Will one dry. It raises the iconic question, are you better off than you were four years ago . The rising answer for our nation is an unequivocal no. Jobs have been lost, hours have been cut, employers have been forced to drop coverage their employees were happy with, premiums have skyrocketed, millions have lost coverage they were happy with. Obamacare has hurt medicare recipients by cutting about 156 billion out of Medicare Advantage. And this cut was a grave miscalculation. Medicare advantage is a shining Success Story that millions of seniors, like my mother, rely on. In short, its a program that allows you to receive your coverage from a private provider using funding from medicare. This has encouraged providers to compete for business by tacking on all sorts of Valueadded Services for seniors. For example, one of the reasons my mother picked her current provider is because in addition to good doctors, they pick her up, and they drive her to her appointment. This sort of competition in the marketplace invariably leads to two very good things; a decrease in prices and an increase this choices. Choice and competition are also at the heart of another medicare Success Story. Medicare part d. Through this marketbased program, seniors have at least 28 different Prescription Drug coverage plans to choose from. And as competition has worked as a powerful cost control mechanism, this has made part d a booming success by every conceivable measure. The Congressional Budget Office found that the total Program Costs are on track to be 45 or 348 billion less than the initial tenyear projections. Average monthly premiums are expected to be 31 in 2014, which is less than half of the 64 originally predicted. And not only does it save money, seniors love it. 95 of seniors enrolled in part d find it convenient to their needs. So when it comes to a broad and comprehensive medicare reform plan, lets learn from the mistakes of obamacare and the successes of programs such as Medicare Advantage and Medicare Part d. Lets dramatically expand Health Care Choices for seniors, spur competition in the marketplace and extend the solvency of the Medicare Trust fund all while making sure traditional medicare still remains an option. So to do so, i propose we transition to a premium support system which would give seniors a generous but fixed amount of money with which they can either Purchase Health insurance from either medicare or from a private provider. The choice would be theirs to make. My friend paul ryan is a leader when it comes to medicare reform. I supported a couple of key proposals to fix the program that were detailed in his road map during my 2010 race. Since then he has teamed up with senator wyden to propose a bold, bipartisan plan to institute the premium support model. Under plans such as these, the government contribution would be fastened to either traditional medicare or the average bid, whichever is cheapest. This way seniors choose plans that cost metropolitan the benchmark, they would more than the benchmark, they would have to pay the difference. By driving competition between private plans and traditional feeforservice medicare, we could spur choice while controlling costs, and it would also lead to innovations that are specifically focused around the needs of beneficiaries. The increased efficiency brought about by free Market Competition will allow providers to offer the same Health Care Benefits as traditional medicare, but for less money. The cbo predicts that by 2030 medicare spending under a premium support plan would be 14 less than under the current system. Most importantly, this new system insures that medicare continues to extend an impartial hand to all seniors for generations to come. Let me just conclude by mentioning, as i did earlier, that my birthday is later this month. Thank you for the cupcakes. [laughter] but it seems just like a few years ago, a few days ago that i was graduating from high school or standing at the altar or welcoming our first child home. As these years go by and the older i get, the more im reminded of how quickly things move and how its never too late to start planning ahead for the next phase of life. Now, as a citizen and as a husband, this means safing for retirement. Saving for retirement. I means seeing what it takes to be ready when the time comes. But i also share another responsibility, the responsibility to save the timehonored institutions that have long been at the service of the timehonored among us. That allowed my mother and my father and so many millions like them to retire with dignity and live out the final years of their American Dream with comfort and peace of mind. The responsibility to save these programs belong to all who are elected to serve. Yet many seem to have forgotten that we are here to pass policy, not posture politically. They forget that issues such as these are the why of politics, not merely optional dirty work. Partisan politics in america has always been contentious, but throughout our history on issues of generational importance our leaders have agreed to put aside politics for the sake of our people. If ever there was an issue worthy of sort of solidarity, preserving a secure retirement for 21st century seniors is that issue. And should we fail to address it, history will point its finger at all who stood aside or stood in the way. Today i have presented an agenda for addressing this crisis head on, and i am eager to work with anyone, republican or democrat, who will work in good faith on these reforms. Ultimately, i believe we will solve the retirement challenge before its too late. We will solve it because rising to challenges is what we have always done. We will solve it because we must for the sake of our children and our childrens children. And we will solve it because once we do, the American Dream will be brought within reach in this new century, and the greatest nation in history will shine for many generations to come. Thank you very much for the opportunity. [applause] thank you, senator rubio. What do you believe would be the consequences of a failure to take legislative action to shore up Social Security and medicare finances . Well, the consequences are as i have outlined. The programs will cease to exist certainly as we know em. The longer we wait to address it, by the way, the more disruptive those changes will be. And thats what i want us to avoid. The moment of truth will arrive one way or the other. We never want to reach that point. The closer you get to that moment in time, the more disruptive and chaotic the reforms are going to be. So one of the reasons why ive advocated acting early and acting now, the more incremental the changes can be, the less well have to impact anyone currently benefits from these systems, in fact, i think you can avoid impacting those who are at or near retirement age. The longer we wait, the more significant the reforms will have to be, the steeper the climb will be. If you do this with some foresight, you can gradually do these things in a way that will not impact currentpoicy benefics and wont be traumatic to future beneficiaries. Do you believe that Social Security finances and personal saving exchance need to be enacted together, or is it sufficient to take these objectives one at a time . Well, i dont know that this process today is conducive for doing anything big all at one time, but i certainly think they both need to be done. Every year it gets by it will get harder to deal with Social Security, and the solutions will be more disruptive, potentially more painful. And as far as the personal savings are concerned, thats something you need to do ahead of time because it takes a number of years. For me, the real concern is the millions of americans who work somewhere that doesnt offer a Retirement Savings vehicle. Now, theoretically finish. [inaudible] go into a Financial Institution and apply for it. But if youre the Forklift Operator at a familyowned warehouse operation, you probably neither have the time, there are the inclination to go into your local Financial Institution and awe ply for this if you even make enough money apply for this. So im trying to create an additional vehicle thats easy to access, that allows people to put pretax money. And by the way, if they ever go work somewhere that does offer a retirement plan, they could roll that into their new employers plan. But i think its critical that we create more awareness and more access for people to be able to put money aside in a pretaxed way for their retirement. Following on, how would you propose making up the lost revenue by millions more putting pretax dollars into tsps . Well, a couple points. Many of the people that would take advantage of this program probably, their incomes are at a level where theyre not a significant, you know, significant part of our income tax system. They certainly are paying fica and payroll taxes, but many of the people that would take advantage of this are not making that much money right now which is one of the challenges they have to savings. And the other long term, if people dont have significant retirement, theyre still going to have needs, and were a nation of compassion that is not going to allow people to suffer in their retirement years, so were going to address it one way or the other. I think its better to allow people to address it for themselves, but i dont think the costs, whatever they may calculate to be, will be significant enough for us not to pursue creating yet another option for people to put this money aside. The last point i would make, in the question think about what its implying, and i dont mean to question the questioners motivations, but think about what it implies. What we basically would be saying is we need your tax money so much that just because you work somewhere where they dont offer a pretax savings plan, were not going to make it easier for you to access one even though you have the legal right to access one. I think its important for all americans to have the ability to not just know about pretax savings for their retirement, but the ability to actually do it. Its good for our country, its good for our longterm finances. Addressing declining Labor Force Participation by younger seniors would seem to be a politically attractive as well as a substantially important issue. Why do you believe theres been so little legislative attention to improving seniors work incentives . Partially because theres been such little legislative attention to anything over [laughter] on any issue. But i think part of it is the need for more people on both sides of the aisle to say this is a priority more our country. Part of it is, i think, this adjustment were still trying to make there the last century to a new century where, quite frankly, people will work longer because they feel productive in their work, and theyre making a difference. I joked about the senate as an example, but certainly the senate has many people that continue to work well past retirement because they enjoy their work, not for the paycheck. I think thats also true in the private sector and among our citizens. So i think this is an issue that were really beginning to confront over the last decade. We have so many people over the age of 62 who want to continue to work, who are still extremely productive, who work, quite frankly, not only because they need to, butin many cases because they want to. Bearing in mind the various points you made in your remarks, id just like to hone in on a specific question. Do you think Social Security and meld care benefits will still be offered when you reach retirement age . Well, thats actually a choice that well have to make. If we want them to continue to be offed, were going to have to make offered, were going to have to make changes. What im discussing are changes that will be there for my generation. My generation and people younger than me are going to have to accept that our Social Security and our medicare will still be the best in the world compared to other countries, but it will look different than our parents. It will look different because it has to, because were going the work longer and live longer than our parents generation, and were going to have to make that acceptance. And i think my generations prepare today accept that. But thats a choice were going to make. If we dont make these choices now. Then all i can tell you is from the budgetary figures that are available to us, these programs will not exist at least as we know them. The question is not if Social Security and medicare will be reformed because they will be reformed one way or the other, unfortunately. The question is whether they are reformed in a way thats less disruptive and more productive, or are they reformed in a chaotic, emergency way as we near that moment of truth for both of these programs. As you would expect and i think you indicated you expect that your remarks and your presence have generated questions on many other topics which i would like to turn to. Earlier this week you rejected scientists assertions that human activity is causing Climate Change and that actions taken to curtail such activity will destroy our economy. How would you propose z that the country weather any dramatic shifts in climate and the impacts such shifts could have on quality of life . Well, let me make the first point. Headlines notwithstanding, of course the climate is changing because the climate is always changing, and thats a measure bl that you can see. There is Climate Change. The issue is not whether the climate is changing as it always is changing, the issue is whether there is legislative proposals before us that could do anything about it. And what i have said and what i disagree with is the notion that if we pass cap and trade, for example, this will stop this from happening when, in fact, half of the new emissions on the planet are coming from emerging markets. So i think a better approach, number one, is im all in favor of advances in technology and innovation that makes us cleaner and less, and more efficient. But in way that through a cost benefit analysis determines is also good for our economy. And i dont think those two things are necessarily incompatible, but out must be a part of that cost benefit analysis. And the other thing that i would point out is that i agree we need to spend time and energy on mitigation as well because there are mitigation actions that need to be taken place whether its how we store water in the west or how we prepare to harden and address storm occurrences in the southeast where i live where weve built very expensive structures near the coastline that are susceptible to natural weather occurrences and all sorts of weather events of this nature. So i have no problem with mitigation events and, quite frankly, i have no problem with advances in technology. But i by no means am going to go out and tell people that by changing these laws and the way we conduct our Energy Policy that it would have any measurable impact on our weather, because its not accurate to say that. What information, reports, studies or otherwise are you relying on to inform and reach your conclusion that human activity is not to blame for Climate Change . Well, again, i mean, the headlines notwithstanding, ive never disputed that the climate is changing, and i pointed out that climate to some extent is always changing. Its never stat you can. Thats not the question before me as a policymaker. The question before me is if we ban all coal in the u. S. , if we ban all Carbon Emissions in the United States, will it change the dramatic changes in climate and these dramatic weather impacts that were now reading about . And anyone who says that we will is not being truthful. The truth of the matter is the United States is a country, it is not a planet. And so there are things that we can do to become more efficient in our use of energies, there are things we can use to develop alternative sources of energy, there are things we can do to be better stewards of the Energy Resources we have, like oil and natural gas. But for people to go out and say this will somehow lead us to have less tornadoes and hurricanes, thats just not an accurate statement, and thats what i take issue with. The u. S. Geological survey has warned that sea levels could rise by two feet be by 2060, imperilling floridas coastline. How should the United States prepare itself and its citizens to deal with rising sea levels and the catastrophic flooding that is likely to follow . Again, as i pointed out, i have no problem with taking mitigation action as we did in my time as the speaker of the house after we were hit by five hurricanes in the summer of 2004 and 2005. We encouraged people to harden their homes against to car insurances of these storms. Occurrences of these storms. We have extended a large amount of money to drainage programs because, quite frankly, much of south florida was built on a former swamp called the everglades. The natural everglades has been developed, and weve had to account for that over the years. So i have no problems taking steps toward mitigation, in fact, i would think that would be essential. Not simply because of weather occurrences, but because of the fact we have developed very expensive Population Centers near areas that are vulnerable to hurricanes. Tsunamis in the asiapacific region, hurricanes, tornadoes, natural catastrophes have always existed, and as we build out Population Centers in vulnerable areas, we will have to take mitigation acti