that program. there are other programs like that we can do away with some of the job training programs. there is duplication there. and defense? and defense. i spent a lot of times in the wings of the pentagon. if you don t think there s more money to be cut in contracting at the pentagon, you don t understand what has happened at the pentagon. should these sequester cuts on defense be upheld, senator? david, as much as i love claire, those are not the painful cuts that have to happen. we really have to look at much deeper reforms to the entitlements. and i would say that speaker boehner s biggest problem is not his base. it s having a willing partner on the other side that s really willing to look at these kinds of reforms. and i think that s going to happen. i think there s a possibility anyway. but i don t think it s his base. i think the speaker is frustrated right now because as you ve mentioned, the white house keeps spiking the ball on tax increases for the wealthy. but
and eventually we got $2.5 trillion in spending committed without tax increases. we got a good deal. now the president wants to take back off the table spending cuts that are already in lock. so when he talks about spending restraint, he is adding $1 trillion, $1.5 trillion, you might count $2 trillion, in additional spending by taking the $1 trillion away and deciding he ll put off the sequester forever. he has a massive spending increase because he is trying to undo his previous agreement. i opposed going over the cliff two years ago. we didn t. we cut spending. i m not for it this time. two years ago, we extended all the bush tax cuts. we didn t go over any cliff. it s the president who is in the bank screaming he ll shoot the hostages and it s your fault if you don t give him everything he wants. that s not a reasonable position, and it won t hold. congressman, what are the chances we do go over the cliff this time? i think the chances are better that we will not go over the cl
the modern republican party wants less taxes and lower spending. they passed a ryan plan which reforms entitlements, reforms taxes, doesn t raise taxes. it s the democrats who don t have a legislative budget. make the case for why you view this the president making a truly balanced approach to not just solving this problem but really moving the economy forward. well, he has. and first of all, let s be clear. the way you get massive tax increases, $5 trillion tax increases, is if you go over the fiscal cliff. what the president has said, let s just ask higher income individuals to contribute a little more to reduce our deficit to prevent that from happening. the president has taken a balanced approach. look, we already entered into $1 trillion in cuts which we ll have to enforce and implement over the next 10 years, including, by the way, cuts in defense. you mentioned defense cuts as part of the clinton deal. that was 1993. we did the first half of the clinton deal as part of
savings in medicare. the president did, $760 billion, and we can build on that by trying to modernize the system, reduce costs overall in the system, not simply transfer rising health care costs onto the backs of seniors on medicare. $22,000 median income. that s what the voucher plan did. we believe we can find savings by changing the way we reimburse doctors and hospitals. not by across the board cuts, but by focusing on the value of care, the quality of care, not the volume of care and the quantity of care. one final bottom line question for grover norquist. in this deal, are there new taxes in the end? i know what your position is. but what does reality tell you? this can play out several ways. if we have tv cameras in there, cspan there, if we have seven days of bills these are 24i7k things that obama promised. no, that s not going to happen. we are going to get tv cameras in there. what i m tired of is people
saying, we ll get to a specific number but we won t specify? is it because there s so much pressure on the left to not reform medicare? i think it s certainly a fight. and i think we have to be careful. we have to make sure i think we can get to means testing fairly easily. some higher co-pays for people who can afford it. as i said before, donald trump may need medication but he doesn t need the government to pay for it. we ve got to get to a point where we are really having people who can afford to pay for their health care, having them take that responsibility. that s the position the president should adopt in your view? i think so. i think aggressive means testing for people who can afford it makes sense as we look at long-term savings in the medicare program. but here s the thing. bob and i both know, he and i are talking and i think we can get a deal through the senate. the question is, i feel almost sorry for john boehner. there is incredible pressure on him from a base