of deficit and increased the national debt by 150% notwithstanding the fact that they inherited a prog -- projected $5.6 trillion surplus. and now they've passed this april fool's joke on america. the gentleman, who is one of the co-sponsors says won't pass the senate, we know it won't pass the senate. but they pretend in their language what is clearly contrary to the constitution. because they say, if it doesn't pass, the provisions of h.r. 1, the bill they've sent to the senate, passed by the house on february 19, 2011, are hereby enacted into law. in other words, we're going to deem it bassed. let me tell what you eric cantor said about deeming it passed. malfees ant manner. discharge -- to not discharge the duties of their office. and then speaker boehner said this about these deeming pieces of legislation which this is. he said it was a scheme and plot. th

the constitution federalists' order prohibited congress most of the time from acting directly on the residence of the state, the district of columbia was different. this could be maddening for the residents of the capitol and in fact it still list, but it makes for interesting and provocative history how the nation's most powerful lawmakers and president, too as it turned out, the policy how they wanted to make policy when there was virtually nothing in the constitution to restrain their power. now let me shift gears and talk about the debate over equality. my hope is that this book also sets out a framework for the study of the civil war i era by directing attention to a surprisingly neglected topic, the struggle for equality. in recent decades, historians of emancipation have made the concept of freedom their principal analytical category. now come to be sure, after slavery the question of the freedoms meaning particularly as it related to the organization of labor was crucial. yet slavery's evolution also inaugurated a debate over the future of equality in america. in this book i

i've had social security bill every session of congress since i got to congress in 1998. what we are trying to do, and this is an area where i really do think there's a shot at some bipartisan agreement. so we're trying to set the table for that. we're trying to put in place a process that requires, you know, harry reid to own up to the fact that we do have a problem, that requirements -- requires the president to submit a plan and then many of us are going to be submitting a plan. we're talking amongst ourselves in the budget committee about getting behind somebody's plan. but i do in fact plan on working on that. >> why in this budget proposal you didn't put forward an -- >> we went back and forth on this. we thought if we put one out there it would be too attempting for the -- tempting for the democrats to attack and that would set us away from coming together and talk about it. we decided to do this trigger, not unlike the old medicaid trigger, that when the trustees certified there was a problem in social security, which there is, that requires submission of plans to

congress -- giving the u.s. congress the right to say whether the e.p.a. can or cannot regulate greenhouse gas. also the amendment preserves the authority of the agency to improve the efficiency of automobiles and light trucks emission which deserves wide spread agreement. while it tends to accept auto standards, it would stop the e.p.a. from improving any car efficiency standards. this does not remove any enforcement power the e.p.a. has previously exercised since the enactsment of the clean air act. at the same time, this amendment does not authorize new regulatory emissions as beyond what the agency has done for decades. for example, the agency is no way authorized to undertake low-carben fuel standards or new emission guidelines or permitting obligations for stationary sources. finally, my amendment refines the definition of h.r. 910 by removing water vapor. this is consistent with the legislation we have considered in the past of what is and isn't greenhouse gas. water vapor is not a long-term harmful warming cause in short this amendment makes the un

and that other problem is, is we in congress, this congress, the congress before this, and the 10, 20 congresses before that, have not taken seriously the idea that this country has to live within its means. and, in fact, we are not living within our means. we weren't living within our means before the housing crisis of 2008. we weren't living within our means except at one short period of time when we had a true net surplus of about $36 billion thanks to the tech bubble and the fact that in 1995, the 104th congress did a rescission package that -- of significant amount, under $30 billion, but the accumulated benefit of that allowed us to run those surpluses. so the question before our country today is, is the congress just going to pass another debt limit? are we just going to raise the debt limit again and not do what every other family, every other business and every other organization in this country has to do, and, in fact, the rest of the world, and that is they don't have the liberty of spending money they don't have on things they don't absolutely need? and i believe the quest

he repeated this constantly in his september 2009 address to the congress. the president declared nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have. it's extraordinary. in fact, mandates, regulation, the economic incentives are hardwired into the law, will require literally millions of your fellow citizens to change or lose what they have today whether they like it or not. in 2010 the obama administration unveiled draft, health insurance rules that were to be grandfathered, but the draft rules would require about one half of all the plans to change. beyond those rule changes, when you look at the impact of the incentives on the law of the actuary at medicare richard foster estimated that literally 14 million americans would lose or be transition out of their employer based health insurance. the former director of the congressional budget office, our friend doug holtz-eakin, look at the economic incentives behind the bill projected 35 million americans would be transition out of their existing coverage. now, that number ladies and gentlemen, could impa

congress is starting to h.a.r.p. on this and say you need to tell us how many contractors you employed. it is definitely a big issue as we start to tackle these issues. host: did the commission address that at all? guest: they did. they are critical of the fact that the pentagon does not have insight into this key figure. host: when other aspect of the recommendation -- overseas contingency operations. what are they? guest: that is president obama is a new name for the war spending bills. under president bush, it was called the global war on care, and both the name change -- on terror, the name change was partly to make the definition of emergency spending a little more strict so things cannot creep into the budget. host: we will go to louisville, ky on our line for republicans. caller: i wanted to address the comment about letting civilians takeover activities that the military performs in the states. i just want to ask, what would she have the military personnel do when they are not actively engaged in a conflict?

many of those cuts were proposed at even deeper levels by congress. so i thought i would review a couple of the major cuts that have been proposed and what those level of cuts would look like if they were adopted by congress. for example -- and you will here momentarily from the mayor's office of housing, the community development division -- in greater detail. an annual basis, the city receives approximately $22 million, and those funds support a variety of computing -- community programming. most of those funds are channel through non-profit organizations in the community. on an annual basis, we receive about $22 million. the president proposed a 7.5% cut in year one, and in the second year, a 10% cut, so approximately $2 million. congress has proposed a 62.5% cut, so that would be about $12 million or $13 million. the department is planning, based on our conversations with our federal lobbyist and with their own contacts, on a 25% to 30% cut. we believe that it is very likely there will be a significant reduction to cdbg in the fiscal year 2011-201

they can petition congress to give all members of congress collective bargaining rights or c. they can give duffy a role on a new reality t.v. show i hear he's really good at it's called the real congress the tourists. ory of seven lawmakers pick to work on capitol hill and how their lives have changed i know what happens when lawmakers stop being bipartisan and start being car wow i love america it is really hard to be a congressman and only make one hundred seventy five thousand dollars every year please send your top hats and send your french cup shirts and center monocles needs and representative sean duffy really needs your help today because he's not work in a job that pays the american media and income about thirty five to fifty thousand dollars you know exactly what the article was not which is let's say this was a bad way to go on those we left out one important thing which is that he said he supported the cut and congressional salaries and he has six kids he has to live in two cities most people don't have the courage to happen for the right just a really hard becaus

and makes his mark in congress. in his first sunday show interview, senator marco rubio talks about the debt crisis and his political future. ryan and rubio. only on "fox news sunday." also the c.i.a. puts covert operatives on the ground in libya. we'll get the latest on the conflict and ask our sunday panel just how deeply involved the u.s. should get. and our power player of the week. an old washington hand goes hollywood. all right now on "fox news sunday." and hello again from fox news in washington. on capitol hill, republicans and democrats are battling over a few billion dollars in government spending, while facing the deadline for a partial government shutdown next friday. but this week, the house g.o.p. will unveil a new budget for next year. that would cut trillions of dollars. here with a first look at the plan, congressman paul ryan, chairman of the house budget committee. congressman, welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> thank you for having me back. good to be with you. >> chris: start with the big pi

what happens if congress takes away america's credit card? bonnie, turn up the volume. your baby sister has something to say. [ male announcer ] this intervention brought to you by niaspan. so now your doctor's talking about plaque building up in your arteries -- she called it coronary artery disease. you think that's something you can just stick in an email and that's the end of it? do you know me? look, bonnie. i know you've been exercising and eating a healthier diet. and that's great. but you wrote that your doctor also wants you on this cholesterol medicine -- niaspan. i know -- another pill. i get it, i do. but i am not taking no for an answer. [ male announcer ] if you have high cholesterol and coronary artery disease, and diet and exercise are not enough, niaspan, along with diet and a bile acid-binding resin, is fda-approved not only to slow down plaque buildup but to actually help clear some of it away. bonnie, ever since we were kids, you would do anything for me. i need you to do this for you. [ male announcer ] if you cannot afford your medication, call 1-8

i also know they're not going to be tried in civilian court rather military commissions they blame congress but we'll see if they ever even try to fight then could push reyes be heading to the cia according to reports from n.p.r. gen david petraeus might be the next head of the intelligence agency so we'll have details on what that move could mean both for our wars abroad at her presidential politics here at home and today many people are wondering what about israel all the drastic changes that are happening in countries in the middle east how is it going to if i can this tiny country and its foreign policy to look into it and we'll hash out the details of one u.n. report author who slightly changed his stance on the war in gaza and the countdown to the shutdown continues the government will turn off its lights this friday unless the right and left can reach an agreement on the budget paul ryan's two thousand and twelve budget plan is also out with six trillion dollars worth of cuts over the next ten years old debate who the winners and who the losers will be and then sit back and enjoy a m

so the problem is the congress. it's -- the president is using the authority that the congress is giving to them. you look at the obamacare bill. and i think there's 700 times the words -- "the secretary shall" appears in that bill. you're giving power away from the people who were elected to actually make decisions about how government should operate and you're yielding them to the executive branch and worse yet to the bureaucracies within that branch. and so the best answer to this is not the -- to mess around with the regulatory system but let's get back to simpler bis, no big three, four, five, 6,000-page bills. but talk about getting simple bills that actually force congress to make decisions. when the lnrb, what's an unfair labor practice? well, read that law. you have no idea what an unfair labor practice is. so let's get congress back to the job of actually articulating what the laws should be and not yielding that authority over to the executive branch. [applause] >> senator tomko burn has called earmarks t

the floor of this congress and this congress declared that it was broke. that it couldn't find money for anything. we took a vote on september 10, 2001, to the -- to defund education programmers in most vulnerable children in our nation. every member of congress, mostly conservatives and many conservative democrats made the argument we can no longer afford to provide high quality education for your children, we can no longer afford to provide health care for the american people, that we could no longer afford it. and just 24 hours later, a tragedy, the great tragedy of the 20th century, terrorist attacked the world trade center and flew a plane into the ground in pennsylvania and landed a plane on our nation's defense system at the pentagon, just 24 hours later. the congress of the united states that did not have the money to provide for education for our children, the congress of the united states that did not have the money to provide health care for all the american people suddenly found an unlimited amount of money. to chase down saddam hussein. and we

because congress should be more than a congress of back seat drivers. more than a congress of arm chair generals. you gentlemen have conducted your responsibilities ably and well under difficult circumstances. i worry that we in this body have not. so i'm hopeful that on a going forward basis, we can examine some of these things, not having declared a war since world war ii. vietnam was not a war. korea was not a war. we need to get our act together in this body, and this is not a criticism of you. you gentlemen in the executive branch are doing ably and well. we need to get our act together in the legislative branch. thank you for your service. above all, thanks to the troops. in the interest of full disclosure, we need to reflect on congressional shortcomings as well. thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you. mr. coughman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for your service also. thanks to the service of our men and women in uniform. when mr. secretary and mr. chairman, can you tell me when the -- when it was clearly communicated to moammar gadhafi that

you know that it's another question i think you know congress. kind of puts its finger to the you know many many members of congress put their finger to you know look their finger put in the wind and see which way the wind blows. you know there's. an old line i think from f.d.r. you know. politicians see the light when they feel the heat so one question will be will there be you know. and in and public pressure. to do something about this and to really get in and investigate what happened and have some some true accountability now in terms of what we saw here right which is the fact that these people this was fraud that was going on that they were looking at making their own profits they were more concerned about themselves and they were about their customers senator coburn said something about that today said when that happens no country can survive and neither can their financial institutions but if any of that project behavior really stopped. it's a good question let me give an example of what they're talking about so we can really there was s

that is why i ran for congress. despite some recent signs of life, our economy still is not creating enough jobs. one of the reasons for this is the business here going on in washington. washington's inability to get spending under control, creating uncertainty for our job creation, discouraging investment and its eroding confidence in our economy. the spending binge in washington is holding our country back and keeping our economy from creating jobs. last year, when the president try to put forward another big spending budget, americans demanded that we stopped the spending binge and started working together to create a better environment for job creation. they put in new majority in charge of the house with clear orders. so our economy can get back to creating jobs. we have made some early progress. this year, the federal government will spend $51 billion less than it would have. because we kept the pressure on, democrats in the white house and the senate are being forced to talk about a bill that would cut tens o

>> congress writes the tax laws. our job is to take the laws on the books and to make sure they get administered in a fair way to the american people. i am focus on running their, balanced programs. americans filed returns, they get a refund directly deposited into their account or they get a check. that is what they see us. we weigh in. the unique perspective we at the irs have is that we interact with the american people every day. we can see where parts of the tax law treats them up and where honest mistakes are made and where there are grey areas in the law. we end up in lights and controversies with corporate taxpayers. our fight is to administer the laws on the books. we are an apolitical agency. we try to stay out of the fray and make it as easy as possible for the american people to interact with whatever tax law is on the books. were a flat there tax. would that not required less resources to process returns and in a budget cutting in our mature agency could theoretically be at risk toward the goal of greate

is your message to congress -- what is your message to congress? caller: the democrats and republicans have agreed on $33 billion or close to it, but the republicans want to do fund part of planned parenthood, which would cause -- to defund part of planned parenthood, which would cause more abortions, the irs, which we really need, the epa, which is -- i mean, we need the epa. that is ridiculous. rich man's tax and defense are off the table. lordy me. what is in the democrats' package? no one has told me. maybe we would be more for it if we knew what it was. host: thanks, sylvia. this is andy an independent in albuquerque. caller: no matter who you vote for, democrat or republican, they act like they will do something different, but they do the same thing all the time. this country is falling apart because you're not living by the constitution -- we are not living by the constitution any more. it is hard to tell which direction we will go as a country. we have to get used to people spending less money in the government. they will have to. there is

so, if democrats in congress, mr. president, want to enact climate change regulations, i would encourage them to bring a climate change bill here to the floor. that is where this should be debated, by the people's representatives, not decided by bureaucrats in some federal agency. wheys the e.p.a. -- which is what the e.p.a. regulations would in fact do. there are a number of amendments that have been offered which i would describe as political cover amendments. they want to, because they know their constituents -- they're hearing the same thing we are from our small businesses, agricultural groups, from consumers across this country, about what these regulations would do and how they would impact adversely electricity and fuel costs in this country, and so they're trying to give themselves, i think, some cover to be able to vote forkin for st i want to point out that all of these other amendments that are being offered up by our democratic colleagues as alternatives to the ink who have-mcconnell amendment don't get t

it speaks to the institutional way of how congress operates. them immediately behind it out two big battles -- >> immediately behind it are two big battles. early suggestions are $1 trillion out of medicare -- excuse me, medicaid. that is employed. over the next 10 years and moving more block systems. where does this go? is this what the year will look like until the election? >> they have enormously difficult things they have to do. a lot of people feel really passionately about spending, doing the debt limit in particular is going to be an enormous gordian knot to try to figure out how to get that through. >> but leadership on the house and senate were notified of the treasury department. that will not arrive until june or july now. keeps getting pushed off, partly because the economy is picking up a little bit, partly because the treasury the farmer has and can carry out, so this issue could go right to the back end of that congressional recess scheduled for august. that could be among the final things congress takes before it goes back to t

when sam adams got to the continental congress, most of the congress, they were not called congress, but most of the delegates gradually isolated him and the other radicals and they had little to do in the continental congress at the beginning of the war ordering the war and indeed, sam adams couldn't organize his own business and his own home. he had no place in the continental congress and john hancock was elected president of the continental -- first president was patent randolph and he got sick and about three or four months and john hancock became the first effective president of the congress. one the articles of the confederation were signed, he remained president of the congress, and ergo the first president of the united states. in fact, if not in the title. and he was a brilliant administrator. one would have to be to run the kind of business he did. he was a brilliant administrator, and helped washington win a war. he really had a very difficult time trying to organize, purchase arms and material because the congress had no right or no power to tax. so hancock had to send e

congress and to the american people. this budget marks the new house majority of us answer to histories call. it is up to all of us to work together to keep america exceptional. thank you very much. [applause] questions, anybody? >> thank youchairman ryan. we appreciateour remarks. of work for a school that focuses on world schools, particularly high poverty place. di't hear you mention the word education once. we're in the process as you know of reauthorize the secondary and the expectation is investing in competitive grants. where is the majority in the house going when it comes to reauthorization? where does that fit into your principles? >> you will have to ask about half he plans on we authorizing. they are working with arne duncan on that. we are setting a cap on discretionary spending. it is up to the committee to prioritize it. he did not get down to the mike carona specifics. we said the cap. then congress passed to prioritize that. of this is an area where the government is more deeply involved. only 6 cents on

congress agrees. advancing a credible solution to the crisis will begin to restore confidence and create better conditions for job creation immediately. the president's recent budget proposal is worse than just a commitment to the status quo. it would actually accelerate the debt crisis. it would double the debt held by the public by the end of his term and triple in the decade from now. it would raise taxes by $1.5 trillion, even though the problem is that washington spends too much and not that americans are taxed too little. it would permanently enlarged the size of government by sending government spending is a share of the economy skyrocketing to levels the healthy economy cannot sustain. it offers no real reform for government return programs and new leadership. our budget is very different. instead of locking in the spending spree of the last two years, our budget cuts $6.2 trillion from the president's budget over the next 10 years. this keeps government spending as a share of the economy cons

and those are members of congress. and i find your statement to be absolutely astounding, especially in light of the fact that you were special counsel on the tarp where you said that you find it offensive that this agency would be subjected to the appropriations process and therefore politicized. i mean, for goodness sakes, article 1 of the constitution gives the power of the purse to the united states congress. we are directly elected by people who want to see us -- see oversight on behalf of these agencies. and yet you make the statement that thank goodness we have the consumer financial protection bureau that's immune from this process. i'm just shocked at that. but i want to go on. >> if you're shocked, i would note that unfortunately there is a vigorous lobbying process in this room -- >> oh, come on! these are little guys. ok? >> there are big guys, too. they're not in the room here. >> i've been through a thousand real estate transactions. and i practiced law just before respa came in. i would charge sometimes

congress is back this week. two big budget items. voting on a budget for the rest of the fiscal year that expires at the end of september and the tkaebt that begins on a budget put forth by paul ryan. we carried that last week in a series of mark-up votes that extended seven to eight hours. that is what we are focusing on. harold is joining us from cleveland on the republican line. good morning. harold, go ahead. are you with us? caller: yes, i am. i was just calling to say i definitely support paul ryan, what he is doing, as well as what the republicans are doing get our fiscal house in order. people have to realize, especially the democrats, have to realize that we have a $14 trillion debt that is sinking the country. and the democrats don't want to cut anything. the reason why we have gotten so close to the government shutdown is president obama didn't lead. he put out a budget that was very political, didn't take any chances. then somebody had to if i am the vacuum and -- fill the vacuum and luckily the republicans filled the vac

i have covered congress for long. i am not sure how many twists and turns this will take. >> talk about the republican side in the provisions in it. >> i would rather be in the audience listening to norma. i am his substitute this morning. one of the challenges in the next several days as they try to put together a bill has to do with a fact that there is a new dynamic with new numbers. as janet was alluding to, many of the freshmen members in the house did not come here to compromise. they came here to win. they believe there is a difference between compromise and winning. many members have been here for a long time and certain members understand it winning and compromise is somewhat of the same thing. i worked for a number of years for someone who is known as a dealmaker. one of the things i learned from my experiences is that if you lose, no matter how great your principles are, you are not moving the ball ahead. a lot of deals it put together that ultimately involve compromise. some things get enacted into law tha

he's going to have to meet congress halfway. really, the american people halfway. >> schieffer: senator schumer, one of the white house advisors, david plouff, said this morning that or suggested anyway that the white house may agree to some conditions before raising the debt ceiling. what would be the acceptable? >> well, i think david plouff said that the president would outline a proposal to get our long-term debt down this week. that's a good thing because, you know, speaker boehner had to keep these negotiations going to the last minute to show the tea party people he was doing everything he could. you cannot do that with the debt ceiling. that is playing with fire, because if the markets believe we are not going to pay our debts, it could be a formula for recession or worse. so this is playing with fire. i would urge both sides to take the threat of not renewing the debt ceiling off the table. having said that, the president is going to come forward early and outline a plan, as david plouff said. it will be... that's a goo

unfortunately i believe the health care bill that passed this congress, that passed this past congress is a step away from that direction. last week i had the opportunity to take my daughter, 7-year-old daughter, to philadelphia to see the liberty bell, to visit constitutional hall, the national constitution center, to talk about the great symbols of freedom in our country. the people who worked at independence hall to write those founding documents, what it meant to talk about freedom. about liberty. about our great republic. and i'm reminded of the time when recent events in libya, egypt, my wife and daughter watching television, watching the news when the president spoke on tv and they were talking about the fight for freedom that continues in the middle east. the president mentioned how we have to continue working for freedom around the globe and my daughter looks at my wife and says, but we are free. and to that my wife looked at her and said, yes, but we must always continue to work for it. to fight for it. and that's why we are here tonight, talking about how we can make sure th

article one section eight of the constitution which gives congress the war powers to claim for himself and executive privilege so war he's gone beyond the war powers act and the requirements of it he's even gone beyond the un mandate so what we have here is an executive who apparently doesn't have to pay attention to what anyone says in a government whose first principle is representative government government of the people wouldn't it be reasonable to suggest that actually that. article one section eight is that it were never it is said that the power with the war power in congress that that was really a version nine hundred seventy three with the war powers act and that obama was going along with it well no he's there is no actual or imminent threat to the united states i mean it's going to stablish that's read more on it for the war powers absolutely and what's happened is that you could even argue about the constitutionality of war powers act because there's a sense in which congress actually ceded power to the executive in a way that was not consistent with the founders intent but

>> congress was forced to adjourn and reconvert on -- reconvene in new jersey. >> congress needed to find a new permanent capital. >> it took many years to decide where to put this capital them somewhat in the york and others want it in philadelphia. >> it was a sectional dispute. the number 1 in the capital in the north and the south wanted the capitol and the south. >> finally, jefferson brokered a deal that allowed the government to be placed on the banks of the potomac. >> this compromise had more advantages than met the eye. >> a committee was created to see how large the federal city should be and how much jurisdiction, brittany -- congress needed over it. >> the committee consisted of people who want to empower the federal government. >> alexander hamilton did not want in -- what happened in philadelphia to ever happen again. >> there is a need for a federal district under federal control. >> at the constitutional convention, a section pass that gave congress the exclusive jurisdiction over the capital city. congress would soon exploit these powers. that became a heated issue

we in the congress say keep it up. they have already lost the independence. they were responsible for the fact that they took over the house, they're quickly shoving everybody back to president obama who is now having almost a free ride on his way back to a second term. >> i would say, she's right. we are losing as republicans lot of people and get wrapped around this issue. i've said it before, roe v. wade has been the law of the land my entire life. my entire life. i'm more concerned about having children. it's the law of the lapped. i don't think we need to get -- planned parenthood does do some good work. it is sometimes the only care that some women can get in some areas. when you're cut poor, you are coming out of college where you don't have anywhere else to go. that's just a fact. the thing is, is we can't get ourselves wrapped around these little issues, we have good issues, we have fiscally responsible. we get wrapped around these marginal issues and we lose everyone. >> all right. final thoughts? i think more people are now pro life than they used

the fact is that members of congress get a fair share formula. the republican budget does not give a fair share formula to seniors on medicare. it just doesn't. in fact, the way it saves money is to give them an unfair deal. it unconnects the support we give to seniors from rising health care costs. that's why seniors will end up paying so much more and more and more because you make the savings. health care costs are going up like this and the support, if you want to call it support, it is really not, coming from the medicare program from the federal government, is going like this. that's why the seniors are having to eat those additional costs. that's what the republican budget does at the same time they do provide additional tax breaks for the very folks -- the folks at the very top. and if you want to get rid of some of the junk in the tax code you can support the democratic plan because we got rid of subsidies for the oil companies, we got rid of those perverse tax incentives to reward corporations that are shipping american jobs instead of

the inaction of the last congress certainly did not excuse work on our part in this congress. instead made our responsibility all the more critical. mr. speaker, this house has met that responsibility. through an unprecedented and lengthy debate two months ago, the house deliberating $-- deliberated and ultimately passed a resolution cutting $61 billion in federal spending. in march the house passed and sent to the senate two short-term funding bills that cut a total of $10 billion and kept the government functioning. yesterday again this chamber sent to the senate a bill to avoid a shutdown and ensure our men and women in uniform are paid through the end of the fiscal year. the response to this senate has been consistent, deafening silence. despite their agreement on the short-term measures, the senate has not sent a single bill or single plan for this year's budget to the house. they have a responsibility to act now and i call on them to pass h.r. 1363 to continue cutting federal spending and to keep the government opened. mr. speaker, this debate is not merely about passing