alan simpson, a former senator who was co-chair of the national commission on fiscal responsibility will join us. we will tell you more details of the plan and open up the phone lines and ask for your comments on whether or not you support the payroll tax cut deal. our phone lines are 202-77-000 to four republicans 2-0 -- 202- 737-0014 democrats and 202-628- 0008 for independence. we will ask you throw out our program this morning to talk about the state of the economy the federal spending decisions being made here in washington, and how it will be effective and about this deal reached by a bipartisan accord in advance of the end of the month deadline that has three major provisions. daniel new hauser is on the phone with us. mr. neuhaus are, good morning. let's start with the major part, the extension of the social security tax holiday. will you tell people what they need to know about that and how much it will cost? guest: that is right. it is a $100 billion provision. it does not offset what republicans are pushing for for quite some time. they wanted it to offset with funding elsewhere. last week, they decided that, in order to make this expedia politically, that they would not offset it. it will continue current tax breaks for just about everybody. the average american home makes something like $50,000 will get about $1,000 extra in their paycheck. >> but the $100 billion that it costs will add to the deficit. is it true that it does not the play money from social security, but the with allies, a short amount is covered by general fund -- but though wavell lot is, a short amount is covered by general fund? >>guest: it needs a little more fleshing out to figure that out. caller:host: with republicans saying that it could lead to the deficit, it blurs the line between the two parties. what are the politics in this decision? guest: both sides -- now are out there trying -- both sides are out there trying to push that. there are parties within each party who will vote against this thing. host: so there are both democratic and republican constituencies within the house and senate who have concerns, even though the broader membership seem to be leaning toward supporting it? guest: yes, i think this thing will pass on a bipartisan vote today. i do not think that either party likes this thing on their own. but there is definitely a lot of griping about a bunch of things. first of all, the fact that the payroll tax is not offset, but also the unemployment insurance fein that there is not enough -- the unemployment insurance thing, that it does not go far enough to change the system, some republicans say. democrats say that there are not enough weeks paid out to those who are on jobless benefits. at the end of the day, the people who will vote for it will do so because it gives people a tax cut in an election year. and each want to get it off their played. host: the unemployment benefits are extended. the republicans call it a win because it cuts the length of time. guest: yes, the longest amount of time that it is paid for is 99 weeks. as the end of the year, the longest amount of time will be 73 weeks. that is for states with unemployment over 9%. some people say that this will be -- that the majority of states will have 73 weeks and some people say that, by the end of the year, the majority will be seeing 60 weeks. host: then the medicare so- called doc fix 7% paid to doctors seeing medicare patients. how much is that? >> it runs about $50 billion to $60 billion total. there is an offset with cuts elsewhere. some cuts to pensions for federal workers. host: and also the sale of broadcast spectrum. guest: yes, and some cuts to provisions in obama's health care law. host: it only extends this until december of this year. is that correct? guest: that is correct. there were hoping to extend it for two years. -- daisy or hoping to extend it for two years. but at the end of the deer, -- and of the day, they have it for one year. host: the house and senate will both pick it up. the house will pick it up right after our program at 9:00 a.m. today. they will make their decision. at possible, it will go to the senate for their consideration. you can find his article on this on "robocall." there are the -- "roll call." and the other side of the ledger is also controversial. members who are representing people in washington area with high members of federal employees are concerned that they will be paying more into pension plans to help pay for this. and there is also the sale of spectrum that is intended to bring money into the federal treasury and free up spector for both emergency responders and for the increasing -- and free up spectrum for both the emergency responders and for the increase in broadband. caller: everybody talks about this as a middle-class tax cut. but it reduces social security income funding and will add to the national deficit by about $100 billion. if each person says, well, you know, we will have $40 to $60 in spending in each month how wonderful this is, but this is undermining social security because this is a withholding tax that is taken out on all of our paychecks. and we underdone -- which undermined this in 2011 and once again we are undermining this in 2012. this reduction is increasing the national deficit but it is underfunding social security. i really feel that say we will take the money and replace it with general fund money is incorrect. the reason i believe that is incorrect is because we already have a deficit and we will increase the deficit. whether it is democrat or republican, i think it will be a heated debate coming up in the selection, that those who vote for this proposal are of voting to undermine social security which benefits so many people, especially in these economic times. it benefits our seniors and people on disability and others. host: if you were here and able to make the decision, how would you fix the situation? >>caller: i would increase the income cap so that the wealthier will pay more into the system. it cuts in at $96,000 per year. after that, you do not have to pay the same rate as people who make less money. if you raise the income cap so the welfare pay more into the system then you will make social security financially solvent for years and years into the future. that would be the solution here rather than to cut this back so that eventually people on social security will lose their benefits. host: thank you for your call. anthony, a republican in new jersey. caller: i am disappointed with the payroll tax increase because it will lessen the amount of money that an individual would have at the point of retirement. socials record was supposed to be an aide to the people. -- social security was supposed to be an aide to the people. people who will be getting $40 a week will not save the money. it will only increase the debt and the deficit of this country. that is my comment. thank you. host: massachusetts, up next to your response to the dock fix and extending the social security tax holiday. this is an independent. caller: good morning. i agree with the other two callers about social security and how it will affect it. i do not agree in extending the unemployment. you cannot fly and -- if you cannot find a job in 99 weeks you are now really looking. you have mexicans crossing the border. how come they can find jobs? we're giving and giving and giving and -- host: thank you for your call. the video is yesterday of the house and senate germany or signing the legislation. they're raising their arms to show their unity. that is the message they're sending actor in a public signing of the conference report compromise. -- sending out in a public signing of the conference report compromise. larry, you're on the air. caller: good morning. the key is to put everybody back to work. you can fix everything. that is the key. right now, we need to do everything we can do to help the economy. host: so you believe that this is indefinite and people will spend the money and it will help the economy. caller: yes, i do. you cannot cut your way out of a deficit. that is crazy. if you cut all the jobs, where will the taxpayers be coming from? host: thank you for your call. next is martha, a republican in washington. caller: let them go work overseas. take it from them and give it back to the american people. host: thank you for your call. this is greensville ohio. caller: i'd disagree with the payroll tax cuts because basically, i agree with what roslyn said. she premature said everything i was going to say. -- she pretty much said everything i was going to say. unemployment is getting out of hand. it should have been 26 weeks with a 13-week extension and be done with it. i was on unemployment and i got a job. i took less pay and took a job. that is what these people will have to do, i think. they will just have to stop with this unemployment all along the line. i think it should have been 36 weeks with a 13-week extension. that is all i have to say. i agree with rocklin about the payroll tax cut. it is just hurting social security. i am sure there will not go back and say that john doe did not pay so much into social security and give it back. so people are getting hurt themselves by this. host: thank you for the call. bill tweets -- let's listen to speaker john painter talking about the compromise yesterday. guest:[video clip] i want to thank the chairman camp and all the work and effort put into this bill. let's be honest. this is an economic relief package. it is not a bill that will grow the economy and create jobs. tomorrow is the third anniversary of the president's stimulus bill. yet another reminder that we need to change course and focus on pro-growth economic policies and the types of bills that, for months republicans have been passing over to the united states senate. in december, the white house family said that extending the payroll tax cut was the last must-do items on the president's agenda. according to the white house when he signs this bill, he is finished. he has been an engaged in leading our country. host: that is house speaker boehner speaking yesterday. gainers camp rejected that offer. that is a little behind-the- scenes. back to your calls. next up is a call from columbia south carolina. jim, a republican, is on the line. caller: the reason they capped the payroll tax at $100,000 or so is because they limit the amount is received in cannes are litter on and social security. what kind of person would put money into a retirement plan when they would not get the return on their money that they deserved. you cap social security and 24,000. what makes you think you can take any amount from someone who happens to make them work really hard and make this money -- i do not make $300,000 a year. but if i did, i would not want to pay 9% on $300,000. people need to know that and understand it. secondly you talk about 45% of people who do not pay income tax. if they are voting for democrats for all limited benefits, then they have to pony up somewhere. both republicans and democrats are giving the american people what they want. we keep voting for tax cuts. it is insane. they stood up there yesterday putting us more in debt and putting us in the way of greece finding things that we care for and acting as though they are saving the country. we fell for it and we elect them. it is really bad situation. again, if you are going to vote for democratic issues and you want democratic platform, then pony up some of the money. at least you could pay a bribe hundred dollars rather than zero on your federal tax notice. and people who say they are only in the 15% tax 40, there are people in a higher bracket than 15%. someone the other day told me they were retired at 40 years old and were paying three dozen dollars in federal taxes. he thought he was paying -- $3,000 income taxes. he thought he was paying more than mitt romney was. how the heck can you expect someone to pay more over $100,000? that is like taking from them to the point where you're just being ridiculous. host: are you in the financial- services field? caller: -- host: jones senses e-mail to ozzy. -- two of us. -- joan sends this email to us. the next caller is an independent. caller: there is a painless way -- i am not sure they have -- i am not sure why they have not talked about this to help social security. i agree with the first woman from california and extending the tax. taken up to $200,000 -- take it up to two hundred thousand dollars and people who make up to $500,000. they'll leave pay 2% more. over $1 million, they only pay 1% more. tickets all the way up to $100 million for the wall street guys -- take it all the way up to $100 million for the wall street guys. host: thank you. on facebook -- there is a story about the gop in "the baltimore sun" this morning. this is the story. "something damaging happen to to do once-dominating tax policy. insistence that the cost of the tax cuts be offset by spending cuts. mitch mcconnell of kentucky said that he did not have a view of that strategy. the difference is continued onas voting on the measure approached. paul ryan said thursday that modeled differences between the two parties, he said. by january, it was 75% who disapproved. london, kentucky next, david republican. caller: first of all, i want to respond to the caller from tennessee who says that it is impossible to get at of a deficit by cutting. actually, that is the only way. the federal government or any government cannot create its own tax base by spending or by cutting. tatting can be stimulative -- cutting can be stimulative. but the upper income levels of the ones who invested the most. as far as this payroll tax cut extension, i am a working man appeared to benefit from it. but i would rather put my country first and see this debt paid off. actually the money that is taken from investment by government debt is more -- i do not want to say unstimulative, but it takes more money from private investment and tax revenues. so the best thing to do is cut cut programs, cut something. for god's sakes, you have to cut something. why not now? host: abc news is estimating that the payroll tax extension could give consumers about $85 a month. here's a comment from stevens, a democrat from kentucky. next up is maryland. a democrat. caller: this is how you solve a social security problem -- some people say to raise the cap and cut benefits and raise the age. let the cat stay right where it is. once you get to the cap, a two hundred thousand dollars, you only take at 1%. from two hundred thousand up to 400,000 votes, they get half of 1%. up to $600,000, take out half of 1%. every time you go up 2%$200,000 you take out half of a%. host: thank you for your call. next is alabama. this is surely. caller: i disagree wholeheartedly with the payroll tax compromise. i think this is just ridiculous. i think one of the things need to do is get rid of social 63 and pay back every dime that the government took and give it back to the people. let them be in charge of their own money. and just do away with social security administration. host: thank you. this is from "the washington times" this morning. president obama praised negotiators for the deal and urged the full congress to pass it. but conspicuously absent from the agreement was senate republicans who withheld their signatures from the report. without some democrats on the board, it is tenuous in the upper chamber ahead of a vote expected friday. they say friday or saturday. but we are told the vote is expected today after the house has done its work beginning at 9:00 a.m. eastern time. the votes will begin at 10:00 a.m. expected to wrap up by about noon. philadelphia is next. good morning to ronald, independent. caller: they should raise the cap. in the first place, nobody gets exactly what they put in. if you get interest compounded daily on everything i put in for the past 40 years to 50 years, i would get a lot more than when i am getting. your neck getting more than what you put in. thank you. have a good day. host: american hero tweets -- next, we have a caller from michigan. caller: good morning. host: yes sir, you are on. caller: one problem i have never grasped is that we have the youngest generation that bring a lot of kids into this world. they are really putting a burden on the older people who have been working all of their lives to try to have something and -- i have nothing against taking people that need it and the little kids that come into the world. but there comes a time when the youngest generation, not just african-americans, but whites and almost are having too many kids that they cannot support. we have a lot of people that are getting food stamps and medicare for their kids. then the elder people and of having to pay the city taxes, the school taxes and they pay no tax at all. i have six kids. all of them and have grown a long time ago. now we are afraid of -- those that have the money -- why would you have that kind of money and not pay your fair share? i do not think i really want to be a billionaire because there is too much greed. host: thank you for your call. trip as our caller from georgia an independent. caller: thank you. i love the program. thank you for letting me get through and talk. basically, the american people are kidding the kind of government they deserve because they left these people in all the time. -- they let these people in all the time. can they just let this continue forever? we will get on the same road as breezes. host: what would you do if you're in washington? caller: seriously, i think i would just start cutting everything across the board. the government gets involved in things and they distort the economy and the markets, just like they are distorting the labor market right now. the congress has been controlled mainly by the democrats since world war ii. people just have to get the courage to not these votes to these people into -- the only real hope this country has is people like the tea party. they came to washington to try to cut the budget. i guess they're just waiting to take their places. host: 24 call. -- thank you for the call. they write that congressional negotiators agreed to require only federal workers to pay more into their pension plan. those hired be beginning next year comes into higher increased payments. new workers with fewer than five years of previous service will contribute 3.1% of their salaries to their pension benefits, significantly more than the 0.8% paid by most current sappers. this will be 83be a $628 annual tax increase. caller: thank you for taking the call. i wanted to say thank you for being a moderator of c-span. after many years, i have no clue as to your political affiliation. host: thank you. that is the way it's is supposed to be. caller: you would achieve a lot more in a private account. but youa person can work three years and have their retirement based on that three years. the scope that they receive in their retirement will be 10 times to 15 times what they put in the system. that links to be corrected. there's not enough emphasis on the fact that federal workers or state workers, for that matter, are retiring and living a life of job security. that is unfair for our system. that is a lot of the animosity between liberals and conservatives. what i legislature to do the right thing and make sure that has a balance. -- i want my legislature to do the right thing and make sure that has a balance. host: congress will sell public airways to pay for this bill and here is a bit of what they say. a are talking about the broadcasters use the public airways as a spectrum to transmit their programming. in this auction, they would be compensated for the airwaves that are going into auction. they are projected to raise more than $25 million and for the obama administration's broadband plan. you will recall that network has been demanded since september 11 2001. it looks like they're hoping that this will pave the way for that coming into being. next up is miami, florida. cecilia, democrat. caller: i support the payroll tax extension. these people have no jobs. where do they think the money's coming from? nobody is paying no tax. especially not those who are out of work. we need to help those people out. it is only temporary. the republicans do not want to help anyone. these people agree to this tax because it would not put any emphasis on taxing the rich. you think it is a problem now because the tax cut has been passed. come on, people. something had to be done. it is the right thing. it is only temporary. people who are not having a job they are not paying in because they have no jobs to pay in. republicans do not agree on anything. they only agreed on this because it will not do anything for their rich cronies out there who they help. host: thank-you very much. the details of the middle-class tax relief looks like this. we have it posted on our website, c-span.org, if you want to go through the provisions. for people around the country it is not in legalese. it is about seven pages long with each of the provisions of this legislation you can watch the house and senate take a vote on it today. up next is larry from florida an independent. what is on your mind about this tax compromise? caller: i feel that any money that is put back into the economy comes back to the government several times over. i feel like it is more of a stimulus program than anything else and i am for it. the government does not have an income problem. they have a spending problem. they have foreign aid, for example, that does not ever come back into our country. it is recirculated over and over again. the $85 a month would be put back into the economy many times over. host: let's go through a couple of headlines on the campaign trail. there is the story about mitt romney and earmarks and federal money. "he criticizes earmarks but sought aid for massachusetts and the olympics. inside "the post," santorum made millions as a consultant. the gop candidate releases his tax return with an effective tax rate of 28.5%, and income of $930,000 and paid $16,000 in charitable contributions. they also have the gingrich, romney and obama tax returns. that is all in "the washington post" today. in "the the new york times," this is about the warm friendship between met ronnie and ron paul. there is a great deal of -- and civility between the two. the filed -- the final debate on march 1 was canceled after they dropped out. there is still one more day republican debate. it will be the 21st of the race, seemingly some sort of record. speaking of campaigning, the president has been on the campaign trail raising money in california. he had several events yesterday in california. you're looking at one of those right now. this report suggests that, in two and a half days, he has raised $8 million for his reelection. next up is a call from houston. caller: i am -- i was in favor of tax cuts that take money away from government and give it to the people. on that score, it is a good thing. but we have 10,000 baby boomers retiring every day for the next 18 years. eventually, people will realize that impact. there are not enough younger people to pay into it that make up the baby boomers' retirement. they're all collecting social security. they're all going on to medicare. yves daschle, it will hit the wall. with regard -- eventually, it will hit the wall. with regard to not doing anything, paul ryan had two health care proposals that obama will not even talk about. by law, they are required to pass the budget in 1000 days and they have not and it is not even mentioned in the press. somebody has to hold the democrats senators feet to the fire because that is where the problem is that. host: 8 twitter follower rights -- we have about five minutes for six months to take your calls this morning. remember last week when we were talking about the big deal that was announced on the bank payments for the mortgage situations and the 2008 crisis? here is "the financial times today." the deal agreed last week holds these banks to pay and reduce monthly payments to distressed u.s. borrowers. however, -- the existing initiative provides tax funds as an incentive to troubled borrowers to reach loan modifications. cleveland, ohio, next up is beverly, a democrat. caller: good morning, susan. caller: good morning. caller: supply and demand is one of the main fundamentals of our economy. with this payroll tax cut we saved over 400,000 jobs according to the economists. those people are paying taxes into social security and what other areas we pay taxes in. so it is good all the way around. this money just does not vanish. it keeps things rolling. they never should have made this much fuss over it, susan. while they're doing this, they are passing a blunt amendment. host: thank you for your call. next and are probably less for this segment, sherry is on line, an independent. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i hear a lot of people this morning talking about trying to save social security. i have said this over and over. it was a trust fund. when it was originally started, it was established as a trust fund. they have borrowed the money. they borrow the money to finance world war ii. they have never paid it back. why not pay it back plus interest? maybe that would beef up social security. why did they not do this on income tax reduction rather than going into social security and reducing the amount we pay and that will only hurt people, like people have said, what people will be able to claim later and beefing up the pond? the other thing i wonder about is where are the lawyers? since the day led to the social security account like another slush fund because they keep taking the money out where are the lawyers? why cannot we sue the people who are the trustees? there are a lot of people in jail for not living up to their fiduciary responsibilities. host: thank you. we will continue this conversation. remember, we just have a two- hour program today. we will be joined in a couple of minutes by congressman peter welch of vermont, a democrat. there, alan simpson will be here. i think continues to be the unstated the economy and today's the on that payroll tax holiday. we will be right back. >> book tv is live on saturday from the savannah book festival. it begins at 9:30 a.m. with tom kalidclavin. at 1:30 p.m. eastern, bragggreg mirey. at 5:15 p.m. s.e. quin on the rise and fall of the command chief. in 1966, due in bonn was prevented from taking his elected seats on the georgia state house after he was voted not to seek can do to a stance against the vietnam war. >> i went to the court to hear the argument. i was sitting in the court just behind the bar with the lawyers in front of me. i was sitting next to my lawyers partner. the attorney general of georgia was making an argument that georgia had a right to throw me out because i said things that were treasonous and seditious. i think it was judge white who is said to him, "is this all you have?" you come all the way appear and this is all you have? [laughter] so i said, we are winning, we? >> more on black history month on c-span 3 and on line in the c-span video library. search and share more than 25 years of c-span programming. >> washington journal continues. host: we are happy to have congressman peter welch with us this morning. i wanted to start here with this little ap story. legislation co-sponsored by congressman peter welch will eliminate wasteful spending past the u.s. house and by a partisan vote of 254-173. previous attempts to enact executive bottom-line veto authority has been struck down as unconstitutional. first of all, why do you want to do this? why do you think a line-item veto type mechanism will be helpful? guest: where the president can cancel out the bridge to nowhere, congress has the opportunity to vote to approve it by a majority vote, not 2/3. so congress will have the final say, the power of the purse granted in the constitution. the reason i want it is because it does allow the president to scrub the budget, to determine which things he/she thinks are wasteful. but congress, at the end of the day, say yes or no we want to spend that money on a bridge to nowhere or not. the transparency care, putting that peseta cut on the floor for each one of us has to vote yes is reporting that on the floor for each one of us to vote yes or no, it gives the voters specific emission on where we stand. >>host: for people like yourself who are concerned about the increasing debt by the annual budget, there seems to be consensus on the income of programs. this would be discretionary spending. how will it help? guest: it will not help on health care. that is where we are facing enormous costs. the baby boomer is getting to be 65. the bottom line is that, when we have health care in this country that is going up two times to three times the rate of inflation and the rate of wages you cannot sustain that. it is not just apply to medicare. it is applied to health care expenses in the entire economy. we have to bring health care costs down to reasonable levels. host: but this will attack discretionary spending. guest: this will not help that, that is right. it gives us an opportunity to peel away the bridge to nowhere. it was buried in the congress. as a member of congress, you have to vote yes or no on the budget. this is the president a tool to bring it back to us and work on questionable projects. host: what you think about the compromise today and the decision that $100 billion will be added to the deficit. guest: i do not like apart. this is an amazing thing. we do have a fragile economy. the whole thing about the payroll tax reduction will put about $1,000 in the person's pocket, let them spend it and stimulate the economy -- there is some merit to that when we have a fragile economy. but the last time we did it, we pay for it. this time, we are not paying for it and that is a mistake. there are two issues. one, it will add $100 billion to the deficit. we do not even have something in this bill to pay for it. it is just borrowed money. no. 2, this is the real concern for many folks. the payroll tax funds social security. social security is the most important for most americans. we are doing something we have never done before. we are borrowing money from the social security trust fund. that is something that makes me a little bit apprehensive. we are borrowing money for tax cuts and not finding a way to repay it. we will have a $100 billion hole in the security trust fund. i think we should be paying for this. host: have you decided whether you will go for it? guest: it will be no because of the borrowing from the trust. unfortunately, in washington, there seems to be an emerging consensus. republicans passed tax cuts that we did not pay for. now democrats are passing tax cuts that we will not pay for. so that is an unfortunate confluence of cooperation. host: i have heard a couple of callers this morning who have used the phrase "we are worried that we will be like greece sunday." is that a serious concern? guest: no, we are not to greece. we are a $14 trillion plus our economy. but we do have to reform our tax code to make us more competitive and to restore fairness. also, one of the big challenges for our country is the income inequality and the pressure that middle-class families are experiencing and have been for 20 years to 25 years about being able to pay their bills even when you have one or two people in the house will now working. when people make those statements they are expressing something that is real, and that is significant pressure on middle-class families to stay afloat. what i also hear is that, a lot of times, parents will be talking about their kids and for the first time kids are apprehensive as to whether their kids will be able to do as well as they did. kids are getting out of school with significant debt. the jobs that a lot of our kids get do not have health care. that is one of the very good things about the health care bill that has been passed. our kids can stay on our health care until they're 26 when they are getting that footage -- that first step into the jobs market. but there's a lot of apprehension in this country for middle-class families and whether they will hang on. host: vermont is doing pretty well in unemployment compared to the rest of the nation. you were 5.1% in december. what is going on there? guest: two things. one, vermonters are hard workers. many of them have a second job. there really do. they find ways to keep things afloat. vermont did not have the bill and it did not have the best. when we had the foreclosure crisis vermont had the second lowest foreclosure rate in the country. the reason is that our banks did not give out these of the snow- documenting/no-income loans to people who could not afford it. and the average vermonter wanted a modest house. they wanted shelter and not a mansion. we were not caught up in the real estate thing that has cost so much part in some many parts of the country. -- in so many parts of the country. host: as a veteran of this program, you know we will be taking calls tweets, and e- mail. here is the first one. guest: i like that idea. that is a very common-sense approach. if we pay for this, the millionaires, the hedge fund tax, the buffet tax, there is a lot of room in the tax cut where, by simply being fair, you could raise the money and give a break to working families. social security is a tough tax for people. host: we will take our first telephone call from st. louis. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have some solutions for you and some reps. number one is a solution, remove the cap on social security tax. we should be taxed no matter how much you are making. it totally funds to the system. i believe the congressional budget office has already scored it and it will take care of the entire problem. no. 2 we have a revenue problem. anybody who's anyone can look at any nonpartisans fax or figures -- tim dickerson did a wonderful article in a " rolling stone" that show that the increase in wages for the lower class, the 99%, has remained stagnant for the last 30 years, since ronald reagan got in there. and the income for the richest 1% has skyrocketed to hundred 75%. anybody who argues that that is not true, i defy you to print anything that shows anything different from that. thank you very much. guest: you are right. the income inequality has just widened. this country has always been prosperous because we have had a broad and expanding middle class. that situation is under assault right now. so you are correct on that. second, raising the cap is a good idea. when social security was established, the cap was set -- i have a strong, but you get the idea. it is something like 90% of what the wages were. it is now to something like 80%. if we bring it back up to where it historically has been, it would raise the cap. it would not eliminate it altogether, but it would go back to what had been the status quo. host: an earlier caller suggested that, if you were to do that, you should also raise the limitations that retired workers can have on earned income. guest: that is a good thing to consider. retired workers work hard and paid social security on it. social security has to be secure. adjustments that we make has to be about social security, not reading social security and using it for general fund expenditures. host: heading home for the presidents' week holiday, this is what is on the mind of one of your. you have another vacation coming up. guest: we do work when we return to the district. one of the best parts of our job is our district work weeks when we are working closely with our folks back home. on the tax reform, you are right on that. that is a major issue. in washington, that is an ideological matterbattle. president obama has made several proposals that essentially asks the higher income folks to pay more. i think we do have a revenue problem. it is in my view an outrageous situation when you have somebody who runs a hedge fund and makes literally billions of dollars and pays 50% whereas some of your -- pays 15% whereas somebody in your committee or mine does the same kind of work and pays 35%. that is not right. but there are a lot of folks in congress who essentially say that we should not have taxes. it is almost that extreme. that is a bad thing. you need revenues and you need taxes. host: i want to ask about the doc-fix. there could be a 27% drop in those payments. guest: it is no fix. this is my sixth year in congress. every year we come up with a so- called temporary fix. there was some budget gimmickry that was done several years ago that allowed congress to claim it was getting some savings in medicare. but the savings would result if this plan went into effect and cuts in payments to the local doctors. that is devastating. each year congress comes up with a temporary plan to try to keep the system afloat. there is no fix. we'll take a overall comprehensive look at this budget. host: that same sentiment expressed by this view work on twitter. guest: there is but it would cost money and it might result in pressure on premiums. it is directly possible and we should do it. but the budget conflicts is preventing us do have a success on that. host: there is a republican -- barry is a republican. caller: people running the media want to frame the issue. i do not want them to frame and all. they are contaminating it every time they touched it. that goes from left or right or whenever. there are dials. you can turn it up or turn it down. they can control how much food you can buy. a farmer can bury half of his crop. the banker will sit there and you have as much or what ever -- they will come up with a figure. they are all working together. you got all these people calling and saying i can fix it with this or with that. people do not try to fix it. we're listening to the suggestions but they are saying, screw you you are our slaves, we own you. that is ridiculous. guest: you're expressing frustration that people have with these institutions whether att the media, washington -- whether it is the media or washington. we tried to move on for each day and do the best i can. host: how does the congressional approval rating affect the way you do your job? is the mail coming into your office? guest: there is a lot of frustration and people express it to me. i hear, why don't you get together and get things done? the frustration is the inability to find common ground. the budget is a good example. most people now have to be some cuts and some revenues. we're fighting about this like this is an ideological battle. people will look at every single thing they could cut and they might go without. but they also might take a second job. it might be tough but we need some revenue. there is an immense amount of frustration and i think that is where the disapproval comes from -- the inability to find some common ground. host: we have a tweet. guest: there is some politics in this. medicare and social security are the most important programs for senior citizen americans. there is a conflict about medicare because of the cost of health care. we have to address that. that issue has been politicized to some extent for -- people want to make sure that it is secure. the rhine budget -- the ryan budget would cut access to benefits for people 55 and younger. the republicans demonize democrats the were finding savings in medicare that didn't cut savings and so the back and forth goes on. host: we have a different point of view from "the wall street journal." this is from a health care executive and this is what his chart looks like about the trends and the changing health- care spending from 2000 to 2010. he said it has been declining for a decade driven by better medical care and consumer charge. he gives examples of why. a $5 generic drug my work as well as a $50 one. an ear infection can be spotted faster than an emergency physician can. people are finding economies in health care. guest: i know health care is incredibly expensive. in vermont, there is an effort to get a single payer health care system. there is some hope that that approach could achieve savings and make health care more sustainable. one goal is to allow the right type of practitioner to be interacting with the patients. that example of a nurse protection are -- and risk pa nurse practitioner checking your ear is one example that could bring down costs. there is a long way to go with what the legislature has passed in vermont. what is occurring is that the hospitals and the doctors are at the table. this is not a directed event legislatively. our doctors know we have to change the way we are delivering care. the big change is to move away from the fee-for-service. as a patient, you have a medical home and the proper type of practitioner can be interacting with you. we have real success in chronic diseases. if you have diabetes, you need interaction with providers but it does not always have to be a doctor. host: what would the role of the insurance companies pay? be? guest: that is being worked out and that is a work in progress. what role they would play is to be determined. host: peter welch service in the agriculture and the government reform and oversight committee. he was in the vermont state senate and is a lawyer. boston is a next call for him. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i'm and rock war veteran -- i am an iraq war veteran. everybody who rails about government spending has selected amnesia whether it is the gi bill or subsidies that help the oil and gas industries and people rail about solyndra. government spending is not always a bad thing. the economies of greece is in the crapper. germany has a phenomenal health system with strong unions and a strong manufacturing base. so i think we should accept that and listen to our own bs and try to figure what we're doing wrong. guest: that was a brilliant comment. thank you for your service. host: ken, are you there? we had a bad connection. we move to clearwater, florida. go ahead dan. caller: thank you. hello? as far as social security, taking the money out without even asking or putting a vote from the public. i think we should have legislation that went to parties cannot get along, they sent the vote out to the people -- that when two parties can walk along they send the vote out to the people. guest: i did not agree with that. the point of democracy is for the people to decide who they want to represent them in washington. my responsibility is to do the best i can to have votes reflect my best judgment about how to represent vermonters. my responsibility is to reach out to other members of congress republican and democrat, to try to find a way to make progress. if i fail to do that, they get a chance to vote for somebody else. i do not think we can send everything back as a referendum if we cannot reach agreement here. we have to do our best to make decisions. host: we of a tweet -- we have a tweet about health care. are you studying it/ ? guest: i don't think there was a single payer system. i think there was a broad expansion to health care. in vermont we have been working on health care in vermont for a couple of generations. republicans and democrats have done this. we had a republican governor and i was senate president. the governor was focus on how to control the costs. we sat down and said that we're both right. we have to control cost to expand access. we have approached health care reform -- we had to control costs. host: we have another health care tweet. guest: i am a strong supporter of the public option and i voted foerr it. the public option would have been a competition to will bring prices down that are being charged by the private health insurance companies. we do not have the public option in the health care bill. if i had a chance to vote for again, i would. host: willet stand up to review -- will let stand up to review? guest: i do believe there has to be an obligation on all of us to help pay for eightit. i don't have confidence in the supreme court. they prohibited the florida supreme court from doing a recount in the bush v gore race. they said a corporation can spend unlimited amounts of money and castaway hundreds of years of judicial ruling. what this court will decide is anyone's guess. i hope they upheld the bill. host:ken ken good morning. caller: they talk about the record profits that they made and that they would not create jobs but they are making record profits right now and they are not making jobs for people. what makes it light -- if they give a tax break, they are still not going to do it. guest: everybody has to pay their fair share. we have companies that pay no taxes and pay less taxes than your grocery store down the street or hardware store if you go to pick up some nails. in some cases they get a rebate from the taxpayer. that is not right. we need a more simplified tax code. everybody will be paying a reasonable tax on the profits that they made. host: there's been a breach on this bill -- there's been a outreacreach. guest: i hope we do not use the fact that it is an election year to not get more work done. one area is on infrastructure. everybody knows our roads and bridges are deteriorating. we don't have a 21st century infrastructure and we should find some common ground that would create jobs. the second is energy efficiency and conservation. we of arguments about the correct fuel source or drilling. if you use less fuel and if you are a business and you can get more mileage with less fuel, that saves money. 95% of the energy we use is manufactured in this company if we work on energy efficiency. host: peter welch -- what is a light behind closed doors with democrats right now? guest: it is pretty good right now. president obama is doing better. our fortunes in terms of taking back the house is tied very much to how president obama does and he seems to be doing better. there is an upbeat feeling among the democrats that we are heading in the right direction. host: have you made your decision on that vote? guest: i have to read all the details. i am concerned about borrowing money from the social security trust fund and adding that to the debt and not fully funding the social security trust fund. host: thank you for being here. we have one more segment and that is with former senator alan since been. -- former senator alan simpson. he was asked to look at the end, but issues and was asked to rput out a report. he has a new authorized biography about his life and last night there was a book party for him in washington. we'll be back with alan simpson at our table. [video clip] >> how are you? >> i am here. >> it is very important. [unintelligible] >> a trouble maker in town. >> hi! >> we wrote the book. >> it has to be about eight volumes. >> i am so glad. >> he did not seem to object to that. you know where i am. >> oh! oh, my god! >> who is this man? >> i am in the presence of royalty. >> david brinkley come back from the dead. >> how much are they? >> i do not know. >> things could have been left out. i was thrown in the clink. would you step up? i said i need $300 bail. i am in the clink. she said, "just stay there." host: that was senator alan simpson's book party last night. guest: we sat around for a long time. it is a great book. i didn't write it. it was done by a man i've known since i was a child. host: this was drawn from the diaries you can. people don't keep diaries nowadays. did you ever worry that you kept diaries? guest: i never worry about anything. if you cannot just be who you are and do what you need to do he should not be in congress. the gentleman that just left, i have to admire him. there are a senior staff people that will not let their principal come to a program like this. host: we have lots of big used to talk about. -- we have lots of big issues. let me ask you one aspect about your biography. before you became an upstanding citizen, you have some serious problems as a young man. i bet there are some folks who left that similar situations in their own families. you believe in the redemption is power of life. talk about how you move from a troubled teenager could and young manhood into being the person you are today. guest: i think i was rebellious. i came from a great loving family and mother and father at that live to be 95 and 93 and a brother who is as close as kenbei. i did not like authority. -- who is as close as can be. i was involved in what they would call arson today. there was an old shack with booze bottles and we torched it. host: and it was on federal property. guest: i was on a federal probation for shooting mailboxes. then i did get sloshed on night in laramie. my mother would always cry and i knew that meant i did something importunes. when the old man cried and gave the old lament, "where have we failed?" it is stupid. it is dumb, savage, out-of- body stupidity. i wrote the amicus brief in the sentencing of a juvenile to life at the a job14 16 for a felong -- at the age of 14, 16. i get letters from guys saying, thanks i think i have a chance to get out. i am 40 now. i killed a guy. when you're 50 and you're working in the pen or take ged or what, you have to have a chance. host: one other story. this is a photograph with you and your two have the most interesting chance meeting as a young man and became good friends. guest: that was quite a story. norman mineta was transported to a pile of sagebrush in wyoming in the relocation senate. there were 10 of them. his family was sent there. the scoutmaster said will co-op to the jap camp -- that's what it was called -- the scoutmaster said we will go out to the jap camp. they got barbwire all around it and guard towersr and machine guns in the tower. this, said these are embarrassing citizens -- the scoutmaster said these are embarrassing. host: how old was he? guest: 12. we were both 12. we read the same books. we did tied the knot send merit badges -- we tied the knot and did merit badges. we dug a trench. he said i kept him up. he is one of the dearest of my friends. he's a democrat. i watched him. we came to congress together. he and his wife and my wife, they have given up on us. we break our glasses and kiss each other on the head. he is a special guy. host: he was in an internment camp and went on to be a public servant. guest: he didn't have any bitterness at all. he was like nelson mandela. he came out and there was no bitterness. when i was teaching at harvard oni had norm come up. he said, get in the game. he's an inspiration for his people, the japanese americans. we both help to setup a learning and interpreting the center. $5.2 million. host: federal dollars? guest: no. the gave all tent camps $35 million and split up to restore the camps to show the american people how that happened and how to avoid it happening again. host: this is the book. it is called "shooting from the lip." a lifetime of public service and as early roots in wyoming. we'll turn to issues. guest: i do not get a nickel from the book. it is a great book. it was the author who made the contract. all the royalties go to him. i ain't making a nickle. host: we been talking about the compromise that congress seems to have struck, the extension of unemployment benefits and to continue the payroll tax cuts. the republicans said the $100,000 did not have to be paid for and would contribute to the deficit. what do you think? guest: you cannot keep doing this. when will a congress is something with guts. erskine bowles and i go around the country. give us an hour. we do not do bs. we take any question on any subject and we get a standing ovation. people are thirsting for somebody to tell that a truth. where is the aarp in this baby? i had a hearing when i was in congress. i dragged the mam in. i said, what do you do with the money? they said all their existence of their money, and never touched the precious life stream of social security. the precious life stream of social security is the payroll tax cuts. i have said, are there any pictures in here or just marketers? if you're out there today, tell us what you think when you watch the sacred flow of money to the system, the payroll tax getting off balance from 6-2 to 4.2. eventually it will be put back. you have to borrow the money from the feds to do it. when you put it back, it will be called a tax increase and grover norquist will call it a tax increase and 95% of the republicans will be terrified. what can grover norquist do to you? he can defeat for reelection or play a primary opponent against you. if that means more to the your country and patriotism, you should not be in congress. host: first call is from montana. this is gerald, a democrat. caller: good morning. what a unique opportunity. god bless you. you have in your in box a 2.5% solution. this has to do with the gse. congressional members and committees were distributed this week and the rest of the folks are being distributed next week because of a difference in mailing. can i get you to say read the one-page letter? host: he has a solution for how to address this. you probably get a lot of these. guest: i do not hear well. i did not ascribe to those kinds of things. i'm a guy that's never signs a petition. host: do you read suggestions from people? guest: i never throw anything away. i read them all. we don't have a staff. we have some moment of truth projects and people that help and the research. if you'll send me that, i will read that. host: next call is from wyoming. this is ray a republican. caller: hello. guest: ray is an old pal. what are you up to? caller: not much. i was pleased to see that you are going to be on c-span this morning. i want to tell the listeners what a great guy you are. we crossed swords in one campaign and you were my honoring german in 2008. it wasn't a good year for republicans but we -fun- you were my honor chairman. guest: you have guts. you are a real conservative. people hear you and they enjoy you. it was just one of those years. you laid yourself on the line. i did put my foot in my mouth. i think of the many times i got my foot in my mouth. i have a 16 shoe. host: he tell the story about the energy on the debate which led to a bill that has your name, since in-mazzolmpson-missoli. we didn't have much material from 1986, but we have a clip from ron reagan's 1984 debate we talked about that. [video clip] >> we supported the bill strongly and the bill that came out of the senate. it is truitt our borders are out of control -- it is true our borders are under control. i supported this bill. i believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots even though they may have entered illegally. host: we're having this same debate in this country. guest: you talk about my diary. the reagan diary is a great book and a great thrill for me to see how many times i was mentioned in his diary, because i love that guy. all through the work there were guys trying to kill it both parties. i would go right to ronald reagan. he would say, i'm still with you. the bill did not work like it should because the right and left said, wait a minute. they have a more secure identifier and that is in national id card. when you get that object rising in the eastern sky, you are in deep trouble. the lefties are calling it a national id card. it did not work. but we did not duck the word " and the statemnesty." i haven't seen a single article about a national id. you couldn't put the burden on the employer unless you have a more secure identifier. about 3 million people came out of the dark. host: what about right now? guest: you want to be part of a country that is going on the hunt for 12 million people? i came from a county in 1963 where they went after people working in the beet fields and they called it operation weback. you either -- wetback. you either give people a legal status, pick their pocket for some scratch say they will be in temporary status and then be a temporary resident or permanent resident. you have to give them a pathway. host: this comment from a viewer on twitter. guest: fine. do whatever you do down there. arizona is doing what they have to do in their mind. i do not have a single argument about that. the government has failed to do woit. so if they want to do something about illegal immigration in their own way, be my guest. i would not challenge that at all. host: pittsburg brendan. caller: thank you for taking my call. guest: i didn't. she did. caller: i have two comments and a question. if that is okay. my first comment is if the democrats and republicans both take the oath of office to follow the document -- the constitution, then why is there such problems in the congress and the white house? my second comment, why is that everybody is talking about how good of a job president obama is doing when it just not too long ago he signed away our rights? thank you and i would like to hear your answer. guest: the constitution means many things. the language is beautiful and real. those have talked about the strict construction of the constitution and those who talk about the fact that things have changed since those years. the supreme court has a different view of the constitution. every time there's a new supreme court there is a new view of the constitution. people say we need the constitutional amendment for a balanced budget. if they start that, there will open it up to other things. people have been waiting to change its constitution. when you say it is a living document, you are in trouble. it is living documents. i believe that. if we cannot stop saturday mail delivery without breaking down the country -- it is in the constitution mail. your second part about the president was what? host: mdaa -- the ability to stacks' citizens without charges -- the ability to snatch citizen without charges. guest: lincoln the era of habeas corpus -- got rid of. host: presidential politics. mitt romney and the federal money. he sought aid for the olympics and massachusetts. he led an aggressive efforts to win federal aid for the struggling games. he requested millions for projects. he once boasted about his prowess for winning taxpayer money. what do you think about the gop candidates? guest: republicans have a curious history. i voted for eisenhower when i was 21 years old. the people who represented taft thought ike was a pink-hole. i have been called everything. there isn't a single person in this campaign or sitting in the congress that did not pride themselves in bringing home the bacon. so what is new about that? "the washington post" wouldlike like to drill romney anyway. look at obama. people say, how did we get here? you send people to congress to bring home the bacon. "go get me the highway. get me the stuff." he took a person with you that said, write it down. let me tell you, there ain't no more back to bring home. this country owes $6.2 trillion. people do not know what a trillion is. the big bang theory of the universe happens 13 billion, 600 million years ago. this is where we are. we're on a true victory of debt and interest which is like greece and ireland and portugal and we were sitting your winning for the markets and up goes inflation and interest. host: i want to circle back to the caller whose questions we did not understand. the president signed that into law. this is a note from wikipedia. it does hearken to our question about norm mineta. this is what wikipedia says. "counterterrorism which deals with detention of persons the government expects with involvement in terrorism." that was what was on his mind. guest: i apologize to the gentleman. i've lost track of the acronyms. i remember what gdp means. even though the wars in afghanistan and iraq are gone, there will keep people in guantanamo and the president said he did not want to do that. but in that circumstance, they feel if people are released they will go back and get back in their groups that were picked out of. they all have legal representation. there are many layers they go there on a pro bono basis to release them. do not know-- those things happen and they will continue to happen if you see a guy go back and make more bombs and do some tricks. host: a republican is next. caller: i was so happy to hear mr. simpson say some things that i agree with that so many people did not anymore. people here more bad news than i hear good coming from the government. obama is doing is taking away our freedom. he also -- i heard last night over c-span that he has wanted to now take our nuclear weapons away. 80% of them and put them in jeopardy -- should other countries try to attack us. i did not like anything he is doing. he is not an american and i'm very upset about it. if i could, i would have him impeached. host: do you believe the president is not an american? caller: no. host: you do not believe that? caller: he was born in indonesia. guest: i respectfully -- i was asked to be the co-chair of this national commission with erskine bowles. i've been accused of being a republican toadie covering president obama's fanny. he is an american. i think these birthers are way off the wall. give it up. give it a rest. turn off your television and just rest without watching 24/7 junk. there is notions thing as a 24/7 riot. people get all steamed up. it is absurd. i did not think we of ever elected a president who came into office to destroy this country. we should have a lighter hand about that because it makes no sense. host: we hear reference to the simpson-bowles commission work. the treasury secretary was on capitol yesterday and were several exchanges with reference to simpson-bowles. guest: we call it bowles- simpson. host: we went online and we saw both ways. guest: intaglio what it is -- let me tell you hwatwhat it is. it was voted on after a year of work nearly and five democrats and five republicans and one independent voted for this package. 60% of the 1788 members. it stumbled to the weeds -- before the weeds because it was very specific. before they left, they said, do not tie our. grover norquist wonder did and he said ronald reagan is my hero. i said i know ronald reagan and you know robbery in. i said ronald reagan raised taxes 11 times it is eight years. grover said, i know, i did not like that. i said, why do you think he did? he did it to make the country run. we never have less revenue to run this country since the korean war. 15.2% of gdp. you don't need to do a tax increase. cohen and dig into the pile of tax expenditures and jerk some of those babies out of there and go to any tax system. caller: you are one of my heroes. what do you consider to be full employment in the united states? guest: i cannot play the game. think of the young people coming into the workforce. host: what percentage would you be comfortable with? guest: you can do the figures all day long, bounce them back and forth. pick a figure during reagan's time 4%. i was in congress 18 years and never saw a statistic that was correct about growth or unemployment. it is like health care. 10,000 people a day or turning 65. if you say the present unemployment is this and forget how many hundreds of thousands come into the employee circle because of their age and their skill, so i guess you would say go back and look get a good year was it3% or 4% and grab it. caller: let's say 90% of the american people are employed. what the consumer would be the right thing for the social security tax to be. 14%? half and half? 15%? guest:if the 12 8%, would that help secure it -- if it went to 8% would that help social security? guest: please read our report as to what we do with social security. we're not balancing the budget on the back of seniors. make a baby solvent for 75 years. raise the retirement age to 68. there are two ways -- reduced the benefits or increase the payroll tax. that was too simple. we give the aged, a kick up every year. raise the cost of -- change cpi. but you can't let what is going to happen in 2 the year036 yuou 2035 you will get a check for less and no one will challenge what i just said. that's why it is going debate and i think that is cruel. host: there is a statement about the president's budget. here is what they have to say officially. "it focuses on deficit reduction." "it would achieve less deficit reduction would briefly save at a level that is already too high." what is the bottom line? guest: the president is using the figures. quit fiddling around with the baseline. the engine trick in washington -- we had a millionbucks bucks last year and a cut us. this is notuts. he has used the war as savings -- overseas contingency operation -- we already did that. he cannot use that gimmick. it is a big gimmick. he cannot say that is a savings. it was already figured in. we knew the war was coming down. he can just keep using the gimmicks. the war was in there. you have to go big or go home. this is where we are right now. there are plenty of americans who say, get at it. host: we have a question on twitter from jim. guest: a study who kept asking that on the commission -- urbdick durban. he is a gutsy guy. imagine how tough the was for him to support our proposal. harry reid said, you cannot vote for this because it talks about in reform and that's how we'll get power back. we will cite the never me -- we will say to not ever mess with the entitlement of medicare. host: will be the catastrophe that sets off -- guest: the money guys would get tired. they care about money and they always take care of themselves. erskine bowles knows those people and he knows what they do. he says the market will call the shots. "we want more money for interest." at that point you will have a rise in the interest rates. forget ben bernanke. he is trying his best and he get crucified. when the market's response and inflation kicks in, guess who gets hers to worurt the worst? the little guy. that will be the chain -- the market will call the shots. host: don from oklahoma city. caller: what would it take for him and erskine bowles to decide to run for president and vice president? we don't care which one gets first. just to get someone with some common sense. guest: i tell you, i want to be king. erskine bowles is one of the great guys. host: not going to happen? guest: king of the. a curmudgeon. host: this will be our last call from indiana. caller: good morning. i have a question on medicare. congress wants to cut medicare by 27%. i just kind of wonder about this. when the insurance companies follow suit? medical cost has gone so high. wouldn't they cut their payments to the medical field by 27% also? host: that is the