tv After Words CSPAN April 13, 2015 12:00am-1:01am EDT
>> to personal advice for the reader on how to minimize your tax burden. so there is going to be a wide range of topics for us to discuss but i want to start out with the title. the irs end zones? why do you want to end the irs? and also even in sort of your materialized dream world with a single rate flat back only on consumeed consume consumed income someone is collecting tax revenue for defense. >> we went from one to two
percent of taxes and in london it was 20% at the time. we were growing, we were moving along and tremendous things happened. over time a series of things happened and the government got bigger and bigger and more complex. the economy slowed and our relative strength compared to the rest of the world slow and reversed. the investigation was we were doing well and moved away from the policy that worked to one that doesn't work as well. how do we get back to that? the solution isn't a fix tomorrow. i think we can look forward to a time without income tax. there wasn't one until 1913. i talk about doing things at the state level that is models for federal activity. term limits started at the start
level and now hit congressman as committee chairs. wouldn't happened without the state. transparency at the national level followed state. welfare reform moved from states to washington. we have nine states with no income tax and another ten that are moving to phase out their tax. arizona is joining, wisconsin talked about it north carolina kansas pulled the trigger and mississippi the house voted to follow a kansas model as revenue comes in and additional revenue from 2-3 percent will goes to phase down the income tax. what happens in states without a ratchet additional money comes
in because of capital gain tax and the rather than sprout and spend it you never think through what happens. it shows up and disappears to the special interest. >> you would want a similar model? >> yeah at the national level you believed thing about federal right to work laws. nine states with no income tax and i think we will get to half over the next 10-15 years. and then you saw we not we had to have an income tax in oklahoma or arizona and do we need it at the federal level? maybe not is the answer and we keep moving in that direction. >> host: >> host: i think people are unsure because you need the military? >> not tomorrow, not next year and we are not talking about
changing the name. this isn't the old kbg. >> host: this is a very long-term scenario? >> guest: yes, took decades to get into mess and decades to fix it. >> host: >> host: i think the short term concern is what you start the book out with talking about how the irs targeted conservative groups in the 2012 election. is that part of what drove your title choice? >> guest: you are right. eight pages into the book we discuss what i think is very possibly a decision by the irs bureaucrats, politically appointed bureaucrats, to go after the growing tea party movement and deny them 501-c status so they could not have bank accounts and have staffers
and rent offices and grow into the state institution. tea party started in 2009 and i would have told you it could not happen. i knew from the experience the american people will rise up against the tax increase. proposition 13 property taxes and proposition two and a half massachusetts, and proposition 13 property tax revolt. when taxes road to medium they didn't goit of hand. they waited until the taxes increased. i thought they would wait until obama spent a lot and they would say that is not a problem but now taxes are raised they said it is a problem. the american people sensed all
of that spending would lead to massive tax increases. the tea party came first. it was the first anti-spending movement that i can find in history. when they did that they had maybe 600 to a 1,000 rallies they could document. it is a wonderful study. >> host: i obviously think it is wonderful. >> guest: this was very powerful. it said here is where you have a tea party rally and here is where you would have one but it got rained out. what was the difference for voter turnout and numbers of volunteers and future demonstrations. they were estimating between three and six million additional votes came out for republicans in 2010 beyond what you would
have expected because of the rallies themselves. the left is always doing rallies and when i was younger i thought it was because they didn't have jobs. well you meet people at rallies and say i am part of a movement you have friend and get together. >> guest: i think how local the affects is one finding. the part of the narrative the left had about to tea party movement was astroturf and organized from washington, d.c. by evil billionaires. and i think the turnout driven by local turnout and weather on the day of the schedule shows you how organic a lot of it was. >> guest: at first the obama administration said he didn't watch the rallies.
i got calls from grownups in the media saying you and exxon are doing this right? and i said actually no. i was trying to find all of these guys because we would love to work with them but we have never seen knee of them. i went to some of the early rallies and people would say how many have been to a political rally before and 10-15 percent raised their hands. these were people that never did this before. 2010 the democrats got wiped out and lost the house because of the tea party surge and vote turnout. it was at that point, senators and the president were cream -- screaming outloud something has to be done. and louis learner gave a speech
on october 10th and said they are all telling me i have to do something. people looking for the e-mails you don't mead it. you could see it in letters sent from senators and the president's comment something was wrong and needed to be stopped and her comment was they want me to do something like that before the election. >> host: this was at duke? >> guest: yes. what if the general said we need to do something five days before the election. they should not talk like that. they harassed people setting up associations so they could get a bank account and elect are presidency. we didn't have the growth like we did from the '79-'80 taxpayer revolt. they are major players in massachusetts and california and
other states. obama and louis learner succeeded in knee capping the tea party movement so it could not have the up surge in 2012 republican votes. >> host: romney didn't outperform. >> guest: it was a margin of three million and it was three-six in the surge. it should have built over the two years period. there is a serious argument that that was a major factor maybe the factor in obama's election. you cannot have part of the government playing politics against the american people and that is what we have with the irs. let's say they didn't do enough to make it happen.
they were trying. >> guest: oh for hur. many of the people who work in the agency self identity -- >> host: many of the people self identify as liberals and why do you think that is? >> in american history we have always been friends of government. they were the people who wanted to stay with britain and the british government brought an army in to try to let them win that fight. what happens when you have tons of liberty today, republicans,
libitarians and friends of government and any kind of liberal democrats, when the government comes in and is not the servant of the people but a participant in the political struggle and hits the tea party activist or republicans and sub-saharan -- subsidises the ad. and republicans don't want to work for the government. they work for themselves or the private sector. the government is a static career. you know what you will be making ten years from now. there is no such thing as i am good at this i will make twice as much as the guy sitting next it t me in my cubicle like what happens in the rest of the world. you notice when nixon said give
me tax reports it was linked. what bothers me about the learner situation is there were no whistle blowers. we now know in the irs, people are still using their own g-mail counts. this is hillary clinton at the irs and hundreds of thousands of people sloppy with your data and mine and the american people's. we know they shared some conservative donor list with opposition groups in order to attack them and bother them and threaten them. that is the real threat. and the fact that -- i would be much happier if learner said we are doing this and someone said i am calling "the new york times" and this is thought happening. but you are right, the irs culture and much of the
government's culture is they are friend of government not friend of the people. they are friend of government and see themselves as loyal to the state rather than the nation and they serve the interest of the state which is bigger government. >> now, i sometimes get the sense that you would like to change that. yeah. yeah. >> i wrote a book on how to change it. >> exactly. part of your book is about how to get there. that is about the sort of coalition, the leave it alone coalition as you called it in an earlier book, how do you see that organizing process? how do you think it will end up bearing fruits? how do you see its future? >> what i tried to do in the book is not just diagnose the problem. there are people that said we have a problem. thank you. i don't do windows now. or you can write a book and say here is the problem. and if everybody can do one solution we would win. there are other solutions other people are working on.
you cannot pull people into only doing your project and what if your project doesn't win. in the second half of the book there are dozens of things you could do with the president's person thinks you could do at the state level or things that take 40 years to take affect. the paul ryan budget and entitlement plan. we try to lay those out -- >> host: one big part of the book is about different types of tax reform. and you know i get to that part and i expect now we will see tax reform. >> guest: i think we have to move toward taxing consumed one income at a fair rate. that could be flat income tax,
sales tax, and raise taxes other places which is where we were for more than half of the country's existence so the idea we cannot go there is ridiculous. maybe we could live with an income tax if it was 5% instead of 50% in how they dealt with it. and a lot of things could be moved to the state level not at the national level. there are lots of things we need to do to move in the right direction. we can sell assets. we own trillions of dollars worth of stuff underground. >> host: it is odd that doesn't enjoy more bipartisan support. even the economist magazine had
an article about how countries own property they can sell off to lower taxes or pay off debt. why do you think there is not broader support for that? >> guest: i run the no-tax increase pledge. and in the middle of the book i talk about the problem we are in and the role the taxpayer protection plan had in setting up a guard rail that says no net tax increase. it is a simple, 58 world commitment by analect elected official. you can do any part you want as long as it isn't a net tax increase. it was written to enact reagan's law because what if the rates pop up again. we got senators to sign in
writing they would be opposed to race rates or broaden the base. we have the majority of the house and almost the majority of the senate who signed the pledge never to raise taxers. a thousand state legislature and a lot of governors. of the republicans running for president today all but jeb bush signed either as governors or senators and kept it. and they took it because they brought it to the president before and signed the pledge then. say the track record of signing the pledge and keeping it. and bush is not raised taxes as governor but i think he has his father's decision to take the pledge and broke it last election. he through away a perfectly good
pre pre presidency. the problem wasn't making the commitment. he would never have been the nominee if he would not make that. he beat dole because dole wouldn't take it in new hampshire. he was 14 points down when he said read my lips and said he was not going to raise taxes. he would not have won the general without that commitment and it is when he broke it he made it impossible to be trusted and to get reelected. at the end of the day, jeb bush will make a commitment in writing writing to the american people. that is the important part. >> host: in the book you discuss, i think senator hatch's initiative to repeal the ethanol tax credit. >> guest: it was coburn. the pledge became a great wall
of china beyond which politicians couldn't move. as long as the republicans have the house, senate or governorship which was from '94 till 2009 there was no tax increase -- longest period in american history with no tax increase. only when they were all democrats in 1993 and in 2009 when they passed a tax increase only the democratic voters. that was the longest period without tax increase as soon as the republicans got control of the house no tax increase again. the reason you say this is to force a discussion about spending areform. if tax increases were an option government never reforms itself. we will add these on top and raise taxes and it is like a ship that keeps accumulating and
there is never an effort to decide whether some of this stuff doesn't help. the pledge forced the sequester and spending cap we are under for the next ten years. because of that people who care about national defense are talking about talabort's legislation to reduce the number of civilian employees at the pentagon by a 100,000 and save 170 billion in ten years. that is a lot of what you need to get to the sequester numbers without reducing the number of people in uniform or the number of planes and tanks. but you would never have these discussions, and didn't during the bush year. there was no reform in military spending. it was we have a war going on and instead of reforming government they added on to. in world war ii they set-up an anti appropriation committee and
all they did was recommend unspend it. that is why the civilian conservation core is not there anymore. they had you don't need to spend anymore and they put it into world war ii. the wpa, the world projects -- all of these things i wonder why are they not still here? so many dumb ideas are. why didn't this become national service? because there was a committee whose job was to end unnecessary spending. one suggestion in the book and let's bring that committee back and senator roberts has brought that up and i am hoping we can discuss and enact that with a republican president. >> host: one way around the pledge is to call it spending tax credits. do you see that happening?
because for example, under senator lee and rubio have a tax reform plan where on the business side there is a lot of stuff that you probably like but on the individual side, they raise rates and they want to i guess funnel and send funds to families with lots of children. they call it tax cut. >> guest: two things. if it is refundable it is definitely spending. there are better and less good tax cuts in the world. tax deductions, tax credits are generally less beneficiaryl than rate reduction. it is a much-improved piece of legislation. they reduced the increase on capital loans to zero. >> host: what percentage would
you want? >> guest: it is in total senator lee of utah and senator rubio of florida their bill would super charge the economy. they spend a lot of tax credits per child and so on to build political support. the pro-growth part of that is very impressive. senator rand has a bill i have seen general allies of it and dramatic reduction in tax rates and that also would super charge the economy. you will see a lot of strong republicans running for president. a lot of governors, people with track records and organize things unlike president obama and too many candidates. >> host: theistose are first-term senators as well.
>> guest: we do and they will have to show how they will compete. democrats have hilary clinton and the depth of the republican bench i think is helpful. the one character they were going to run, the former governor of maryland, was so unpopular with his tax increase policies that his lieutenant governor, who should have been a shoe in in a deeply blue state lost and hogan, a republican won. >> host: by a big margin too. >> guest: yes there is hilary clinton and nothing else. it suggests she is not building the farm team. the republicans used to be the ones without the farm team and now it is democrats and that is troubling long-term for the democratic party. >> host: they have lost so many
governorship and control of state houses. >> guest: one reasons why republicans can experiment at the state level and democrats can is one only good ideas flourish at the state level, really stupid ideas can only be enacted at the national level. if you want the minimum wage at $50,000 and do it nationally it would be bad for the economy and people would wonder what did that. but if you do it in vermont everybody knows what happened. the reason why when they passed government-run health care and then they repealed it because they knew it would badly damage the massachusetts economy. they could only do obamacare nations nationally. never state by state. vermont said no to do it at the
state level. this is a tax advantage that free market limited governments, republicans have and that is they can try things out at the school level. school choice. and when one state does it the argument that the world end if you give parental choice to pick schools or no right to work or no government unions in the private sector it works better. you can check that. and then you run for president on that background and we have more than 30 republican governors. 24 states with a republican governor republican house, and a republican senate with half of the county's population in those 24 red states. democrats have seven states they run completely. >> host: california is one of them. >> guest: and hawaii and delaware connecticut, oregon and there is a real challenge
for the democrats in they don't have control of state bodies and the republicans do. >> host: and the ones they control you are not allowed to shower anymore. >> guest: and their policies don't work and people are leaving blue states and moving to red states. >> host: i think governor perry's central argument in running is that. >> guest: i have been governor 14 years and people are moving to my state. he has a strong narrative. >> host: i want to go back to your policy prescriptions. i want to talk about this. there is a lot of money in there. so how would you make the case -- the people at large with lots of federal land should be sold off, how would you -- the environmentalist movement you posted this how do you see the future of that?
>> guest: hold the pledge. as long as tax increases are off the table then the spending that needs to occur in a free and open society -- national defense/courts -- they go and as long as the federal government is running the ropes they go with the highway system. i would rather have the states do that. you are seeing this happen state by state. people want to build more roads or spend more on roads say we want more money and we are not raising tax. what do you suggest? go find me a spending reduction and we can couple that with more spending on roads and you can have the roads but the government doesn't get bigger. or one state gives a gas tax increase but the income tax comes down like south carolina. you turn a spending interest -- roads and national defense -- into our ally in reforming
government. the pentagon owns a lot of the airways. and their position is well if we were to -- reorganize it to free it up so there is all of this stuff. and if you could get it down to a fraction and sawell it off. it would go into the general revenue if we sold it and we would see none of it back or a piece of it back. i am in favor of saying look, the pentagon owns/uses this spectrum there are tens and maybe hundreds of billions of dollars available, say to the pentagon you restructure, you sell it and it goes into the pentagon budget beyond what su sequester allows. but we are not going past
sequester and you have to money and don't have to cut it. the saving spectrum, some day you might need it goes i don't need this and i would rather have a shiny new plane and let's sell that off. the basic restructuring and closing effort from the '80s in which the pentagon says here are a series of basis we don't need. a commission comes in. it is bipartisan and regional and they pick 30 bases saying they can be close. we are not taking an important thing away from the pentagon in terms of bases. and with the house and senate votes to overturn that they can be closed restructured and move people from smaller to lower
bases. we saved tens of billions of dollar dollars. there is another bracket to be done. half a billion for spending on property they are not using in the pentagon. that is a lot. more than i pay in taxes. and it is those kind of reforms that will only happen if the sequester holds and we say no to tax increases. i spoke with one of the leading congressman who deals with military spending and i said look i want to help you on this spending retrain that you have got. tell me what will congress let you do save money and i will help fight to get it done. and every proposal i put out, which is something i knew was being offered to save money, he wasn't interested because it didn't solve all of the problems. at the end of the conversation this chairman i said what can i
do to be helpful here? he said tell everybody there is not a penny to be saved in the pentagon. that is non-sense and that is person is no longer in office and has the power he had. but that was the thinking; there is not a penny to be saved in the pentagon. even though i talked about ideas that would save tens of hundreds of billions over time. he wasn't interested in any effort. the presentation on the hill and some of the hawks who spend a lot say tell me about the saving ideas and not the senate but the house guy. the calvin bill was interesting to senators. with a spending restraint cap sequester sequester, all of a sudden people who care about national defense become the ally of the taxpayer and not their enemy. how do we get stuff sold off?
well there is no more money. there is a pile of about a trillion dollars over time, trillions of dollars, in oil and natural gas and minerals under the ocean and american and government property, in federally-owned land, imagine if we would the expansion in fracking on federal land as we had on private land. as you know, if a hundred plus person in all of the oil and national growth largely from fracking took place on state and local land because under obama and the democrat who thought of it it went down on federal property. obama has had a negative role. we had an explosion of energy production because you could not stop it. but if you go to his spending coalitions, in fact we have to cut the budget or use
responsibility and drill oil and natural gas. you poke a hole in the ground. and that is how we force reform. don't raise taxes. and the spending interest will fight each other and push other people away from the table. >> host: that sound like a viable scenario. >> guest: it has been working at the state level. >> host: it would be helpful for the president were on born with this as well. >> guest: yes. >> host: a new one is going to be elected soon. what do you make of the race? you say hell hillary is the presumed candidate on the democratic side. what about the republican side? >> guest: chris christie has a pension plan that is great.
he voted -- vetoed over tax increase they voted for and been a serious governor in a difficult state. scott walker. you would have thought wisconsin was as blue as new jersey but they have a republican house, senate and governor. and a changed labor law in that state for public sector union. the changes are you have to have an election every year because all of the people paying union dues never voted to join the union. they were told you are here as condition of employment. teachers and government workers are paying 2% dues. they cannot withhold that from
your pay check either. it has dropped somewhere between half and two thirds. there has been a drop of about 100,000 employees not paying union dues or being part of the union and since that is a $1,000 per person it a hundred million every year out of the pockets. the conservative number is probably higher since unions are not rushing to tell you how they are collapsing. as a result the efforts of voter fraud in the last election i was talking to republicans who police against voter fraud, they were waiting at 6:15 to get calls. they are showing up with 20 people you have to get the lawyer down. you cannot get the money for it. the way the unions spend money to move people to polls they could not afford to do it because they don't have money because they cannot take it
without people's position. he has dramatically changed the bar for what a successful governor looks like. if he is the president, every governor is going to go through his check list of thing and do those in order to be considered a republican in good standing. texas governor, rick perry. 14 years as governor. bobby jindel is the expert on health care, and did an expansion of parental choice, passed an ethics law cut taxes. the legislature hates him for the ethics law but he got it passed and he was a phenomenal governor in a very difficult state. >> it a republican state but
democrats who changed jersey but not necessarily mindset. cruz just announced. he is serious on straining restraint. rubio would do well with the spanish vote. lives in florida. very serious, well spoken and very serious policy. jeb bush running. he was a cutting-edge governor 12-14 years ago. he was elected pre-tea party and before the tea party there was one level of expectation which was very low and he was good. i said very nice things and he is ground breaking. he is doing stuff like this and walker is up here because post-tea party you could do more and you are expected to do more. this is criticism not of bush
but like being post or pre-reagan. bush never caught up with the reagan mindset because they learned how politics worked before reagan changed the world. now it is pre and post-gingrich. if you think half of the people are lovely -- it changes how you approach things. and there is as big a change with the tea party. they took spending on ear marks when prior to the tea party was considered a time of being
vulnerable. like i have stolen money from other people and given it to people that live near you. it was said that is great. it was in the obitary to talk about getting money back. today ear marks are like farting at the dinner table. they are considered what? it is corruption. this is corruption not comptence to be an ear marker. i worry the people who made the tea party happen don't under how dramatically they have succeeded already in changing the way politics works in washington. have we won? no but we are heading in a different direction. >> host: i would say a lot of people think we started this in opposition to bailouts and obamacare and the bailouts happened and obamacare is still
in place. we have not succeeded. that was the main driving source, i think. >> guest: that is the failure of the public high school not to explain to the people the president has a veto. we had the house not the senate. it takes two 3rds of the houses plus to override a veto or a different president and the answer is it takes a different president. no one should be frustrated because we took the house and senate and can't make the president sign the abolition of obamacare. it is who he is. we can sit and yell at him, we can run video ads we could beat him in debate it isn't happening. there is no way to trick him into it. that is not happening. what we need to do is be ready to get a different president and then move. and i think that we are on track
to do that. >> you worry as the government remains in place people are receiving subsidies. do you worry the longer they rin place the harder it is to take challenges? >> guest: i worried about that in the past but less now. the tax inexcreases kicked in and they are poplar. there is another increase to come and that is designed to restore gold-plated and good insurance policies. and that is kicking in 2018 and there is another wave that is going to disappoint people who organized their lives on one understanding about how much money they are putting in and what they will get for health insurance and obama is taking that away by taxing that away. people are seeing health savings account, flexible saving counts and efforts people need for
special needs kids are being taxed. eight of the taxes affected the middle class. obamacare is full of taxes on middle class people particularly as they announced you to by obamacare and if is a mandate. and obamacare remains wildly unpopular and social security went in and republicans voted for it and it was reasonable poplar same with medicare and medicaid no republican voted for this. watch how the independents go. if they go with the republicans, they will win. if they with the d's then all of the republicans huffing and
puffing it still won't work. a different president and you can reform obamacare to the point it isn't obamacare anymore and it is consumer based not government base. >> host: how would you do that? >> guest: making it easier to have health insurance counts and buying insurance over state lines so the rules can be avoided. by taking federal mandated they took them and made them a federal problem. get rid of them and let people make their own decisions. take medicaid and block it to the states the way we did with dependent children. take medicare for the bipartisan reforms that now paul ryan put forward that will allow competition. there are two ways to keep prices down on something. wage price controls -- hasn't worked for the last 4,000 years.
end -- in competition and the more competition between the states and consumers and vendors the better off you are. do we have to clean up the irs if we say no tax increases? there is legislation voted on during the week of april 15. seven pieces. get rid of the death tax is one. these are reforms that say no using private e-mails to put in public data on them. there are 500,000 hours each year used for union purposes at the irs. so when they don't answer 60% of the phone calls are not the appointees say that is because you are not giving me enough hours. 2.3 million in calls could have been answered in that time.
the workers the people are paying for are working for the union. not the taxpayer dollars and that is the irs. we need to ban an effort they started which was to say did you contribute to the conservative group. we think the gift tax, ill illinois as a set of powerful ideas, they were calling conservative donors saying you need a gift tax. 25%. it is not true. it has never been read that way. the guy goes maybe i should not give as much money this election cycle and not contribute to the tea party. you can discon bobilate people
so this law is helpful. >> host: you mentioned one path toward a consumption tax is to expand the 401-ks and making unlimited ones. do you see anyone pushing that angle? >> the republican solution is 529's for college education. obama wanted to kill it. health savings accounts. obama weakened. flexible spending cuts. obama cut it back. republicans want you to save for investing in the future, life time savings accounts education saving accounts health saving accounts, and the democrats are trying to close them down and damage them. there has been a couple of people on the left, one clinton was pushing years ago that
wanted to reach into everyone 401-k and tax all of the buildup in there and throw it into one government welfare pension system. that is what they did in argentina and are talking about doing it here. you see them do it to the flexible saving and health saving accounts and tried to kill 529. seven million people contributed and there was a revolt and obama backed up. but he said he still wants to do it. he just knew he could not get away with it this time. but it is still on the to-do list and that is detroy your 5-- destroy your 529. >> host: i don't think people
realize. >> guest: i try to focus on the book. >> host: in the chapter you tell people how to reduce the tax. >> host: >> guest: you could have tax credit for kids and lower taxes on capital and investment retail sales tax, and then there is one where we say there are things you can do just within the law. remember, take advantage of your company's 401-k plan. don't overpay because if you get money back from the government at the end of the year you gave them an interest free loan. don't do that. but it the series of those reforms where personal is political. more people have fsa's. in the end, it is how do we create a coalition committed to liberty that will win the elections to give us these battles. and i look at people and what
they want from the government is to be left alone. you have people at the polls all of the time and you have people thinking i want this and this. a lot of people like rhubarb but do they vote on that? they don't care. everybody with a 529 knows one party want to take it away and obama tried. two million people home school in the united states. it was illegal 30 years ago. now two million kids are being home schooled, ten million americans have been home schooled in the last couple decades and they know one party want to take that right away from them. they are not available to the democratic party as a result. there are 11 million americanwiseamericans with oo a concealed carry permit and there were close to zero 30 years ago.
there are about three or four ten years ago. that is a huge jump in the numbers. they know one party wants to take that away. and you can get into things like vaping. the democrats want to ban that. but that is a lifestyle issue where people feel threatened by the government. all of the savings in investment vehicles the democrats want to take that away with you. by alerting people one to the fact they really do want to take it away and two you have not got one yet, you can and once you have done it you have a different human being who is saving $2,000 a year. >> host: all of the numbers are big and add up to a lot of people but the current president still managed to get elected twice. how would you explain that? >> guest: when you did have the irs going after the structures being create would the tea party. and two we need -- we have such
stronger candidates and by that i mean numbers of stronger candidates. two or three people were running in 2008 and two or three people running in 2012 and the rest were selling books or going on lecture series or auditioning to be presidents. this time we have a collection of people can look you in the eye and say this is why i want to be president and this is what i do and you cannot laugh them off the stage. the strength of the candidates is good and the weakness of hillary and they had to go back to an older candidate, she was going to run on secretary of state and the russian reset but that is in the memory hole along with the e-mails, and we don't promote people that way with kim kim, kim kim.
i am not sure people like clinton, clinton, clinton. i think it is a challenge for her. >> host: you think they like bush, bush bush? >> guest: that is a boat anchor for the administration. that hurts rather than helps. >> host: i want to move to a slightly different topic. one topic you don't focus on too much in the book is entitlement reform. i guess partially because it is not a very original topic to include in the book and you want to make it as interesting and at time very funny. >> guest: thank you. >> host: do you think because of the sequester and the dynamic we can expect to see in the next ten years where there is no
super urging problem do you think it is harder? >> guest: no easier and i refer to it paz as the paul ryan reform. that is everything but social security. the means tested welfare program gets blocked to the state. and the pensions we need to move state and local federal from defined benefit plans like general motor plans to have define contribution like 401-k's without unfunded liabilities the government can't lose or forget the raise the tax do is pay. utah did this completely. all new hires in utah as of a few years ago here is your pay here is 10% into a 401-k it is yours. police and fireman 12%.
when you leave you take that with you. you want to leave to another state or take another job -- >> host: that is what everyone has in the private sector? >> guest: the private is defined contribution plans and state by state you are seeing it move at the state and local level. at the national level we need do that as well. you don't have to deal with someone who is 55 and promised one thing. okay. fine. let new guys in and have something that is sustainable. all pensions to define benefit, all welfare programs block granted to the states medicare block granted to the state, medicaid the voucher plan or the plus out plan where everyone gets a basic benefit and you decide how to spend additional resources on your own and companies compete to give you that additional add-on. that together if we don't do the ryan plan, which passed four
times in the house, so the depth of understanding among sitting republican congressman of the ryan plan i wanted to put congressman ryan and chairman ryan together with de soto and i called and said he is in and would like to meet with you, i read his book and i would love to meet with him in two and a half months. i said he only needs 20 minutes. and he said i am spending every free half hour with the republicans of the house to walk through the new ryan budget. just the changes from last year. so everyone got a tuitorial on this and they feel comfortable. >> host: it is not just remarkable given medicaid reform
was in. >> guest: and they can explain it to young people middle age people and retired people saying this is not a threat. this is a help to the kid's future that you have that base of understanding and i think it makes all of the difference in the world. the left believed there would be a grand bargain and unchanged we would go to 40% unspending. and we will take taxes up to 30 and we will bring 40 down to 30. so the government is 50% bigger. i call it compromising. government should be smaller than where it is not bigger. and so the fact that somebody is coming up with and republicans voted for a reform without a single dollar of tax increases, all reform they find that uninteresting. you never see the "washington
post" or new york times write about those reforms because in their mind it is code word for how to trick tax increases and promise reforms that don't happen. the republicans added to the mess. never reformed it. the only reform was when the republicans forced it three times on clinton and the most recent fight forced on obama. ...