Transcripts For CSPAN2 Tonight From Washington 20130716

Caller thanks for taking my call. Thats going to be thats something fouled that one that was just on there. The filibuster change theyre talking about is just for president ial appointments. The advise and consent that bob spoke about, both sides play politics with that, and the politics of which president is that the republicans are not going to give him anything because he is a black man. We have to deal with race in this country. And its deepseated and i dont understand whoa he cant have his people, by a simple majority, let the republicans have their guys by a simple majority, take it out of the politics, and harry reid knows the constitution. It says in there, the president should have his people by a majority vote. Host sharon, home state of mitchell mcconnell, kentucky. Youre take on all of this. Caller good evening. Thank you for taking the call. I was raised a democrat in this wonderful state, basically youre putty much told that as a child, you need to be a democrat. I recently changed to the republicans due to the actions of the republicans since 2008. In the way theyve handled everything. And when i had deep concerns about the company i worked for, i wrote nancy pelosi. I wrote the president. I wrote the Vice President. I wrote everyone. The only person to respond to me was Mitch Mcconnell, with honest concern and he actually met and spoke with me about the middle sized company. What they are doing, taking away the rights of the average american, it appalls me. Theyre out of touch. I think they all need to come back and speak to the people, and remember where they come from and who theyre supposed to represent, and follow the laws written. Host okay, sharon. Katy has this point, what are you up to tonight . Im glued to cspan2 and my twitter feed. Set the stage with whats been happening in the u. S. Senate today, lawmakers came in at 2 00 this afternoon for regular business, and then recessed just before 6 00, as the vote was taking place to have the senators move from the Senate Chamber to the old Senate Chamber. They have recessed for the evening so wont be back tonight. Theyre scheduled to be back tomorrow morning. And the Senate Democratic leader, according to ed okeefe, remind defiant in his attempt to change the senate rules. He spoke today in an event that we cord. We covered, and the debate between senators reid and mcconnell as what is now referred to as the Nuclear Option, changing the Senate Filibuster rules. Were waiting for senators to come out of the meeting. Matt is on the independent line, good evening, pennsylvania. This is just a classic example of how both parties are to blame, and i would like to address mr. Reids comments. I think that i didnt catch his whole speech but he says this is about the constitution, and id like to know where the in the constitution it talks about filibusters in article one or article one section a, and parliamentary procedures is roberts results of order. Id like no know why there is not threefourth of the vote when the minoritys rights are going to be taken away, you knee 3 4 of a 0 vote. Both parties for play. Both parties need to know and thats the only way to save our country. Host you can china in on the conversation. The filibuster is not a rule of debate. It blocks debate and gives a veto to 41 senators over the entire legislative process. Carl, good evening from kansas city. Democrats line. Go ahead, place. Caller hello, is this me . Host if youre carl go ahead. Caller great. Heres what want to point out. Were throwing around a lot of rhetoric about minorities and majorities and tyrannies and the like, but the 13 colonies were more or less equal, even though there were littler and bigger one. The senate is two votes per state. Now, utah, wyoming, mt. , north dakota, cannot out california, illinois, new york, and pennsylvania. So, listen, my fellow americans, stop talking about democracy in the senate, okay . Thank you. Host senator brasso will be joining us tomorrow morning, and norm ornstein who as coauthored a number of books on congress, including broken branch, and what if anything is resolved tonight and to give us a sense of what to expect tomorrow when the senate reconvenes. Jim is joining us from arizona. Independent line. Thanks for taking my call. I think i thought this through a little bit and might be a compromise they might want to consider, and that is if the nominee is a member of the treasury department, which is a Financial Management thing, or the department of defense, heat go with the 60 votes. All others are 51 . Thats way you get the compromise, the serious guys with an opportunity to have the filibuster if necessary, and a little more due diligence, and the ones that arent quite so important, main they can go to a 51 vote. Just a suggestion. I dont know if anybody will take it. Thanks for taking my call. Host thank you. You can see reports keeping a close gaze another whan is happening behind the doors of the old Senate Chamber. A handful of senators have left the session, including senator paul, and senator graham, and senator menendez of new jersey. Were awading other staffers who might be approaching the doors, which may be a sign that the session is beginning to wrap up. Well keep an eye on that. Kathy, your question. Caller why does anyone in congress get to have secret meetings or closed meetings . The public votes them in office. They work for the public. They work for us, the people. Nothing should be secret. Talk to us. Talk to the people. Be transparent. They say transparent all the time. Talk to us. Let us know whats going on. Let us have a say in it. Thank you. Host thank you, cathy. Wayne has this point again, the hash tag cspan chat. En invoking the Nuclear Option does not get knock nieces appointed. They uget a vote. Ken, democrats line, good evening to you. Caller good afternoon. First of all id like too say people need to read the constitution before they decide to uphold it. The simple majority means 51. This senate, under the democrats, have tried for two terms of the president to get something done. Rich much mcconnell said, im not going to do anything the president wants done and he has stuck to his word. Thats why congress is at a stand stihl and why we need this. Otherwise he would never get his cabinet. Thank you. Ill listen for the response. Host ken, thanks for the call. From michigan, the republican line in florida. Joe. Caller im calling i am a republican and im more of a social conservative republican in ft. Meyers. I dont really think this is an issue about changing filibuster rules. If i understand if the constitution is corrects simple majority all thats needed to vote on a president ial nomination. Its not changing a filibuster rule. Its trying to prevent parliamentary intervention to putting nominees to a vote. And i also would remind that this is about the first recess appointment. If we recall the ambassador to the u. N. , under president george w. Bush, was recess appointment and has spoken on the fox network, and so now basically what this course is ruled, pretty much if my understanding is correct, the federal court in washington is that recess appointments are unconstitutional. It finally came to a head under these particular nominations and thats the problem here. The majority has been actually railroaded to have these up our down votes for any nomination, and it needs to change. This happens on both sides. So, this is going equally benefit both parties when they are the majority in the senate, and i think thats fair. Host you know the Supreme Court is going to be taking up the issue of one of the questions, when is the senate in recess . Going back to your earlier point about recess appointments. Something to keep an eye on in the next term of the u. S. Supreme court. Caller exactly. And like i said, just by extension, extend that to john bolton who was recessappointed and i was a big gw fan so this is nothing against george w. Basically done to try to circumvent the blocking process and thats what both president s have done and they but this group wants to make him look good and its been equally bad on both sides. Host jay from pennsylvania. Independent line. Caller how are you doing. Host senators leaving the session. Go ahead, jay. Caller two quick points for you. One, its kind of ironic that watching this i remember watching this eight years ago in 2005, when the republicans and the democrats were taking exactly opposite positions what theyre taking now. I find it interesting im a fairly conservative independent but i actually rarely find myself agreeing with hari reid. It should be 51 votes to get an pint. For the president. One of your callers said, where does this start . Its true that the full buster rules have been been changed since 1986. 2005 was the first time the rules were applied on a president ial nomination. The democrats blocked the nomination of george w. Bush. So, for harry reid to look this is disingenuous. The second thing related to those, for those who remember the debates from eight years ago, what brought that debate to an sentenced quite frankly it was the group that got together and basically decided that as long as they stuck together, then they could keep the senate from changing the filibuster rules. People like john mccain and lindsey graham. I fine it interesting they were so vocal on this issue eight years ago when a republican majority leader was looking to do it. But now that the democratic leader is going basically silence them both. So with that ill hang up. Host appreciate the call, jay. We 0 go to mark, madison heights, michigan. Democratic line. Caller steve . Host go ahead. Caller the with a i see it is the democrats are looking to change the filibuster rule on executive appointments. Correct . Host correct. Caller okay. Not the judicial or legislation. Host it i will not impact according to senator reid will not impact any judicial appointments, Lifetime Appointments or legislation. I dont see why the president shouldnt be able to appoint his own cabinet. I dont know why the republicans feel that they must go on the floor and say if harry reid does this, then maybe the aca and other things could be overturned. Its almost like theyre blackmailing the democrats, saying if you do this, this could get out of control. And i dont think that the democrats are taking it that far, and the republicans why would they automatically assume that if they do this just for this appointments, that all of a sudden theyre going to change the legislation with a simple majority and we havent done that in how many years . Host okay. Ill leave it there. Mark, thanks for the call. The cloture rule was first put in place in 1917. And some senators leave the old Senate Chamber, you can see ed okeefe in the center of the screen, and were also getting your comments on twitter, one viewer says a simple majority for president ial appointment. Sounds great. About time. Next call is mark, joining us from mason heights, michigan. Go ahead, please. Caller thank you. The next two virginia, republican line. Caller good evening. Thank you for taking my call. A couple of things i want to say here. As one of your callers said earlier, when this was tried with republicans, democrats screamed at the top of their lungs how this was going to violate every ethical rule in the world. Now, its really funny that harry reid now says i have to do this now in order to get his appointment through. Heres my one question for every american listening tonight. Theres the word illegal appointments, to our congress and to the people of this country. Immigration apparently doesnt mean anything to harry reid doesnt mean anything, to schumer doesnt mean anything. Democrats have forgotten what the term illegal means. When the Supreme Court ruled that the appointments are illegal, they should not even be up for a vote. They should be plain and simple. There should be no argument about this. The process was put in place to make things correct, to get everybodys sayso. Harry reid has no right to stand here and complain. Its hypocritical of this party to continue to say things like this. Thank you for taking my call. Host can i. Joe, next, from maryland heights, missouri, independent line. Caller thank you. This argument starts in 1917, the constitution wall was written in 1700. None of this has anything to do with the constitution. It has to do with the rules the congress has been making on themselves to control the program. But the people need to find out is we dont have a constitution anymore. It was changed in 1934 by Franklin Roosevelt when they went in and made constitutional law, when the lawyers all got involved and changed everything. The constitution says that the war is supposed to only last for two years. Never supposed to have had an army made. All kinds of stuff in the little book those people carry around, but its not what this country going by now. Host okay, joe, thanks for the call. The session in the old Senate Chamber began just shortly after 6 00 eastern time, at about 6 15, and now also we approach two hours and 37 minutes into the session, well show you the scene not only inside the u. S. Senate the area known as the ohio clock but also as dusk begins to settle in, an outside view of the u. S. Capitol. Some of the senators may depart from the infamous steps on the front steps of the senate side of the capitol. Well keep an eye on that. We talk to zachary, stockton, california, democrats line. Caller i think the fill buster is wrong. Nothing constitutional about it. Its basically saying that senators that want to vote for something, their votes can be silenced because one senator has a problem with it. Nothing has been done in washington for the past several years. Nothing. And i am sick and tired of nothing being done. We vote these people to go up there and work for the people, and instead they take special interests and vote against things that will help this country and mask Everything Else with problems that have nothing to do with the economy. The economy is what is hurting this country. Thank you for taking my call. Host zachary, thanks for the call, shreveport, louisiana, greg is on the phone, democrats line. Caller i was calling about the filibuster, one of your earlier callers came in and said she was her goal to be a senator and to she filibustered, and thats the problem with the filibuster. People want to play games with it. She just wants to get notoriety and thats what our present senators want to do, too, and the whole time theyre doing nothing but slowing down progress that we could be making. The president should have an opportunity to get who he wants in office, and remember, he they answer to him. He going to be up for election, they dont have any type of real power because the president is the one that has power. Thanks. Thanks for the call. Host pete from washington state, as we see a little bit more activity as reporters try to get information from senators who may be departing. So well keep a close eye on that as we listen to your comments on the republican line. Caller yes. I like this filibuster. And without it, this democrats would run rampant. We need to get this country under control and we are doing it little by little. Were going to stop this government from operating, and the next election were going to have all the money we need and we will run the democrats right out of office. Thank you for taking my call. Host thank you. Linda has this point. The constitution requires a simple majority for approval of president ial republican or democratic appointments and offers a pertinent point. You can share your thoughts at cspan chat. Dodd is one of the Senate Parliamentarians and talked about the issue the senators are dealing with tonight. Now, it is true that right now, senator reid does not have 60 votes in his caucus. And he is supposedly going to use, quote, the Nuclear Option. To change all of that. Now, this is not the first time this issue has come up. When senator bill frist was the Senate Majority leader, and was being frustrated by votes on judicial nominations. He proposed the Nuclear Option. And the result was that a gang of 14, seven republicans and seven democrats, worked together and came to the floor and said, no, were not going down that road. And that was enough to stop senator frist. I would hope that as a result of the caucus on monday night, there might be a Similar Group that would come to the floor and say, do not go down this road. I can tell you, having seen what happened in 1975, when the senate did go down that road, the repercussions lasted for years. And the bitterness lasted for years. Its not something i would ever wish for the United States senate. The senate is an institution that i love. I worked there for 35 years. I now teach about how Congress Works at George Washington university, and i honor the senate. I can remember, frankly, that when this was proposed, by senator frist, i went on the cbs evening news, and suggested that as a group of senators would come to the floor and say, stop the madness, we could stop it. And that is exactly what happened. And that is what established senator frist. I sincerely hope that is what happens after that caucus on monday night, and a group comes to the floor and says, stop the madness. Robert dove, the coauthor of a book, defending the filibuster. An event at the Heritage Foundation here in washington. Youre looking live. Thats the moon in the for ground on a clear night here in washington, dc, as the senate has recessed its official business. But the important business of what is happening behind closed doors in the old Senate Chamber as lawmakers are debating whether or not to invoke whats called the Nuclear Option, which would change the Senate Filibuster rules. Were awaiting senators to come to the podium, if they do so, to tell reporters exactly what happened in that meeting, which is now close to approaching the threehour mark. The session began shortly after 6 00 eastern time. Its now five minutes to 9 00 here in washington. Well go to your calls and get your thoughts about what the senate is debating. Peter from pennsylvania. Line for democrats. Good evening to you, peter. Caller good evening. Thank you for taking my call, steve. I wish you would correct the people calling in about the attempt to change the rules and why the democrats were so upset about it some number of years ago. That attempt by the republicans to change the rules had to do specifically with judicial nominees. Now, this attempt to change the rules by the democrats has to do with just letting the president choose his team for his cabinet, and for the executive positions that he is allowed to appoint to. Theres a big difference there, and i dont understand why, between people call in complaining about this, you dont clear up the difference there. I think it would make for a better discussion through this whole exercise here tonight. Host well, let me ask you about the senate as an institution. This is called the Nuclear Option because it would change the senate in many peoples eyes, and not for the better. Whats your take if this is in place, five, ten years down the road, because of democrats or republicans . Caller i think its a bad idea. I really do. But i dont see where the democrats at this point in time have any other option. I mean, filibusters were never used to for for everything appointment out there. Please. Just for the most minute officer appointment out there, theyre being filibustered. It just doesnt make any sense, and its no wonder that the ratings of the congress are as low also they are. This is just i dont know. Its sad. Okay. Peter, thanks for making your point. We appreciate your call and your perspective on this. Tom from kingsport, tennessee, on the republican line. Caller if we, the American People, want to change the congress, we ought to establish 12year limits for senators and 12year limits for congress men and then we wouldnt have all this. Theyd have to stay there and do their jobs. As it is now, theyre there three days and home four days every week. They dont do their job. On either side. And my name is mcconnell. Okay. Thanks for the call. This from a viewer joining our conversation. Again, the hash tag is cspan chat. The ohio clock reminds me of the Meeting Place on the titanic. Where the ship is the senate. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us. Next is tom from pleasant valley, new york. Good evening, independent line. Caller good evening. My name is tom, and i was just wondering, why are they all huddling in a secret conference when on a filibuster when they should be talking about veterans rights, homelessness, joblessness. I just dont understand it. Host okay. Thanks for the call. Mike is join joining us from mounds, oklahoma. Good evening to you. Caller actually, its my thing is, i am a registered republican, but the last several elections, ive had, due to my conscious, vote democrat for the most because all these guys are doing phloem republican side are taking all this money from these from the Big Oil Companies and think tanks and shipping it overseas to these dang banks to where nobody has to pay a dime in taxes. Do nothing and they allow Many Americans to get Social Security while people like myself, i am disabled and on Social Security. I live on 47 a month to be able to live on that for food. Thats for food a month. And why do millionaires and billionaires get Social Security . They dont need it. Host okay. Caller i think that the senators need to look at again, now that their lets cut it off and say the Million Dollars, cut it off there. But when you make a Million Dollars you dont need Social Security. Host okay, michael. Ill stop you there thanks for the call. An article points out that if the senators fail to reach an agreement tonight, senator reid does plan to have a key test vote tomorrow morning, first on the nomination of richard cordray, and of course, was created as part of the doddfrank legislation signed back in 2010, and then senator reid is scheduled to move ahead on a couple of other nominees, nominees for the National Labor relations board, the president s pick to head up the labor dont, thomas perez, and the head of the expertimport bank, and the environmental agency. Were keeping an eye on the clock where the senators are still meeting behind closed doors. We checked in with a former republican leader of the senate, in the majority and the minority, trent lott, as he talked about the senate as an institution and what lawmakers are discussing tonight. You have been the majority leader, you have been the minority leader, so you can look at this from both sides of the perspective. Explain the frustration senator reid is now feeing and the options for your colleague, senator Mitch Mcconnell. Well, understand the frustration, and i felt that when i was majority leader, and i felt it when i was minority leader, because you want to try to get things done and get nominations confirmed. Was very anxious to get some federal judges confirmed, which the democrats blocked with filibusters and you get frustrated when youre trying to move the legislative agenda along. In fact the biggest problem that majority leader has in the senate is time, because he or she has to keep in mind that if he calls up a bill or nominee thats going to be full busterred, going to take type to break the filibuster, if you have an option to conference, its takes time. And i was tempted to change the rules on more than one occasion but doing the right thing by going into the old Senate Chamber, which has a lot of history and a certain awe aura about it. On three different occasions when i was in the senate, we went into the old Senate Chamber and we didnt know what the result would be and we were looking for a process to get out of a fix. Theres a reason. There are very, very clear objections and understandable problems with some of these nominees, but and, for instance, everyone of obamas cabinet secretaries have been confirmed. They have moved over a thousand nominations. There are a few that are problematic, but without trying to secondguess either party or either leader in this particular fight, my advice would be to find a compromise, find a way to avoid this. I was involved in the process the last time we get very close to the neutral option back in 20005, i believe it was. We worked it out through a process. It was difficult, but we got a ton. I hope that majority leader reid will listen to the options. The republicans will understand his frustration and that there will find a way to avoid doing this because if you can change the rules with just 51 votes instead of the 67 that the rules require, then you could change anything. It may apply only to executive calendar this time or executive nominations, but it could be judges next time or legislation that. The senate would just be a many house. Host our conversation with former senator trent lott. Foreign listening to that we saw senator Jay Rockefeller rockefeller, senator fred from West Virginia who is stepping down leaving the old Senate Chamber. Background of pcs from where these reporters are, the old Senate Chamber which housed the u. S. Senate for 1819 to 1859. It was designed by Benjamin Henry latrobe. Later became the u. S. Supreme Court Chamber from 18621935. As you can see from these pictures, part of cspan the capital program. It has been restored and is open to the public. Youre able to come in and see what it was like both of the members of the Supreme Court and for the senators in the 1800s. Ornate, historic, and this is where the senators are meeting of this hour. Some senators have left, and as soon as we hear official word or one of the Senate Leaders comes to the podium of course it will take you there live. In the meantime your phone calls, joining us from maplewood, new jersey. Our line for democrats. Good evening. Caller good evening. You know, when someone like trent lott gets up and makes the jump to 67 votes are needed only for treaties, the nominations 51 votes, and when you listen to robert dove, i heard that whole panel, that particular. If you heard but he said prior to what you have on their then you would realize that this is not exactly an impartial statement that he was making. Not in the least. Now, what mcconnell has done in the prior session, meaning last year, and that is why there was the january agreement. That dont have to say what happened with that agreement, which is are rare at this particular point today. And listen to the complete discussions between reed and mcconnell, you need someone who will get all of the facts and come on your cspan and indicate exactly what has transpired over all these years so that people can really understand what is going on here. I am not thrilled with it to say the least, but people dont know enough about what has been happening in the past and was happening now. Therefore, i dont know how anyone can really understand because when i listen to people and the statements that they make, thats why someone said to you, cant these people be corrected when they come up the statements are completely wrong . And from trent lott i could not believe it. Host abcaeight. Fine a point. Go ahead. I need your final point. That you very much. Appreciate the call. Ed murphys office sent out that tweet. He will be sworn in tomorrow morning as Vice President joe biden, that will be the very first or business. Well happen to 00 eastern time. Live coverage on cspan2. Next is san joining us from pittsburgh, pennsylvania. Independent line. Good evening. Caller thank you. I every with the last callers comments. To the comment i wanted to make was i find it interesting that the state represented it by the senators who are doing this filibuster stuff at the same states that filibuster the human rights legislation for black people. And there was no ridge about that at all. But what is interesting now is that the same states represented by the senators to block humanrights for black people in the 50s and 60s in the 40s by the same people who are blocking appointments for the first black president of the estates, and i dont think that is a coincidence. Thats my comment. Thank you. Host this point from our twitter page. We were founded as a limited republic. The idea was to follow a small government model. Deasy needs a refresher. We saw senator Jay Rockefeller walkout. We were expecting a couple of tweets. David drucker of the washington examiners as we came a lot closer as he exited when asked about whether or not the conflict had been defused and another saying that senator rockefeller says he believes a filibuster deal can be reached for tomorrow morning avoiding in a clear option. Next week joins us from san angelo, texas on the republican line. Good evening. Good evening. Thank you. I am just puzzled because the constitution is said to be saying that the simple majority is what rules in the senate. And i am reading article one section five. Each house may determine the rules of the proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior and with the concurrence expel. There are other places where twothirds are needed to get any business done. I personally prefer for the minority to be able to use the filibuster. That is all there is to that. Thank you. Thank you for the call. Earlier tonight we also checked in with the longtime former democratic senator, byron dorgan, who served 18 years in the senate, democratic from north dakota. Retired in 2010 and offered his perspective on what has been debated in the senate and how he views the institution. What is different today that would force the senate for the First Time Since 1986 to potentially make changes to the rules . Sp3 it is that the change came off the bicycle. Its broken. Its not working. It is not just the senate. Across the country we have these strong feelings on each side where in the old days democracy is reaching across the aisle uncompromising. No compromise is a fourletter word. People in both caucuses reach across the aisle and are seen as people that are not standing for the principles. That is absurd, but that is what happened. The result is that the caucus bob scott grenades back and forth at each other, but i understand why senator reid is frustrated. The fact is, it has been hard to get anything done, not just on the nations. We have seen it with all due respect, senator, and his colleagues who have required a cloture petition, filibustered even motions to proceed on noncontroversial bills. Why . To stop things from happening. Well, they have been successful at that. The American People, i dont believe they think it is much of the success of the country. Senator, having served in Congress Unless it the hypothetical that it than it their option is about in the majority will rule, could that turn the senate into another house of representatives . It could. It sure could. This is not a free vote for anybody. This is a consequential action. You know, my hope would be that this group that meets tonight will decide that they will resolve this issue. Theyre all United States senators. My hope is they come out of that old Senate Office chamber and decide they dont have to take action. There will reach some agreements to protect the senates prerogatives and to do this in its business. As of the American People pay them to do it is what they expect their representatives to do. I served with a lot of people over the years in the house and senate. I tell you what, republicans and democrats, conservatives and liberals really unbelievably qualified interesting, thoughtful people, i mean, really terrific people serve in the congress. Yet somehow some way they get there in a caucus. The question becomes houssay you want. There really only ought to be one side, the American People. That is of the answer ought to be. Instead it is lobbing grenades and it is just not working. That conversation earlier tonight just before the closed door session took place inside the old Senate Chamber. We heard from Jonathan Weisman who has been tweeting from the location. He is quoting the senator saying that he thinks there will be a deal before the 10 00 a. M. Vote tomorrow morning. There is no deal yet, but theyre is a much better understanding. Joining yes from new jersey, democratic line. Good evening to you. Caller good evening. There are you doing . Host fine, thanks. Caller i just wanted to respond. This is something that mr. Mcconnell has been working on for a long time. He has finally pushed the envelope of the table. There is nothing getting done in washington. You know, everyone keeps saying, both parties are going, you know, throwing grenades at one another. That is far from the truth. This president has been to over backwards trying to up the to republicans halfway. You dont have anyone on the other side that is willing to negotiate. Everyone knows the word negotiation with the republican is a bad word. And i have never seen a president this respect in the meanspirited and treats so mean in this country. They even attacked his children. And that is supposed to be something that is supposed to be a rule that you dont ever attack the president s children. You know, everyone is supposed to be have their hands that not on that situation. To attack the president s children . Well, you watch fox news and it will talk about the president s daughters went to so and so place. You know, when they went so why. Or if they go out someplace. You never report the location of the president s children. You know. One man trying to say is that the spirit and the mindset that is coming out of washington and spreading across this country, this meanspirited attitude where people respect one another i dont care whether its black or white or were never, the meanspirited and nastiness that is coming about. Harry reid has to poland a clear option, i would time to pull it because he is not really being a friendly partner on the other side. On the night of the inauguration , his only stated goal is to make this president a oneterm president. When they succeeded the next option is to deny him on every issue. Host thank you. You can weigh in on our twitter page. That has tank is cspan chat. We are now at the three hour mark of this closeddoor session taking place inside the Senate Chamber. Some lawmakers have left, but we can gather from the reporters still in the ohio area, the area, the corridor in the senate, the ornate corridors that is a gathering point for reporters and senators to speak to the press. And so we will keep an eye on that. In the meantime, senate to read this morning making news may essentially laying out his point of view on why he would invoke the Nuclear Option, changing the filibuster rule, including the nomination of jean m. Mccarthy to head the epa from the center for American Progress this morning. As we know frank passed away recently. Finally he left the senate. Gene mccarthy after 1100 questions were answered, they refuse to have a single republican attempt. So the only way to work on that is all democratic senator said to be there. Franklin byrd was dying. I called and said we have to have him here. The literally on his deathbed came down here and help came down here from new jersey and walked in to make a carcass. Everyone was there for the democrats and the epa committee. Doing stuff like that. That is i was all about. You cant reward bad behavior over and over and over again. Center read this morning here in washington laying groundwork for the debate that is presumably taking place tonight between democrats and republicans on the filibuster rules to be a live look at the u. S. Capitol on this monday evening. It is my 18th year in washington d. C. 3plus hours since the meeting began behind closed doors in sty inside the historical said chamber. Also at one point, the u. S. Supreme court before it at a building of its own across the street. We will go to john joining us from texas. Republican line. Good evening. Caller get afternoon. Thank you for giving me time to hear my voice. First off, i think we need to do away with the filibusters. We need to do away with that their options. Secondly, any deal that comes before the commerce, every person up their needs to sign off on the affidavit that they have read the bill, that they have understood the bill before they are allowed to vote on it, and many to be checked off. Thats all i wanted to get in tonight. Host thanks for the call. Managing editor of the hill newspaper, also keeping a close eye what has been happening all day and night. Thank you for rejoining us this evening we will try one more time. Are you there . Yes. Thank you. Thank you for being with us. I know your in your car. It has been a long day, but what can you tell us . Well, alex bolton, staking out this meeting. It is very surprising how long this meeting has gone on. It was supposed to last an hour. There is no end in sight. Maybe theyre getting a little fatigued or ivory, but this has gone on a long time. Now its somewhat of a guessing game as far as other theyre getting closer to a deal. But the scheduled vote in the morning, so they have to reach some type of deal or were going to have the first test. Of course, republicans unless theres a deal, there is no way that will lead cordray through. I would suspect that this means that they are getting closer to a deal. A lot of senators have been mom coming out of it. We are getting different senators saying different things, but theres been no shortage of talk in the old chamber tonight. The fact that they have gone on this long, i think, suggests that the chances of some type of deal are increasing because obviously if theyre was no hope this meeting would have ended a long, long time ago. We dont know. We dont know whether there will be a deal. Both sides clearly after save face. They want to bring back to their party in their base that they got something out of this. But it remains to be seen whether there will be any type of bipartisan deal tonight or maybe they postpone it until the morning. What question at this hour do you have . What you want answers to . Well, the big thing is that how much harry reid gives up. Today as you saw, he was not you once all seven nominees, the republicans to let through. I think the big question is, is this a battle of organized labor, big priority, these nlrb appointments. Will harry reid allow some type of deal where republican say, okay, we will let two of these three nominees get through. They have to be replaced. We will allow an up or down vote on different nominees because of that court ruling on the nlrb. The republicans say those nominees are taken. I think that is where there has to be some type of giveandtake if theres going to be a deal, both sides have to get something. And harry reid was taking a very hard line to my good negotiator, but he was saying the republicans kind of avoid this. All seven go through. There is very little chance republicans just want to say, okay, we will let all seven through. Mitch mcconnell has already suggested that theyre going to let mccarthy as well as tom press get an up or down vote. How much more will Mitch Mcconnell give . That remains to be seen. So really it is anybodys guess, but i do think the fact that theyre going on for hours on end could mean two things. Senators like to talk. There also could be a suggestion that theyre getting a little bit closer to getting a deal. Were talking with the managing editor of the hill newspaper. We saw just a moment ago senator carper of delaware. By our count only a handful have left. Rand paul. We also saw tweet from senator lindsay gramm. Unless Something Else has happened, the vast majority still remain inside. And any type of big deal, bipartisan deal, whether its on this issue or legislation, fatigue becomes a factor or senators might be fired up at the beginning of a meeting, but after hours on end and it goes into a late hours, they might be more willing to strike a deal or vote yes on legislation. That is a staple of republican and democratic whipping. They cannot fatigue to get senators for house members to say yes. A bill or possibly a deal. So the main point of this remains senator reid and mcconnell and their deputies, but this is the big showdown. I think both sides want to get a deal. Harry reid really in his speech today made it clear, made it clear for the last week that he is going to have to get significant concessions from republicans or else is going to move forward on the clear option. One final point, this podium, of attention. We have been watching it. The reporters. Have you heard definitively whether or not we will year from the Senate Leaders tonight . Will they come to the podium . Will there be a paper statement or will this all be delayed until tomorrow when the senate cavils and tomorrow morning . This is a question that has been going on in both the senate and a news terms, including ours where youre dealing with a print deadline. Of course there is no web deadline. But their war rumors at around 8 00 that they were going to come out and say something. Of course they didnt. We are dealing with a lot of speculation of whether there will come out. I do think that after such a long meeting in after dozens of capitol hill reporters staking out, i think it will have to say something. Whether its we dont have a deal, continue to talk, or we have a dealer not, but there will have to give some type of status update. Clearly both sides of the aisle here have been told not to talk to reporters. I saw several streets saying that he was trying to avoid reporters because did not want to talk to the press. One of the most media from the senators in the upper chamber. So i think they have been told to mike, while were talking, dont talk to the media and so we have collectively something to say. In fact, while ago we had that. It were just at halftime. Now we have three hours and 50 minutes into this meeting. Yeah. In these meetings it can get creative. We are talking about seven nominees. So it doesnt look like material. But who knows what other things can come into play, whether its the other promises that harry reid would never end the filibuster, judicial nominees or legislation. Now, senator reid said that today, he is totally comfortable with the 60wrote threshold threshold, but maybe there are other concessions that are unrelated to these nominees. When theyre is will theres a way. And if theyre is a strong sense on both sides to get a deal they can find a way to broker one. Clearly the clock is ticking and they have to get a deal in the next roughly at least 12 hours. Managing editor of the hell this paper joining us live on the phone. Thank you for being with us. Thanks. Of course to all of your home, you are seeing will we are seeing which is reporters are moving in and out and senators to prick the old Senate Chamber with everyone trying to get a sense of what has been happening inside. Of course no cameras allowed inside the Senate Chamber. It is really a carcassup the issue of the Nuclear Option, the changing of the rule of the filibuster. A call from West Sacramento california, democratic line. Good evening. Thank you for being with us. Thank you for taking my call. First of all, would like to say that everybody should not take this as an accident or a joke, we are responsible for each other regardless of your political beliefs. I have been voting for the Democratic Party for, oh, my god, all of my voting career. I have been disenchanted by what had been seeing over the last 15 or 20 years. It is i really matter which party it seems to be. There seems to be some of the power which is making the parties compromise their values to the point where they have no values of all. And because of our system, which is beautiful. I love our democratic system, if you are really disenchanted with the way that things are going, whether it be your party or the other, the only way to do that, i would suggest, to change your affiliation, which is what im going to do, i believe tomorrow morning and going to go the city of and register myself as an independent, on the because i believed that they are, perhaps, in that near future politically viable. Pau we all must be responsible for each other. Just because the church out there does not mean you have to be one. There is definitely a divine purpose for existence on this earth. I thank you for taking my call. Any questions i would be glad to answer. A couple of tweets. Pointing at that he had a chance to talk to senator dianne feinstein. In the meeting is productive and it is not to senators rita m. Mcconnell to work out a deal. That is from alex bolton on the ground on capitol hill. Jim is joining us from arlington virginia. Go at. How are you doing . Find. A firsttime caller, long time you were. No of you guys. This is about the most exciting thing i can remember since the 2000 election. Just not sure what will happen. The biggest to send it biggest decision. The majoritarian. End and just thrilled. So much excitement that i cant stand it. And now you guys are glued there. I cant wait. You can sense from the activity with reporters moving in and out that the meeting might be breaking out as additional senators to part. You can see reporters trying to glean information from the senators or leaving. A plane is on the phone from West Virginia, democratic line. Good evening. Our you doing . I would like to just make one statement. Everyone is talking about the constitution. Nobody wants to read it. The first word says weve had people, not the unions or the big money people. It says we, the people, in order to form a more perfect union. We need to read unionize the congress can get them to work for the people. All this filibuster stuff is all about money. As the only thing i know that they can be after. If you follow the money, you usually get to the relief will. Thank you for the call. Want to share with you, there have not been many tweet from members of the senate inside the session, but this just a moment ago from senator and the kroger share commit democratic. We are here debating our will. It is a heartfelt discussion. The democrats or republicans deserve to have their nominees approved. Approved. Again, one of the senators inside that closeddoor meeting. Senator bob corker to read just a moment ago we saw senator orrin hatch speaking to reporters. Again, once those principles come to the podium we will stop and let you listen to what is happening. In the meantime, a chance for you to weigh in on the debate that the senate is undertaking. Go ahead. Yes. Thank you for taking my call. I am very discouraged with some of the comments that i ever tonight where it seems like the country is so divided down racial lines. Any reference to the president or what he does or doesnt do is motivated racially. I can tell you that i thought that most of those were over the race issue back in the 60s. But i guess i was wrong. However, getting through to todays issue with the filibuster, for the nominees, i would say that when we go to a changing major legislation, such is as we are getting on a slippery slope. While it may be a winner for one party today, it will deal loser for that same party in two or three elections. And we cannot, as a nation, become so divided that we forget who we are as people. Who we are as a people is one nation, melting pot of all nations. That being said, for issues that have come out of town last several months in the papers regarding other trials can we hear them . Has really torn this country apart along racial lines. And it is time for americans to get back to being americans and supporting each other. Thats all i had to say. Thank you for the call. Youre watching the republican from south dakota, part of the Republican Leaders as he speaks to reporters as the session wraps up. Also keeping an eye on the podium where we expect to hear from some senators. There are to announce what happened to my independent line. Go ahead. Are you with us . Yearonyear. Yes, i just wanted to comment on this great reporter we have been watching for the past three hours. I learned some new dance steps. Now would like to say, im going to jump in. Were able to hear senator john ten. Lets listen in for a moment if we could. That is an awfully difficult thing to turn the other way on. All of republicans. If the democrats are willing to do that, but i did not see any evidence tonight that that is going to happen. Like as said, the discussion continues. Senators reid in, talking, as are, you know, the individual senators. Having discussions over the weekend. The back and forth. Well, none other than the obvious which is given us no republican votes for cloture. This can all be avoided. Or dont to the put option. If this were to happen, does this mean we will have another threat to change the rules this Session Congress . Theyre just werent any. No one is willing to make the hard commitments at this point. The nominees other than the nlrb. The nlrb is the real point of contention. I think that cordray, for example, probably would be sufficient republican votes. But i think the two appointments are really difficult for republicans to believe there were illegally made. And that comes back to an issue of the separation of powers and whether or not we will concede the power to decide when congress is there is not in session. You think it will be votes have send a row . Well, i dont know he has this cued up tomorrow. Conceivably. Yes. There is still this idea that killing nuclear could be bad for executive nominations. A cold war that changes the rules could be bad for the institution and changeup president think about nominations . Well, i think Going Forward this is a new president obviously. It creates all kinds of potential questions about what might happen next. But for sure if this happens now is clearly going to be discontinued in a republican administration. Evidently there are not a lot of democrats are willing to accept that, the less there would not be for it. Many of them are for that. One executive nomination, most of a line at judicial nominations of legislative filibusters. Its really hard to go back. [inaudible conversations] the comment, the meeting has concluded. This means that there was a tweeting of san a Bipartisan Senate meeting in june to three and a half hours of discussion. Those continue of the Nuclear Option. Dugard from the senator johnston, republicans sought to cut the biggest wheat, i did not mean to interrupt, but we wanted to jump in. Go ahead with your point. Trying to make this short. We have been doing a great job with cspan for a long time. Very educational. A lot of these folks are calling in. It is kind of a window what theyre listening to. A lot of what i call the radio and tv for a short amount of time. Thats apparent formed by. So i would like to remind a lot of folks who are crazy about jumping on the republicans about civil rights. They should remember that in our state here in tennessee al gore, fought tooth and nail against Lyndon Johnson back in the 60s. The democrats were insane of this civil rights act. A coalition of republicans. Anything the democrats wanted they have the following. And it is not necessarily read state blue state. So that comment plus one more. Over 1500 nominations. Only four have been turned down. Okay. Thank you for the call. Read that tweet from senator corn and he says the Bipartisan Senate meeting is adjourned after three and half hours. Discussions continue on the issue of the Nuclear Option. Reporters are standing by presumably for one of the Senate Leaders to come to the podium. We do know that earlier senator Mitch Mcconnell went straight to his office. Here is the Senate Democratic leader. Okay, everyone. Thank you. The homerun derby. Okay. And i cant hear anyone. What i said is that the night is late and theyre were no brakes. We have had a very good conversation. The conversation will continue tonight. We will reschedule for 10 00 in the morning. Averted and changing the rules . [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] and a very, very brief statement by the Senate Democratic leader indicating that the discussions will continue. Of course, the senate is scheduled to reconvene tomorrow morning at 10 00 a. M. Eastern time. A brief comment about bryce carper, both he and senator Mitch Mcconnell are fans of the washington nationals. In the of run derby in advance of tomorrows allstar game, but no indication as to any resolution tonight to images that very brief statement. He was joined by senator Chuck Schumer of new york. We will get more of your phone calls. Dean is joining a strong union town, kansas. Go at. Guest thank you for taking my call. Two brief points. The accountability of people that colin has really been disingenuous and very disheartening. I dont know how many i tried to keep track, but i could not keep track of the number of people that swore that the republicans goal was not to give obama anything while he was in office. And the gentleman before me pointed out, the number of appointments and everything overwhelmingly was agreed to. He got those appointments. But they have a right to question, you know. My second point is, there was a gentleman, and he was a learned gentleman, i can tell. I dont know if he was a former senator. He had a position. He said that he objected to the people that did not know what was really going on. And this system, may try to explain it. It is my opinion to my humble opinion that what is really going on is pure politics in that the unions want to those three appointments, labor appointments made. If they would have been made legally and in the normal procedure, the wail of the others were, there would probably already be in there. But it was very and it was pointed out by the federal court that it was not unconstitutional. But i have a lot of friends that are labour people. Theyre good people. There are good and bad on both sides. They got it from right in their face on this obamacare, what it really how is really going to affect the now. Theyre very, very unhappy. I think this whole thing is coming up at this opportune time to try to appease the labor unions. I think i know surely that there are enough labour people that hardworking people know theyre being played. They are smarter than to except this little token of appreciation. How long are those appointments going to last . There will be in all the time. Thank you from the call. The republican line. Philip is joining us from new york. Our line for democrats. Evening. Good evening. Thank you for taking my call. I would like to remind listeners. The founders and their wisdom gave two votes to every state regardless of population. So effectively will we are witnessing with the 40 votes, approximately senators representing Something Like 20 percent of the United States population trying to have veto power over the other 80 percent of the population of the country and i think that that two per state rule that the founders set up is more than enough power through the minority. And the whole concept of the filibuster should be abolished. Thats my opinion. Thank you very much for taking my call and thank you for cspan thank you. Appreciated. The hill newspaper, just quoting he said very briefly, we had a very good conversation. Talks will continue. Next is re joining us from fort myers, florida. Good morning. This wonderful broadcast. I followed cspan quite a bit. You guys are great. Two plus a one to make. This is a time when we need the likes of melvin laird. I happen to know him. Hes a wonderful man. He did wonderful things for country in bringing republican and democrat together in times that were very difficult to run the vietnam war in the 60s. We have now melvin laird. The second thing i wanted to say is, today i was lucky enough to watch a beautiful ceremony in the white house from below 1,000 point of light award. George h. W. Bush was there. He did a wonderful job. Of course is going on in age, but he is a great guy. Barack obama did a wonderful guy with the entire program. Unfortunately tonight to were witnessing how very the very, very worst thing that can happen. His minions have now decided that they will try and rip apart country. Im very sorry to see that. Have a wonderful day today. Thank you. That event with George Herbert walker bush wearing his redandwhite striped socks that he has been known to wear, as he calls them, the crazy socks. You can see at event along with president obama from the east room of the white house available in our website. Another tweet. Quoting senator reid commander will show you what he said. The Senate Meeting ends after three and a half hours. We had a very good conversation. Pope votes are set for 10 00 a. M. Tomorrow morning. No questions. The following the tweeds from congressional reporters and members of congress in attendance. So far to we have been able to track. Lisa from riverview, mich. , democratic line. Hello. How watch politics all the time. Unfortunately we hear people on the line like the last one who was trying to buy the democrats. Is the republicans. The only thing they want to do his best the obama administration. When i hear senator reid say that discussions continue, i worry because it sounds like hes on watch the filibuster in texas, the state senate. Why is it that the u. S. Senate does not have to do the same thing . There were trying all of these tactics that they had to end a filibuster and have the vote. But in the u. S. Senate they dont do that. They dont even have to come out and talk. The all thing needs to go away and it needs to be an up or down vote, a simple majority like the founders wanted. Thank you for the call. Congressional reporter paul singer has this, the senate talked for hours, resolve nothing. The synod meeting adjourns. The discussions will continue on the Nuclear Option. Our cspan congressional reporter pointing out that this senator left the old Senate Chamber and went straight to his office. The lights are not turned down inside the ohio clock area. We showed the reporters of love to. Presumably no action until tomorrow morning when the senate does reconvene at 10 00 eastern, 7 00 for those of the on the west coast. In case you missed it, its your short. Heres was senator reid said a few moments ago. Okay, everyone. The night is late and im anxious to see how Price Chopper is denim on monday to okay. I cant hear anyone. But i said that the night is late. There have been no brakes. We have been going steady in there. We had a very good conversation, a conversation that will continue tonight and go to a 10 00 morning special. Avoiding a change in the rules, sir . [inaudible conversations] joined by senator dick durbin and schumer of new york. Very brief statement after a three and a half hour session and said the old Senate Chamber. It is clear, no agreement reached yet on the filibuster rules and the number of the president s nominations to serve as the labor secretary members of the nlrb, director of the Consumer Financial protection board and the president s choice to be epa director. And so work will continue overnight and we will find out tomorrow morning at 10 00 unless theyre are reports earlier about what has been resolved. However, a chance for you tomorrow morning to check in with a veteran observer of congress, joining us on cspan washington journal, part of our coverage of 7 00 a. M. He is written in number of books, including its worst and it looks. Also, to members who were in attendance, a total of 98 senators bernie sanders, an independent from vermont caucuses with the democrats. Republican of wyoming at 9 00 eastern time as we check in with him from the russell Senate Office building tomorrow morning. Cspan washington journal. Thank you for being with us. You can get more updates during the night and tomorrow any time at cspan. Org. Cspan, created by american Cable Companies in 1979 brought to you as a Public Service by your television provider. This week on the communicators, interviews from cable show in washington d. C. , including elected issues facing the cable industry with analyst jessica reed kaelin. The bureau chief bill lake. The joining us on the communicators, managing director at bank of america, Merrill Lynch. What do you do . I am a Research Analyst covering the media and entertainment in the cable and satellite. When it comes to the cable industry,. We actually very bullish on cable. They have a huge into the home with multiple services. Obviously initially it was video and over time that has become most importantly broadband, but also voice. Rolling out of the services on top of that. Hall monitoring. It could be things like managing the thermostat a turning on your pool heater, but your nanny camera pet camp. News services are beginning to roll out on a platform. The same time, cable is also rolling out as in the os of Medium Enterprise business. The same thing, video, voice command data to be addressed starting to see it leverage in many ways. Another separate investment point for a cable is that the industry finally they tend to have hundreds of billions of dollars in investment and become cash flow positive. Of the ls three of four years we have seen very significant return of capital to shareholders. Also through dividend. That is a gigantic change for the industry. In the last five years we have seen the industry go earnings positive. They cable name a misnomer any more . I mean, there is still cable, but is a Multi Service platform. You will see more and more that. We will see, i think in this convention a lot more advancement. Technology is an enabling of many things. You are buying. And will make the guys that we as consumers use much easier to use. More friendly, but also makes it a much more enjoyable a experience. Think of an itunes or netflix. That is a really Welcome Change i cant tell you how many times ive had some they come for my kid. A very big difference in terms of what it does the revenue to the Cable Operators. This is a rebate opporunity of Cable Operators getting customers or losing customers. Losing customers, losing video customers at the expense of competitors, whether it satellite. We believe intel is about to come out of the new product. There may be others behind them. Over the top type Video Services but in terms of broadband, cable has been gaining size and gaining market share. So in most of the country the have a far superior product to anything offered. The incumbent, the telephone companies. So thats a pretty significant amount, 30 percent off 45 . So this is obviously where more than cable. Kind of a slower pace than they had previously. On the business side all of cable gained, they are not the incumbent. They have been getting pretty significant market share. When you look at a comcast, a different Business Model, they have the network and the cable operator, killed provider and the network. Is that Business Model of future . Every company is a different approach. And so comcast bought Nbc Universal. A lot of discussion. With a doing the right thing or not . It did not work for other companies. Time warner burned to arrest another cable. So as warner music. There spinning out publishing. Theyre very different personality and culture. The case of comcast, this should work extremely well. They have really strong communication throughout the company. Very strong management. And our view basically they play a really good data related price. They bought it at a very good time when advertising was extremely weak before it was obvious it would be a big revenue generator for the network. The broadcasters. And so right timing, right price, right structure. At this point nbc is a performer. Its Getting Better, but it still far from where it should and could be. So our view is that Nbc Universal is a media play. Getting virtually no credit for nbc. So in our analysis, if it trades in line with the other Cable Operators, we have the value for Nbc Universal, almost between 5. 8 for comcasts share. If they do a great job, if they do well that over the next two years this could be worth 20 a share. If they execute flawlessly, absolutely perfectly, maybe 30. But if they just kind of model along, theres this option that investors have. And our view is that steve burke knows the industry well. He is the heir apparent from disney for a long time and has very strong management under him. They know what they need to do to put those businesses command each one, whether it is broadcast, cable network, fell more international, as you just said. The potential product coming out onto the market, whether your thoughts . Well, its not for me to opine on whether thats legal and not. I dont think it changes. Its a very interesting concept. Many of the forecasters, ready to signal to pay tv operators and rare kind of an like the third round. So the first round may be was 40 to 50. The second was close to a dollar. And the broadcasters were also going to get to this 2 range in the values of the contract. Another big step up. And they provide a programming. The broadcasters provide great programming. It is hard to believe that its legal. There are a lot of technology challenges. And has been for years. Providing programming you need to have the right. Can you skip ads . Can you take programming and a virtual . Its there are tons and tons of Disruptive Technologies that may or may not be illegal. John mccain is talking about his cable bill . Is that a disrupter . It doesnt seem like theres a lot of support. I would be worried more about the programmers perspective. The programmers do not want to unbundle, have their networks unbundle. They dont want to sell individual networks because if you have viacom and have fifteen networks, how many operators will take more than mtv and knick nickelodeon. Would they take the full . Its a risk for all programmers. Of course its a risk for the tv as we it doesnt but its its not like one running and the other isnt. Its the big risk for anybody. How many would pay a lot for sports . Im not sure i know the answer to that. Do you think theres a change it will go through . It doesnt feel that way. Certainly doesnt feel that way. When you look at the horizon and you think about the future of tv, tv everywhere. What do you see . Well, the great thing about whether its tv everywhere awe and the multiple devices any of us have. Many of the disrupted technologies, like twitter, for example, or facebook, its made the television experience for some its made it better. Its made it different. A lot what is going on in the social Network Universe is all of that on tv, you know, you can its the way people cost the somehows more involved. But theres more to it. There are ways to catch up. So historically you would see it would be normal would be three or four five of the show peak and come down. Instead what we see is many shows is that in year tree, four, five, the viewership is going up. Whether its net flicks or video on demand they are catching up. And now, you know, people are talking about homelands and season two did better one. Or downtown abby or walking deed. You see audiences build where historically you lose audiences. Technology has been an amazing enabler. I guess the biggest shock is an lettic coverage i wont say for home decades, decades plural, viewing time has gone up. And its gone up for home from five or six hours a day to over eight hours. Its not per person, but person home. Thats an astounding amount of Television People are watching. Theres no danger that television. We have a great product particularly in american companies. As huge we have a big universe and single country. Our programming tends to be escorted a lot of money in that. As americans we love our tv and tv shows get sold over and over. Its a profitedble industry on a global basis as well. How did you get start in this industry . It it was eons ago. I started a the the small company. The person hired me is alan took a chance. Took a chance on a young person. Were you interested in the cable industry . Did they assign you to it . I loved it. Honestly i was hired by a guy that covered [inaudible] and had i been hired by the guy who covered auto i wouldnt be an able list today. It was a lot of luck. When i started covering cable, it was really, really small and very highly levered industry. It was very different. It was really it was meant to make people couldnt see television. They couldnt get clear signals. Its evolved. One of the First Companies i followed was mtv when it was a public company. I remember that. And the demographics have changed cable television, younger people as they got their own household wanted to watch the channels, and people see the same thing with broadband. Broadband penetration in the u. S. , is depending on what statistic you take. Ds will recollect or not. High speed data is 50 plus over time our viewers that will be 85 or 90 . Its a long way for cable. In broadband not even including sme and the commercial business or home monitoring whatever that becomes. What are some of the storm clouds that are potential in the cable industry . The cost of programming is really scary. Its very bad time line. There are three drivers of programming costs inflation. Retransmission consent, which really cant start getting in the last five to seven years. It was used to get more care. The Regional Sports channel were nfl was charging a lot of money. And the costs get passed on to, you know, the eventually to pay tv providers, satellite, and as consumers. And the third driver just normal negotiations. So you see companies that are being deliberate. They invested in programming. Ill take the discover, for example. The Program Budget went for 500 million to 1 billion. It was a Different Company today. In our view they will get very decent price increases without it. Simply because they delivered very high quality programming. Of course multiple channels whether its discovery, tlc, animal planet,. Othero. W. N. How closely do you watch the fcc watch congress . We have less at the moment. There are less issues. Its a very big deal at the time. And luckily the government took a light hand in broadband and broadband prices which stimulated the industry to invest. It was a very positive thing. We have the big types with very fast high speed data, which is getting faster and faster since the fees are going up and up. Had the industry been regulated with price caps, the level of investment would have been lower. I look around to the day of the fcc, which there was great rollback and cable industry found a loophole and really, really then the fcc closed the loophole. And there were 17 rate roll back. So i think the light touch of the fcc has actually been a big benefit to the industry. Its been a massive amount of investment. And thats been the benefit to consumers ultimately. One of the issues we talk about on the communicators here in washington is the issue of net neutrality. There are a couple of cases working their way true right now. What are you thoughts . Well see what happens. The verizon case is the one coming up. Hopefully i think so you just the providers of broadband have generally, and it was not for me im not a regulator. I think there are many flavors and prices. Consumers have options to pay low prices for lower speeds. Higher prices for higher speeds. Generally when offered a choice if someone can afford it, they will always prefer to pay with the higher speeds. There are many flavors and many options out there. And so far, i think, its regulatory touch has been a big process. Do you know tom wheeler at all . I do not know him. I hear excellent things about him. Is there a danger in getting too close to your people you analyze . Is that possible to happen . You say from a no as an analyst for you. Is there a danger in getting too close to the companies . I mean, you have covered them for twenty or thirty years . As an analyst we have an objective opinion. Owe can see. If we didnt have if we werent as analysts able to provide a truly, you know, if we werent able to give an honest appraisal, then we actually have no value to our clients. I think its a lot of what happened in the past. It people can see through that. As you active for a company. Investors see through that. Theres no value. So what is the you have to be honest and very objective. And really try to call it as we see it. And sometimes that doesnt makes very popular with the companies. And honestly sometimes it doesnt makes popular with investors. If you own a stock and negative its not a pleasant experience to go through. A lot of people of cutting the cord, is that at the Cable Companies to be take advantage of that . Cable is offering more and more wifi and more spots. The bulk of trans to get high speed wifi you need a fixed line wire somewhere. Its it augments it. It gives us mobility. But we dont see wireless broadband as an effective substitution for wire lines. With bank of america and Merrill Lynch managing directer have been covering the cable industry for years. You are watching the communicators. We want to introduce you to william lake. Hes the bureau chief, the media bureau chief of the media communication. Get to meet somebody behind the scenes. What is the media bureau what do you do . Why the part of the commission and recommendation policy on the commission on the Electronic Media. Broadcast radio and television and the cable industry. What is one of the issues right now . One of the big issue we have what is called the incentive options. An attempt to enable some of the broadcasters to surrender their spectrum voluntarily to it can be auctioned off to the wireless carriers and the broadcasters will share it. Its a big project something we have never done before. Its taking a lot of activity. The professional staff at the media bureau, is it going happen in 2014 . Are you ready for it to happen . 2014 . We are on schedule. Its something that the media bureau is doing with the other bureau. It cuts across the agency. We think we are on schedule. Do you work with congress very closely . We work with them closely and follow their enactment of the law. It was a proposal we made that required legislation. Were watching what they do and keeping our deadline. Well, its june 2013 we are taping this interview, where are you right now in the process . We have gone through the Public Comment process. We are now in the process of formulated recommended rules that end up to the commission with the hope theyll vote on it before the end of the year. Mr. Lake, how often do you meet with the commissioners are where are you . Each of the commissioners at least two weeks with the Chairmans Office more often. And we report them to regularly on where we stand. And we will probably at the june meeting do a public report on the progress at the meeting. You have to meet with them individually; correct . Because of sunshine laws . Yes. They dont meet anymore one of two of them at the time. What other issues are you working on . One of the things were spending a lot of time is on implement implementation of the seability act. Congress passed a statute to make the Electronic Media to people of various handicaps. We are tackling something the last step in our process to try to make Program Guides. The user interface. The Program Guides you see on television. Assessable to those visually impaired. So talking program which is a simple concept, but quite complicated as a technical matter to influence. We are working very closely with the industry to try to get it right. And the Cable Company is working with you on that . Yes. We put on a notice and get formal comments and informal help from the effectived Disability Group as well as the industry. One of the issues you are responsible for at least tracking our cable rates; correct . Yes. How have cable rates gone up in the last five years . How much is there a limit to where they can go . We just issued an annual report, and what we found is consistent with what we found in recent years, which is that the average price of most people subscribe to continues to go up. 6 in the last year. The world will know what is happening to cable rates. As the media bureau chief at the fcc, are there some laws that have become outdated because of changing technology . Well, mostly do what Congress Tells us to do. Its true that the last Major Overhaul was in 1996 before the internet was a major phenomena and all the changes going on in the video marketplace. So, you know, many people of congress who think it might be time to revisit the law. In the meantime we have implement the law we have. Has your work slowed down because theres only three commissioners . Not at all. We are on the tight incentive option. Were continuing i dont know it will be voted on the commission. Its a threemember commission after the we get the two additional members. We want to serve it up so it can be acted thon year. Mr. Lake, what is your background . Im a lawyer. Most of my career i practiced law with a Large Law Firm in washington. This is my fourth time in the federal government. I have gone in and out sever tiles. Your second time at the fcc . Well, i came in 2009 at the beginning of the obama administration, to oversee the final stations of the broadcast transition and stayed on the media bureau chief. Two jobs but one time at the commission. Are we ready to put a period on the Digital Transition . Almost. There are still some rules that havent been updated for the digital world. We are trying to work them through. Yes, i think so. Of course, the broadcast industry has to keep evolving like all the other media industries. They are now considering a possible new digital tv standard to replace the one adopted when we did the first transition. Change is inevitable in all of the media industry. With so many people now watching video on wireless devices or computers. The television, the Traditional Television model has changed. Does that name difficult for you to do you do regulations needs to be adapted to fit that . We try to adapt our regulations to the marketplace. Again, within the four corners of the statute that weed a administer. And the change is i did maamic dynamic in the video marketplace both the services and the devices which they can watch the services. A chance to meet somebody behind the scenes. William lake is the media bureau chief. You are watching the communicators. Cspan created by americas Cable Companies in 1979. Brought to you as a service by your television provider. Just under an hour ago on capitol hill, the old Senate Chamber republicans and democrats wrapped up more than three hours of closeddoor talks on the fate of several of president obamas nominations. Nominees. And those proposed filibuster rules changes. We have no resolution. They are back tomorrow at 10 00 a. M. Eastern. Also tomorrow those proposed senate rules changes will be parking lot of part of the conversation on the washington journal program. Washington journal is live tomorrow and every day at 7 00 a. M. Eastern. Later in the week ben bernanke is expected at the pair of hearings on capitol hill. It starts at 10 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan 3. On thursday, he testifies at the Senate Banking committee hearing. You can watch that live on cspan 3 as well. That gets underway at thursday at 10 30 eastern. Next Federal Reserve board governor discusses the economy and the implementation of the doddfrank financial law. He says that the economy despite slow growth is more table than it was leading up to the 2008 financial crisis. Due to doddfrank and increased Household Savings among other factors. Hosted by politico. This is about an hour. [inaudible conversations] good morning, everybody. Thank you for coming out. Try to keep the try to keep the room cool for everyone. Were going get started very quickly. Joining me is Federal Reserve governor danielle. Hes at the center of the feds regulatory effort and the member of the open market committee. Perfectly situated in the corner of wall street and washington. I want to thank everybody who came out. Everybody joining on the live stream. Thank you for being here. I would like to encourage those watching to tweet questions at me morningmoney. Well get your questions a little bit later on. Housekeeping item, if you have a cell phone, keep it on. Put it on mute so we dont interrupt. Andlet ged and get started. I want to start by first of all saying thank you for coming out. Ask a little bit about your view on too big to fail right now. Do we have banks in this country at this moment who are too big to fail . If they got in to trouble in a crisis would be bailed snout despite all of the efforts thus far. There are some being implemented by other regulators. Based on doddfrank do we have too big to fail banks in the country . I think the way to begin is to realize that too big to fail is not a finery status. I dont think you have an institution that in either some ab absolute sense is or absolute sense isnt. Think about what happened in the crisis. The pretty small Money Market Fund when it became insole vent set off a crisis in the rest of the Money Market Funds that require an intervention by the treasury and the fed to keep that industry supported. One before the crisis would never have thought of reserve primary fund as a systemic constitution. Theres a important lesson, to some degree, too big to fail is a contingent status. Depends on what it going on in a greater environment of the Financial System. Having said that, its obvious that the risk pose bid any particular institution can be substantially greater, and the imminent failure of some institutions can pose a much more obvious threat to the Financial System than others. For that reason we do conventionally identify some institutions which may not characterize as too big to fail. At least systemically important. I guess i would say that with respect to those largest most complex institutions in the united, that while a good bit has been done, and as you mentioned about to be done under sets of regulations and agreement that will be implemented. My own view is that we still do need to do more to get to the point at which the risks of opposed by some of these institutions are confined to what we would think of as manageable proportion. Lets start with what has been done first. More than double the capital in the largest institution. We are on our way to a set of liquidity requirements both short term and over somewhat longer and medium term liquidity requirement. We have the orderly resolution Liquidation Authority in place being implemented by the fdic. We have a stress testing regime that the fed put in place. So an awful lot has been done, and some of those things could be surcharged later liquidity requirements are on the horizon. The big area, i think we need to do more about is short term funding. Right. Thats an obvious follow yum. When will you do something on the short term wholesale funding . What would you like so see happen . And less vulnerable . The first opportunity. Theres an opportunity here. Thats a net Stable Funding ratio for those in the audience who dont know. We in the other Banking Industries will put out a propose the in the fall to implement the United States. The net Stable Funding ratio is supposed to deal with somewhat longer term liquidity situation of the bank. Right in the original con step sort of proceeded on assumption that a a matchbook was a more or less safe position to be in. My own sense is while its better to have a more matchbook than a less matchbook its still the case that large amount of wholesale funding at particular institutions or the system more generally make the institution and or the system susceptible to run. In the first instance i think we should whether we can adjust the net Stable Funding ratio to take that in to account. It not, i think we have to do something independent of that. Thats why in that speech a couple of months ago, i floated the idea of tieing short term wholesale funding to an independent metric of some sort. And possibly tieing it to higher capital level as well. On the leverage ratio proposal that just came out, you have proposed going beyond what they have proposed 6 at the Company Level 5 at the bank level. Five and six. Theres been some criticism theres too much between now and proposed and the sixty day period for banks to comment and make it less stringent. Its too limiting to the ability to make loans. And drive the economic recovery. There was a way to do it differently to, you know, an interim final or something that would be more immediately impactive on these Bank Accounts and make the system safer fast ensure. You have to remember, as i mentioned a moment ago, we have already doubled amount of capital. All of them are continuing to build capital in accordance with the expectations and indeed the requirements of when we put out the surcharge. So the banks are already on for regulatory and anticipate reasons and upward trajectory. The research ratio is a compliment an important compliment to the riskbased capital environment requirements making sure its harder to when you have an leverage ratio theres to do the riskiest you. When you have only riskbased capital to try to arbitrage those category. If you put the two together, you have a little bit more coverage. So all of these requirements are intended to be phased in over a period of years. In doing so you minimize the chance of disruption to the flow of credit and capital more generally. I think we would also demonstrate a successful approach when you lack a look at the capital in the United States since early 2009. In term of the interim final rules are intended for circumstances that supposed to be exjentd theres a powerful reason for not having the kind of notice and comment which the administrative procedure act contemplates, and which most people think is very good idea because it means that the proposal made by regulators have a chance to be scrutinized by everyone in the public. So obviously with this as Everything Else we go out for comment. I think you can also see in the proposal that its a strong sense in the agency that the 3 ratio which is adequate. We made a proposal for something more. What do you make of the arpgment argument of the banks covered by this . The largest Financial Institution it will limit the flow of credit and liquidity and taking in to account going too far to regulate banks without the seability of credit. To you theres ab legitimate article it could be damage together economy . Well, the interest is always. And peoples comments and comments from all distribution destructions and people can make what is goik to give off a level of that will protect against a recurrence the extremely financial crisis we had a few years ago . And the analytic behind that suggest among other things and stray to the reform process is the need for so sablizing the Financial System being an insurance policy against are there costs associated with that . There are almost any cost associated with the policy that tries to protect individuals. If you tell people they cant drive as fast in order stop there from being fatality on the highway. Some congress will take longer to do. We have balanced this. I think the transition periods means there will be a minimal disruptive effect on the economy while we get plank blank arguing we should reseparate Investment Banking from consumer banks. Do you think its a good idea to protect individual consumers . Would that address too big to fail in a way we havent addressed it so far . There is quite appropriately a continuing discussion of ways to take additional steps to provide more of that safety and stability i was talking about amoment ago. I think its useful to begin by identifying for ourselves what the criteria we want to bring to bear on reform proposalses are. And i think probably the two most important not hard to identify are first how the proposal be preventing the kinds of problems we had five and six years ago. Or preventing problems that right now without a lot of imagination one could foresee development. And secondly, what will be the cost . Thats the backdrop. Number two, i think its important to keep a little history in mind here as to how glass stegall ended up being first narrowed and then in at least in the separation of banking and Investment Banking aspect eliminated. This the commercial banks beginning in the about the mid 70s began to experience a real squeeze in their Business Models on both sides of the Balance Sheet. On the liability side, deposit basically they had been very cheap sources of funding. Indeed for awhile suppressed by the amount of interest you could pay on them. Deposit have been a very predictable beneficial the bank source of funding. That were becoming less and less reliability because other savings vehicles were developing for American House hold. Mutual funds, money market mutual funds. A variety ways that an individual household get a higher return 0 the savings. Obviously meant that the bank deposit were becoming less attractive eventually of course Interest Rates were deregulated. The funding was a little more available, but somewhat more expensive. On the asset side of the Balance Sheet, the growth of Capital Markets in the United States had over the proceeding couple of decades lead to a situation in which very Large Companies essentially did not borrow anymore from commercial banks. They may have standby arrangement, bridge funding. They didnt take out longer term loans. Capital markets had made publicly issued bonds much more readily available first to the biggest and eventually the big and medium Large Companies as well. All of that on both sides of the Balance Sheet of the to the good for the economy as a whole. Good for house hold to be able to get higher return on the savings. Good for companies to have a lower cost of capital. It did produce the squeeze on banks. To some degree what was happening in the 80s and 90s regulators and the congress was reacting to the squeeze which was calling in to question the viability of the banking moadged. That was a lot of what behind the erosion of glass stegall. When it was finally the underbrush was swept away, it was not so much a radical change in the situation that had been happening for awhile. But it was a lost opportunity. It was a lost opportunity to put in place a regulatory system that responded more to the new forms of funding and activities. Okay. So with all of that on the backdrop, the way i think about glaces stegall is roughly the following. Which is on the benefit side there would be some benefit in having a separation of banking and commerce. I think we saw in the runup to the crisis, many of the institutions that actually provoke the most serious phase of the crisis were not within the commercial Banking System at all either individually or by affiliation. They had no access to the discount window. The most noticeable are [inaudible] now there were large banking organizations which are also had some other things that did similar things to what they did. You didnt need a commercial bank to do that. So theres some question as to how much that separation would actually prevent the kind of problems we saw from developing. Then secondly theres at least some question as to whether one would lose something. Which is the benefits of having Large Institutions with the capacity to say they have to be as large as the institutions are today. A relatively Large Institution with the capacity to provide funding of any sort that a client may need from a line of credit in a commercial bank to underwriting a bond to going out to the ipo. Now what those benefits are a little hard to pin down. There hasnt been as Much Research as i would like to see. At least argument. When i put them together 66 a can sincerity and at least some questions about unexpwended consequences. My own sense that i wouldnt have there was a problem with them. I think that problem, again, was on short term runnable funding more than it was what kind of firms there affiliated with. I guess its a way of saying people should dont explore and ask questions about and analyze what the impact of various reforms would be. For me the priority of short term wholesale funding. You mentioned there were banks in the commercial space that got in trouble. Citi group is the greatest example of that. Arguably one of the main reasons glass stegall came down was, you know, lobbying pressure from those who wanted to one stop shop supermarket. People dont talk about it that much is it a reason to support legislation like this. Ultimately as a factual historic call matter. In the end the biggest on city was that it allowed city to absorb travelers. The irony of that is that that was a fairly short lived marriage. I guess that the real point is that the vol nebility posed by using short term funding to fund longer term assets are vol nebility that develop in many kinds of institutions. And so if were trying to solve for that problem, i think we should solve for that problem. No matter what the institution and which the activity is taking place. I think to bring them to the [inaudible] do you think it leads to Better Outcomes or there are too many cooks in the kitchen sometimes . Its definitely been a complicated process. If you think about the precrisis period, the free banks agencies did a fair number of rules particularly capital roles and they worked out a way one another. There were noticeable things in the precrisis period. Since i have gotten to the fed, i think relationship among the staff and the principles at to agencies is pretty well developed in a shared perspective. The important thing for people to realize everybody when its overwhelmingly the case acting in total debate. If everybody has their own perspective, and it needs to be worked through, it takes longer for staff to incorporate all of the views in the i think 22 separate people have the five Relevant Agency have a say in. And when agencies that are not necessarily sharing the same basic approach like the three banking agencies have to do deal with one another. There may be some learning. I think thats the learning. Thats been the good side of it. It takes quite awhile. It requires sometimes that you have difficult element of proposals being placed together in a way that no one agency would on it et. Cetera have done. I think young someone being in the middle of it is seems very long can be frustrating that takes that much time. Again, you dont frustrated with the individuals. You just with the process taking as much time as it does. I think probably you have to wait until the whole process is over for more objective observers to ask the question on net has the value been such to make that kind of rulemaking with multiple agencies the best way to go . I think its a little early to judge. I think its undenial that feature part of slowed down the rulemaking process. You say there never actually any personality conflict . It doesnt much matter what the particular institutional structure is there sometimes personality conflict. I guess what i would say about this set of exercises, i think people have gone out their way in general to try to im going get back to regular story question in a moment. I know, the time moves fast. I want to talk about the Monetary Policy and this very interesting time that the fed is in right now. I wonder if you were surprised by the speed and intensity of Market Reaction to the chairmans press conference on june 19th particularly in the bond market and the reaction of the tenure treasure i are to those comments. How did you feel about that Market Reaction . And do you think since that has happened the market has gotten back to a more disappointed delivery and the fair value . I think its worth going back to the middle part of the spring when yield started to rise. And this was before the chairman testimony much less before the fomc in june. I would think that the overwhelming ebbing play nation explanation for that rise would have some anticipation that things were Getting Better in the economy. If you will the good reason why longterm rates will begin to go up is an expectations that conditions at some in the future will warrant higher Interest Rates. Dealing with an upward trend that had a jump at the time of our time june ofmc meeting. I think that having spoken to a lot of participates in markets over the last several months, i heard from almost unanimousic, there will be jumps upanddown. Many of the people were supporters of the policies. Not all. But many were supporters of the polls that would have been pursuing in our Monetary Policy. They all bankly said you are going to have jumps upanddown whether in equity or bonds or both. I didnt find it wholly surprising whether that might be that action. I think im echoing things in the fomc minute and the in the statement itself. And there are two things i think really to keep in mind. First with respect to the large scale asset purchases. Qe3 as its been popularly called. What were talking about here is eventually a reduction in the number of purchases for a month. And then eventually a new purchases. No one is talking about unwinding or selling the securities we have been buying. Thats a member of data or data driven depending on the economy as we see the economy develop then well make our judgment. Were not specifying, you know, no matter what happens on this particular date were going have a change in the flow. So thats one thing. It can be a economying policy. Probably even more important for people to realize theres not some intellectual collection between 6. 5 unemployment. Are themselves thresh hold and not triggers. That is to say when one or both of those is reached what will happen is the fomc will sit and think about whether under these circumstance its appropriate to make a move on the federal funds raise. Its not automatic and indeed its not differ to imagine circumstance in which one would say that even though, for example, the 6. 5 Unemployment Rate has been reached inflation might be undued. We might see theres a good bit of slack in the labor market. Perhaps Labor Force Participation is not bounced back. What is set off by the threshold is a consideration of what to do next. Nothing has been pull each moving on the own set of contingent conditions as assessed by the committee. In term of those targets or the triggers, threshold. Being met theres a general consensus in the economic immunity that the feds forecast for Economic Growth the rest of the year probably to were not going to hit those levels. It looks like Second Quarter number is going to be very weak based in part on the drag well see what is your view on the state of the economy right now and your forecast for the rest of the year. Do you think the publish forecast are to ambitious or hopeful . Do you see the economic recovery gathering base . First is the technical matter that the projections that chairman was reporting on the june press conference is the central tendency of the aggravated projection of 19 individuals in the blank useful to point out. Some central bank have a process where by the member of the Monetary Policy committee sit around and put together the individuals and come up with a consensus. We dont do that. Having said that, i think the most important thing again is my decision, certainly, i would anticipate those in my colleagues will be based upon with a we observe about the economy. What the outlook for labor market which the purchases. So it turns out that the central tendency of fomc participate has been too optimistic. That would suggest that the class of the economy is not going to go as the chairman related those expectations in june. Therefore whey they would call a reaction poll. Hes going to indicate we should behave differently. In a sense this selfcorrecting mechanism in there. More generally on the economy, you know, its interesting. I think for the last several years, the spurt many Economic Growth of job creation we would see for several four or five months were largely the result of Monetary Policy, fiscal policy, stimulus effect or some combination of the two. I was skeptical that there was selfsustaining underlying momentum there because of the large amount of household debt, the depressed state of the housing market, the major dislocation that occurred in the American Labor market. When some people were getting a bit more optimistic. My underlying assumption would be were going have some backslide. Indeed that has taken place each on each of the previous three occasions. Beginning toward the end of last year, i think the an lettic frame has shifted some. I think its the case now that household debt. Its by no means the case at all house hold are back in the circumstance of the precrisis period. Enough house hold have got a lot of work done on the own Balance Sheet. We know the Financial System is stronger than it was. Large corporations are very cash rich right now. They have been in very good shame for some time now. Its appearedded those head winds that the economy was facing had diminished substantially. I think for this year, the question has been to what degree will a fiscal drag that has taken place because of the increase in the payroll tax and sequestration rebound the economy which otherwise seem supposed to steadier period of growth. Not a second already but a steady period of growth. I think the jury is still out on it that to sop degree. I think its undenial the fiscal effect had a drag and the significant one. They think about an percentage and a half off of gdp this year. But for all of us. The question is going to be can the economy with such underlying momentum built up work through the peak period of fiscal constraint which is probably sed second or third. Before those effects begin to diminish a little bit. Theyll still be negative effects. They should diminish a little bit in the beginning of next year. That is the question that im going to be asking myself as we come up it 0 the next several fomc meeting. What does the data say whether that underlie momentum is enough to sustain positive growth through this period or to what degree the fiscal constraints risking again that kind of backsliding each of the last three years. How much of additional risk is it to that backsliding for we get another debt ceiling theres no clear path toward resolution of either of those at that point. How much of a risk do you think that poses to the economic recovery . In addition to coming on top of the fiscal tightening well dont see . As we saw couple of years ago , in term of confidence and market and certainty for Business People trying to make Investment Decisions and the like, those kinds of high uncertainty, the socalled fiscal cliff cannot be helped. Its just something that is out there that can eject more doubt more uncertainty in to a group of consumers and investors who are already asking a lot of questions about the underlying strength of the economy. This is a twitter question, but also i want to add on my list which is your view on the bernanke effort to bring more transparency to the central bank. Particularly i said inflation target. He held press conferences, attempted to be more open in the communication with the general public as previous debt. Chairman may or may not have been do you think on balance in has been a positive thing . Are we in a period where feds and communicate better with the public . So lets start by thinking about think about this as so what are the reasons why that the principle reason why one want transparency in government is essentially one of accountability. That is where we are a nation of delegated power on which the people delegate to the congress under article i of the constitution which in turn delegates to a variety of government agencies. And there is a very strong interest in any democracy in the people being able to observe how those dell agrees are carrying out the authority that congress has given them. So i think in the first instance, the transparency policy, which the chairman championed long before he get got to the fed can be understood as a way for congress and through congress to public to evaluate how the fed, which is an independent entity as a lot of independents for very good reason. With that independence it needs to give people an turn opportunity an to evaluate what the policies are. What the reasoning is. How it what its trying to accomplish in pursuit of the dual mandate that congress has give us. To be able to get a better sense of how the pot the path to Monetary Policy could play out with economic conditions. A