Transcripts For CSPAN2 Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20140520

Society but i was also a believer in a tough approach to the soviet union which means i had ready 30 much at home in the Democratic Party at the time. You had pat point hand. You had Henry Jackson a great senator from Washington State and later on that element of the Democratic Party shrunk to nothingness. And as it did i was without a home. I remained generally without a political home. You could obviously fairly call me a neoconservative then. Host s been 18 years since the 1996 telecommute nations act was enacted by congress and signed by president clinton. Today on the communicators we are going to discuss that its goals and whether or not it should be rewritten rewritten. Joining us are two of the authors of the 1996 Telecommunications Act rick boucher who is a democrat from virginia served in congress from 1983 to 2011 and jack sub 3a republican in texas from 1981 to 97. Congressman feels what was your role in the development of the 96 pelka medications act . Guest it was actually very fortunate. I was the chairman of the subcommittee of telecommunications and finance and telecommunication policy had not in reform since 1934 so there was really a compelling need in 1995 to begin a process of massive telecommunication reform and at that time you basically had ox is. You had a box for broadcasters, a box for Telephone Companies a box for longdistance you know, cable, satellite and our view was we had to come in and eliminate the last lines of demarcation and promote competition that would be more investment more Consumer Choice more innovation and fortunately i think the result has proven us correct and thats exactly what has happened. But now we are in a situation you know not that many years later that there needs to be again i think a massive overhaul in light of all the new technology and all the new applications in the new modes of service. Host rick boucher you have worked on telecommute occasions for a long time as a member of congress. If congress understand what was going on with the 96 Telecommunications Act or was it few members . Guest well as is often the case the committees focused on particular subject matter and take the lead in this reform. Jack was chairman of our subcommittee. Other members of our subcommittee had been focused on telecommunications for many years and in some cases decades. We were certainly well prepared for this reform. There was a larger Interest Group of members of congress. Other members of the energy and Commerce Committee who were not on the subcommittee. Other members of the house and senate who are equally focused on the need for reform and what was unique i think about at that point was we had a large interest in in the public community. Recognizing that fundamental changes have taken place in technology. Fundamental changes had taken place in the marketplace and the laws that were written for an earlier era were actually imputing, imputing investment, prohibiting the kinds of competition that we thought would well serve the consumer interest so the barriers in that law were taken down. That was the fundamental achievement of the 96 act. Telephone companies were able to offer Cable Tv Service in their Telephone Service areas. Cable companies and others were given the opportunity to offer local Telephone Service so that market for the first time became competitive. Once the local Telephone Exchange have proven to be open for local phone companies were given the right to offer nationwide Long Distance and they were also given the right to manufacture Telecommunications Equipment. So markets that had been segregated, markets that were largely monopolies prior to 1996 were made competitive and decades of innovation and investment were unleashed and today we stand on the cusp of another reform because we also have fundamentally different technologies today that have outstripped the regulatory environment. And it created the need for the next comprehensive rewrite of the Telecommunications Law. Host jack fields so much of the 96 act was about longdistance and local Telephone Companies. Two things we dont even think about today was the internet address and the wireless address in the digital address. Guest we really didnt have my opinion and i will give you the best example. As the chairman of the subcommittee i wanted to meet with bill gates and try to get a vision of what he thought the future would be and i couldnt get him and his colleagues to come to washington. I actually had to go to seattle to meet with them and if you look at 96 act theres only one small provision that deals with the internet. And so there is a real need to come back and look at where the act falls short and what needs to be done. I will encourage my colleagues when they do this to do what we did not do. We try to make the act as open as we possibly could so that could get involved with technology and everything we thought was going to happen in the future. I was very disappointed with what the federal Communication Commission did subsequent to the passage of the act. I think much of legislative intent was lost and so my encouragement is going to be that those who do the rewrite be as prescriptive as they can so there is you no, a small chance the federal Communication Commission will come in and add their own content to it. Host what is an example of the legislative intent they lost . Guest we came up with a checklist of what the Telephone Companies had to do to enter Long Distance and open the same day to longdistance companies to offer local Telephone Service and in my opinion that interpretation went far too long. I think it went outside of what was an originally intended and so again when it comes to writing the bill this time i think legislators need to be as prescriptive as possible to direct to the federal Communication Commission and anyone else that has to review the acts the Justice Department etc. So its narrow so that we preserve what lawmakers intended when they pass the bill. Host rick boucher because congress hasnt enacted another conference of Telecommunications Act in the last 18 years has it fallen to the fcc to take over regulation where they see necessary . Guest i think to a large extent the answer to that is yes because today the world is moving into clear directions. One is its going wireless and the other is that its going to the internet protocol for the delivery of information of all kinds. When the 96 act was written they were largely focused on Telephone Service whether it was local or longdistance. To some extent we focused on Cable Tv Service and we wanted to take steps to make that market competitive, which we did but the primary focus was really what we call plots, plain old Telephone Service and the landscape is fundamentally different. The fcc has managed as well as it can without clear direction from congress about how the transition from the era of Telephone Service to the time when everything is delivered over the internet should take place. And in my mind the fcc has done a good job. I will cite just one example. Chairman tom wheeler chaired a task force inside the fcc before he was chairman. Its their Technical Advisory Task force and in that role he produced a report that recommended that by the end of this decade the old circuit switched Telephone Network sunset and there were Important Reasons for that to happen. That Network Today is wearing out. Its so so old and fact that people have moved on beyond that to such a great extent that the Telecommunications Equipment manufacturers in many cases are not even making Replacement Parts for that old network. The result is that the cost of maintaining it are just soaring. Under current law Telephone Companies must maintain the old network as if it was the Core Communications medium used by everyone. But in point its only used exclusively by 5 of the public and its use by another 29 in combination with a Wireless Service so in total about 33 of the public is using that old network and twothirds have abandoned it altogether. But under current law that has to be maintained as if it served everyone. The cost of maintaining it are draining investment from the internetbased services and the broadband architectures that consumers have indicated they preferred. And where they can get dramatically more expanded and more functional services and do so in a way that modernizes their Communications Access and capabilities enabling them to communicate wirelessly as well as by wired medias. The investment needs to be focused on the broadband future and the commission and saying its time to sunset the Circuit Switched Network is forecasting that clear need and putting in place a thoughtful process based on having demonstration projects and some selected markets around the country to find out what happens, what essentially goes wrong when people are rapidly moved from the old Circuit Switched Network to more modern Broadband Networks. Then in advance of the National Transition towards the end of this decade Solutions Based upon those perceived problems can be put in place. So your question was has the fcc to undertake an regulation in the absence of clear statutory direction . I think because the 96 act didnt focus on broadband and really didnt focus on internet protocol delivery the fcc has to a large extent been left to its own devices in that area and in my judgment its done a good job. I think chairman of wheeler and his colleagues are on the right track in setting up demonstration projects, finding out what happens when you transition people to Broadband Networks and making sure that core consumer values are protected as that process goes forward. And that is a very substantial step which i think the fcc has handled quite well. Host should there be a reclassification of Broadband Services from communications into Communication Services . Guest i think thats a question that has to be looked at but i want to go back to what rick said just a moment ago. Tom wheelers a friend and i think he is doing an excellent job and certainly his background here in washington gives him a very unique position in which to help fashion the fcc and make good decisions but i still believe that when legislators come up with a comprehensive reform they need to be as direct and as plain as possible so legislative intent is preserved. That would be my encouragement to them. Host what do you think you got wrong with the 96 act . Guest i can answer that question and i dont want to be repetitive but i come back and tell people that i think we shouldve been much more prescriptive. We made a conscious decision to leave latitude in legislative language so that it would evolve with technology and i think that was a mistake. That is why i would encourage people not to do that again. Going back to what we did the head a clear cut path that we announced in early 1995 that we were going to do hearings within a certain period of time combat that we would have our markups markups markups and be out of the committee by may and be off the floor by july and hopefully being conference with the senate in september or october which we were. We felt like we had to leave the process and rick was on our team. It was a bipartisan effort. When you go back and look at the 96 act, there was very little opposition in the subcommittee, very little opposition in the full committee, very little opposition on the floor and we actually had a very Good Conference gradea think much of that was as rick alluded people had worked on this for years. My counterpart was ed markey. Ed and i are philosophically different but we came together thinking it was in the best interest of the American People to come up with the new policy framework which we did and policy framework predicated on competition with this little Government Intervention and regulation as possible and i think that is what is needed again today. Host some former fcc commissioners and other people have said in testimony in congress that the act does not need to be rewritten. Perhaps piecemeal legislation. Guest i think some fundamental things have to be done and they have to be done legislatively. The rewrite is in the eye of the observer but there are fundamental pieces that have to be addressed. For example the current regulatory structure at the fcc is a throwback to the earlier time when cable Companies Offer cable service, phone Services Offered phone service. You have a wireless entrant but its fairly new. Theres nothing that speaks specifically to the internet which is in a very early stage of commercial development at the time we wrote the 96 act and because you have different arrows writing different rules for these various companies you can get disparate regulation. You have to bear in mind that these companies are competing headtohead with each other offering exactly the same products. They are offering a voice. They are offering data and video and they are doing so in a very hardfought headtohead competition, and they should be regulated the same way. So realigning the fcc structure in order to meet the realities of the marketplace where you no longer have silos but you have serious crossplatform competition is fundamental to making sure that the regulation enjoys parity and that companies are not given an advantage or disadvantage because of the regulatory environment. Only congress can do that. The fcc cannot realign the structure that is establishestablish ed by statute so you can start with that. We also have a spectrum launched today and rapidly the spectrum is available was being outstripped by the demand for mobile services. Carriers are experiencing the order of magnitude increases over a very short timeframe in the demand for mobile data. We have got to find creative ways to get more spectrum allocated from government holders who in many instances have an excess of spectrum through the commercial launching process and into the hands of the commercial carriers. The current way we do that just isnt working. Its extraordinarily slow. The allocation process takes forever and even after an agency is told to vacate a spectrum it can take years for them to move away from it to make that available for commercial auction. So i think Congress Needs to be really innovative in the way it addresses this. Maybe some incentive should be provided to agencies so that spectrum is vacated more rapidly and made available for the commercial carriers. Some have even suggested that we use a kind of a base closing approach for this. After the cold war when it was clear we had to Close Military bases and it was hard to do that because members of congress would fight vociferously in order to keep the base open in their district and have their colleagues support them in the process. It was very difficult to do it through the regular legislative process. So Congress Passed a statute that created a commission, the base closing commission. Periodically that commission evaluates what basis can be closed and those that can be downsized. It recommends a list back to congress. Then that list is put to an upordown vote with no amendments being ordered on the floors of both a house in the senate and every time that list has been presented to the congress four or five times now since the end of the cold war, it has passed. Maybe we need to have an tia or perhaps an independent commission evaluate the spectrum thats in the hands of Government Agencies can see what is accessed. What could be commercially auctioned and then put that to an upordown vote that list as produced by the agency or an independent body of some sort. It certainly worked for base closing. Maybe it will work for this but you know what im suggesting is congress be creative in the way it addresses the need to get more spectrum into the hands of the commercial carriers and the majority of the spectrum that really can be made of old available for that relatively quick he is in the hands of government. Host rick boucher do you see at some point wireless and internet ip becoming being reclassified as essential Services Rather than Information Services . Guest im not going to go there. I dont think its necessary in order to do that. I agree with jack that Congress Needs to be very precise and in directing the fcc. With regard to what congressional intent is and what the role of the fcc in implementing that intent is going to be. I think jack is right. When we wrote the 96 act we were a little bit too generous in terms of trusting the fcc to do exactly what congress intended. We have learned our lesson and i think this congress and can now apply that lesson to the next telecom reform. But i think the fcc has recently with his power recently been deferred by the d. C. Court of appeals in the Net Neutrality decision, not to do precisely what was done in that first order but to do many things that can assure that the fcc functions effectively as an overseer of internet communicationsbased services. Its not going to be necessary to reclassified. Thats something that would only be done as a last resort and the failure of other authorities. I think the d. C. Circuit has made it very clear that the fcc has the authority it needs to be an effective regulator. Guest peter i think theres one issue that is really glaring out there that when you talk about you no, comprehensive reform it needs to be addressed and thats this issue of must carry. Retransmission consent. The role of a Cable Company in the role of the satellite company, a role of the Telephone Company in delivering different types of programming. I was the republican sponsor for a must carry retransmission consent in the 92 act. To me, thats another example of something that was wellintentioned that is totally out of whack. Today you have a situation where there were 12 blackouts in 2010. In 2010 there were 91 blackouts. This year one company has jumped its retransmission consent feeds upwards of 17 which ultimately gets passed onto the consumer. I think we have to go back and look at what was originally intended and i can say as the author the original intent was to preserve localism to make sure that the localism of the local broadcaster you no, at the local news in the local weather and local sports was on that basic tier and we mandated that. The world is different. Now you have a number of different competitive needs and i think we need to create again an environment of competition and environment of openness and i think having that requirement that a broadcaster is on the basic tier you know is not right and i think the Cable Company should have that right to enter into negotiations with the broadcaster but if something goes awry and there cannot be a good negotiation unfortunately many of these negotiations occur before the Academy Awards or before the super bowl, before dancing with the stars or whatever and i think the Cable Company should have the right to go out about local market and pull in another signal if they can compete and find in a negotiated since the programming that they need. I think that would create some balance. So i think what we have is outdated legislation particularly in the area that needs to be addressed. Its interesting literally within weeks the aerial decision is going to be decided. Im not going to predict whats going to happen but i think there is a very strong likelihood that decision is going to go against the broadcasters. So its going to be interesting to see how they immediately come back to congress and say you know,somethings got to happen,somethings got to give. I think that could be a real propellant in terms of another major Industry Groups saying its time for comprehensive reform. Host to the broadcasters, do the Cable Companies and do that now Silicon Valley companys, did they have a real power up in congress or a real influence in congress . Guest you know, members of congress are always looking for information so i think all of these are purveyors of information. When eddie markey mike oxley rick boucher and anna eshoo when we were doing the 96 act we try to focus on what was best for the consumer and we tried not to think what was going to be in the best interest of the broadcaster or Telephone Company or longdistance satellite etc. We try to figure out what would be the passengers of the consumer. I happen to believe that you still have people like greg walder or anna eshoo, Steve Scalise mike moyle. These people are all looking for what is in the best interest. I feel while special interests have points to make they also provide information. I think that helps educate members of congress. I think it helps provide the data that is needed to come up with good legislation and im very confident that in 2015, 2016 there will be a legitimate effort to mount a major reform and i think thats going to result in a major piece of legislation that will go to president obama. Guest i think one remarkable change just within the last decade is the fact that Silicon Valley companies have become very much aware of how important it is for them to Pay Attention to what happens in washington. During the time of the 96 act we didnt have google. We didnt have amazon. Com. Thats all pretty new and certainly resent since that timeframe. In the intervening time these companies have grown up politically and they have a very clear sense that they need to have a washington presence and that they need to be involved in the debates in the discussions. Jack is right. Members of congress are concerned about consumer interest but everyone obtained access to information that is relevant from a wide variety of sources. And when companies can talk about the way in which particular scenarios that congress may be considering will play out in the realworld having that point of view is important. It was critically necessary i think for the Silicon Valley companies and the realization of that fact to establish themselves as and i think they have done that by and large pretty effectively. There is one other notable aspect tres Telecommunications Law making and i think this deserves mention, perhaps perhaps justifiably has a reputation for being hyperpartisan and most issues that are debated on the floor of the house are even now must send it to a large extent tend to follow along partisan lines. You get voices on different sides of the aisle taking positions. Telecom really maintains an island of bipartisan cooperation in what is oftentimes a notion of partisan strife. Our house energy and Commerce Committee i think jack would agree, historically has been the most Bipartisan Committee in the house. Most of the issues we have considered, telecommunications in particular rarely draw partisan differences. There are differences. They can be Geographic Area there can be differences based upon particular industry points of view but rarely ever these partisan differences. So an opportunity really exists to address the challenges we have talked about here today and do so within a legislative framework and have some reasonable expectation that the bill is really going to pass even at a time when you might not say that about tax legislation or other things that oftentimes are inherently somewhat more partisan. Host we have one minute left. Where do you draw the line to start . Okay now we are going to regulate from this point. Are we going to write legislation from this point forward. How do you do that . Guest i think you have to draw from every resource you can in terms of information. I think you have to put the consumer at the forefront. You have to think about what may happen in the future and you know, while im an advocate of this particular moment in being prescriptive i think if you have an opportunity to provide a little latitude to the federal Communication Commission and the Justice Department will do the right thing in the right that in but its very difficult. When you look at where we have calm from the 34 act telegraph no television no radio Smoke Signals and the 96 act we had a burst. Some of us had begun to have cell phones. No smartphones, no applications. Most of the members were not on the internet. I was writing my own speeches on a computer and today its an entirely different dynamic. The greatest success i think of the 96 act besides knocking down the barriers of competition would put the consumer in control. Getting this consumer more opportunity to get what they want in whatever mode of service , voice, video and of course the internet with the explosion of information to me thats the greatest thing we did. The consumer now is in control and i think thats what we have to preserve and try to create as much freedom as possible for greater innovation. Guest just one quick note to that. I think in terms of the starting line and where to go chairman upton and chairman walden are doing a superb job and collaboration with their democratic counterparts. First of all understanding is going to take some time. We started the 96 act in 1988 and literally the forerunner of legislation was introduced a full eight years in advance. Hopefully it wont take that long this time but the two chairmen has set a schedule that involves this year receiving recommendations from a broad interested public perhaps holding some initial hearings. Next year drafting legislation, putting that drafting through the regular process of hearings and markups with the goal of having a law enacted at the end of next congress. I think thats a realistic schedule and i think they are very thoughtful in starting in that measured and longrange kind of way. Host rick boucher said in congress from 83 to 2011. He is currently with the Sibley Austin law firm headed the Government Strategy group and jack fields is the ceo of the 21st Century Group inc. Which is what mr. Feels . Guest a Government Affairs agency. Host gentlemen, thank you for being on the communicators. Jill abramson is the first woman executive editor of the New York Times. She was fired last week with conflicting reports for the reason. She gave the commencement address today at Wake Forest University in winstonsalem north carolina. The address was a little less than 20 minutes. [applause] you brought a lot of friends with you, didnt you . There are few jobs more daunting than editing a newspaper. The very viability of newspapers at stake these days call for unusual energy, innovation, courage and judgment. Meeting that challenge is the Gold Standard of american journalism the New York Times. She shines brighter than ever. That is in large part to to Jill Abramson. As we crack more of the Glass Ceiling of gender discrimination , the speaker of the house, that corporate ceos Television Anchors chair of the Federal Reserve board a step was taken three years ago when the New York Times named its first woman executive editor. She took over a Great Institution and leaves it this past week better, stronger, more vibrant than ever. It is said she can be a tough nononsense even pushy in her passionate commitment to truth and accountability no matter rank or party. That is what makes a great editor. It is said she has a keen eye and a range of knowledge so broad its humbling. Thats what makes a great editor. Whether directing coverage of wars, elections, disasters, the corrupting influence of special interests or the abuse of governmental powers, jill always demands excellence, the best. Thats why she is such a great editor. Smart, support of, ever let less she is absolutely fearless. Let me share one anecdote. Jill and jane mayer road and acclaimed book about the clarence, as controversy more than 20 years ago. 60 minutes max schedule an interview with them. Only when cbs showed up did david authors realize it was to be a piece critical of the book. Now this sends shivers down the spines of mere mortals. It a 60 minute inquisition. Just imagine. Not Jill Abramson iron lady. She got her note what, pulled out the facts rebutted every charge and killed the theme. She went eyetoeye with 60 minutes. They blinked. It was on this campus a halfcentury ago that i decided to become a journalist. Influenced by spending several days with the visiting New York Times legend scotty reston. Little did i realize that decades later i would be Close Friends with another New York Times legend. She isnt a pipe smoking contemplative columnist. Shes a thoughtful, courageous editor with a new york accent so thick we may need a translator this morning. [laughter] she is one of the most powerful women in the world who always has time for her many friends. Its one of the pleasures of my life to be her colleague and today it is with such pride that i present your Commencement Speaker my dear friend Jill Abramson. [applause] [applause] [applause] i think the only real news here today is your graduation from this great university. [laughter] first of all, congratulations. [applause] i am impressed that your achievements have attracted so much media attention. [laughter] as well they should. I am so happy to be here to share this important day. My own College Graduation was still a thrilling memory. In fact i actually had wrecked us this morning with one of my college classmates who is one of the proud parents of a graduate sitting out here today. One of my favorite family photos is of my busting with pride father at harvard, a college dropout. He never got to wear his own capping down. So he crams his sixfoot self into mine. He looked silly but radiant. I hope all of you in a class of 2014 are lucky enough to have at least one parent or someone who helped us raise you here today. A shoutout to all the parents, grandparents and others in the audience create my own children are recent College Grads so i know how full your hearts are today. As your kids have worked so hard and achieved so much. President hatch suggested that i speak to you today about resilience and im going to take his wise counsel but im not quite finished with the parents part. Very early last thursday my sister called me. She said i know dad would be as proud of you today is the day you became executive editor of the New York Times. I had been fired the previous day so i knew what she was trying to say. It meant more to our father to see us deal with a set back and try to bounce back then to watch how we handled our successes. Show what you are made of he would say. Graduating from wake forest means all of you have experienced success already and some of you, and now im talking to anyone who has been dumped,. [laughter] you bet. Not gotten the job he really wanted or received those horrible rejection letters from grad school. You know the sting of losing are not getting something you badly want. When that happens show what you are made of. I was in china recently and as some of you know the New York Times web site has been blocked by censors their for more than a year. That means in china citizens cannot read the most authoritative coverage of their country. And every time i reflexively try to open the times web site i got the message safari cannot open that page, which made me become more and me are furious. While i was in beijing, one of our chinese journalists patrick zuo was detained or hours by authorities. The government meant to scare and intimidate him. Why was he detained . Simply because he works as a truthful journalist. So what did he do . He came right back to work and quietly got on with them. I did what i believe and that makes me fearless patrick told me after his ordeal. You know, New York Times journalist risked their lives frequently to bring you the best news report in the world. That is why it is such an important and irreplaceable institution and it was the honor of my life to lead the newsroom. A couple of students who i was talking to last night after i arrived, they know that i have some tattoos. One of them asked me, are you going to get that times t tattoo that you have on your back removed . Not a chance. [applause] i faced a little challenge of my own not long ago. I got run over and almost killed by a truck in times square. You may begin to call make calamity jill but stay with me here. And with the seventh anniversary of that accident approaching i wrote an article about the risk to pedestrians with three times colleagues who had also been struck and hurt. We mentioned a 9yearold boy in the top of our story who had been hit and killed by a cab early in the year. A few days after the story was published i got an email from dana lerner. It began, thank you for the article you wrote in last sundays times read the poll you mentioned is my son cooper stock. I met with dana last thursday. Cooper was just killed in january but dana, her husband and others are already working on a new law to make the streets safer. She is taking an unimaginable loss and already trying to do something instructive. We human beings are a lot more resilient than we often realize. Resilient and purse or varying. There are so many examples of this. For me professionally three heroes are Nan Robertson a groundbreaking reporter at the New York Times and catherine graham, the publisher of the Washington Post which broke the watergate story. They have both faced discrimination in a much tougher more maledominated newspaper industry and they went on to win pulitzer prizes. My colleague jim rice and he was standing up against an unfair washington leak investigation is another hero. I coauthored a book about anita hill who testified about Sexual Harassment before an all white, allmale Senate Judiciary committee in the 1990s. The senators portrayed her as being as one of her detractors so delicately put it, a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty. She turned that potential humiliation into a great career teaching at Brandeis University and writing books that tell truth to power. Anita was one of the many people who wrote me last week to say they are proud of me. Those messages are so appreciated. Some of you have faced danger or even a soul scorching loss but most of you havent and leaving the protective cocoon of school for the working world must seem scary. You will probably have a dozen different jobs, try all different things. Sure, go losing a job you love hurts but the work i revered journalism that holds powerful institutions and people accountable is what makes our democracy so resilient. This is the work i will remain very much a part of. My only reluctance in showing up today was that the small media circus following me would detract attention away from you, at the fabulous class of 2014. What total knockouts you are. [applause] yes. Whats next for me . I dont know so i am in exactly the same boat as many of you. [laughter] [applause] and like you i am a little scared but also excited. You know, i dont really think coach manning could find much use for me. But right after this speech i have booked a private session with andy chan. [laughter] [applause] whose career counseling operation is a model for universities around the world. When i was leaving my office for the last time i grabbed a book off my shelf. Robert frost speaking on campus. In closing im going to leave you with some wisdom from the kolbe county College Commencement speech he gave in 1956. He described life after graduating as pieces of knitting to go on with. What he meant was that life is always Unfinished Business like the bits of knitting women used to carry around with them to be picked up at different intervals and for those of you who have never knit, incorporated of it as akin to your tumbler something you can pick up from time to time and change. My mother was a great knitter and she made some really magnificent things but she also made a few itchy frankly hideous sweaters for me. She left some things unfinished so today you gorgeous brilliant people get on with your knitting. [applause] [applause] see if you go back and look at coolidge he was a conservative hero. His tax rate was a Gold Standard tax rate that we saw in the media 25 was what he got the top rate down to indy fought like crazy. It started with wilson in the 70s so that is an epic thatll end when you look at what the socialite said about coolidge in washington how cold he was when he would meet with him you want to remember that they were probably also from families that endorsed different policies especially Alice Roosevelt longworth whose father had a different model. T. R. Was a lets get them active role pulled and here was coolidges. She said he looked as though he had been weaned on a pickle. Coolidge was cultural. He was from new england and farmers dont wave their arms about. It was temperamental. He was a shy person but it also had a political purpose. He knew that if he didnt talk a lot people would stop talking and of course a president or a political leader is constantly bombarded with requests. His silence was his way of not giving in to special interests. He articulated that quite explicitly. Next they look at the upcoming week on capitol hill and at the white house. This is from washington journal. Its 45 minutes. Host we are back for two veteran reporters here in washington. Bob cusack is managing editor of the hill newspaper and jim kuhnhenn reported the Associated Press to give us the week ahead in washington. Jim let me begin with you. Whats on the president s agenda this week . Guest you know quetta hes its been doing one of these fanatic weeks. The weeks ago was energysaving and Climate Change and last week he did infrastructure. This wiki is kind of if theres a theme its Foreign Investments in the midwest. He is bringing Business Leaders to the white house on tuesday and then later in the week is going to cooperstown to the Baseball Hall of fame to discuss tourism. So that seems to be the theme of the week this week. It is his kind of day at the white house. They call it his pen and phone thing where he tries to do things on his own when congress is it with them. Host is this interaction with congress . Was on his agenda this week doesnt sound like something is asking congress to do. Guest no, this is basically highlighting things that he thinks he can do or has been able to do. He has this program called selectu. S. A. Which is a way he has coordinated a lot of federal agencies to help cities and states attract businesses to the u. S. And he has a couple of examples. Luke gone gonzo set up at the plant in puerto rico. They just cut a deal with the Belgian Aerospace company for oklahoma so these are the showcase moments hes got. At the same time it underscores how limited his power and ability is to deal with the economy. Host and bob cusack house lawmakers out next week. They are back next week. The senate was in last week he lets start with the house. Whats on the agenda . Guest the Defense Authorization bill is coming to the house. Hundreds of amendments have been filed. The House Rules Committee will did i decide on voting some of them. For the defense bill you have nsa issues boteri Sexual Assault there could be immigration. There has been talk of giving people who have served in the military green cards and this is something that is very controversial. Its basically half of what the d. R. E. A. M. Act isnt some democrats and republicans want this attached to the defense bill. Thats something to watch in both the house in the senate. On the senate side you see the tax extenders bill. We talked about that last week. Back up dog down in a dispute over amendments. They couldnt come to an agreement. The finance Committee Leaders are trying to get some type of an agreement. This kind of bill is similar to the medicare physician payment. They can get a big tax reform bill through congress at least have brakes that are opulent both parties. Every year they are extended and senator wyden who is the new chairman of the finance Committee Said this is it. We are going to do this one more time and that we are going to attack the tax code. One of the thing that could come up in the senate is Sylvia Burwell kathleen to bilious replacement at hhs. Her confirmation process has gone as smoothly as it can go and she will get probably a big bipartisan vote probably not unanimous because its essentially contentious departing. We have tea party tests and remarries in kentucky georgia idaho and oregon and you have incumbent republicans who are being challenged from the right including senator Mitch Mcconnell also in the house you have mike simpson an and ally of Speaker Boehner who is being challenged. The challenger to simpson so we have some legislation moving. Not huge pieces of ills that the election season is definitely up and running. Host beyond what is going to be talked about on the floor there are of course the debates that have been off the floor in one of is immigration. The lead story for the hill. Com this morning the inners dig reform decision. Whats he going to do on immigration . Guest thats a great question. Its a good story by russell berman. Everyone is watching the paper. All eyes are on a nerve. There was a controversy last week where white house Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett said she had a commitment from boehner to move immigration this year. Boehner has mocked his republican colleagues back home a week or so ago. He had to walk this back when he got back to washington so the question is what is boehner going to do . Is he going to do speak either speaker next year . Is this the legacy because boehner throughout his career has been a dealmaker. He wants to move Immigration Reform but its so hard to move House Republicans, runs partly because a lot of republicans say why are we doing this . We are looking at a good election season and we may win the senate. Why bring up something that divides us . Daynard does feel when the senate moves on something and it sits in the house he feels like the ball is in his court. So there has been a lot of talk on conservative radio very concerned on what nader could do and then of course what would eric cantor do . A possible successor to boehner. Cantor has indicated hes not ready to move on anything unless it has the support of the House Republicans congress. He has said we are not going to conference with the Senate Passed bill. We are not owing to move any bill unless it has the majority of the majority. Anything on immigration right now is not closing to have the majority. Its very intriguing and the deadline people say is the august recess. If it doesnt happen by the august recess watch democrats and the white house sharply take sides with republicans. They have held off until august. Guest i think the white house and in fact one of the comments that Valerie Jarrett said as we have until august to make a determination here as to whether the house is going to move. There have been back channel discussions between the Speakers Office in the white house and i think they believed that the speaker wants to go but they understand what his political limitations are. In the meantime there is this kind of parallel track going on with the department of Homeland Security word jeh johnson the secretary is looking at how he can soften the bite on deportation. The president has gotten a lot of criticism from the Advocacy Community the immigrant Advocacy Community over the number of deportations in the country. So they are trying to figure out how far to go and whether to make this a wholesale executive action that vastly diminishes the number of deportations. Its not where they want to go because they think that would certainly destroy any deal they could get with republicans. So the fixes might be more on the margins. Even if congress doesnt act and even if boehner doesnt act by august i think what you will see from the administration will be some tweets but nothing thats a wholesale change in immigration law. Host i want to show our viewers what the president had to say about this recently. Last tuesday was a Law Enforcement briefing on immigration and here is what he said about the issue right now and the prospects of it moving in congress. See Public Opinion is on our side on this. Unfortunately we have got a handful of House Republicans right now who are blocking going ahead in leading the legislation get to the floor. To their credit they think Speaker Boehner and some of the other leaders they are to believe that Immigration Reform is the right thing but they have got to have a political space that allows them to go ahead and get it through the caucus and get it done. Bill is exactly what lands on my desk for signature. But, there are some corporate suppose we have got to get done. Stronger border security. Wehave got to make sure that are dealing with companies that are not doing the right thing by workers. We have got to make sure that we have got an improved Legal Immigration system, a lot of folks are getting pushed into the legal system because the waits are so long through the legal process. And we have got to make sure there is a way for people to earn some pathway to citizenship. , the jim kuhnhenn president last tuesday. Was that a nudge . Guest there were some interesting clues in where the wiggle room exists. The senate bill has a path to citizenship for the 11 Million Immigrants that are here illegally. There is some interest in the house and certainly some of the republican opponents of Immigration Reform have talked about a legal status for immigrants who are here illegally. Path tossarily a citizenship. Not something that puts them ahead of others who have been gaining in line to citizenship. When the president says he is not hellbent on getting everything in the senate bill, that is an important bill. He did not mention a path to citizenship in those remarks. Leaving an area that could allow the house to come up with a compromise. Host bob cusack do those comments help or hurt . Guest i was thinking about that when the president was praising Speaker Boehner. Tolder privately has democrats not to publicly praise him, especially on immigration. This is a tough task for Speaker Boehner. Putier this year, boehner out some principles with the House Republican conference. Put out some principles with the house the republican comments, and it looks like all signals were a go and in the House Republicans had a meeting and they said they did they are not ready to move on this. It is a real tough spot for john boehner and the president. The debt ceiling fight of 2011, there are still scars from that. Said thener has since president has stepped up and has House Republicans build some trust. A speech where he says he would follow the law . I do not know if it is a must. An interesting proposal if you do not trust the president , lets pass the bill now. If there is a deal, and i am deal,ul, if there is a that could be a compromise. News story that dominated last week, that is what is going on at the health care authority. The story continues over the weekend. Think will happen with the white house this week with the pressure building . Administration, they dohave seen this not chop the heads off of people in positions of authority until much later in the process. You saw the white house doing the send inre. Gov debacle, one of its most trusted fixers to go into the hhs and bail Kathleen Sebelius out of the problem, in this case, he has ,ent his deputy chief of staff who has long ties with the hill, because hes to be legislative director for the white house, they sent him to help with this review of what the problems are,. Here is a bit of a difference that was centralized and in one place. V. A. Nva hospitals are diffused. Anyone of them can be a problem. Once you start seeing two or three or four, it starts looking systemic. That is a problem the white house needs to get a hold of right now. This morning, the administration was warned back in 2008 during the transition that there were problems with the v. A. System, that there were inaccurate waiting times and scheduled failures that threatened to deny health care. What do you make of this story am impacted has this week for the administration . Guest the white house likes to say, bob gates, the former secretarygeneral, who won the president at the very beginning that he should realize some place, someone in the federal government is screwing up and eventually, some of those end up on his desk. Warningsmight have youre the white house would tell you they have tried to tackle one of the persistent problems, these long with of disability claims and an incredible backlog there. They said they are able to shorten that. The assertion perhaps comes into question once you start seeing that at the very hospitals they were gaining the system and numbers on other types of treatment. In any event, the white house says they have we have tried to deal with some of the onelems, but here is the where you have 40 people die while waiting for treatment in arizona. Is a big problem for the white house. It probably right now is overshadowing benghazi as an issue. Staffday, the chief of has gone on tv and said, the and went is mad as hell have not seen the president mad as hell yet but certainly his chief of staff is saying theyre taking it seriously. On the hill, there efforts a legislative efforts, i believe, to give sin jackie more to fire people, which s not have at this point that is to give him more authority. The house considers that bill that would give him that much more power. In his testimony last week, he did fairly well. He said he was mad as hell. Of blame. Lot a trio of republican senators had him step aside. Many of these how ongoing investigations will be lawsuits but overall, he has been able to keep his job and said he has served at the pleasure of the president. His first impulse is not to fire people. He has not called for his resignation. While. S will go on for a thingsthe most damning is you have these not only cooking the books, but the coverup. You have a former senator of nebraska. Why does it matter . If you are in trouble, whether republican or democrat, if the other party is calling you to step aside, members of your own team, we have seen that over the years, where different politicians have gone into trouble, but when your own team turns on you, that is when you are in trouble. Maybe this could be the beginning of it here and we are in election season. Democrats do not want to be is in ag him when he moment of fire. Maybe this could be the first of several democrats, we will see. Veteranob kerrey is a navy seal who lost his leg in action. He brings more weight to the argument. Vietnam were,n was awarded the medal for heroism and combat. He was a patient of the v. A. For eight or nine years. Lets go onto our first phone call, bob from virginia, democratic caller. Caller hello. Thank you for taking my call. What really bothers me is those saying hillary has brain damage. I would like to know what bob thinks about that. She is a terrible secretary of state, responsible for benghazi, everything. Ares horrible what they doing to Hillary Clinton. It is outrageous. Please respond to that. Host your thoughts on this debate. Guest big controversy and it will go on for a while because it is likely she will run for president. She will be 69 if she were elected, which will be roughly the age john mccain would have been, but younger than ronald reagan. Republicans obviously did not like the way rove did it and how you run it, and when for president , there is so much pressure for you to release your records, and she has has she has had Health Issues before, tech and karl roves life. Is health or rain at the state department, she will have to make the case or benghazi. Every candidate has strengths and weaknesses. She will have to make a compelling case. Benghazi maybe could have been handled differently. The committee created in the house to investigate what happened on september 11, 2012, did they call the former secretary of state before that . That is a huge question. A huge risk, but a lot of republicans feel they have to call her. Congress,ied before in the senate, and i think they probably will. It will be quite a theater if they call on her to testify. Investigation, the initial investigation, she was not questioned on it era public and will need to say, these are the three questions we do not know about benghazi and they started to come up with their message on that. Another question is whether democrats will participate in this special committee. They have been divided on it. There have been talks of what cutting it completely. They want to have seven democrats on it. John boehner said that would not happen. You will get five. Senate republicans have told us they want a housesenate special committee. Democrats are not going for that. What will House Democrats do . It is up to nancy pelosi. When push comes to shove, i think they will put in five democrats, as many as they can get on the committee. When Hillary Clinton is in the room, democrats will want to at a subpoena or after the testimony. The idea they could delegitimize the committee by not appointing members has probably lost some power. At the white house, they spoke about this idea of naming one. They were seating that decision to pull oc, realizing she had a political issue, a political problem with her members area this idea of naming one, just so they can keep track of what was going on, so they could have took,add depositions they was something that that had caught the attention at the white house. If they realized the delegitimizing is not the path to take, they might as well just point time, the select committee is about to watch and get underway this week, you have got the government reform thisttee continuing with investigation, working to get secretary john kerry with them area he has had traveling conflicts. What is going on between the leadership there and who is really doing the invest ignition . Investigation . Want john boehner did not this. He got a lot of report support and cosponsors and john boehner initially were resisted. He wants to defer to the committee chairman, most notably the chairman of the oversight committee. Then, the pressure there was an email from a white house , notor that came out because of an investigation, but because of a lawsuit brought by a conservative group through the freedom of information act. That is when john boehner said, ok, we need more power and we have got to step it up. Not crazy about this idea, but he is saying they could continue doing their investigations. Of Committee Chairmen who have on thisated Benghazi Special committee. John kerry will testify. It is just a matter of when. He was not there when benghazi happen, but as far as the documents republicans claim the state department has not been as forthcoming as it should be. This is a headline from fox newss website. Republicans want new clinton area wheren benghazi talking with to zach, manager of edit of the hill. Taking your questions and comments about the week ahead in washington here. We will go to a republican caller out of texas. Good morning. Yes. I just wanted to ask the assessment on unemployment. Note the labor secretary recently raised the issue again. Is the issue finally dead . Certainly, the white house is butl pushing for it, congress has not acted. The numbers are not there. Better access into what the politics are, but this has not moved, i think some of the steam goes away from the issue as some unemployment numbers have come down. The that scene, hiring increases. That is a fluctuating number. You go month a month and then suddenly, you are back to a low hiring by the private sector. I do not know i agree. The momentum for the bill, earlier this year, he looked like it was going to happen and it stalled in the senate, and then through a lot of negotiation, they got it through the senate. This is another bill a lot of bills, the house passed and there sitting in the senate. This is an immigration bill that is stuck in the republican led. Conservatives do not feel pressure to act on this. As you mentioned, dropping the Unemployment Rate hurts the effort to move this bill and really, we have not seen the push from the white house it has been intense at times. Of thisink the chances bill are very slim. These next in massachusetts, independent caller. Hi. Caller a couple of awesome nations. Of your observations. One of your guests said john boehner and the president do not have a good relationship. It probably do not, but i think john boehner would i to have one. The great debt crisis, where they could have had a grand bargain and were only a handshake away. The president did everything he could. Kept raising the the bar. First, they wanted a dollar and revenue. R every cut of men wentdent from two to three dollars beer john boehner said, you have got everything you want 30s shake his hand and we will destroy the party. John boehner row probably go down in history. I think the problem is not so much the relationship. It is not even policies. A matter what the president seems to want to do, there will be the Tea Party Fashion that just says, we are against it. There is no doubt, john boehner has to watch the tea party guys in his conference and as the caller mentioned, they were very close to a grand bargain, extremely close. It would have been very controversial and tough to move to the house. Israises the issue, what John Boehners legacy as speaker . That could have been one, the grand bargain. It did not happen. Could it be immigration . It could be. Other than that, curbing spending here and there, but that crosses his mind. Tomorrow is primary day in several states and this is a test for Tea Party Candidates. Mean if tomorrow comes and some Tea Party Candidates have one and some of lost . So far, we have a fight on the right. There is a fight on the left as well. Hillary clinton, some people want to have a primary with her. There is some concern with her on the left. The Biggest Party is on the right. Establishment versus tea party. We saw this play out in different primaries over the last couple of elections. Elected oneel they electable people. They won the primary and lost in the general election, including the challenger to harry reid a few years ago. This is another test. Is a tea Party Challenge to Mitch Mcconnell. It was like he will win and win big. If he does when they, that is a big deal. A contested primary in georgia, where some republicans do not want congressman paul broun to win. They think he could struggle in general. We have this fight and the establishment right now is fighting back and winning. , it congressman mike simpson loses his seat, because of a tea Party Challenge , that is a win for the tea party. Is a big day. We will see it throughout the next several months. House, they will strategy for the rest of the year depending on what happens in the primaries. Guest what the white house easier if the Republican Party as a whole having moved to a more conservative stance. That affects how they view and create their strategy for dealing with congress. There is really not that much more other than immigration as a slim possibility that is out there for these sides to negotiate over. Think, and my colleague chuck wrote this over the weekend, the idea that even as even if the tea party suffers the loss is, you have seen the party in general move to the right. At the same time, you have seen the chamber of commerce come in as kind of a representative of the establishment of the Republican Party way in. You mentioned in the georgia race, they put money for Jack Kingston in that race. Affect are trying to these races as well. But again, fundamentally, there has been the needle has moved a little bit to the right because of the tea party, whether they win the races or not. On twitter, is it not hurting the republicans . Guest it is not. The map supports the public the republicans this year. History shows the sixyear seven year itch, when you have the president s party second terminate term, not a good situation. This is been frustrating for Congressional Democrats here on individual only issues they do well. Is one that is not a top issue as far as one or two jobs in the economy always trumps it there it white House Democrats have made the argument it would help host even with the hispanic population, it polls below jobs and the economy. Two things we looked at, one, how do they deal with the Affordable Care act, did they mention obamacare, and also immigration. We found a lot of democrats were not talking about obamacare. Not just maybe health care in general, but not the law, which is not popular. Immigration, unless there were certain district host republican caller, go ahead. Caller i have a couple of comments. I am a republican and i feel very discouraged about the two representatives there representing the media. I watch cspan thoroughly and pretty much across other media outlets. I watch the hearings in congress and on the floor and i do my research. To see these two representatives here continuously misinform the public host what did you hear misrepresentjust the information that is out there host give me an example. Caller one example is the fact when st this morning, was on talking about Hillary Clinton about her Health Records and her age and so forth, age does not have too much of anything to do with anything about the records her medical records, just as much as the republicans on the republican side of any person running, whether it be rand paul look at his record and his history of what he has done as a politician host what did you hear caller he has not given any information to the public chris christie. I will move on. We will go to steve, republican caller. Are a lot of good topics here. Immigration, all the scanners all the scandals. Are ai am an 80 year vet, 19 p. About thishing Hillary Clinton and the bushs, why is everything focused on that could save the country. Benghazi is a big thing with hillary. Her congressmans, i do not see any. Her accomplishments, i do not see any. Months ofremaining this legislative session, is it about 2014 or 2016 . Guest both. Democrats are saying the investigation about benghazi is all 2016, and about weakening Hillary Clinton. Republicans are hungry to get back in the white house. Other democratic challengers other than Hillary Clinton . Yes. A substantial challenger . I do not think so. Some people think Elizabeth Warren will run. She says she will not. I do not think she will. Agenda, 2000 14, the big question is, can republicans win back the senate . Bills where it moves through the senate. You cannot blame senate republicans. When the house. House republicans are in a position where they expect to pick up seats. Democrats think they will pick up seats, but the chances of democrats winning back the house , unless something dramatic happens in the next several months, that will just not happen. Think they do not have that much interest. He does not have a dog invested in the 2016 fight. He has been careful not to give a nod to either Hillary Clinton or joe biden. To 2014, the one thing they are relying on the president to do is raise money. A lot of candidates really do not want him campaigning with them. The way hethey like makes a pitch for donors, because he is still very effective at doing that. Every week has been sprinkled with fundraising events. He is doing one here and another one in chicago. The one kind of example that does not prove my point, last week, when he went to little rock. Senator pryor invited him to come. Senator pryor has been trying to distance himself from obama policies. Disaster you have a like the tornado over the state of arkansas, having the president there is more a symbol that you have the clout to bring the most powerful person in the country into your state. That was an effective way for prior to use the president without having to embrace his policies. You senate the top you could see the Senate Voting this head of hhs taking over for Kathleen Sebelius. There is a shakeup at the white house, moving positions around. Julian castro. Host what is the president doing here . Guest he is bringing in shaun donovan, the current secretary of housing, into the white house. As what he wants. Castro, whojulian is popular and wellliked at the white house, one of two brothers who have made a name for themselves in politics. His brother is a member of congress. So, if donovan goes to the budget office, he will be are placing sylvia, who will not have a vote this week on the services, anduman then castro would come in as isretary of housing, if he confirmed by the senate. It is an interesting move because castro is really kind of a known figure, a rising star within the Democratic Party. His base is at as mayor of antictonio in the his community. This is an attempt to raise his village his visibility. To give a hispanic more prominence. Certainly, the life set the white house has come under criticism. Tom perez is the one who stands out in the labor department. This is an attempt to raise his village his visibility. To give a hispanic more prominence. I have got two comments i want to make. [indiscernible] why do you want to add a billion dollars to something already being wasted [indiscernible] a billion dollars [indiscernible] at more money onto it. Another thing i want to say is i watched cspan quite a bit and i watch [indiscernible] republicans do not mind wasting money like that. When it comes like food stamps or Social Security [indiscernible] when is the military ever going to go broke . Never hear about that. We know how much waste is going on. We got your point. Two different points. The spending one. The Defense Operations bill is on the floor at the house. Yes. we have got the sequestration deal that was struck. Both parties did not like it but they were handcuffed. We have the sequestration through the deal struck by patty murray and paul ryan. There is a big deal about defense spending and food calling that was a big issue and the farm bill finally pass. Not asde some cuts but many as the house bill wanted. If you look at medicare, reforms have to be made. These programs are headed for bankruptcy. The caller was talking about cleaning up the v. A. System rather than dumping money on the situation. Guest i think ultimately congress has to decide what they and do for appropriations whether this is the kind of problem that requires financing or change in leadership. I do not know the white house is making that big of a push for infusing infusion of money before they make a determination of what the problem is in the first place. In scranton, pennsylvania, a republican caller. Caller my question today, the irs scandal. And is this runs deep undercover bigtime. The nbc and cbs network has not given any coverage. The latest news, why is this not giving coverage . I appreciate your time. As far as i think benghazi now is capturing a lot of the attention, but the irs continues. A former recently held official in contempt. There was a bipartisan poll. Watch that i do think has been undercovered is that the irs will release all of lois lerners emails. This is something dave camp has been pressuring for. The irs said it would. That will be maybe the next shoe to drop your lois lerner is not talking. Until she talks, she is really the linchpin. She has claimed the fifth. Im told there is more news out of this and other things will grab the attention of the media. Class i agree. Problemils could be a or could be illuminating. Eventually, as the scandal works looksy through, while it like the irs had been emphasizing or giving greater scrutiny to the conservative groups, there was the occasional liberal group that was also getting extra scrutiny. The question was, which ways the irs tilting . Perhaps these emails will show something that we could focus on. Class any word of from a Justice Department on whether they move forward . The republicans want an investigation, some sort of prosecution. Request i am not aware of what the Justice Department is doing. I cannot help you with that one. We will move on to brenda. Youre on the air. Go ahead. Irs, obama, medicaid and medicare. Host what about it . Benefits,l the medicare and stuff, that is also for the v. A. And everyone else. I think he ought to be audited. He could pay off the United States senate. Host you are breaking up a little bit. Feedback from a television. I will let you go on that. Defense and drums. A nominee played a role as far as crafting the legal memo that justified the killing of an american in yemen, a terrorist that was killed. The white house was talking to democrats about him. They want to move him through. Vocal on that. Be there will also be hearings and debate on the house floor about the objection of schoolgirls in nigeria. The big thing tomorrow election wise, primaries in big states, the biggest one, senator Mitch Mcconnells challenge from the right. He is expected to win. Lets we will have coverage here on cspan and cspan two. What are you watching . How they respond and continue to respond to v. A. Problems, i think the white house is leaderted to see how pelosi deals with the benghazi investigation so they could gear up for that. Bob mentioned the one Circuit Court of appeals. They had a flat last week over a federal judge in georgia by the name of michael boggs, who the president nominated. So that kind of through a whole deal the white house had str that through whole deal of the white house had struck through that into contention. Host lot to watch and we will have coverage of the white house as well. Go to cspan. Org for all the details. Managing editor of the ill, jim kuhn in, house reporter with the Associated Press. Thank you both. Pga tour time. Won the next washington journal we will get an update on the Justice Department announcement that it was indicting by Chinese Military officers for computer hacking. We will talk to Ben Fitzgerald of the center for a new american security. Then, a conversation with dr. Michael bell of the centers for Disease Control and prevention about the potential threat of some adrs virus. It will take your phone call on the prairies is and take join the conversation on facebook and twitter. Cspan newest book sundays at 8 00, a collection of interviews from 25 years of book notes and q a conversations. At that point i was what you might have called the Henry Jackson democrat kamal cold war liberal, a believer in the great society, but also a believer in that tough approach to the soviet union, which means i had pretty much of all when the Democratic Party at the time. Pat moynihan, Henry Jackson, the great senator from Washington State, and later on that element of the Democratic Party shrunk to nothingness. And as it did, i was without a home. I remain generally without a political home, but i am you could obviously fairly call me at kneele conservative. One of the nations top Story Tellers on cspan sound is a it 00 publicized Public Affairs book and now available your favorite bookseller. Republican governor mike pence of indiana wants to repeal the Affordable Care act but has a plan to use Medicaid Expansion funds from the bill to help the states lowincome residents. He outlined his proposal at the American Enterprise institute. This is a little less than an hour. [inaudible conversations] good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Im Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise institute and a delighted to welcome you to this mornings events featuring governor mike pence of indiana. The title of the stock is market based medicaid reform and the age of obamacare, and we are looking to was very much anticipation to hear about his states new waiver proposal for obamacare and medicaid. Mike pence was elected is the 50th governor of the state of indiana in 2012. Prior to that he was indianas representative in the sixth Congressional District for six terms. In the house, he served as House Republican conference chairman and the chairman of the House Republican study committee. He has had a huge amount of Public Service of the federal and state letters to five levels. He has distinguished himself as being a warrior for the people, particularly people who have less power than average. Todays policy is no exception. It is my honor to welcome governor mike pence. [applause] thank you, arthur. Thank you for that very kind introduction, and thank you for the hospitality of the American Enterprise institute. I am genuinely grateful to you and to the a. E. I family, not just for your hospitality today, but for really keeping the twin lights of freedom and enterprise burning brightly in a city that too often seems committed to extinguishing those lights. The mission of ati is about keeping the hope of opportunity of a better life and more vibrant Society Alive and well in this country, and in promoting empirically grounded, fresh ideas and to make that possible. So it is an honor for me to be with you today, and please join me, again, and thinking the American Enterprise institute and Arthur Brooks for your great lead. [applause] like many other admirers of yours and your work here at eai, arthur, i have been influenced bynum your writings and your sense of that term earn success. And i come from the state that works. It is a state where people value hard work, and so i see the principal of really earned success lived out every day across the 92 counties in indiana. I travel across my home state and see it in as School Teacher who helps at risk is after school, help them graduate and go to college. I see it in the contadora a Business Owner who started the business in their living room and now employs 50 people, or the Police Officer who takes pride in keeping the piece and i streets each and every day. I see in cities large and small across the state of indiana that principle that you have articulated so well that people are happier and more motivated when they built something of their own, when they take greater ownership in their lives and turn the success. Whatever level of success that is. And that principle is much of what brings me here today. What i am here to talk about today is related to that point, and it concerns the future of health care in america. And particularly how indiana has been leading the way for the kind of reforms that i would submit respect the dignity of every person regardless of income and honors the aspirations of every person for a better life. I agree with the thinking here at American Enterprise institute and that it made the case that reformminded conservatives need to ensure that this safety net is welldesigned and strong to provide a firm basis for those starting out on life slaughter. Eyesight none other than president reagan who would say in new york city in 1979 these words. President reagan said, we have long since committed ourselves as a people to help those among us who cannot take care of themselves, but, he added, the federal government has proven to be the costliest and most inefficient provider of such up we could probably have. I would submit, once again, reagan was right. The truth is, the safety net does not need to be expanded, as some in this town argue incessantly. Does not need to be abolished, as some also argue. It needs to be reformed. Needs to be made better, and i believe that can best happen in the laboratories of innovation and democracy at the state level. If you think of what president reagan said so many years ago, we have long since committed ourselves to help people who cannot help themselves, but that the federal government itself is the least suited able to do that. I come before you today to really say that when it comes to the issue of health care, i believe, people in my party need to be solution conservatives, offering real alternatives to Big Government dancers of the liberal establishment, grounded in respect for the aspiration of every person to earn their own way, to succeed, to achieve selfsufficiency. And to do that in the best way possible with the kind of innovation that can happen all across the country on a statebystate level. Now, i say all this recognizing that this is the very antithesis of the approach embodied in the Affordable Care act. Ordering every american to buy Health Insurance whether they wanted or needed are not is not the answer to expanding access to Affordable Health care in america. I have said it before. I will say it again. Obamacare must be repealed. And obamacare must be replaced with marketbased reforms and, as i will elaborate more today, with a flexible medicaid Block Program that allows the states to create Innovative Solutions at the point of the need. I have and will continue to advocate for congress and president as the political will to repeal obamacare so that we can do even more to improve access and outcomes. Some of you have known me for a while in this town know that i was a pretty vocal opponent of obamacare when i was in the congress. I said then that this law will not stand, and i believe that more today than ever before. Even though obamacare architects and boosters are breathing a little easier it seems these days, the program is still terribly flawed and should be repealed. It is bad for families. It is bad for business, and it is bad for america. And despite the great progress we have been making in our economy in the state of indiana there is not a days day goes by that of travel across the state and your people tell me that the implementation of the Affordable Care act has a dampening effect hanging over indianas economy and our nations economy. Is really stifling growth in america. Early in our administration against that backdrop to make clear that indiana would not establish a statebased exchange, and i stand by that decision. Everyone knows the fiscal position of these exchanges is untenable, even if there will not admit it. Come november when rates rise again i predict you will see another big drop in public support. It was a government takeover of health care, and the overly regulated topdown command and control structure of the law will never allow the exchanges to operate freely, as they should. As a result, access will stay the same or get worse as costs go up. I always thought that was the fundamental flaw of the argument on the other side. Most people i talk to back when i was serving in the congress back home with say they were most concerned about the cost of Health Insurance. The focus and the congress was not on lowering the cost of Health Insurance. It was about growing the size of government, and that is audi of 40 care act came to be. Well, obamacare needs to be repealed for all of those good reasons, and i would submit to you for one more because it is pushing a massive, flawed Medicaid Program on the states. I believe a plan for statebased medicaid reform is not only entirely consistent with the repeal of obamacare but helps make the case for why repeal is needed. Now, republicans in congress have long argued for reform and medicaid into a block grant so that states have flexibility to design better programs. I cannot think of a budget that i voted for during my years in congress that did not include block granting medicaid back to the states. And i submit to you today that in the debate over of care reform states need to lead the way, like indiana is doing. Last week i announced the state of indiana will seek to do just that, to seek flexibility from the federal government to close what is known as the coverage gap by expanding our own Homegrown Health care solution. It is known as a help in the replan. Honestly, i have been talking about using the health the indiana plant for at bases of expansion of Health Care Coverage and in the innocency before i took office in january january 2013. I am pleased to have the opportunity to share with each one of you the details of our administrations proposal to expand the health the indiana plan and offer consumer driven private marketbased Health Care Coverage to low income hoosiers. A little bit of background. Today in indiana we have some 350,000 low income working hoosiers. Those below 100 percent of the federal Poverty Level. For a family of four that is about 24,000 year. These are hoosiers who lack access to the kind of quality Health Insurance that many of their better off neighbors enjoy experts, as i said, rightly call this the coverage cap. Truthfully, many hoosiers, up to 138 percent of the federal Poverty Level which is about 33,000 a year in income for a family of four also as a practical matter cannot access to affordable coverage and live with uncertainty in their families as well. Last week when the man our announcement i had the opportunity to introduce the people of our state to a number of users that fall into this coverage cab, working men and women who are of growing their sleeves up, often times in the most difficult circumstances courageously moving forward, providing for their families. People like Becky Kincaid and pat murphy, proud hoosiers all who find themselves essentially, for all intents and purposes, caught in that gap where their income simply does not give them the ability to purchase Health Insurance for themselves or for the family. Now, some of our neighbors across the midwest have chosen to address the coverage get by a spending traditional medicaid. I respect the decisions that others have made. I am here to talk about indianas decision. From the beginning of my tenure as governor we have been saying no to obamacare. We declined estate based exchange, and im 80 clear from the outset that we will not expand traditional medicaid, watch. Medicaid is not only broke, it is broken. Medicaid is not a program that we need to expand. Medicaid is a program we need to reform. It was nobly created some 50 years ago to help the poor and those with disabilities access Quality Health care. To be told, medicare has morphed into a bureaucratic and fiscal month trusted of monstrosity that does less help lowincome people and advocates claim. Obamacare advocates continue to promote Medicaid Expansion despite the overwhelming evidence that the program does not work as it is supposed to. As a highly anticipated steady in oregon showed just last year, medicaid actually increased emergency room use by enrollees and produced Health Outcomes that were no better than being an insured. Other studies have also shown that Health Outcomes are no better and sometimes even wars for people that are covered by medicaid compared to those with no coverage of all. The truth is, last years organs that he should have sent shockwaves through ranks of Public Health policy. For some reason it did not do that. Expanding a program that does not improve Peoples Health outcome was the right approach for america or how it is just fair and right to do that. I mean, if you care about lowincome americans, why in the world would you want to expand a program that provides such inadequate coverage . You know, the only thing medicate does well is make it on to the gao list of highrisk programs. Rihanna doctors see highrisk patients for free. I mean, let me say again, obamacare needs to be repealed for many reasons, including that it is pushing a massive, flawed Medicare Program on to the states. Now, some proponents of expansion, particularly those who helped author that underlying legislation, the Affordable Care act, are satisfied with covering a vulnerable population with a program that is so deeply flawed than i am not fortunately hoosiers have found a better way. In indiana we have learned that the way to change medicaid is to base the program more we know improve self and lowers costs, namely consumerdriven health care. Using Health Savings accounts. Let me brag on the Hoosier State for just a second. We think indiana is actually the birthplace of Health Savings accounts. Some of you in the policy community here in our Nations Capital remember the name j. Patrick rooney. He was an insurance adjuster and the visionary. In addition to his ideological of medical savings account which he, perhaps more than any other american, popularized on capitol hill was able to achieve being added to the tax code as a pilot program. He also personally finance the first private funded Educational Choice Program in the United States of america. J. Patrick rooney was my friend, but he was a visionary hoosier, and we miss him. But beginning with his vision in the early 1990s, indiana became a centerpiece for the discussion about consumerdriven health care. In fact, today india has more Public Employees, 96 percent and roll with Health Service accounts plans, then any other state. Out private marketplace has a higher percentage compared to many other states. So the health the indiana plan built, as it is god help save his accounts and Consumer Driven Health care makes the most sense being lost and piloted and expanded in a state where Consumer Driven Health care, in many respects, was born. Sixth years ago against that backdrop and the progress, indiana became the very first date to successfully create a consumerdriven health plan to expand quality Health Insurance coverage to the population affected through medicated covered and medicaid. Created on a pilot basis. Recall that, as i have mentioned , the health the indiana plant providing help savings accounts today the some 40,000 hoosiers and empowers them to take ownership about their Health Decisions and it works. The healthy indiana plan integrated the principles of consumerism within medicaid, encouraging enrollees to take charge of their health care, and powering them to act as consumers and Health Care Market here are some of the facts. The healthy indiana plan has lowered inappropriate emergency room use by 7 percent compared to a traditional medicaid during the course of the program. 60 percent of the hip enrollees and that is our acronym, 60 percent of hip enrollees these Preventative Care which is similar to the rates we see in general commercial marketplace. Had been released used generic drugs in a much higher rate than people covered by other, private insurance plans. Back home when you think in a broad sense, Consumer Driven Health plans have been sold to decrease Health Care Spending by 27 percent across the country and those Public Employees that i mentioned in the state of indiana who have a 96 enrollment rate in Health Savings plan, that saves me about 23 million a year for taxpayers in indiana thanks to the adoption of those programs. We are also beginning to see this downward trend in Health Care Cost within that healthy indiana plan as well. And let me say, hip enrollees also have a proven track record of managing their own health care decisions. 93 percent of hip enrollees make contributions to the savings account on time. Onethird of them said they regularly as their Health Care Providers about the cost of services, and 98 percent say they would enroll in hip again if they were given a choice. We actually call it hits 2. 0. My kids like that. Hip 2. 0 would offer three basic options and i want to roll through them