p.m. eastern. once again, we are waiting for president obamas address to the nations on this first day of general assembly. here is a preview of the president's speech. >> tell us a little bit, you may have heard the headline, but as far as specifics, what is the president expected to say? >> i lot of us are very eager to find out. not releasedse has his speech yet, but it is very likely he will go over the topics mentioned. everyone is eager to hear what he has to say about syria, especially with of this last week behind us with the threat -- chemical weapons. ll he continue to push for the threat of military strikes? will, because this is a big chunk of what he hopes will be his legacy in the white house over the years. and then, iran, there has been a whole lot of chatter there. if he gives any sort of a hint about that's beat, that would be interesting as well, because they could run into each other at the u.n. reception. itselfthe white house give any indication to the importance of this speech in particular in comparison to past speeches that the u.n.? >> just the context of where we are based on what has been going on in the middle east, what has been going on in syria, what has been going on with iran, this raises the stakes as you said. scrutiny. lot more andu.s. president will come speak at the united nations general assembly, and certain people pay attention because this comes at the same context -- >> there are several stories in will some type of dialogue between president obama and the iranian president happened? -- happen? unclear, the white house has left the door open for notible contact, but it is guaranteed that this will happen. the iranian government will have to take action and show that willing to talk about its nuclear program. it is difficult to say whether or not there will be some sort of encounter. if there is, it is unlikely to be a meeting, it is unlikely to be a sitdown bilateral meeting, it will be more like a handshake or a brief visit on the sidelines of the national assembly. that there any indication there will be a behind-the- scenes meeting with the advisors of these nations is morning? some meetingsbeen going on already, and both sides membersing toward the of the un security council, toward a high-level meeting with secretary of state john kerry. levelg at that kind of a has not been seen in many years. they are having these lower- level talks, and that is going to be pushed up to at least the secretary of state later this week, if not the presidential level today. >> jeff mason, who covers the white house for routers -- reuters, thinking for your time. e president obama is a -- xpected about 10:10 a.m. in the meantime, we want to's -- to share some of remarks from the u.n. up president ban ki- moon. >> good morning. it is 9:00 a.m., social we should begin. to the second meeting, the general assembly will give its presentation by our secretary-general on his annual report on the work on the agenda item one -- 11. i now give the floor to the secretary-general. secretary-general? >> mr. president of the general assembly, distinguished heads of state and government, excellency's, other administers, ladies and gentlemen, each year at this time, we come together not to preserve the status quo, but to talk about where we are going. this is an era of wondrous opportunity. ours is the first generation that can wipe poverty from the face of the earth. the pressures from people and , lack of jobs, global warming, bring uncertainty. outpacing the institutional systems designed for another age. our -- around the world, people are asking the people in power, the world leaders, to listen. they want to know that we are secure life can to and liberty for them. excellency, ladies and gentlemen, for more than a decade, the end of the year 2015 has been our long horizon. what seemed a distant most men -- moment, is now just around the corner. 2015 is the year by which we have pledged the goals. adopt a in -- an ag global agreement on climate change. 2015 is a historic opportunity. they have captured be imagination, and beat back doubts. yet, ensembles, we lack -- on some goals, we lack. toomany people face -- many people -- we will get the full remarks from secretary-general ban ki- moon later today. we now go to president obamas remarks. [applause] >> on behalf of the general assembly, i have the honor to welcome to the united nations, his excellency barack obama, president of the united states, and invite him to speak. mr. president? president, mr. secretary- delegates,llow ladies and gentlemen. each year, we come together to reaffirm the founding vision of this institution. for most of recorded history, individual aspirations were subject to the whims of power, of empires, divisions of race , through the sword and the clash of armies. the idea that nations and people could come together in peace to their disputes and advance a common prosperity far-fetched notion. took the awful carnage of two world wars to cement this idea. the united nations did not think this body could eradicate all wars, but in the wake of dead, and theople development of nuclear weapons that could annihilate a planet, they understood that humanity could not survive the course it was on. institution us this , believing it could allow us to resolve our conflicts, enforce rules of behavior, and conduct habits of operation that would develop over time. for decades, the united nations has made a difference. from helping to eradicate disease, to educating children, to brokering peace paid but like every generation of leaders, we face new and profound challenges. we are tested. the question is whether we possessed a wisdom and encourage , as nationstates and a member of a national community to squarely meet those challenges. whether the united nations can meet the test of our time. for much of my tenure as president, many of the challenges have revolved around an increasingly integrated global economy, and one of the worst economic crisis is of our lifetime. collapsed,economy and thanks to coordinate efforts by the countries here today, jobs are being created, global financial systems have thought -- stabilized, and people are once again being lifted out of poverty. -- rutgers isous fragile.- progress is to ensure our citizens the opportunities to thrive in the 21st century. we have just come from a decade of war. ,early five years of -- ago nearly 500,000 americans were serving in iraq. today all of our troops have left iraq. next year and international will -- coalition will end this war in afghanistan, having achieved its goal of decimating al qaeda from 9/11. this is also meant shifting away may eventual war state. beyond bringing our troops home, we have limited the use of bombs to target only those who continue to oppose and create a viable threats to the united states, where there were a near certain threat of no civilian casualties. they are tried in courts of law, and we are working diligently to close operations. just as we reviewed how we deploy our extraordinary military capabilities in a way ideals, weup to our have begun to review the way we gather intelligence about so that we can address the securitye and -- concerns of our citizens and allies that we all share. , andresult of this work cooperation with allies and partners, the world is more stable than it was five years ago. but even a glance at today's headlines indicates the dangers remain. in kenya we have seen terrorists target innocent civilians in a crowded shopping mall event -- mall, and our hearts go out to the families affected. recentlyies work killed by suicide bomber in a church. in iraq, killing by car bombs continues to be a terrible part of life. -- allle, i conduct qaeda is blundered into the intons -- splintered factions, which does not give them the capacity to pull off tax like 9/11, but does still present a threat to civilians all across the globe. just as significantly, the convulsions in the middle east and north africa have led to deep divisions within societies. as people grapple with what is next. have toomovements often been answered by violence, from those trying to create change, and by extremists trying to hijack change. weaponsntial spread of of mass destruction continues to cast a shadow over the pursuit of peace. have we seen these trends more powerfully than in syria. -- efforts to try to reform the regime was met with deadly force. situation spiraled into civil war. the international community recognized the stakes early on, but our response has not matched this detail of the brutality. cannot keep pace with the suffering of the wounded and the america and others have worked to bolster the opposition, but extremist groups have taken root that's what the crisis. al-assad's traditional allies have propped him up, and shielded the regime. august 21, the regime used the local weapons in an attack that killed more than 1000 people, including hundreds of children. syria, and the destabilization throughout the region goes to the heart of the broader challenges that the international community must now confront. how should we respond to complex in the middle east and north africa? conflicts between countries, but also conflicts within them. the choice ofess standing carelessly by well children are subjected to nerve gas, to avoid embroiling ourselves in someone else's civil war? aimeds the role of force order to solve disputes in that region? what's the role of the united nations, and international law in meeting cries for justice? outline whereo the united states of america stands on these issues. syria, wect to believe that as a starting point, the international community must enforce the ban on chemical weapons. when i stated my willingness to order a military strike against the syrian regime, i did not do so lightly. it isso because i believe in the national security interest of the united states, and in the interest of the world , to meaningfully enforce the that is older than the united states itself. the ban against the use of chemical weapons has been agreed to by 98% of humanity. it is strengthened by the searing memories of shoulders of any in the trenches -- soldiers cating in the trenches. of jews being gassed in the chambers. evidence is overwhelming that the asad regime used chemical weapons on august 21. vectors gave evidence that large walk it's -- rockets fired large quantities of gas around regime neighborhoods and landed in opposition neighborhoods. against the legitimacy of this is addition to suggest that anyone other than the regime carried this out. i know in the immediate aftermath of the attack there was a question of legitimacy of even a limited strike from a mandate from the security council. without a credible military threat, the security council that was rated no inclination to act at all. have discussed with president putin for over a year, most recently in st. petersburg, my presence has always been a diplomatic resolution. in the past several weeks, the united states, russia, and our allies have reached an agreement to his place -- to place syria a's chemical weapons under international control to destroy them. syria took the first step to agree to turn them over, and now there must be a strong security council resolution to verify that the regime is keeping its commitments to mandamus because quizzes if they fail to do so. to do this, agree it will show that the united nations is incapable of keeping even the most basic of international laws. succeed, it will send a powerful message that the weapons has no place in the 21st century them and that this body means what it says. our agreement on chemical weapons should energize a larger diplomatic effort to retail -- to reach a political settlement in syria. i do not believe military action by those in syria, or those who are foreign powers, can achieve lasting peace. nor do i believe that any nation should determine who will lead syria, that is for the syrian people to decide. a leader who has slaughtered his citizens, cannot regain the legitimacy to lead the country. the notion that ceric and somehow return to the prewar status quo is a fantasy. it is time for russia, iran, to willze that to ignore this lead to the outcome may revere -- fear. whourn, those of us continue to support the moderate opposition, must persuade them that the syrian people cannot afford a collapse of state institutions, and that a political settlement cannot be reached without addressing the legitimate fear and concerns of minorities. committed to working this political check. settlement, asis is not a zero-sum boat. we are not in a cold war, there is no great gain to be one -- won. sure that this does not become a safe haven for terrorists. i welcome the influence of all nations that can help bring -- a peaceful old resolution of syrians civil war. as we move forward, i urge all nations here to step up the humanitarian efforts around the world. american has -- america has committed over $1 billion, and we have agreed to provide an additional $340 million. givess a resolution that the syrian people a chance to rebuild their country, but it cannot work on people desperate to survive. what rot or conclusions can be drawn from america's policy toward syria? who arehere are those frustrated by our willingness to use our military might to depose al-assad, and believe that we do meritface of a weakening -- american resolve in the region. others believe that our intent to use military force shows that we have learned nothing from a q, and that this mirrors the situation that has existed in the region for decades. we have been acute -- chastised for meddling in the region, and accused of conspiracy, while also being chastised for not doing enough to solve the region's problems. isealize some of this inevitable, given america's role in the world. --se conjured her eerie contradictory attitudes have an impact on america's attitudes toward the region. they want to avoid addressing difficult problems themselves. let me take this opportunity to outline what has been the u.s. policy towards the middle east and north africa, and what will be my policy the remainder of my presidency. the united states of america is prepared to use all elements of our power, including military force, to secure our core interests in the region. externalonfront aggression to our allies and partners as we have done before. freedom of the while we the world, are reducing our dependence on oil, the world still depends on the resources of that region, and it impacts the global economy. will buildssible, we the capacity of our partners, respect the sovereignty of nations, and work to address the root causes of terror. but when it is necessary to defend the united states against terrorist attack him a we will take direct action. finally, we will not tolerate the development or use of weapons of mass destruction. just as we consider the use of chemical weapons in syria to be a threat to our own national security, we object to the development of nuclear weapons that could trigger a nuclear armory -- arms race in the region, and threaten the national security. to say that these are america's core interests art not to say that they aren't our only interests. we deeply believe it is in our interests to see the middle east and north africa that is peaceful and prosperous. theill continue to promote moxie, human rights, and the open market, because we believe that these things achieve peace and prosperity. but i also believe that we can rarely achieve these objectives through unilateral american throughparticularly military actions. q shows us that democracy cannot simply be imposed by force. when we partner with the international community, and with the countries and peoples of the region. what does that mean going forward? america'sr-term, double my efforts will focus on two particular issues. iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, and the palestinian a really conflict -- palestinian/israeli conflict. these things have been a major source of instability for far solving them will sour as a foundation for a broader peace -- serve as a foundation for broader peace. from one been isolated another since the islamic revolution of 1979. this mistrust has deep roots. ans have long complained of a history of u.s. interference in their affairs, and of americans overthrowing the iranian government in the cold war. on the other hand, the americans iranian-- an government that has declared war against us, taken us -- our civilian hostage, and attacked our ally israel. this is something that cannot be solved overnight, the decisions run to deep. but if we can solve the issue of iran's nuclear program, that can serve as a major step of working toward a different relationship, one based on butyl interests, mutualchell respect -- respect. since i have taken office, i have made it clear in letters to the reigning government, that we preserve -- prefer to resolve our concerns peacefully, although we are determined to prevent iran from developing nuclear weapons. we are not seeking regime change, and we respect the right of the iranian people to access equal nuclear energy. is dead, we insist that the iranian government meet its responsibilities under the u.s. 30 council -- un security council resolutions. the development of nuclear weapons, and the new iranian president has just reiterated that they will never develop a nuclear weapon. , made by ournts respective governments, should offer the basis for a meaningful agreement. we should be able to achieve a resolution that respects the rights of the reigning people, -- i romney and people -- ira nian people. consolatory words will have to areatched by actions, that verifiable. iranians choices that have led to this. iran invades seen responsibility is in the past, and has a vested interest in making sure that iran meet its obligations in the future. but, i want to be clear, we are encouraged that the new president received a mandate from the people to sue a more moderate course. i am directing john kerry to pursue the settlement with the iranians, in cooperation with the united kingdom, france, china. the roadblocks may prove to be too great, but i firmly believe that it must be attempted. while the status quo will only will be good for the region and the world. it will help the reigning people meet their extraordinary potential and commerce, and culture, in science, and education. determined to resolve a conflict that goes back even further than our differences with iraq, the one between palestinians and israelis. i've made it clear that the united states will never compromise our commitment to israel's security, nor our commitment to his preservation as a state. i was inspired by young israelis who stood up believing that peace was possible. the occupation of the west bank is tearing at the democratic effort of the jewish state. the children of israel have the right to live in a world where the nations assembled in this body recognize their country. when we unequivocally reject those who fire rockets at their homes, or who incite others to hate them. statese, the united maintains that the palestinian people have the right to live with dignity in their own sovereign state. had theame state i opportunity to meet with young palestinians, and their incredible potential his match by the pain they feel about having no firm place in the community of nations. they are understandably cynical that real progress will ever be made, and are frustrated by their daily indignity of occupation. but they to recognize -- too recognize that different states as the only way to peace. they know that israel is here to stay. is now right for the entire international community to get behind the pursuit of peace. already, israeli and palestinian devastated a willingness to take political risks. to put aside the shorecrest to peace and -- shortcuts to , and come to the table. they have reaffirmed their interest and a palestinian thee, and are focused on final issues of refugees and jerusalem, and borders. we must be willing to take risks as well. friends of israel, including the united states, must recognize that israel's security as a jewish democratic state depends on the realization of the palestinian state. we should say so clearly. arab states come and those who support the palestinians must recognize that this will only be served by a two state resolution and a secure israel. all of us must recognize that this will be a powerful tool to defeat extremist throughout the region of a and we are prepared to build a better future. ties of trade and commerce between israel and palestine could be an interest -- an engine of growth in a region that has many a people without work. to emerge from the familiar corners of blame and prejudice, and support the israel and arestinian leaders who paired to walk the path of peace. real breakthroughs on these two , iran's nuclear program, and the israeli/palestinian peace, would have a patent -- ofound impact in the whole region. just as lasting peace cannot be measured only by agreement between nations, it must also be measured by our willingness to resolve conflicts within nations. by that measure, it is clear that all of us have a lot more work to do. transitions began in tunisia, the entire world was filled with hope. although the united states, like others, was struck by the beat of transition, and although we did not, and could not dictate events, we supported those who call for change. we did so based on the belief that these transitions would be hard and take time, but the societies based on democracy and the openness and dignity of the individual what ultimately be more stable, more prosperous, and more peaceful. years,e last few particularly in egypt, we have seen just how hard this transition would be. mohamed morsi was democratically elected, but proved unwilling or unable to govern in a way that was best for his people. the interim government that replaced him responded to the heirs of the people who believe that revolution had taken a wrong turn. inconsistentisions with democracy. america has been attacked by all sides of this internal conflict, simultaneously accused of supporting the muslim brotherhood, and engineering the removal of others. the united states has purposely avoided choosing sides. our overriding interests throughout these past few years has been to encourage a government that legitimately reflects the will of the egyptian people. one that has respect for the minority rights and the rule of law, freedom of speech and assembly, and a strong civil society. that remains our interest today. so going forward, the united states will maintain a constructive relationship with , and willm government continue support in education that will benefit the egyptian people. theave not proceeded with delivery of certain military systems, and our support will depend on egypt last project -- progress.oject -- the united states will a time work with governments who do not need, at least in our view, the highest international expectations, but who are working with our core interests. nevertheless come a we will not stop asserting interests and ideals. whether that means supporting the international declaration of rights. reject the notions that these ideals are simply western exports incompatible with the ideals of the east. we believe they are the birthright of every person. although we will be wary of efforts to impose democracy through military force, and those -- and though we will be accused of inconsistency, we will engage the upholding of the law. this is the task of our generation. this includes efforts to resolve secretary and tensions in places syria.aq, bahrain and we understand such long-standing tissues cannot be solved by outsiders, they must be addressed by the muslim communities themselves. we have seen grinding conflict come to an end before, most recently in northern ireland when catholics and muslims both realized that the endless cycle was causing both immunities to fall behind a fast-moving world. we believe those same secretary ctarianflicts -- se convicts can become -- be overcome in the middle east and north africa. to summarize, the united states has hard-earned humility when it comes to our events and interactions inside countries. the american empire may be useful propaganda, but it does not reflect america's current policy or public opinion. as recent debates within the united states over syria clearly show. this is not an america that is too eager to immerse itself in the affairs of other countries, or take on responsibility in other regions than itself. the danger for the world is that the united states and after a decade of war, is rightly concerned about issues back home. aware of the hostilities that our engagement in the region has engendered throughout the muslim creatingey disengage, a vacuum of leadership that no other nation is ready to fill. i believe that such disengagement would be a mistake. remainve america must engaged for our own security, but i also believe a world is better for it. some may disagree. but i believe america is exceptional, in part because we have shown a willingness, to the sacrifice of blood and treasure to stand up, not only for our own interests, but for the interests of all. i must be honest though, we are likely tofar more invest in countries who want to work with us, to invest in their people, rather than the select few. to embrace a vision of society where everyone can contribute, man, woman, shia, sunni, muslim, or do -- jew. from europe, to asia, from the areca to americas, we looking for those who are looking to uphold a common humanity. i believe the same will hold true for the arab world. this leads me to a final point. there will be times when the breakdown of society so great, the violence against civilians so substantial, that the international community will be called upon to act. require some very tough choices. designedd nations was to prevent wars between states, and increasingly we face the challenge of providing slaughter within states. these challenges will grow more pronounced as states grow fragile or fail. places where karen this violence can put men, women, and children at risk, with no hope from their international institutions. i've made it clear that even one --america's core interests even when america's core interests are not threatened, we stand ready to protect basic human rights. not, bear and should that burden alone. both the we supported french intervention i'm a and he african forces who are keeping the peace. in eastern africa, we are working with partners to bring the resistance army to an end. in libya, when the security council provided a mandate for to protectillions -- the civilians, we took action. he does what we did there, countless lives were saved. criticizet some now libya as an object lesson. they point to a democratically elected government struggling to provide'd security -- security, and extreme ends -- ex tremists active. they say it is doomed to fail, look at libya. them of thend americans who are committed to living people, including the ambassador. does anyone truly believe that the situation in libya would be if he had been allowed to brutalize and kill his people into submission? it is far more likely that without international action, libya would be engaged in civil war and bloodshed. of imperfectworld choices. different nations will not agree on every entrance -- instant, but sovereignty is that the center of our order. sovereignty cannot be an excuse for the international community to turn a blind eye. while we need to be modest in our beliefs that we can remedy every evil, while we need to be mindful that the world is full of unintended consequences, do we really accept the notion that the world is powerless in the rawanda?her wanda -- if that is the world that people want to live in, they should say so, and reckon with the cold logic of mass graves. i believe we can embrace a different future. if we do not want to choose we mustinaction or war, get better, all of us. we should respect the sponsor list of nations and of individuals, meaningful sanctions for those who break the rules, dogged diplomacy that resolves the root causes of conflict, not merely its aftermath. development assistance that rings hope to the marginalized -- brings hope to the marginalized. while this may not be enough, there will be moments that the international committee needs to acknowledge that the multilateral use of military to prevente needed the very worst from occurring. ultimately, this is the international community that america seeks. convert the do not resources and lands of other carry outut those who the founding purposes of this institution, and where we all have a responsibility, to uphold the rules established to prevent the kinds of wars that our forefathers fought. a world where human beings can live with dignity, whether they live in new york, or nairobi, or damascus. times,re extraordinary with extraordinary opportunities. thanks to human hybrid, a child born anywhere on earth today can do things that 60 years ago would have been out of reach for the mass of humanity. i saw this in africa where moving anding -- are poised to take off. they are able to bring power to places off the grid. i see across the pacific region where hundreds of millions have been lifted out of poverty in a single generation. i see it in the faces of young people everywhere, who can access the entire world with a click of a button, who are eager to join the cause of eradicating extreme poverty and work on climate change, expand freedom, and leave behind the old ideological battles of the past. that is what is happening in asia, africa, it is happening in ,urope, across the americas that is the future of the people of the middle east and north africa -- they deserve it as well. they can fork is on opportunity, -- that way they can focus on opportunity, rather than whether they will be killed for what they believe. time and again, nations and people and shown -- have shown our capacity to change, to choose our better history. stood where 50 years ago martin luther king jr. the american people, at a time when people of my race cannot even vote. stood in the cell where nelson endured decades, from his people and his world. who are we to believe that today's challenges cannot be overcome? we have seen the changes that the human spirit can bring. that this hall can argue we will give over to those who would seek to oppress the spirit? i know what side i want this country to be on, and we are ready to meet the challenges of tomorrow with you. we believe that all men and women are created equal, and are possessed with a dignity, and an inalienable right that cannot be denied. the uterineok to with not fear, but hope -- to the future with not fear, but hope. thank you very much. [applause] on behalf of the general assembly i wish to thank the president of the united states for the statement is made. may i request the representatives to remain seated while the secretary general i greet the president -- and i greet the president. the morning obama speaking for about 40 minutes to the un's general assembly. his remarks focusing on overcoming terrorism and peace efforts around the world. it speech is available any time online for viewing at www.c- span.org. he will be meeting with world leaders, and the un's secretary- general ban ki-moon. we are also looking forward to when he needs iran's new president. the directed secretary of state john kerry to broker a new weapons deal with the president of iran. this forum would give them an opportunity to meet. we're looking forward to the iranian president's speech later this afternoon. meanwhile, we will go to the clinton global initiative in new york, to hear remarks from former president clinton. they are talking about the health-care coverage that will 1.e place on october on the healthcare exchange enrollment process from the view that is hosted by the kaiser family foundation, and that will be live in just over a half hour. also live this afternoon, the senate cut -- budget committee is meeting to discuss the looming government shutdown. we will hear from leading economists, including mark zandi from bloom -- moody and later -- analitics. un'se will go to the general assembly general secretary on key moves remarks -- ban ki-moon's remarks. >> good morning. it is not :00 a.m., so we should begin. in accordance with the decision taken at its second meeting on of 2013,n september the general assembly will take a presentation by our secretary- general on his annual report on agenda item 111. i give the floor to the secretary-general. cretary-y general -- se general? >> mr. president, of the general assembly, distinguished heads of state and government, excellencies, honorable ministers, ladies and gentlemen. each year at this time, we come together, not to preserve the status quo, but to drive our world forward. this is an era of under his opportunity -- wondrous opportunity. generation first that could wipe poverty from the face of the earth. people of the planet are building. jobs, global warming, -- are often outpacing the institutions designed for another age. scares across the world addressing those in power. they want you, the world leaders, to listen. they want to know that we are doing all that we can to secure life and stability for them. excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, over more than a decade, the year 2015 has been our long horizon. what was once a distant moment is now just around the corner. 2015 is the year by which we have pledged our minimum veltman goals.- development and it is the year in which you globalreed to complete a agreement on climate change. 2015 is a historic opportunity. thee have captured imagination, generated remarkable gains, and brought about the betterment of society. yet, on some goals, we lack badly. too many people explain -- face exploitation. on new development, our agenda eachbe -- must be on sector. it must be universal, with ending poverty as a top priority for every government at its core. must find expression in a single set of goals, and there should be no hierarchy among the development. should not put off social justice for later. the empowerment and rights of women must be at the heart of everything we do. simple, when we have the financial access to support women, when women's lives are free from violence and determination, nations thrive. i admire voice to those of voice to thosemy of leaders who are opposed to this violence. let the 21st century be the century of women. [speaking french] they have to be able to create jobs. must be ethical and responsible in carrying out their activities. and they must do everything in their power to protect the environment. the heads of industry in their global pact summit last week from us to to take additional measures to ensure that their objectives with veterans aligned with the goals of the un. ways ofust acquire more working together, more just with the business world and the world of finance but also with civil society and philanthropic organizations. your excellency, ladies and gentlemen, the effect of climate to all formsthreat of development. the human and economic repercussions are increasing in scale and effect everybody. the poorest and the most vulnerable are the first to suffer. pay the highest price. justice whenater it comes to climate. planet and from the from scientists is very clear. we will say once again this week when the intergovernmental group of experts on climate developments will publish its assessments. dangers come hand-in-hand with opportunities to be grasped a way of changing city planning, transport, and the way in which our homes and our factories are supplied with energy. towards low carbon economies is opening up before us. this is a path which can lead to the creation of jobs and to an improvement in public health while now allowing us all to protect the environment. i invite all of you to the climate summit meeting one year from now, september next year, here in the united nations. i challenge you to bring to the all the innovations to scale up and incorporate and as it closes the emission gap and puts us on track on ambitious legal agreement through the un process. seize the 2015 challenge of a final push for the mdg's, new directions on energy and climate and an inspiring new development framework. we must leave no one behind. ladies and gentlemen, let me turn to the biggest piece security crisis in the world, the crisis in syria. well over 100,000 people have been killed. people,1/3 million of the total population, have fled their homes. families are under siege. cities and towns lie in rubble. the economy is in ruins. communities once alive with the plans of traditions and faith have been torn apart. being dangerously destabilized. we have seen the worst chemical weapons attack in a quarter- century. nowneration of young people fills refugee camps. theymong us can say that and their mothers and fathers are wrong to feel abandoned by the international community? we face a moment of reckoning. fullyrian government must and quickly honor the itigations it has assumed agreed to in the chemical weapons convention. the committee must bring to of the the perpetrators use of chemical weapons in syria confirmed unequivocally by the un investigation mission. mustnternational community also, with equal determination, ensure the safeguarding and instruction of the syrians chemical weapons stockpiles and programs. satisfied withe destroying chemical weapons while the war is still destroying all of syria. killing majority of the of the cities has been carried out with conventional weapons. stopeal to all states to fueling the bloodshed and to end the arms flows to all the parties. i look forward to the imminent and enforceable and binding security council resolution on chemical weapons. this should be followed immediately by humanitarian action. un human rights monitors can play a useful role in reporting and deterring further violations. governmenthe syrian upholdr politicians to your obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law. left all obstructions to excess and and the unconscionable targeting of medical personalities. it must release the thousands of men and women and children who are in the tension but has no basis in international law. seriousountability for international crimes is also vital. either in the international court or by other means consistent with international law. to the heinous use of chemical weapons has created diplomatic momentum. the first signs of unity in far too long. now we must build on it to get the parties to the negotiating table. i have been consistent in saying that military victory is an illusion. the only answer is a political settlement. i appeal to the government of and, and the opposition excellencies, i appeal to all those in this hall -- with theuence over them to make geneva conference happen as soon as possible. it is time to end the killing and to reach the piece the syrian people need and deserve. ladies and gentlemen, we can sees, tremendous stress and upheaval across the region. transitions have stumbled or slowed. inspiration are giving way to winters of disillusionment. immense immense, we need pluralistic dialogue housing the flames of secretary and is him after the iron grip of dictators is gone. this story is still being written. we must do our utmost to have these reforms accomplished. seize the potential opening and respond to declarations of cooperation. each nation will chart its own course. we cannot be complacent where but wes a backsliding should insist not on universal bad news but tolerance and political inclusion. these are the foundations of peace and prosperity. the re-engagement of israelis and palestinians and direct negotiations and the bold diplomacy that made this possible. if we are serious about achieving a two state solution, we must recognize that the window is closing fast. i urge the parties to show leadership and sense of long- term interest of the people's and the region. convene a meeting -- [no audio] this goes hand-in-hand with democracy and economic growth which is as sustained as it is impressive. in somalia, political progress -- in mali, credible elections -- in the democratic republic of congo, more robust peacekeeping and for the great lakes region, a new framework agreement. these are achievements on which we can build. said, abject poverty is still there and there is an ongoing lack of stability in the central african republic. collapsed.r has millions of people have been cut and are all assistance likely to be the victims of abuse. and just like the humanitarian appeal to syria, our appeal for assistance for this country is only generating desperately insufficient contributions. alone, s past week horrific attacks committed in kenya, iran, and pakistan once ofin reminded us the amount terror that- terrorists can rate and the amount of damage they can cause. we once again note that human rights and rule of law are the foundations of stability and coexistence. commitigh time for us to more firmly to international justice and the international criminal court. i would like to launch a particular appeal on behalf of of the extraordinary chambers of the cambodian tribunal. significantceived but constantly come up against the syrian financing thatems to the extent their very existence is currently compromised. the failure of these chambers would be a tragedy to cambodians who have a way to justice for such a long time. i would urge the international community to release the necessary resources to ensure that all the cases can be completed. gentlemen, the inability of member states and nations to prevent and put a stop to larger scale humanitarian -- [no audio] at the end of the war in sri lanka, identified a systemic failure. member states did not provide the united nations with the support to meet the test they themselves had set in the system itself, unfortunately, did not adapt properly or deliver fully. anniversary year of the conference on human rights, we should renew our commitment to the united nations founding principles. i intend to help member states reach only consensus to prevent larger scale violations and i am implementing recommendations to upholdthat the un system its responsibilities under the charter. there will be little peace or enjoyment of human rights unless in warront a world awash . year so the promising adoption of the arms treaty finally regulating the international transport of conventional weapons. nuclear disarmament still lingers. it is plural liberating. -- it is proliferating. small arms continue to kill and maim. meanwhile, at a time of pressing human needs, spending on weapons remains absurdly high. let us get our priorities right and invest in people instead of wasting billions ofollars on deadly weapons. ads of state and government, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen -- you, the leaders, are here to solve with the people. we can be the ones who preside property -- poverty and give will to the people and usher in an era of sustainable development of lasting peace. you can tackle the problems of states and make your foresight of giving to a future generation. excellencies, i urge you to embrace the global logic of our times. with our faves evermore entwined, our future must be one andore cooperation transform the global landscape. let us find new ways of governing, partnering, and problem solving. nationspower the united to be more than a first responder or last resort. butge is inevitable progress is not. leadership makes the difference. our cue from nelson mandela, frail today, but for power ofn, as a in the pursuiton of human dignity. countries andme we share together. we must prove ourselves fit for proper is. we have to listen to the demands of the world's people and hear the call of history. we speak often of hope. our duty is to turn hope into action through hard work, commitment, skill, and integrity. with passion but most of all with compassion we can build the future your people want and that our world needs. i thank you for your leadership and strong commitment. let us build our world better for all. let us shape our future where everybody can lead -- live harmoniously with peace and dignity. thank you very much, merci beauc oup. [applause] >> you can see those remarks again and all of our coverage of the un general assembly on our website, www.c-span.org. iran willesident of adjust the un this afternoon. his first remarks since being elected. we are planning live coverage this afternoon and we think it will be around 4 p.m. eastern. schedule online but it will be live here on c-span. also this afternoon, the senate budget committee is examining the impact of the looming government shutdown and american jobs and the economy and the testimony will include economists including mark zandi that will start at 2:30 p.m. eastern. the u.s. house returns tomorrow but today, the senate is in session. general speeches and they will shortly debate a judicial nomination and continue work on the house passed continuing resolution to keep the government operating past the september 30 deadline. debate is expected throughout the day tomorrow and there will be votes. see the senate live on c-span two. we have more about the budget battles in congress now as we spoke with the editor in chief of hotline earlier today. host: we are joined by josh kraus, the editor of hotline. >> good to be here. host: what will this week look like? the battle over obama care, whether it will be defined that and what the endgame is for republicans and the white house will be decided in the 5-6 days. it has political consequences especially on the republican side. we are seeing significant divisions between that ted cruz wing of the party, if you will, and the more establishment wing of the party and one of the bigger developments over the past 24 hours is that mitch mcconnell who is up for reelection and has a top riemer he announced he will not be r or join ted the c cruz in d funding. mitch mcconnell will draw criticism for that position on the right but it is emblematic of the divisions facing republicans across congress between the house and senate and the tea party activist wing and the more establishment republicans. given the differences on this issue, how potent is the fight against obama care? will be oneh care of the biggest issues republicans will run on in 2014. when you look at the senate map, disproportionate number of these big races are taking place in southern rates, conservative states, states were the obama health care law is unpopular. the polls show a moderate digit -- a majority of voters dislike this. those numbers are more significant in states like arkansas and kentucky where mitch mcconnell is from and states like alaska. the challenge for republicans did be on message -- is to be on message. they need to decide that they hid the just have this huge political advantage when it comes to healthcare and criticizing the president's law. some of the more activist tea party members of the party are choosing to pick the fight over government funding any potential government shutdown which is the one area of healthcare law where republicans can lose. that there is some cohesion coming together at the last minute republicans have this great opportunity at the a question and to 2014 is will make the most of it? host: what does this mean for mitch mcconnell? guest: he is facing a relatively unknown opponent named matt mitcht and is accusing mcconnell of being an establishment figure and criticizing him on many of these procedural grounds. matt bevan ell and oppose the healthcare law but bevan is accusing him of not being aggressive enough and the moreg some of aggressive actions to de-funds the legislation. usc and the arguments take place over tarp. that mcconnell supported during the bush years, the emergency tarp funding, which many tea party republicans opposed. mitch mcconnell has to worry about winning this but he has a very just he has a very credible democratic challenger. she is trying to make her pitch is a more moderate democrat and that is a challenge he will face later on. host: we are talking to the editor and chief of " hotline." what's is this mean for democrats and the white house? there are new stories coming out on a regular basis about employers, major employers like ups and trader joe's. the cleveland clinic, they companies are laying off workers and dumping some of the workers they have been covering on their insurance plan to the exchange system. there has been a lot oftumult with this healthcare law and even president obama delayed one element of it for one year. that's a big vulnerability for democrats and if republicans can get it together and have a unified message -- we are only a few days away from the actual where thedeadline biggest part of the exchange will begin to take place, this could be a big problem. if people find their health care theytion is changing or find economic anxiety or uncertainty as a result of the changes because of the law, it with aesent republicans huge opportunity and vulnerability for democrats. we have seen a lot of polling how the healthcare stands at the public one of the more significant findings -- pew research found for the first time in many years that republicans have an advantage on health care. they have a two-point advantage when it comes to republicans vs democrats and you usually don't see that on an issue that favors democrats but republicans have the opportunity but can they become united and have a united on the issue? host: what are the chances of democrats taking over the house of representatives? districts are the aligned on the way things are shaping up, it does not seem likely even if the democrats have a good year. there are 17 seats necessary to take back the house. the bigger battlefield will be taking place in the senate. democrats -- republicans need to win back theto senate and that is a tall order. are in veryhe seeds conservative states. there is seven seats that are in states that mitt romney carried on six of the seven states mitt romney carried by double digits. the republican strategy for the , dote is win all the seats well with the base, and that could be the path to a senate majority. the senate is in play but not so much the house. host: we are starting with elizabeth on our republican line. go ahead. commenti just want to and ask -- this man is a reporter and he should understand that the word " mandate" can no longer the use. the word is tax. an employer to mandate, it is attacked. do do not refer to an individual mandate, it is an individual tax. that is the only thing that makes obamacare legal3.. host: what is your take on the semantics? guest: it matters but mandate or -- theyy are popular are unpopular with the public and they are trying to figure out what it means. if you look at the supreme court ruling which said it was constitutional, it put the mandate more in the tax provision. mandate/ly speaking, tax, it is not a good situation for democrats unless they can show the law is effective and working and helping ensure people that were not otherwise to insured and are getting better insurance. host: let's take another call from susan in reading, pennsylvania, on our independent line. caller: i have a practical question -- that were not otherwise to insured and are getting better insurance. host: let's take another call from susan in reading, pennsylvania, on our independent line. caller: i have a practical question -- my understanding of what i've read about obamacare is these exchanges -- there is bronze, silver, gold, and platinum. the obama administration will want everyone insured and that is how insurance works. people who don't need it pay for the people who need it. that's the way the whole idea of insurance works. the question i have is -- a poor young man who graduates from college cannot find a job in his chosen career, he's working two part-time jobs in fast food and is expected to get insurance. to be thets is going bronze package because that's what he can afford unless he has wealthy parents. he's on hisackage, motorcycle, he is writing down he street, it's wet, and breaks his clavicle and goes to the emergency room where he will need an x-ray and probably an mri. an mri is probably $2000. the deductible on the bronze package is about $3000. how can that young man who had student loans, working two-part time fast food jobs, pay for the deductible? let's take it to the next step. now he is home and getting physical therapy -- host: we get the gist of what you are saying. can you respond to that? guest: one of the challenges this administration has faced in selling the law is that they have not delineated between access and quality. president obama said you get better access and lower cost and more quality. is, the law primarily expands access which is a good policy and that help certain constituencies politically but most voters want their health care to be better. the hypothetical situation the caller brought up is why the law is not polling so well. every poll shows that if u.s. voters whether they are confident will help their health care, they are skeptical. they may think the law is good but they are not convinced it will improve the quality of healthcare and that's the big political challenge facing the white house. voters realizes this expands but newspapers have been reporting is if it will improve the quality of healthcare. host: how do we see democrats on the campaign trail frame this issue? guest: it depends on the state and the district. you saw to house democrats last ink vote with republicans defuidning the law. conservative districts and they voted against the law and they could not win reelection from the get go without voting with republicans on health care. the more battleground districts, you see democrats not defending every part of the law but making the points that are more effective in their favor, most notably it will help people who have been uninsured and help them get the access they need. they have been saying the law is imperfect and we need to fix it but we are not quite there yet. want to they don't repeal the law, that is the democratic message. in: let's go to greg, south carolina on the republican line. caller: i am listening now, watching your c-span program, and i heard him state earlier that he said earlier that the republicans need to get their act together. fromremarks like that democrats to the republicans and from the republicans to the democrats that is creating this power struggle that we've got in washington now. we need to get in there and completely restructured washington and get rid of about half of what's in there. and are all overpaid getting paid way too much money. i am on disability and i am making $36,000 per year. i am living comfortably because i know what i am doing. these people that are in washington, half of them don't know what they are in doing. overpaid, like i said. we could save a lot of money taking that money and pay them all about $75,000 per year. they are not worth more than that and we could take that savings and redo our bridges and infrastructure and our buildings and roads. host: thanks for calling. sentiment, throw the bums out, is what we have had in elections in the past. is suchhy the tea party an influential force in american politics now. view that the establishment has been in washington too long and are being paid too much, you have more grassroots candidates run and republican primaries expecting -- expressing those sentiments and some of them are winning elections. some of the tea party candidates get elected and become part of the establishment. , now he is getting the same criticism because he is now part of washington. host: you wrote a story that asked the question -- guest: the grassroots sentiment is still there but that tea party has already won. they have already defeated a lot of the most hated in comments. they beat richard lugar and bob than in senate primaries and a bunch of house moderates that they thought were not conservative enough. the mitch mcconnell primary shows there is still the ability to upset an incumbent. when we looked at all the races, years ago, four there are not quite as many tea party challengers running. even with a high profile ones in the house and the senate. tot: next up, we go tennessee on our independent line. caller: good morning. with the other gentleman that call. it is not the republicans that want to shut the government down. this bill is too big, nobody has read it, it it keeps being changed, some people have to have it and some people don't. the founder of the soviet communist state said socialized medicine is the keystone to the arc of the socialist state. host: let me ask you this -- if the government shutdown happens, it will be the first since the clinton presidency. do you think it will come to pass? guest: we have seen this game before in the last few years and john boehner is different than newt gingrich. he is part of the establishment wing and has no illusion that he is more powerful than president obama. newt gingrich had the same coequal power as former president clinton. republicans don't have those illusions. john banner is always looking for in an game but the most is that we will see some last-minute compromise, something struck it does not involve healthcare. thatl have some punt will push this down the road again but avoid a government shutdown. host: another call from tennessee on the democrat line. caller: i would like to make some comments. first, i think there is a tremendous lack of to medication -- lack of communications on the affordable health care act. there has been obstructionism in the states whose governors do want the affordable health care act for political reasons. toy don't want the details come out to the general public. upon the citizens to take it upon themselves to learn as much as they can about the affordable health care act. if they would go to www.health people can learn about their affordable health care act. they will have to do it by themselves. -- everylike everybody time i listen to the radio or television, all i hear is obamacare. it so the about public is sitting there and all they hear is negatives about obamacare. there are no details. host: thank you so much. can you stay to the messaging going on? guest: most americans don't know what is in the law. years down the road, with the president trying to sell the law on numerous occasions, people still don't know what is in it. the bigger risk for the white house and the democratic party is that people will find out if there are troubles implementing the law and they will find out directly. if you work at a company and they push you through the exchanges and you have a change in your healthcare, that's what will make people feel very strongly. it's less about what is in the law but more about how it affects your average americans that are paying close attention. andheir health care changes if they have trouble getting a job at a small business because of changes in healthcare laws, that's what will have a bigger impact politically. host: let's take another call on the republican line. caller: good morning, the supreme court passed the law of the land. ,ith all the changes they made it's not the law the supreme court made. that case should go back to the supreme court. reviewed as ite- discriminates against the it gives toole and much to the government employees. i will listen for your result. you see from the calls there is skepticism towards the law and that is reflected in the polls as well. the key test is in implementation. the pr game is over and people understand the arguments pro and understandple don't the law but they don't know how it will impact them. the big thing is how they react to the changes on october 1. are people going to be displaced as a result of certain exchanges not being ready? that will be the next a test for the administration. on thee focused healthcare argument. what other issues will be driving people to the polls in 2014? guest: the healthcare law and the economy are intertwined but when you see the unemployment rate not going down like you would normally see in a postrecession time, five years now sense the great recession, the growth of the economy has not been with the administration initially promised and democrats risk facing real challenges in running a stagnant economy. that will be a dominant issue. districts likeg we saw last week that the administration is imposing new producerss on coal and it will not be popular in kentucky and west virginia where there are competitive senate races. it is a risk for many democrats in those states. we could talk about the governor's race taking place in november here in virginia. the republicans have been on the defensive when it comes to social issues. has trailed by 24 points among women and a new " washington post" poll. host: let's take another call from rob in tennessee on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. the impact on the health care for me is that i am paying more for my insurance and getting less coverage. with that in mind, my work i get my is where insurance, from my employer. the whole issue with health care will be how it is portrayed in the press. you keep saying the republicans want to shut down the government. the house bill clearly says that they will fund the government except for healthcare. to whether thewn people continue to believe the media. that's my thoughts. host: thank you for calling. how have the previous shutdowns played out politically? onst: republicans took it the chin in the last government shutdown in 1995. we had two series of shutdowns. the polls at that time showed been president clinton with a significant advantage. he held about a 30 point lead on which side the public took. there was a poll out today that showed obama and the democrats have a more narrow advantage. if there was a shot down, it's hard to win in a debate from the house when you only hold one branch of government. it is hard to win the legislative policy argument and hard to win politically. the parties from the mid-1990s to currently is narrower but it would still provide more risks to republicans. that's why you are seeing a little reprieve from leadership. that's why you see ted cruz being called out by more establishment types. chris wallace on sunday said he was getting tons of calls from republicans against senator cruz because they are dissatisfied with his tactics on this issue. go to memphis, tennessee, calling on the democratic line. caller: thank you -- hello? thank you for taking my call. i would like to ask the gentleman about the affordable health care act. it was written into law -- hello? host: are you still there? go ahead. caller: i would like to ask the -- the affordable health care act was enacted into law and why does the republican party choose that they don't want this to come about and they want to shut the government down? we can send money thousands of miles away in other countries and help other people but when it comes down to helping our country and taking the chance on helping the people in this country, we have to shut the government down before we can do that. i don't know how we can risk other people's lives. down, how willt people get paid? host: thank you for calling in. republicans oppose a law that is the law of the land? they both believe it but it is politically effective to do so. why do certain members of the republican caucus want to tie the government defunding to this? the politics and policy are intertwined but when you see the conservative members of the house were conservative senators, they go home and your average constituent is not gritty of the nitty- what happens on capitol hill. if there conservative, they want to get rid of the law. fors politically expedient them to say this is a quick and easy way to do it. they will threaten to defund the government. that is something that is easily put on a bumper sticker. it's harder to convince constituents that this is more messy and this is how things get past a in washington. that's why you get a disconnect in the conservative wing between the campaign issues and the policy itself. host: let's take another call from louisville, kentucky, on the republican line. want to thank c-span for the great job they did. two quick points on the healthcare bill and the politics of 2014 -- here in louisville, we have a huge healthcare industry and tauzin's of people are employed here. -- and thousands of people are employed here. 100% foressman is on obama care and not answer questions about and how would that play the district like this with him being fanatical about it? the other thing is i don't see a hot race between mitch mcconnell in kentucky. no one knows who bevan is and he is not catching on. risk for mitch mcconnell is when we see these primary challengers in past elections that no one knows about, they start out with load name identification. they are trailing badly in public polling and at the very end, when they can spend money and outside groups start to weigh in, they have an ability to catch up at the end. mitch mcconnell is in good shape. he has a lot of money and is well-known and even if people don't love him, they have respect for his influence. the question is -- can someone like bevan catch fire at the last minute? mitch mcconnell is not taking him for granted. they have seen richard lugar have a 25 point lead a few months before his election and then he lost badly. they solve bob bennett in decent shape and then he did not get on the ballot. mitch mcconnell plus camp and folks thinks he is in good shape that they are not taking risks. he is as john yarmouth, in a safe louisville district. matter what goes on with the healthcare law, he is in good shape. what does it mean if he loses in the primaries? guest: we have seen these tea party upsets before. future of thethe republican party is looking toward 2016. if you can upset someone like mitch mcconnell in a red state like kentucky with a guy who has no public record and is a total nobody until he jumps in this race, it shows that the power of grassroots is ascendant and we should pay close attention to ted cruz and rand paul. if mitch mcconnell loses in kentucky, rand paul has a real shot to win the republican nomination. party isroots of the growing in influence and they may have a key role to play in 2016. a call froml take berkeley springs, west virginia, on the independent line. caller: thanks for the conversation. what you are missing is there is a whole group of americans like i belong to a group called single-payer action that wants to get rid of the private health insurance companies and replace it with a single-payer. that is medicare for all. i saw the republicans held up their alternative which they said, compared to the 2000 pages is 200 pages. the singer payer bill in the house is -- the single-payer bill is 40 pages. it says to replace all of this with one public payer and everybody in and nobody out and you go to a doctor and present your heart and have your medical history and you have your history and no co-pays and no deductibles. it is the only system that controls costs. almost every industrialized western system has this. even the right-wingers in these camera on in the uk says there's no way we would take your system. the canadians would not take the system. the single-payer action group, we call randomly a number in canada and ask if canadians would switch the system to ours. almost universally they say no way. why is this off the table? obama should say let's repeal obamacare and replace it with medicare for all single-payer is/ host: thank you so much. flashback tos a the arguments that took place during debate over the law itself. the progressives wanted a single-payer system and obama decided that was not politically feasible. we have the law that passed to this day. some nervous republican conservatives think that if the to bees not turn out effective and there are more complaints and democrats starts affecting, in 2016, you can see a democratic nominee like hillary clinton run on single- payer. democrats find out this law has problems, it could be the message that the caller said like something we could hear from a democrat critical of the healthcare law calling for more government oriented solution. host: we will go to new york city next on the republican line. caller: the obama care is too expensive. there's too many loose ends and it cannot be done. it's ridiculous. they've got to figure out another way. it should be repealed because you have farmers in states that will throw in something. what do farmers have to do with healthcare? what does the steel industry have to do with healthcare? they threw in anything so they could pass it and it does not make sense. mitchep talking about mcconnell trying to get him out. what about getting barney frank out who destroyed this country? host: thank you for your call. guest: barney frank is not in congress anymore. he retired. healthcare is highly integrated in this country with the economy. economy is going to be a tough issue as well but the fact that you are seeing evidence that businesses are laying off people. administration decided to delay the employer mandate is a sign that the healthcare law is a brake onutting small-business hiring. the two are intertwined. seen, the long- term impact, but there is anxiety when you talk to small- business owners of the new regulations for them. will go to joliet, illinois, on the democrat line. caller: hi, i want to address josh. he is lying about folks not liking obamacare. he needs to look at the questions and numbers about polling. a needs to look at an article that jonathan alter wrote on this and the fact that you are reporting, you are being disingenuous in your comments. i cannot believe you are on c- span. host: thank you so much. let's talk about these polls and what they are showing. in different parts of the country, you will get a different sampling. is thathe big take away many voters don't know what is in the law. there is a lot of anxiety, a lot of uncertainty as to what it will mean. there is a bunch of opposition. i have not seen a poll in the last couple of months that show more people supporting the law been opposing it. you are seeing a lot of nuance in the middle and the intensity is significant because the people who oppose the law say they know everything about what's in it and they are against it. the people who support the law are not quite as certain and are not as enthusiastic in favor. you also see the dynamic during the debates on health care while it was an on congress -- there is a division where the left was disappointed that they did not get a single-payer system or a more government run system as part of the plan. you see some evidence in polls that people who say they are not enthusiastic about our coming from the left because they wanted more government oriented. host: c-span will be televising the debate for the virginia gubernatorial race. what should we be seeing? has had allinelli kinds of problems. he has been outraised kum outspent, trouble within his own party with republicans. some conservatives are not totally on board with his campaign. his strategy will portray him as the more competent manager, the person who you can trust to run the government. terry his as portrays mcauliffe as a candidate who does not have command of the issues. the debatee that at and he needs to start drawing those aggressive contrasts and also needs to match his opponent financially. he is losing momentum so unless he can change the message and to ans opponent unfavorable point, he will have a tough time. host: what is one question you would ask? guest: the big question in this race is about what is the final strategy per the campaigns? cucinelli who he wins to win over? does he need to reach out to the tea party or the base? opponent, i think the big question is, do people trust him. ? he has not quite passed the competent test. can a be a competent steward of the state's economy and government? from richardt call in lake placid, florida, independent line. caller: good morning. i see we have a new host and welcome. host: thank you. -- i haveamacare never seen a bill that affected so many people and costs so much and was held in so much secrecy for so long. we knew nothing about this bill when it was passed. we heard nancy pelosi making the statement that we have to pass it to find out what is in it. we were told it was going to cost less and would be more accessible and quality would go up. we are finding out it will cost almost three times as much. accessibility will not be there because we are not owing to have as much providers like doctors and nurses and medical technicians. we were also told it would not illegals, abortions and we find it will fund illegals and abortions. this bill needs to be either repealed and/or my suggestion would be to let the people vote on this bill in the next midterm election. host: thank you so much. ourt: it's clear that there many hurdles the administration has to overcome. october 1 is the beginning of the exchange process and we will see it very soon. we are seeing a lot of reports in the about kinks system but are they minor or not? are these fundamental challenges? will get a sense in the next two months about how it is doing. talking ande been thank you for joining us. >> coming up live this afternoon on capitol hill, the senate budget committee is examining the impact of the looming government shutdown and american jobs in the committee and testimony will be heard from a economists including mark eastern.30 p.m. we will have live coverage. the senate is in session at this hour with lawmakers voting on todd hughes to serve on the u.s. court of appeals. 12:30 p.m., they will break for lunch. at 2:15 p.m., they will return and debate on the continuing resolution approved by the house last week that would give the government operating past the end of this month. current funding runs out on september 30. senators will likely remove that portion and return it to the house for consideration. you can see the senate live right now on our companion network, c-span 2 and the house of course here on c-span when they return tomorrow at noon eastern. as the senate session was getting under way today, senate leaders took a moment to talk about the way forward and the health care law and disagreement between party members over the way forward. >> there will be no filibuster today. filibusters stop people from voting and we are going to vote tomorrow under the rules. no one can stop that. we can advance it and do it more quickly and we can do that any time and i'll make sure we accomplish that effort. both sides agree that. in fact, it's something we should do. but we're going to vote tomorrow regardless of what anyone says or does today. unless it's a consent agreement to collapse the time and that vote will occur sometime around noon tomorrow. so i just want to make sure that everyone understands there s no filibuster today. mr. president, for millions of american familiar hees, the economic recovery has been long, long and very, very hard. and now just -- some republicans in congress seem determined to derail four years of progress. they're obsessed with defunding health care. pushing us closer and closer to a government shutdown that would taint the economy, and that's an understatement. the business community is grateful concerned about the impacts of the shutdown on the economy and middle-class americans are really upset and concerned about the threat of this. yesterday republican and democratic leaders in both houses of congress received a letter from the business roundtable, an association of chief executive officers that employ more than 16 million people. it's respected by democrats and republicans. the c.e.o.'s cautioned us about the economic dangers of a government shutdown, and they warned of a catastrophic effects of a first-ever default on the nation's debt. the next looming crisis republicans hope to exploit to their own short-term political benefit. i should say some republicans. this is what the business roundtable wrote yesterday and i quote. failure to fund the basic failure of government and address the debt would -- united states economy. even a brief government shutdown would have serious economic consequences and default, however temporary, would be calamitous. that's what they said, mr. president. five years removed from the worst of the great recession, job creation, economic growth, other key economic indicators are not where they should be but they're headed in the right direction. the private sector created 7 1/2 million jobs in the last 42 months. jobless claims are at a five-year low and consumers feel more optimistic about the economy than they have at any point in the last five years. a government shutdown would reverse these trends and stunt future economic growth, and it would pain consumers and financial institutions and would cost the economy more than $30 billion for every week the government remained shuttered. each week, $30 billion. we know of this from experience. coordinate to the nonpartisan congressional budget office, the shutdown in the mid 1990's, reduced g.d.p. by half a percent. mr. president, that was huge, huge amounts of damage to our economy. the u.s. chamber of commerce has joined the business roundtable on calling on congress to keep the government open. here's what they said. quote, it's not in the best interest of the u.s. business community or the american people to risk a brief government shutdown that white trigger disruptive consequences or raise poll sun uncertainty over the u.s. economy. but the dire affects of a shutdown wouldn't just impact the economy. a shutdown would send half of the civilian work force home without pay and many that live paycheck to paycheck. although checks would go out to seniors already on social security, no new application for benefits would be processed. putting seniors and disabled americans at risk. likewise, veterans applying for pension benefits would be forced to wait. the centers for disease control, mr. president, would stop monitoring disease outbreaks. and passport applications would linger, costing millions of dollars. y a three to one margin, americans -- let me say this right. by a margin of 3-1, the american -- all americans recognize that the plan is senseless. some feel more strongly than others. it's a senseless plan to hold the government hostage to defund obamacare. mr. president, as i said here yesterday morning, cnn, cnbc, separate polling, show 59 -- same number on both polls. 59%, the american people support obamacare. and even a larger number of people think the government shutdown is the worst idea that ever came along. as one republican senator said, the dumbest idea i ever heard. so imagine, president, the reaction of the american public once they see the dark economic outcome of a shutdown. i told you how they feel, but they can see in their mind's eye they're losing their jobs, heir family's losing jobs. questionable economic downturn. confuse us -- confucius offered something a long, long time ago. when anger arises, think of the consequences. i realize that republicans are still upset, mad, angry, they lost the election in may, 2008. i understand that. they're still angry they failed to stop the landmark of the expansion of health care. i understand that. they're angry they failed to regain the control of the senate and they're angry that president obama was overwhelmingly re-elected last year. but it's time to set that anger aside. it's time to stop obsessing over other battles and think of the consequences of a government shutdown. so, mr. president, what we need to do, the presiding officer, longtime member of congress, decades being in congress, recognizing how we worked together over those decades accomplishing good things for this country, we need to go back to those days, days of working together. we could start many places. we could start by funding the government without a big hassell. we could work together to do postal reform which affects six million working americans. we could work together to do ag reform, agriculture reform, which under the bill that we passed out of this body, we serve $23 billion. cut the deficit by $23 billion. we could work together to pass immigration reform. my republican colleagues are concerned about the debt. hat reduces it by $8 trillion. mr. president, the american people at least deserve, yes, that we work together to get things done and would hope that with this crisis facing us we can put all our obsessions about health care and obama getting re-elected and our still controlling the senate behind us and move on, mr. president, to do good things for our country again. >> mr. president. >> republican leader. >> about four years ago i moupted a campaign right here on the senate floor against a bill that would come to be known as obamacare. nearly every day we were in session, i spoke about the dangers of this bill for individuals, for families, for businesses and the very character of our country. i prekicted it would be a complete disaster -- predicted it would be a complete disaster and anyone that voted for it would come to regret it because the promises being made about obamacare couldn't possibly be kept. and guess what happened? these predictions are all coming true. obamacare hasn't even been fully implemented yet but we can already see the train wreck headed our way. premiums are skyrocketing. major companies have been dropping the health care plans their employees have and like. every week it seems there are new reports about glitches that will hurt families, compromise personal information or expose the american people to fraud. all of which helps explain why even some of the bill's fiercest early backers are looking for an escape hatch, but there's only one escape hatch that will fully help those trapped by this law and that's full repeal. and that's why i'm supporting the house-passed c.r. not only does it defund this terrible law, it doesn't increase government spending by a penny and it keeps the government from shutting down which nobody wants. and it does something else. and this is really important. it puts the focus right where it belongs, on the democrats who voted for and continue to support obamacare. because once we invoke cloture, mr. president, the focus will turn to our friends on the other side of the aisle, the senate democrats, the majority leader is counting on his democrat eck allies to amend the bill -- democratic allies to amend the bill. we can lose four democrats if he wants to restore funding for obamacare. so if five senate democrats vote against the majority leader, obamacare will be defunded. that, mr. president, is a vote we should have. and in all likelihood will have. democrats have been hearing the same complaints about obamacare that the rest of us have. the spotlight really should be on them. this is a rare opportunity to defund the law with a simple majority, simple majority to defund obamacare. we should have that vote. it just doesn't happen. i just don't happen to think filibustering the bill that defunds obamacare is the best root to defunding obamacare. all it does is shut down the government and keep obamacare funded and none of us want that. that would be the results of filibuster. four years ago every democrat voted for this bill and had the excuse they didn't know how it would turn out. well, they don't have that excuse now. i think we deserve to know where they stand now. four years ago every senate democrat worked to jam this bill through the senate over the loud objections of their constituents and the implementation of this law proceeds, their constituents remain just as angry about it as it's important for their senators to go on record once again. we're giving them a doover, a second chance, if you will. do they stand with the people of their states who do not want this law to be implemented or do they double down on this failed experiment, that's the question. everybody knows where republicans stand on this issue. we made d -- we may be divided on some things. we may not always agree on tactics, but the question on repealing obamacare, we are totally united. this law should be defunded. that's what the house bill does. that's why i plan to support it. but if we're going to repeal obamacare, we are going to need some democratic votes to do it. that's the only plan i've seen in this debate that will actually get us to our common goal of undoing the law. for the sake of our constituents, we need to unite to achieve it. so this morning i'd like to make a plea to our friends on the other side. join us in taking it off the books and replacing it with the kind of commonsense step-by-step reforms that lower costs and that americans will actually embrace. mr. president, i yield the floor. >> under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will be in a period of morning business until 11:15 a.m. with senators permitted to speak thrin for up to 10 minutes each with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees with the republicans controlling the first half. >> the senator from illinois. >> mr. president, i am going to ask unanimous consent to speak, though the minority has the first half, and ask 10 minutes that i speak be taken off the majority time at the end of morning business. >> without objection, so ordered. >> mr. president, i listened closely to the statement made by senator mcconnell of kentucky, the republican senate leader, and i applaud him and other senators who have spoken out against the so-called filibuster that's been initiated by the senator from texas and at least one other senator. it is not technically a filibuster, as senator reid has said, but the object is to slow down the business of the senate and that it is similar to a filibuster. we are going to have that occur today when senator cruz takes the floor this afternoon to state his position that we should shut down the government if we do not fund obamacare. or if we fund obamacare, and that to me is an irresponsible position. it's irresponsible because the senators who support the house position are playing high stakes poker with other people's money. to shut down the government is disastrous. not only for hundreds of thousands of federal employees who do important work to keep america safe and to keep us a leading nation in the economy but also because it's at the expense of american jobs. when senator read, the democratic leader, came to the floor and read a statement from the business roundtable, he was reading from the strongest business group that usually, without fail, supports republicans. that group put out a statement yesterday, the business roundtable, the leading business executives in our country, that to shut down the government or to fail to extend the debt ceiling is devastating to our economy. the words they used from calamitous and catastrophic. that's how they described the republican strategy, which senator cruz and others, are bringing to the floor of the senate today. catastrophic, calamitous. why in the world would we have the self-imposed crisis, created by the threats of the house republicans, on the floor of the senate today? well, they're entitled to a debate. they're entitled to state their position. that's their right as senators representing their states. but they're not entitled to damage our economy and hurt innocent people and shut down the government. that is a pet lent political position. what we need to do is take a more positive approach toward governing this country. senator mcconnell also talked about obamacare, known as the health care reform bill, one of the most important bills that the senate has passed in modern times and one i was proud to support and what he's basically calling for is the repeal of obamacare. what the republicans are asking for is repeal, for example, the provision in obamacare that says that health insurance companies cannot discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. if you happen to have a family with a child that has diabetes, it may be impossible for you to buy health insurance under the old law. under obamacare, your family cannot be discriminated against. the republicans want to eliminate that provision of obamacare when they call for abolishing that program. secondly, when you defund and eliminate obamacare, you're going to change that provision which guarantees there will be no limits on your health insurance policy coverage. who knows what tomorrow's diagnosis will bring, what bills it will bring your family, but some health insurance policies have a limit on what they pay and when that limit is reached, people face bankruptcy and worse. obamacare stops that from happening. the republicans want to repeal that. obamacare also says that if your young son or daughter fresh out of college is looking for a job and hasn't found one, they can stay on your family health insurance plan until age 26. the republicans want to repeal that, leaving more and more young people, millions across america, vulnerable without the protection of health insurance. when it comes to medicare prescription part d, seniors, because of the so-called doughnut hole, were paying sums out of their own savings, their meager savings, and out of their own pocket for prescription drugs. obamacare filled that doughnut hole and gives those seniors more peace of mind. republicans want to repeal that. and finally, they want to repeal the insurance exchanges. today, every member of congress who uses the health insurance available to us as senators and congressmen are part of the federal employee health benefit program. each year senators, republicans and democrats, have an opportunity under an insurance exchange to pick the plan best for their family. that privilege is something we appreciate and want to make available for everyone across america. that's what obamacare does, and the republicans want to repeal it. republican senators want to keep using the insurance exchange for their families and their benefit. they don't want to extend it to other families across america. that's what repeal of obamacare would do. those are the specifics, and for senator mcconnell come to the floor and challenge those of us that voted for obamacare and ask for us to stand by it, we do. there are changes that should be made but in a constructive and positive fashion. this is not just about the peace of mind of people, families and businesses and others when it comes to health insurance. it's about our deficit. if we took the republican approach of doing nothing when it comes to the cost of health care, sadly we're condemning ourselves to deficits as far as the eye can see. 60% of our deficits and looming national debt relates to the increased cost of health care. if we took the republican approach of doing nothing, ultimately it would mean that deficit, those debts would be even larger for future generations. so obamacare is the step in the right direction. finally, mr. president, let me say i understand what's going on now with several members of the senate republican caucus who want to take to the floor and argue we should shut down the government if it means funding obamacare. i think they're wrong on the merits. they're wrong politically when both "wall street journal" and even karl rove admonished them not to take the suicidal strategy. i think they're right. it's a strategy which is not appealing to anybody across america except a handful of extremists, those who are independence and others -- independents and others, believe it's the basic responsibility of the house and the senate. it's important we accept that responsibility, standing up to make a speech on your beliefs on the floor is certainly every senator's right, but let us get on with the business of governs. we should vote on this motion to proceed instead of wasting an entire day today and tomorrow. the sooner we satisfy america that we are not going to shut down the government, the better it will be for our economy to ton to grow and create jobs. mr. president, i'm going to yield the floor and ask the time i just used be taken off the majority time under morning business to follow-up a little later. >> those speeches earlier today in the senate session. senate right now voting on a judicial nomination. and after that they're expected to recess for their weekly party lunches. that will happen around 12:30 eastern. lawmakers will return at 2:15. we're expecting comments and reaction from their meeting and then it's back to work on temporary federal spending legislation. the first test vote is set for tomorrow. you can see the senate right now on our companion network c-span. live this afternoon, the senate budget committee will hold a hearing looking at the possible effects of government shutdown on american jobs and the economy. among the witnesses is mark zandi of moody's. ron johnson is a member of the senate budget committee. here are his thoughts this morning on the current debate over the congressional budget from "washington journal" today. guest: i certainly don't hope so. there is no reason for one. major part of what americans are seeing right now is the utter dysfunction of this place. i come from the private sector. manufacturing. my background is in accounting. it is hard to convey the dysfunction of washington, d.c. one thing i would like to point out to americans is what they need to do is watch this very carefully and make sure they don't rely on the federal government to solve their problems, because the federal government was never intended and not designed and not capable of running the 23% of ur economy that is in charge of not much less of 39% but on trajectory managing of about 30 years. i really hope americans are watching this very carefully and start realizing what we need to do this by devolving power away from this dysfunctional place and start bringing back -- which is really the constitutional framework, governing close to the government which is better than this alternate universe called washington. host: do you support the house bill as it stands? guest: every republican will like to see obama care repealed , defunded. there aren't a whole lot of republicans that don't want to threaten any kind of shutdown. somehow we are going to have to work through this process. never really understood the endgame of this particular strategy. i have done a lot of strategic planning in my lifetime. it always starts with acknowledging, trying to ascertain what reality is and what is the situation. unfortunately for republicans and conservatives, the reality is president obama won re-election, senator harry reid is in control of the senate and it is pretty hard to for -- force senator harry reid to pass a bill that he funds --defund obamacare and have president obama sign it. i think there are better strategies. certainly it is incumbent on republicans to show the american people what our ideas are for health care reform, but what we need to be doing is start painting the picture of what obamacare is really going to look like once it is fully implemented. i think what we are seeing right now is it is not going to be a very pretty picture. i think the best chance we have for preventing obamacare from taking firm or permanent root -- as how i like to talk about it -- is, as this thing does get rolled out, i think americans are going to be not particularly happy with the results. we are already seeing it. president obama's big supporters and the unions are demanding this is change because they recognize it threaten the 40-hour workweek, and certainly not producing job growth and creation. so, across-the-board, the obamacare -- it will be a disaster for the health-care system, and let's face this -- and let's face it, our federal budget and freedom. host: what do you think about the strategy of your colleague, senator ted cruz? guest: again, i don't see how it ends in success. i like to recognize reality. i like to set achievable goals. i don't see defunding obamacare with harry reid in the senate and president obama in the white house is an achievable goal. i think a far more achievable goal just might be a one-year delay. let's face it, president obama personally acknowledged that obamacare is a train wreck and he delayed a number of provisions by executive order, and quite honestly, i don't think he -- i don't know if he has the legal authority to do those things. i think we could probably work with our democratic colleagues potentially to delay it a year. this bill is not ready for prime time. possibly, if we utilize our levers of power properly we might convince them it is in their best interest to delay this a year, and then what we should do is take the next year, prior to the 2014 rex nd have a serious conversation about what we need to do to fix the health care system and run the 2014 election as a mandate, a, to finally repeal obamacare and, b, to institute the types of free-market reforms, the types of reforms that give consumers the choice and start limiting the rate of growth of costs instead of expanding it and produces a health care system that is better for most americans. host: senator mcconnell said he will not filibuster the c.r. and other senators as well. are you in that camp? guest: it is based that depends on how it is presented to us. it's difficult to not allow a vote to proceed to final passage on a bill that defunds obamacare. that's exactly what the defund crowd wanted was a vote in the senate to defund obamacare and to see passage of that bill, i think it will be very difficult to try to revent from that -- prevent cloture from that standpoint. host: our guest is here until 8:30. host: if you want to send a tweet, c-spanwj or you can e-mail us. journal@c-span.org. one-year delay, how would you work that in the senate then? guest: the way i approach negotiations in businesses is you figure out what you agree on. i think the house has had enough senators giving them advice. but if i were in control of the house what i would be thinking about doing his let's put together a c.r. that funds the vast majority of the government, the things that we all agree on. let's get it to the senate and have the senate pass the vast majority of funding for the federal government. if we want to have a little bit of a debate and discussion over -- which i think we should have over obamacare, whether it is defunding, one-year delay, or how about rejection of the o.p.m. ruling giving congress and their staff special treatment in those exchanges, we can do that potentially with a smaller amount of the federal budget which quite honestly don't disagree on the funding. let's not talk about a massive shutdown of 1/3 of the government which is what the discretionary part of the whole c.r. is all about. pedro, it's most people don't understand, 2/3 of the federal government is already fully appropriated. it is mandatory spending. it will be spent regardless of what happened, whether we pass a c.r. or not. quite honestly, even a bunch of that discretionary spending would be spent automatically because it has to do with national security or part of discretionary spending tied to mandatory funding. so, an awful lot of the debates about a government shutdown is really a debate about something that is far scarier than reality. host: regina on the independent line. you are talking with senator ron johnson. republican. caller: good morning, senator. my opinion actually changed of you just a few seconds ago. my major concern, being someone who was laid off, my husband and i, and taking such a significant cut in our finances and being offered health care just for myself is $482, and we have three children. so it is like we have to break, -- split the children up on different health care plans and things like that. it is emotional for me because our government is just crumbling. that is what it seems like, you know? i just really hope you guys do something to help us. i know a few seconds ago -- i am sorry. you said we should not depend on our government, but we pay you guys. we pay you guys to protect s. we pay you guys to just do what we need you guys to do. nd i really think that if we could get our hands out of everybody else, going back toward the u.n. stuff -- helping these other countries. american needs to help america right now. and if there are more republicans like you in the senate, i think that we could get it done. guest: regina, first of all, i appreciate your comments. i always talk about, what do we all agree on? i really believe we all share the same goal. we want a prosperous america. i am concerned about every american. we all want every american to have an opportunity to build a good life for themselves and their family. we certainly have a wide diversity of opinions on how to achieve that kind of prosperity, how do we provide those types of opportunities. i guess what i am asking people to look at just the evidence of how washington, d.c. has not worked particularly well. it is not working well right now. that is part of my message is let's take a look at how we can take control away from the federal government, take it back to the states, bring it back to our communities. i think that is probably a better approach and that is what i am talking about in terms of real health care reform, how do we bring more consumer choice back to the patients? how do we get more individuals involved in their own health care as well as the payment of it? how do you create the structure so you allow the free-market competitive system to control costs rather than have washington, d.c. start rationing care to control costs? host: john from miami, florida, democrats line. are you there? caller: yeah, i'm here. host: you're on. go ahead, please. caller: yeah, senator. i wonder if you could answer this question for me. i'm real curious. you keep putting obamacare down when there's a president who's trying to help all the poor people and the hardworking people. you put obamacare down when it is the law, it was passed throughout the law, it is the law and yet the republicans are trying to kill this wonderful thing that obama is trying to do for us. and another thing, senator, could you tell me in detail what kind of insurance you have and who pays for it? if it's not the taxpayer? guest: first of all, john, what we are seeing is that obamacare was passed on a very partisan basis and even president obama's union backers are taking a look at this law and saying there are a lot of problems with this bill. it is just not ready for prime time. it is not going to work as advertised. president obama claimed if you like your health care plan you can keep it. well, it's not true. he says when you pass obama care, the cost of a family 2,500 m would decline by $ during the first time and it's actually up by $,500. there were a lot of broken promises and promises not been borne out. john, we are a compassionate society. we truly are. we want a strong social safety net. the problem is, how do you design the social safety net that's confined to the people who trulyly need it that doesn't keep into the population of people that don't need it, take vang of it and in so doing bankrupt our nation? one of our problems, the thing i'm really concerned about is our national debt is almost $17 trillion. it exceeds the size of our economy. if we hit a debt crisis, if interest rates spike, if we just go back, pedro, to the 30-year average interest rate of 5.3% from 1970 to 1999, that would add $6.5 billion per year to our interest payment. that's what we spend on defense, more than we spend on medicare. it's not that i'm not compassionate. it's not that i don't want to not help people that can't help themselves. i'm incredibly concerned this nation is going bankrupt. we are the world's reserve currency. we can print money. that can't go on forever. if we have an interest rate spike, all of this government spending that people are relying on is really going to be put at risk. again, i'm just trying to be pisscally responsible in trying to avoid some calamity in the future if we don't get these costs and these welfare programs under control. host: the former education secretary, bill bennett, in his column in "the wall street journal" saying you already set aside money in your budget to help supplement health care costs for your own staff. guest: i'm a business guy. you come here from the private sector and you get a budget for staff and you realize that that budget doesn't have to pay for benefits. something else magically takes care of that. most members of congress don't have a clube how much the benefits cost for the people they employ on their staffs. i realize this is happening. i realize this was the clear intent of congress when they passed obamacare to make sure that members of congress and their staff purchased their insurance through the exchanges, just like other millions of americans are going to probably lose their health benefits and have to access health care through these exchanges. very explicitly congress did not allow the federal government to make payments into those exchanges unless they qualified for the subsidies based on their income. again, it was a clear intent. i recognize the law as it is. what i've done consistently is not spent more than half a million dollars per year of my budget, first of all, just to be fiscally responsible, but also realizing at some point in time this law was going to kick in and i was going to have to do something in terms of helping the people that work with me provide, pay for their health care. i have run a business for 31 years. i made sure that the people that work with me had good health coverage and i always had the exact same health coverage as everybody i employed. host: "roll call" headline said you may sue over the carveout? guest: i don't believe the president has the legal authority to just go ahead and institute this policy from o.p.m. that's going to allow the federal government to make contributions for health care in the exchanges. that is special treatment. there will be millions of americans that lose their health care because of obama quare. when they lose that health care and they got to buy their coverage through the exchanges, the only subsidy they'll get is what's -- based on their income. except for members of congress and the staff. then the federal government, their employer will be able to help pay for that health care. that's the way the law is written. president obama has circumvented that without the legal authority. yeah, what i intend to do if that law is actually implemented, i believe i will have legal standing to sue to overturn that ruling which i think would be the right thing to do. host: "wall street journal" editorial say your colleague made an effort to make sure that members of congress and staff live under it. why did it gain traction? guest: i think they're worried about losing the employer sponsor care for their staff and they are afraid they might lose staff. if you look at the legislative history, amendmentes that were offered rejected by the democrats, in the end, sure seems to me the clear intent was make members of congress and their staff purchase health care through the exchange and not allow the federal government to make contributions to their health coverage. either follow the law or you change the law. you don't do it through regular tore fiat like the president's done where he has no legal authority. host: here is tacoma, washington, nancy, republican line. hello. caller: hello. host: go ahead, nancy. caller: hello. i'm a retired military and i didn't hear what you said. saw your mouth move but -- host: go ahead. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: ok. hello, senator. i want you to get behind senator cruz. i don't care what he's saying or what he's doing, get behind him for the american people. this is an unjust and illegal law. this is not about health care. it's about insurance. now, you have the power to regulate commerce. the children aged 26 can stay on their parent's insurance. they cannot deny you for pre-existing conditions. and a number of other things that are very well welcomed to the american public. insurance ulated companies. then, the democratic party decided to punish the american people. in decided to mandate, other words, you have to. it's something you do not want and do not need. then, the supreme court changed the wording and they did a tax. now, i want you to get behind senator cruz and stand your ground. thank you. guest: first of all, every republican, every conservative is absolutely united in wanting to derail, defund, prevent, really limit the damage of obamacare in our health care system and our economy. but the sad fact of the matter is president obama was re-elected. john roberts ruled. he was the swing vote in saying obamacare was constitutional. i didn't agree with that ruling. so you have to take a look at the political reality of the situation. what we need to do now is republicans and conservatives, we need to paint that picture of what obamacare is really going to mean to our health care system. we got to get the supermajority support of the american people to at least maybe start having democrats think about voting for repeal or start to win-win elections. we need more votes in the senate to have repeal. again, we better really do is win 2016. that's probably our best chance of actually finally repealing obamacare. it's a political process. you have to inform, persuade. you have to win the argument. the sad fact is we don't have the supermajority of americans putting pressure on washington to fully repeal this law. host: if you want all that to happen, then what about senator cruz's approach to the whole thing, writing filibusters because it has impact? guest: i don't see how that leads to a successful defunding of the bill. what you have to do is you actually have to pass a bill through the senate that defunds obamacare. this isn't a situation i think -- i think people are misled early on because we supposedly have the power of the purse. we have the power of 1/3 of the purse. if they pass the c.r., it doesn't get defunded. it's funded in the 2/3 of the mandatory spending. you have to pass a through lieu the senate which means harry reid has to cooperate and we have to find currently five democratic senators and in a month or so six democratic senators when we lose the seat in new jersey, we need to have those people join with republicans to repeal and defund obamacare. so far not one democrat in either chamber has ever broken ranks on voting to repeal obamacare. i don't think that political dynamic has changed recently. host: senator reid took to the floor of the house yesterday to talk about issues that will be playing out for this week and talking specifically about house republicans and the influence of the tea party about the president's health care law. here's what he had to say. >> inside the house republican bubble, the -- tens of millions of americans shut down the government. outside the house republican bubble, the action is altogether difference. the radical tea party plan to shut down the government, unless democrats deny funding passed by the house of representatives friday has been called the dumbest idea ever by one republican senator. it's been called the box canyon which republicans will not escape unscathed by a second republican senator. it's been called dishonest by one republican senator and a suicide note by another republican senator. so, mr. president, the reviews are in and they're universal. the ransom demanded by house republicans to keep the government open is not workable and unrealistic. host: senator johnson. guest: part of the big problem that obamacare has, it was jammed through under total low partisan basis. how did it start out? if you really want to try to negotiate something, if you want to accomplish something, you have to figure out what you agree on. obviously back in 2010 when this law was passed or 2009, 2010, there wasn't that coming together. there wasn't that compromise. this was jammed through on a totally partisan basis so the american people have been totally divided on this thing ever since. it's why i ran for election. it's really what produced that wave of tea party candidates that won in 2010. certainly on our side, there is a high level of frustration that john roberts for example our standpoint, ruled the wrong way, that this law is still in place. so you're seeing that frustration level play out here. what i'd like to do is, again, look at the reality of the situation. i'd like democrats look at the fact that their union backers are realizing this law has many, many damaging effects. i'd like certainly conservatives, republicans to recognize we didn't win the 2012 election. harry reid is still in the senate. we have to recognize that reality. let's start informing the american public. in the end, this all goes back to the american people. what are they going to want? i think if republicans -- i'd say if the medical community, if we start painting the picture -- listen, i talk to doctors. they're really concerned about what will happen in terms of their ability to deliver quality health care. because how do you do this? just from a macroeconomic standpoint, obamacare promises to really dramatically increase the demand for health care. 30 million more americans getting health care that apparently didn't have it in the past. it's not exactly true. 30 million more people demanding health care while redramatically reduce the supply. the current budget window, we'll lose money out of medicare. that's reducing the supply. that's not an economic prescription for reducing the costs. that's an economic prescription for a market disaster, rationing, lower quality care. i think that's the kind of picture that republicans and conservatives need to paint for the american public so we can repeal this bill before it does really damage our health care system and our budget. host: one off twitter, why delay a year, why not implement it, fix the parts not working? guest: i'm thinking possibly we could convince our democratic colleagues who also recognize this thing's not ready for primetime. again, president obama's delaying all kinds of different parts of the bill. the bureaucracy is not ready to implement this law. why don't we take a pause? way on't we collect -- say a year? we could be talking to our democratic colleagues, what are the most harmful aspects? for example, medical device tax. 79 democrats -- 79 senators voted to repeal that during our budget process because they're starting to see when you tax medical device sales, 2.3%, we virtually stopped investing in new medical device manufacturing here in the united states. that's shipping jobs overseas. even democrat senators recognize that. so maybe we need to be doing over the next year is remove the most damaging aspects of obamacare while again certainly from a republican standpoint i'd be arguing to let's repeal the whole thing. it will be difficult to piecemeal this thing and make it better. more than 20,000 pages now of law, rules and regulation and they're only about half done writing this law which is 3 1/2 years to implement it, only written about half of the regulations? that's kind of a problem, isn't it? host: here is clyde from virginia, on with senator ron johnson. caller: hello, senator ron johnson. how are you doing? guest: good. and yourself? caller: good. this insurance thing. go, obama. wow. he's going to fix health care. i thought they were going to maybe somehow get the hospitals and doctors to not charge so much. but for years and years, insurance has been like the -- a real problem with everybody. the doctors have to get a staff just to -- you fill out the forms for regular insurance. hospitals charge more. you know, even in my industry, i do heating and air conditioning. when the insurance is involved, you automatically charge a little bit more. hospitals, used to be, if you take your pet, now you have to have insurance for your pet. it's probably going to be mandatory. which mandatory is a term i wasn't really sure what it was, but i'm very sure what it is now. it seems like we see a lot of mandatory all the time. i just think personally years ago my wife had to go in the hospital and they paid -- it was like a $2,000 bill. i had insurance for years. first time she goes to the doctor. well, we only got to pay $900 ecause you have an accelerated deductible because you didn't use your insurance. i dropped it. i refuse to get it. host: caller, your question or comment for the senator. caller: i'm ranting and raving. i'm totally against obamacare. i don't think the government needs to be an insurance company. i think you guys can defund it or whatever the hell it takes to get -- host: thank you. guest: government's involvement in health care. now the government pays roughly 40%, 50% of health care. they don't pay it at reimbursable rates. it doesn't cover the costs of hospitals. what do hospitals and health care providers do? they shift it to the private sector which is why insurance has skyrocketed. it's that cost shifting because of government involvement. another root involvement is back in the 1940's and 1950's we moved to a third-party payer system. i think the stats back in the 1950's, 40 cents was paid by the patient. there's involvement in making that's consumer choices. now 12 cents of every dollar is paid for by the patient. 88 cents of every health care dollar is paid by somebody else. people don't know what it costs or what it is. by removing the product out of the process, separating them from the payment of the product, we've taken the free market discipline in terms of controlling costs. and you take a look at the two areas where government really has gotten involved -- health care and education, those are two areas of our economy whose costs have skyrocketed in relationship to the rest of inflation. i give my powerpoint in terms of cost of college. because the government's involvement, we've gone -- cost to college since the 1960's increased 2.4 times the cost of inflation. health care has similar numbers. you go, what's so different? for example, what college and universities spend their money on that their cost is 2.4 times the rate of inflation? well, government involvement. we poured money into education. we've enticed our children to collect trillion dollars of student loan debt. government involvement, it's well-intentioned but there are serious negative consequences because you simply can't command the economy. soviet union was not able to do it. venezuela is a basket case. how many people vycation on the island paradise of cuba? when government takes over huge sectors of the economy, it fails to work. host: democrats line. caller: how you doing? guest: real good. caller: from the day this bill was passed, republicans have been crying the blues about this bill. please. nswer this question. if people re-lecked president obama -- re-elected president obama and there is an election between you and the republicans and the democrats won, how -- why do you want to change the democratic system and repeal this bill? because you don't like it. that doesn't make sense. we've heard your story for over three or four years now. we know all the negatives. please. why don't you start talking about the positives of the program? thank you. guest: first of all, unfortunately from my standpoint, the 2012 election was not run as a mandate to repeal obamacare. it was shoved off to the side. we talked about other things. the fact of the matter is all those promises that president obama made, in terms of family rates coming down $2,500. they've increased by $2,500. if you like your health care plan, keep it. you can't. those promises are being broken. so i think those are just some basic facts. the truth of the matter is as well, president obama very clefrl, quite cynical -- cleverly, quite cynically, delayed the implementation of the health care law until after his election. he's delaying some bad parts of the bill until after the 2014 election. i've seen polls where 40% of americans don't even realize that obamacare is the law of the land. as we're moving toward implementation now, people are just for the first time recognizing, oh, this isn't quite as good as was advertised. these promises are being broken and they're going to start seeing the negative consequences of the health care law. that's just a fact. and so from our standpoint, i'm trying to be pretty even keel about this. i'm trying to be as reasonable as possible by let's take a look at the facts, let's take a look at the damage that obamacare can cause to our system, i look toward the democratic colleagues in terms of repealing the medical device tax so we can invest in medical devices again in america. it does have to be a two-way street. i'm glad to be part of the discussion. host: de soto, texas, independent line. caller: something that republicans and conservatives, particularly, need to very clearly point out more of the actual damage, the first three specifically things i'd like to address. the huge increase in deductibles. i heard from our insurance that it will be raised by $10,000. that is $20,000. our premiums is going up over 300%. it is going up to keep the same thing. the second huge thing was discussed today on another channel by the c.e.o. of the mayo clinic and that is the huge increase in out-of-pocket expenses because he said many, many, many people are not realizing while you may get a decrease in your premium, your deductible and your out-of-pocket expenses. when you come to the mayo clinic, huge amounts of things covered in the past are now going to have to be paid out of pocket. and the third many gorilla in the room is what many people do not believe and that is the huge impact that is the independent payment advisory board could have on senior citizens. i think it's a sad state of affair when our country is going to be looking to just a few appointed people who may or may not even have anything to do in the medical field and they will have control over every citizens in the world care simply by a stroke of a pen. host: thank you. guest: we saw an inkling of what the independent payment advisory board would be looking at. t is the preventative task board. women under 50 probably shouldn't get a madamogram. yeah, it will save a few lives but not really enough to justify the costs. that's a government unit making that call when i believe individuals ought to be able to have the freedom to make that decision themselves. and unfortunately the ipab, to use the shorten form there, is from my standpoint, that's really the rationing board. that's really their function. take a look, 15 -- i think it's 15 unelected bureaucrats taking a look at health care outcomes and saying americans really -- we shouldn't be utilizing that treatment. we'll make that decision. i think that's the wrong way to go. what has made this country great is really a free market competitive system where you have millions of consumers making millions of individual consumer choices, determining what level of quality, what level of service, what kind of price you want to pay for whatever they buy. one thing i try to point out. what a free market competitive system guarantees is the lowest possible price in cost, the highest possible level of quality and highest possible level of customer service. did i do that in my business? yeah. that's what we want for our health care system as well. we basically removed the free market competitive system when you have 88 cents of every dollar being paid by somebody else and we just don't have that consumer connected with paying the product any more. host: what should be done about the debt ceiling? guest: first off, anytime the president of the united states comes to congress and asks for the authority to increase the debt burden on our children and grandchildren, that ought to be a very serious discussion. that ought to be a debate. and i believe when we're facing the types of deficits over the next 30 years, we can get into that a little bit too. we don't have a 10-year budget problem, we have a 30-year demographic problem. the baby boom generation, the politicians from both parties have made promise after promise after promise. the problem is they didn't provide -- make the provisions for paying those those promises. as part of my work with the white house, trying to come to grips what we need to do with our debt and deficit, we ran a projection. we've seen hockey stick graphs. it's -- at that point the model blows up. no, it doesn't. we ran the model. it produces very scary numbers. our most realistic number show a 30-year deficit of $107 trillion. primarily driven by medicare. it's about a $36 trillion deficit in medicare. about $11 trillion deficit in social security. so you can't take those things off the table. you must address the long-term drivers of our debt and deficit and we should be doing that probably around the debt ceiling where we have that very serious discussion. it starts with, what do we agree on? we need to agree on the extent of the problem. most people here in washington put their head in the sand. they don't want to look at the numbers because they're big and scary. instead, they talk about these problems with demagoguery. paul ryan, whether you like his proposal or not, it's a real proposal in terms of what we can do to save medicare for future generations. the other side runs ad with the paul ryan look-alike pushing granny off the cliff. i don't know how that moves us toward a solution. what would help us is let's agree on the size of the problem over 30 years. let's let's start -- i call a solution menu. kind of on a no-fault basis. let's start having a way of looking at this. over 30 years, decade by decade, let's say we start recognizing that the population now lives a lot longer. we need to start fact uring that truth into our -- factoring that truth into our entitlement program and if we adjust the retirement age to -- from 65 or 67 to x over x number of years, how much of that $107 trillion deficit would that solve? let's get the think tanks. let's give smart people some experts to start scoring the possible solutions. the solution oppings so then the american people are -- options so then the american people are informed and members of congress are informed what challenges we face and what possible solutions there are to actually meet those challenges. host: on the house side, raising the debt ceiling by not funding the affordable care act for a year, your thoughts? guest: how about a one-year delay? from my standpoint, president obama already acknowledged this thing is not ready for primetime. he's delaying all kinds of parts of this bill without the legal authority to do so, i might add. why not? 't we -- we need to have that very serious discussion. . we need to have that very serious discussion. part of ours is obamacare will cost $13 trillion over the next few years. those are projections, who knows what it will cost, but it gives you a sense how expensive obamacare will be. i already talked about sths and medicare. how those things combined will be about $47 trillion of deficit spending over the next 30 years. how can we afford another $13 trillion? again, nobody really talks those numbers. we a

Related Keywords

Arkansas , United States , Jerusalem , Israel General , Israel , West Bank , Louisville , Kentucky , Alaska , China , Nairobi , Nairobi Area , Kenya , Syria , Russia , Washington , District Of Columbia , Bahrain , Sri Lanka , West Virginia , Egypt , South Carolina , Cambodia , Libya , Cuba , New Washington , Pennsylvania , Miami , Florida , New York , Canada , Damascus , Dimashq , Texas , Afghanistan , Iran , Congo , Illinois , Virginia , Northern Ireland , Craigavon , United Kingdom , Pakistan , Tunisia , Tennessee , Iraq , New Jersey , Mali , Petersburg , Sankt Peterburg , Berkeley Springs , Central African Republic , Geneva , Genè , Switzerland , Somalia , Capitol Hill , France , Joliet , Venezuela , Cambodians , Americans , America , Iranians , Iranian , Israelis , French , Cambodian , Israeli , American , Syrians , Egyptian , Canadians , Soviet , Syrian , Palestinian , Marco Rubio , Todd Hughes , John Roberts , Nancy Pelosi , John Yarmouth , Asia Africa , Josh Kraus , Ron Johnson , Barney Frank , Martin Luther King Jr , John Kerry , Harry Reid , Bob Bennett , Barack Obama , Al Qaeda , Shia Sunni , Matt Bevan , Jeff Mason , John Boehner , Nelson Mandela , States , Mitch Mcconnell , Matt Bennett , Mohamed Morsi , Newt Gingrich , Paul Ryan , Ted Cruz ,