tv White House Budget Director Nominee Mick Mulvaney Testifies at... CSPAN January 25, 2017 5:28pm-8:01pm EST
arm and then he just said, but i did not give that order and then we just said wait saddam, calmed down. >> sunday night on q&a former cia analyst john nixon talks about his book debriefing the president, interrogation of saddam hussein. >> he was a realist in the use of power and the way political power is exercised and in the political power game and i think he saw that when you are in plane at his level, the presidency, the top level in the country, when you win you win big, but when you lose you also lose big. >> sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span q&a. >> next, one of the two confirmation hearings for south carolina congressman mick mulvaney to become the next white house budget director. he discussed budget and defense spending issues, his positions on social
>> >> come to order we are here to have a confirmation hearing for the position of the director of office management budget we have switched the script to be respectful of the senator's time to do introductions in guess you have a whole new calling in life to introduce cabinet employees. >> is my fallback plan. [laughter] >> i know you are at the
budget committee hearing he did it did job to answer those questions but it is a pleasure to introduce the congressmen from south carolina. we know each other pretty well. president trump has picked talented people that people can learn jobs with the skills that the blood the night can tell you about the nominee is he understands that budget. he doesn't need to get caught up he has made it his passion to be involved with all things fiscal. i have known had impersonally for many years but we play golf together we are friends he is meticulous
of us golf course the fed is an indication of the public servant team will be. like tim he has a beautiful wife and triplets. he could raise triplets' he could probably help the government. from the academic background he is gifted from his time in congress to be fiscally conservative and sometimes we don't agree this part of the government or others but i think i voted for every obama nominee without exception bb wonder to buy will tell you why chose to support the obama nominees consequences to the election matter people had different views of what they should do but we came to conclude they were qualified and with a particular issue he is
extremely capable and qualified you could use any standard you was like you will soon hear over the next few hours the man who understands the of budget and was brought it was zero different with president trump with entitlements spending fighting president trump sees congress may and mulvaney that he can trust and is smart but i completely disagree with the president trump view about entitlement. if we don't reform them we will lose them. a man who is excruciatingly honest who has the background to go into the job to understand what the job is all about. and if he disagrees with you with is not because of anything other they and he
disagrees in his own way he tries to help the country as much as you are. he is very smart and talented and incredibly sincere. thank you for having me puerto. >> mr. chairman and ranking member thanks for allowing me to appear and a at my voice of support for the next office of management and budget. mike and i serve together the house of representatives as a trusted confidante i speak from experience he will serve our president at an asian with distinction as you have seen at the budget committee this morning he has to tell the president exactly what things cost as part of the agenda but as a taxpayer. of course, he sets the
agenda but he deserves a clear idea not rose colored glasses for the if last few years he has been telling truth we are spending too much regulations are strangling small business san shortchanging military will only cost more in the long run. the hardest truth of all is the american people who earned this money for hard work and sacrifice will treat every dollar as his own bed that means he will watch the dollar's like a hawk. many people still stop to ask we're doing about the national debt is a huge concern to be a crucial voice in the president's cabinet. with millions of americans who are deeply worried can allow he is deeply
principled he knows our work with others to make progress were we can use a fine choice to nominate him as soon as possible to submit a budget early next month it will be terrific -- difficult with a new director. thank you for your time today and consideration for advocates for the taxpayer and my friend nick mulvaney. >> congressmen mulvaney? >>. >> did you get through the tunnel quick. >> just-in-time.
we thank you for your past service and to your family this is more than a full-time job. i was that the budget committee hearing we focused on the budgetary aspects of the job we had the mission statement to enhance the economic and national security of america. your position it is critical in terms of that enhancement no matter what we deal with their what challenges from my standpoint the number one is that we're not even coming close growing about 3.2% promised standpoint there are reasons for that we are not utilizing the
resources as we should but the other two main reasons i would argue but also come under the pay-per-view of irresponsibility if you are confirmed as office of management and budget director and with the deficit. suggest on a couple of charts senator white house had a chart that you like i have my own. just like a family in debt over their head how can you grow your personal economy? devoted to the basic necessities detonation state is the exact same way. not only are be trillions of dollars in debt we are over
our head as a nation over the next 30 years the projected deficit is $103 trillion. and that compares by the away to show you the magnitude of $116 trillion. clearly that is not sustainable it is something the federal government has to grapple with a real will never have prosperity and that our children should expect from our economy. fiscal year 2016 federal budget pie chart. you will notice there are two colors on the bar chart. read and represents mandatory spending social security medicare/medicaid
and so many dollars are spent with no appropriation. automatic pilot and out-of-control. blue represents discretionary spending. that is what is appropriated. clearly this has to be brought under control of we will restrain the growth and debt to achieve the prosperity that we need. everybody has these charts in front of them i call this the income statement of the united states to demonstrate as part of that 123 deficit
for social security, $34 trillion medicare and the rest is the debt if we don't want to pay to our creditors, we have to address the unsustainable situation. those are the facts and realities collectively we have denied for far too many years but there will be a point of reconciliation. that is the reality we are faced with. and what we have to grapple with is restraining the growth of the economy is a number of hearings in the studies show we are approaching $2 trillion per year in your testimony you talked about the debt burden per family but the
regulatory burden, per family. i cannot tell you to a manufacturer is is the sad commentary but picasso calculation the recently issued cost was equivalent of $12,000 per year per employee with for regulation such as $12,000 they don't have available to increase wages or benefits or to create more jobs that burden is the number-one reason why the economy is not realizing its full potential one last anecdote the last two years the chancellor of university of wisconsin madison has come to my office related to overregulation the last year she came in with a study commission with the
conclusion of the study said 42 percent of research time spent for on grants was spent complying with those regulations will be think of the disease is spending 42% to fill out paperwork over regulation as an enormous cost hopefully there is a great deal of employment to realize full potential. i do have virus written statement i ask unanimous consent and with that i will turn it over to the ranking member for. >> and wish i did not have to begin my opening talking about process. mr. mulvaney has submitted all documents needed for
consideration including three years of tax returns incomplete did the review of conflicts and we have a letter regarding his agreement to address conflicts of interest. however negative not aware when we have not had an opportunity to review the nominees fbi background check. i was told he would see it last week and then yesterday now today it is still ready. i do not fault the nominee but it is evidence of arrest process that we are witnessing. i am disappointed we hold the hearing without the fbi review being completed and it is a bad precedent of like to work with you and the fbi to make sure it doesn't happen with future nominees. a la for word, with the
commitment we will not hold a vote on moving forward to disconnect you can have that commitment. and to do due diligence we will be sure that congressman mulvaney will answer questions whenever that file will tell us. american seven searching to understand the growth of our economy the predictable place to do business to plan for the future despite this the trump the administration economy changes with each new cycle and the strategy will shift depending on which nominee or which transition team is speaking. last week at a hearing phenomena -- the nominee for
secretary of treasury said after the not -- inauguration they bespeak with quotation a unified foyers -- voice. were despite the transition of power issues like social security health care medicare and taxes we're still searching for a unified voice. the director of office of management and budget is to articulate the agenda and if confirmed tool they pose to influence policy proposals budget appropriation the management of federal workers and the safeguarding of the regulatory process. your job is to take the president's ideas to make them clear and cohesive. despite your willingness to serve by cannot help but question how you will achieve this with the views you have expressed for so long to not a line with those of other members of
the cabinet. self-described hard-core conservative who support cuts to medicare to elimination of federal programs and workers. voted for and supported the shutdown of the federal government several times to dismiss concerns to lift the debt ceiling as posturing berger you have said we have to end medicare as we know it to advocate cuts and full-scale overhaul of the program meanwhile president trump said he would make no changes representative price has also advocated for changes that the president's plan remains the same. it is almost the same on
social security. and at one point called it a ponzi scheme. although he said he would not alter social security at all. in with emergency funding to say we are no longer capable to take care of our own. the president made clear he will increase spending by initiating massive infrastructure projects such as the of all even if we have to pay for it, as promised by his inaugural address to build new roads and highways and bridges and airports and tunnels in railroads all across the border felicia. three understand more about your background as a believes it weathered how that will of the impact of the trump the ministrations
for how will we know they're implemented with such different views on such important topics? bodily emi worried we won't have the stability from the incoming administration i am not certain that you, me and who stuck to his principles admirably many of your proposals like your willingness to allow the federal government to default on its obligation for more than you are willing to concede they had yet to meet someone who can articulate the negative consequences of the united states feeling to raise the debt ceiling. then you have not been listening to the economist, treasury secretary, nominee or ivar former omb directors of both parties knowing that cooler
heads will prevail with the consequences of your rhetoric cannot you are accepting a cabinet level post what would happen and? i fear the american people are in for a rude awakening. i will be listening closely to better understand how you reconcile your beliefs out as director of office of management and budget to implement of vision that speaks with a unified voice. >> please rise and raise your right hand. >> to you testify to tell
the old truth nothing but the truth so help you god? >> in 2010 est. representative is a the house serving as the oversight committee the budget committee and the substantial services committee. holding a lot degree from university of north carolina in bringing to the position the experience government and wealth of knowledge and experience with restaurant industries. >> it is an honor and privilege to be here also thanks for the confidence the president showed to
nominate me for the post also senators gramm and senators cotton it is nice to have my friends here to do that. my wife is seating behind me saw the triplets at least he put on a tie. because one of them is here but the hitherto are at school. but as members of the committee no divergence of what we do we don't get a chance often enough to say this on national television i am extraordinarily proud of my family and my children and my wife was asked to come up with you what was in one sentence all i could think to say is i love my wife i am glad she is here today and in my life.
and then to one talked-about your reviews i look forward to continuing to do that. anyone knows you cannot do this job alone. and from several former members of the house and senate for we have all served with distinction that sets a high bar. how the omb director should act with the american people . if confirmed i will use those as role models for you deserve the truth and it is irresponsible to tell you even if that might be hard to here. also the first time in
history there is a chance the next generation would be less prosperous than what preceded it is completely unacceptable we can turn this economy around and turn the country around but it will take difficult decisions to avoid making impossible decisions tomorrow $20 trillion is the national debt is so large it is so hard to grasp i per first to look at if you convert to that amount of money to the ordinary american family that is the equivalent to have the equivalent of $260,000 credit card debt. for this time for the government to figure out as a matter of principle sooner rather than later with the
way we spend and tax with a healthy economy. part of fixing up problem means taking a hard look at government waste and ending it. to be effective and accountable they earn their money honestly they deserve to have spent in the same fashion. this doesn't just mean the shade it is more than just numbers with a strong and healthy economy pressed to take care of our most and the vulnerable. relying on medicare before she passed away from cancer we were glad she wanted that to be there for her grandchildren and many
people want to know those positions i do not presume to know the positions i may take after consulting the president with his advisers but i do know what i believe i have not been a shy member of congress i do not expect to be today or if you confirm me over at the author of -- at office of management and budget. the federal or state or executive branch it takes courage and wisdom i learn i do not have a monopoly of canadians or the arguments of others with a fact based approach with those ideas of how to get our financial house in order for:
management plays a significant role of climate afford to talking about all those issues and working with congress to address the challenges on behalf of all of the american people. >> congressmen mulvaney there are three questions is there anything you are aware of is your background that would have a conflict of interest? >> no, sir. >> with this prevent you from fully to hold the office of which have been nominated quick. >> no sir. >> would you cooperate if confirmed quick. >> will fully cooperate. >>.
>> i know you were very forthright with back taxes or payroll taxes i will start off of situation. >> i think we had a chance to talk about that with various members of the committee triplets were born in 2000 we hired somebody to help with them that we considered a babysitter. did not live with the sordid not teach the children or cook or clean and she helped my wife with the children and we did not withhold federal tax id -- taxes and honestly i did not think about it again and tell december. when you are nominated for one of these band -- positions was uh checklist
of euratom at babysitter or and i said yes and lifted the circular and realized we made a mistake i did the only thing i told my accountant and communicated with the president and how to address the situation and what we have done is notified the irs to have a schedule h. waiting to hear back from the federal government i recognize i made a mistake but once it was brought to my attention i was straight forward. >> i will remain the balance
of my time. >> with those inconsistencies legacy if we can reconcile them. i have heard people say if we don't raise the debt minute it is the end of the world for quite have yet to meet someone who can articulate those negative consequences and then to talk about prioritized payment into was at the end of the of lying to envision a potential failure to raise the debt ceiling. i was surprised when i questioned the future nominee for treasury secretary when he said absolutely raising the debt ceiling is about paying the obligations made and that the president-elect to make it clear to honor that debt
to raise uh debt ceiling sooner rather than later howdy reconcile those two positions. >> as you recall from the last time we had a debt ceiling discussion 2013 the rhetoric was extraordinarily high. a believe this statement is accurate had not found anybody yet who could explain why the rhetoric was so high because at the time for those you expect to call the market was doing the exact opposite. that while he was publicly saying we would default privately telling them they would pave the interest that
goes to the environment at the time. >> i will interrupt you to point this out of the discussion of whether or not we will raise the debt ceiling is not a debate if we will honor our obligations. of course, that will rail the market for good as a matter who was secretary of treasury. and in order to meet the previous obligation the thinking american people gave people the impression raising the debt ceiling allows more spending and that justice not true. >> with those appropriation bills that do that but i encourage you to recognize yes we had won in 2013 put those debates kodak co long way -- go back a long way
with guidance what would happen with prior jersey asian -- priorities but it was to lower the temperature of the of rhetoric. >> you disagree with would be secretary of treasury of treasury would retry to influence them we shin withhold support for raising the debt ceiling? the thank you said paying debt was the most teams -- most important thing. >> raising the debt ceiling he said i'd like to raise it >> that is one. >> i am quoting him to say the president-elect made it clear that is the most important thing. >> i could agree with that. was about to the congress
raising the debt ceiling? >>. >> that is what i wanted to hear. >> also to point out in 2013 you believe the shutdown was the policy diaz still believe that? >> yes. the last bill that house sent over to use the discussion was counterfactual to defund obamacare that what the house did to delayed the implementation of the mandate for one year. we did that for recent because the president had given that accommodation. >> you are trying to make a point and i get that you felt strongly and i respect but the still believe that is good policy if to make a political point?
>> defense spending they hate to cut into my friends questioning but it passed to be on the table the question i uncomfortable the government will continue to exist after the sequester forces the president says it is i take office to fully eliminate the budget to rebuild the of military. have you changed your mind? >> no man might have voted many times to increase the top line i have had a uh chance to discuss with general mattis diane m. lockstep with the president to find ways to increase your first statement is
something i have been talking about incumbent upon my party that waste in the agricultural department is just like in the defense department or it undermines our credibility. >> with health care i do not believe it is a fundamental right to because once you declare it is a fundamental right then they have the obligation to pay for it. you said that in 2010 versus a president who said there many people talking about the reforms of health care that are not covered do you agree we cannot have people with no money not having health care? >> would you have done is correctly pointed out the position i have done the
best that i could to represent those people to the best of my ability to think they are happy with my representation. >> now you will be more liberal with president trump >> the like to think the president has invited me to join his cabinet to bring perspective that at the end of the day he says here is the plan going forward it is my job to enforce that to the best of my ability. >> in 2011 and did you vote for the withdrawal of troops it afghanistan? >> did you vote for the
combat teams quick. >> and not remember. >> i think i was remember vice wanted to withdraw the troops 23rd - - 2013 with about the second calvary quick. >> new york taken similar votes in the past. >> 2011 offer an amendment to cut the budget question mecca believe that was the alco budget. >> so you voted against oco and was at $17 billion by. >> from the operation budget. >> what about 3.5 billion quick. >> it remember i would remember if i cut the way you did maybe don't take it the seriousness that it
deserves. i am not interested to place the magic games but what the military aid your reseeding that it is clear you have been an impediment to that for years maybe we should repeal the budget control act. >> i do think we should repeal and replace the something more efficient. >> voted against it for that reason. >> with those offsets elsewhere quick. >> we made our promise in 2011 to save money and i am interested in keeping the promise. >> as the highest priority quick civic the number-one priority is to defend the nation. >> is based to hear because he's spent your entire career one pitting your time against the military facility directory would
devise of matters stating the government shutdown will contain an element of good policy. the utilizing of a shutdown and responses to questions of the lapse of appropriations as the acceptable outcome from budget negotiations. >> that is the term the government used. >> that is what you believe it is quite. >> to get your direct point of will not recommend that we negotiate. >> you supported the government shut down. >> voted for the appropriations bill in the system. >> you support the shutdown eye and in support of the house bill to keep an open.
>> you knew that would not succeed. >> as it would not pass. >> i do not pretend to know what the senate chooses to do. >> with a corresponding increase for every dollar of oco transferred to the base price. >> i have proposed moving stuff to the topline budget because it is more transparent. >> you believe as the president has advocated that should be tied to increases of spending in other areas? >> i will continue to revise the president the best possible route for word to raise the topline defense number for non-defense discretionary. >> if they cannot reduce spending will use still
support quick. >> i will make my case to the president. >> i'm asking your personal opinion not you would vice the president or if he would support an increase of defense spending without a commensurate cut. >> i would make the argument would recognized your asking but as the elected official lead is not my job. my job is to make the case to the president, they doubt what the implications are. >> sense it is obvious you interference supported the shutdown as a temporary lapse of appropriations maybe go to arizona to tell those people are around the grand canyon when the shot that down we had to fly food to them with the concessions around the grand canyon is a
shameful chapter and the reason why people have such a low opinion with the lapse of appropriations as you describe them. all i can say is i am deeply concerned about your lack of support for the military or withdrawals from europe with combat teams what were you thinking honestly? >> if you give me the time i will give you the story. with your indulgence. >> i have 50 seconds. >> vietnam veterans cave in to my office gave tall man with a leather vest them
ponytail people to reassign addenda parking lot and started crying. i have helped my country my son has been overseas for times in five years it is killing his family to mix of the answer is to withdraw all troops from afghanistan? >> diane to invest i could to represent the people of south carolina. >> because one person came up to you subject to the sacrifices that men and women make you voted to withdraw all troops? tell you know, where 9/11 came from quick. >> you know, about south carolina. >> dino one thing the majority does support the vote in favor of withdrawing
all troops from afghanistan and i can tell you that. there is too much sacrifice that is where 9/11 began i don't know any of leadership that because of that we should withdraw all troops my time is expired. >> mr. mulvaney thanks for stopping yesterday. day recalled meeting with president trump quick. >> yes, sir, and that the president the first week in december. >> and the last time you met with them quick speed may give not met with him since then? did meg that's correct. >> he has spoken in favor of
steps or actions as massive tax cuts for the upper income levels but he is also proposed raising of defense spending by quite a bit and medicare and social security and would not touch those and that we should build a wall but the cost is a never between $5,425,000,000,000 once repealed the affordable care act but the budget could be increased by $350 billion.
speaking truth to power with how you cannot do all those things are you that person could. >> i like to think so to fulfill the exact role telling of president the fax i figure out a way to present with the range of options. >> we had a couple of people general kelly essentially asked to say that is wrong i believe they both said they would step down as a matter
of principle. if you present your best judgment to the president you are going down the wrong track with those idiots he put forward but what you recommended to have a more fiscal policy what will lead you do? that is not easy question. >> s.a. hard question. i don't expect the president to agree with me all the time that to make of best case of what i believe on the particular issue and on the advice of others to make the decision of would not have made myself.
>> the last time we add of balanced budget that is where we had the most jobs created in the history of the country and during those four years as a percentage of gdp and also spending 20 percent, do you recall the percentage of gnp and spending? >> one ballpark was around 18.5 or 20? >> do you believe we need to focus just on the spending and cider is there a reasonable balance their it is a need i don't mind
paying extra money i just don't want you to waste it. >> i think they don't mind paying their taxes but the difference is looking and the revenue side to take a bigger slice of the pie. >> that the regulatory process the locker by regulations with the administrative procedures and with the federal agency puts out the notice is
anybody interested in that as legislators? to say that is a good idea then they can choose to act on that or propose a draft regulation that day may or may not have that obligation but then to have that opportunity to say that is a good idea but then people could still and they do all the time. what is wrong with that process? >> but comes to mind is the cost benefit analysis with
the type of data other times you can reduce the question of that is sensible and we could do a good job and i hope to make sure we are using that not just from a variety of sources but to get the most informations that we can. >> and we can turn this economy around. you remember where we were eight years ago? with the continuously longest-running expansion we can do better than that. i remember where we were eight years ago end at the time from the leadership team.
i remember what it was. >> i will use one minute of my time with a couple of facts. since the great depression for the recession it is ground two%. there's a tremendous difference with that economic activity over 10 years period even with the 2% growth by 1.$1 trillion using energy resources but the other .1 to make we have heard about the government shutdown do you have a handle common chitchat down? i now wish shutdown concessions buddie you had a sense quite. >> said no. i have used is
15% a thing that has been confirmed if you look at the amount of dollars that flowed out the door. >> senator? >> congratulations congressman mulvaney of the nomination you said uh number one priority is to defend the country quick. >> one of those things that was stated affirmative in the constitution. three familiar with this statement quick. >> it was raised at my very first budget committee hearing to put the fear of god did meet with a guide to washington d.c.. >> people can characterize your your position but deerfield for to concern your debt for international defense?
we could not be a strong nation that maybe we could not afford a calamitous crisis concerning our debt to make as full verbal white. >> i think the admiral was considering this great nation to fail from within because of the inability to manage the finances. >> with partisan politics that is the mistake of how we fix things but understanding your motives are for your country but is over concerning the future of your country but talk about raising the debt ceiling and matches been made advocating for a shutdown i remember those debates.
we have just gotten here in those debates advocating a shutdown but if we should have the process at the same time there was of bill oblivious supported that said basically it has to go up some time but to have this debate we should try to fix things summit is over waste i remember we don't do our job with one big bill as a continuing resolution. with all the spending and government and with many
conservatives want to reform that should nbc? in the last time we raise the debt ceiling but with regard to entitlements i hear in the emotion of her voice taking care of your mother-in-law. to destroy the entitlements but the risk we run to do nothing that would be a retired 22 percent across-the-board reduction.
>> saying that to have of massive across-the-board cut. but we all have parents and grandparents. but i think what it is inexcusable when you say you don't care but in reality doing nothing shows lack of care. if you do nothing to fix medicare we should listen to what the candidate say to judge whether they are honest worsens year. into paid taxes that goes well beyond what the allies said bbv as he was honest in answering his questionnaire i wish you the best of luck i hope those on the other
side will not question your motives but that yours sincerely held belief it is heard eight hour national defense than that should be a commendable position not something to denigrate the think there needs to be at balance of concern. >> thank you for this hearing next we at the good meeting there was an issue that came up by sri was not here for the opening statement to deal with the nanny comedy hours the week quick. >> roughly full time. . .
do you believe the position is for the va to provide timely care to a certain extent? do you believe the veterans of this country are having trouble accessing care? >> i know first-hand that is the case. the story here for my veterans as the quality of care they get is actually excellent once they get it. to make you the hear the same story i have.
so i would assume with the answer to the previous question you would agree there is a medical workforce shortage within the va? >> that i don't have any information on. "usa today" reported 41,500 medical professional vacancies at the va. so the question becomes then you are in a very important position that nobody knows about on the street to the question becomes how do we address the backlog at the va with this hiring freeze because, go ahead. >> a couple of different things senator off the top of my head. i'm having a difficult time automatically coming to the conclusion that the best way to make to be a more efficient is to hire more people. i'm certainly willing to consider it as i have filled out a question with this committee or another committee that there may be circumstances where we can provide a more cost-effective and efficient government by having people in certain areas and they might be
limited examples. i'd be more than willing to work with you in her office to figure out what to do that. >> let me give an example. billings is about 200 miles from the north dakota border and last check they were two or three psychologists psychiatrist family counselors in that region. how do we address mental health problems if we don't hire additional folks? >> the veterans choice act was allowing access to private systems. >> those three i am talking about, that's from the private sector. >> billings montana something. sparsely dotted area. >> the problem is we have a ton of veterans that live their and they still need to get the benefits they need. i look forward to working with you on these issues. i think they are critically important and oftentimes i agree
with you that manpower doesn't results necessarily good results but when you get back what they have today manpower does have its impacts. i want to talk about medicaid law grants for a second. you support turning medicaid into a block grant program? >> i have voted for that given a chance in the house. if there are other ways to combine efficiencies and medicaid are more than willing to talk about that but i think medicaid and medicare present bigger challenges to us. >> so with that previous support for medicaid law grants would you also support a cap on medicaid law grants? >> i believe that was part of the proposal the housemate in order order to give the states the incentives necessary to drive efficiencies in their programs. >> in your previous life and excuse me for knowing this i came out of state legislature and i can tell you in montana the state does have that balanced budget amendment and
you talk about that with the previous senator. they are not going to be able to absorb so is their option would be to cut folks off? >> if they don't have the dough what options do they have? >> we have a program and it was clear that the program for medicaid we were required to use it the same towards providing medicaid care in urban areas. we don't have those in south carolina and we would very much like to come up with their own plan to provide for most needy. to senator rand paul's point we want to provide for those folks as well but we thought there was a better way to do it given south carolina but we did not have that flexibility because of the federal law. >> i've got you. the problem i see in enlighten me if this is wrong populated areas differ in the size of the state. we have a lot of other cities
that are less than 50,000 a lot of them less than 1000 and in all three of those cases there are tons of folks that are on medicaid and my concern is that whether they are in a rural frontier or what we call bigger cities, we have got folks that depend on it and if it's a blog granted in this state can't make up the difference they are going to be without care. >> senator again this sounds like we have some of the same experiences. if there are other ideas on how to fix medicaid at the more than happy to do it and i'd like to give the state the flexibility to try. it might be the montana and south carolina dog and a little bit of wyoming does. >> i guess my concern is in the meantime there are a lot of folks who are going to be really in life-and-death situations and that's my concern. really quickly and i will put
this and for the record and it deals with national background investigations bureau. we stood that applies directly for background checks. you are critical important -- component in bringing dmi and opm and the department of defense together to make sure these work and they were brought about because we were failing miserably and i look forward to working on confirmation with you on that. thank you mr. chairman and by the way for a site mark in 2008 we were losing 800,000 jobs a month in today for the past year we have come to 220,000 jobs a month so if i guess it depends upon the metric to a thank you very much. >> senator langevin. >> thank you mr. chairman. congressman mulvaney good to see you again. you and i came in the class and had the opportunity to be a of the served together in the house for four years.
i do have to tell you i was pleased when i saw the announcement by the trump administration in your selection because of what i saw from you in our time serving together in the house. you are a serious student and you worked hard on difficult issues on every difficult decision that need to be -- need to be made. you have a fairly decent business background is so working with businesses. before that in addition to georgetown university graduate with honors in international economics commerce finance is an art scholar law school north carolina chapel hill and harvard business school. that's not a bad background to be able to walk into this type of role but as you know every person in the administrator is on the job and it's on-the-job training. it's an entirely different role so i would like to get some background from you just on some key philosophical perspective so you and i have talked about as well. we talk about regulatory issues and regulatory priorities and
how we can fix the regulatory state. senator carper brought it up earlier and i said i would ring it up often as we work together on reform. what do you see is the aspects for reform? >> a couple of different things senator. offers a perhaps the best opportunity to have an immediate ability to get the economy ramped up even further. it seems to be in talking with folks on this committee that part of why partisan support comes from this chamber for regulatory reform and that takes a good academic data that you suggest as the number one thing we can do to boost economic activity would be to engage in significant regulatory reform. russert have the advantage of being able to do a rather quickly not only because there is bipartisan support but these are things the president can do by himself in a perfectly legitimate exercise. second of authority so the general idea is that regulatory
reform offers probably the best option right now to help get the economy doing even better. >> said the grand challenge of this is i could find 50 plus of my colleagues easily and regulatory reform under president obama. now i'm going to work with republican administration i still have the same perspective really needs to regulatory reform. we need to be able to fix the process of our regulations that are done and i think there will be a greater eagerness for my democratic colleagues to say yes this is a great way to reform the process of regulations. senator hyde camp and i were looking for partner and the administration is not just looking at looking forward to the future and says for every president and how we do regulations there should be a predictable reliable system.
>> when i meet with the domino's pizza or a papa john's pizza, is to be in a franchise business in the layout for me if they follow the regulations regarding disclosures on caloric intake on their product the board to see when you walk into a restaurant would be the size of a foot off field in order to follow the law. when that happens something is broken down. the simple fact that got beyond the process and made it into the real world before someone caught that means we do have a regulatory process and i look forward to helping you work on it. >> you brought up earlier one of the major key performance may be the cost benefit analysis. i mentioned to you when you visit in the office my fear is cost benefit analysis from the administration has become a justification because there's a way to find a benefit margins be able to say no matter what the cost is i have a benefit large enough that you are going to do this rather than looking for what is the least expensive most
effective option out there. what are some ideas that you have on the cost benefit side of things to be able to help reform the process? >> i sit here and i contemplate what it would be like. would be to go to the president and say look here is the data. here is real hard data. maybe from the source and it source and maybe from that source or it may be from a variety of sources. in fact we do a better job of getting permission from a variety of sources and explained to the president what the real world of these regulations would be. not in terms of shoehorning a regulation that we say we want into a square peg into a round hole so to speak to actually look at the facts and circumstances of the speculations and the president can say you know what that makes sense in those four.pay the one thing that i'm very excited about in this administration is that everything the president
has talked about on the campaign trail has included regulatory reform and including in a second a full time in office today or yesterday you talked about regulatory reform. he gave a high-profile of carl icahn to do with regulatory reform. if you read his book you will see chapters about how government regulation is an impediment to growth so say you want to about the president and you may be a critic or supporter but i'm absolute convince his dedication to fixing the regulatory requirements work hand-in-hand with yours. >> we will work through that trust is in the days ahead. obviously budget issues have been a major part of what you worked in the house as well. one of the hardest things to get through washington d.c. is the real number for anything. how can you help us get the real number coming from the white house and what are your estimates from omb? >> the first estimate is through myself which is why the data is so important and try to figure
out a way to get data that we can actually all use. in this age of the government having all this data that people aren't using it because they can even talk to itself about the numbers. one of the easiest ways to fix the system so the data we have access to is the best possible number and to be honest about the numbers with the president and say look mr. president these are the hard numbers and this is real. if we do this that will happen if we do that this will happen and give them the best possible advice i have put the best possible date i have. first we have to allow the government to function properly so every single one of us in a decision-making position would have that information. >> i hope we can work together on the budget gimmicks whether be changing the mandatory programs or other agencies out there with the budget system that gives its fake numbers were unreal numbers and weekend -- senator mccaskill and i have
worked for the past couple of years on the taxpayer's right to know. we were to sensibly with the previous omb to be able to negotiate a process so we can deal with duplication and exposing that. she and i would come back to pretty quickly as well to be able to help vinyl ice this review. as omb director as well so we can deal with the duplication government really can't deal with duplication if we can't see it in the something she and i worked extensively on. thank you mr. chairman. >> senator peterson. >> thank you chairman and mr. mulvaney thank you for being here. congratulations on your nomination and taking our questions here today. you mentioned you have a fair amount of business experience. you had a franchise. what sort of franchise? >> we were in a fast fresh mexican business. i was a franchise or in a franchisee. >> and he ran a law firm as well? >> that as well, yes sir. >> a lot of activities on your plate.
i know you would mention the issue of your nanny and how you've dealt with the payment of back-taxes and the question earlier that she was employed by you for four years or so, is that correct and i believe you also said she worked 40 hours a week. >> roughly. >> a full workweek then. >> yeah. >> how much did she make? >> $400 a week. that was our recollection of the last payment, $400 a week. >> okay but at the same time you employed your nanny you are running a law firm, is that correct? >> no sir. i'm trying to think i transitioned from running the law firm to working in the family's real estate business about the same time. >> you are involved in other business at that time and you have employees at that time. how many hours a week to those employees were? >> they work full-time and sometimes i would be 40 and sometimes i would be more.
>> a work the same amount of time as your nanny. select from time through time you? >> i would imagine i probably did yes sir. >> what i'm failing to see here is what is the difference between your nanny who clearly was working full-time as you mentioned over 40 hours and the employees that work at the law firm or all of these other firms? what was the difference there? >> it's a fair question and in fact i was wrong. i think at the time it was simply a differentiation in my mind he can summon it came to my house and help with the children and the folks who worked at the law firm or worked at the restaurant or worked at the real estate company. >> what is the difference? is the value of the work different? >> no sir. i would never consider a babysitter would fall into that category. i wasn't aware of this and i
recognize and i would have done differently if i had known but i done everything i've known to do to make it right. >> say you didn't consider her a household employee? how would you define a household employee that you would have paid? you are an experienced business person. you are not someone who has never had a deal with an ini. you have to deal with regulations that you want to eliminate. >> the reason we didn't consider her a nanny was for the reasons i mentioned. she was not a nanny who stays over and didn't do any housekeeping or cleaning. she specifically helps with the children and we considered her a babysitter. >> simply taking care of your children is not something you thought was that valuable? >> it was very valuable. the irs clearly does consider a
household employee. >> i would like to look at the work he did the congressman said you were very own fault in the republican study committee. >> ad was active in at the first two terms, yes sir. i was a member of all three but not active the last two years. >> as directory you will be talking about things he believe he should be doing. yakis we nominate you because he wants to hear your advice and the beliefs you have good advice and you will very likely follow as i would expect or you would not have taken this job and hopefully will be able to convince him. i'll would like to look at the budget you voted for because the american people should have an understanding as you are looking at how we deal with the fiscal situation in the country as to what the cuts really mean. i think you may have mentioned this in a previous hearing but you wrote it in the house --
voted in the house to raise the social security for retirement age for 70 so you believe it should be 70 years old as the retirement age? >> i do. i've have had a chance to talk with this -- i have had a chance to talk about this. >> 70 is where you would like to see it as a retirement age? >> given the fact that people live longer i don't think that's inappropriate. i think my children would have enough time to adjust. i wouldn't ever think to ask somebody who is 65 now. i have 17-year-old triplets and a party told them i don't expect them to retire at 67 they should make plans now. >> by looking at the legislation those who are age 60 in under what now have to move up to 70? if you are 60 years old or under you'd have to plan to wait until 70 for full retirement? >> we have done it a couple of times and i apologize they may
have changed slightly from year-to-year but one of the proposals was that if you are 59 years old instead of retiring at 67 you might retire at 57 and two months. >> same for medicare the eligibility would be 67. that is what you'll be it by senate president? >> this is medicare now, i apologize. >> you asked why voted for. when i asa present my intention is if you all give me a chance to do so is to lay out a list of options. mr. president if you want to balance a budget of the next several years this is what you have to do and if you want to balance it in existing years this is what you would have to do. my job as omb is giving the present as many viable options as possible. i'm sorry i thought you asked me about how i had voted. the rules are different. >> i assume and you vote for something it's something you believe should be the law of the land. you would in fact how your constituents this is how i voted
it isn't like i did this just for the heck of it and i've a variety of other ideas. >> absolutely i voted for those things and get the seal of approval that goes for a vote but when you are in a policymaking of icing position you get a chance to have more options are -- you know sometimes we don't get to choose what we vote for. we can voted up or voted down by a time becomes the floor all of that work is hard to happen. i'm looking forward to working early in the process to lay out the options for the president. >> thank you. >> just to reinforce over the next 30 years social security will pay out $14 trillion than the payable tax and congressman he testified you do not think when the county convention trust fund the government bonds being brought to the treasury for reimbursement. when that county convention wants out according to the law
social charity benefits will read the reduced by 21 if we do nothing. in terms of voting i would say courageous vote because you are getting attacked for trying to solve these problems. addressing that reality the 14 trillion dollars shortfall over the next 30 or so hopefully you don't have a 22% cut in benefits somewhere in the 20 to 30 timeframe. >> we have to do something. >> senator daines. >> thank you mr. chairman. i want to congratulate you on your nomination. it was hard to server the an nsa's house as well and i share senate for lankford promised comments. your wife pamela and chipless. james is here as well. i'm the father of four children. sometimes in a job with the site of the forest for the trees in a way and you said in the first question on your questionnaire
to the president-elect give you specific reason why he nominated you to be the next rector of the office of management and budget new has one president-elect trump announce my nomination he noted he stopped by my office and you will see that clock. every montana and that was in my office sees that. i think what senator johnson pointed out earlier in this chart shows was going to happen with our debt and we are going to add 10 trillion dollars to our debt over the course of the next 10 years and in the 10 years following that we will add another $28 trillion. that is $60 trillion all in between now and the year 2035 of debt. that is staggering when we think about it. senator paul mentioned and in fact i met admiral mullen's son this weekend.
he did say the most significant threat to our nation the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and i went back and cool there. he tripled down in the statement the most significant threat to our national security is their debts coming from the former chairman of the joints chiefs of staff. we spoke in my office congressman in great detail and i know you know the importance of balancing a budget but unlike hard-working families in this country congress did not require require -- is not required to pass a balanced budget. my home state of montana i did not serve in ... -- legislature. when i'm in the private sector i had to not only balance the revenues needed to exceed expenses. that's called prophet but in my state of montana the constitution requires the state balance the budget. year after year in washington d.c. we continue to leverage the future of our children james's
future in your triplets future with an unsustainable fiscal pattern and there will be a day when the piper is going to have to be paid. that's why for the third congress in a row i've been in introducing a simple bill, it simply states this bit of members of congress can't pass a balanced budget than they should not get paid. when you put the pain back on the members of congress and is the way it works when you are in business and the way it works in the real world. it doesn't work that way appear. now we spoke about my bill and i would referred to committee in fact. do you support my bill? >> i do. thank you for the question i want to make one thing perfectly clear. if confirmed i will no longer be a voting member of the legislature so if i may couch it in different terms which is that if your bill were to become law and it comes down to olympia zoll pills do they go before omb for review i would give the president the unqualified
recommendation. and you will be presented the budget to the hill once you are confirmed. what are your views in ensuring that budget balances over tenure. max? >> i hope if i am confirmed is to get to work quickly because you need your budget by the middle of separate into february and that deadline sometimes moves during a transition period. what i hope to fail to do is go to the present with a range of options and say mr. president here is what balances in the year and here's what balances in 80 and here's what balances and 16 and explain what it would take to accomplish that and what it would mean to choose one over another. you and i both work hard to make sure in the past budgets that are parties of presented would
be balance in 10 years and i tend to maintain that attitude if i get a chance to advise the president on that issue. >> i think you also have a great opportunity to help ring clarity to this. up here where oftentimes drowning in data. i think you bring much-needed guidance to that organization. cimagine congressman i did spend 28 years in the private sector before coming to the hill. about the last 12 years were in a cloud computing company which was eventually acquired by oracle. in 28 years i was in the private sector and my own personal information had been compromised because seidman hackford wasn't until i became a federal employee that i received a letter from opm. this past october owen be launched cyberdog for agencies can now find the best practice
in cybersecurity and by the way i was the first senator to call for the resignation of the director of omb with over 20 million americans being compromised when we had our pii in the hands of potential adversaries. i was glad to see the cyber.gov site come up, long-overdue web site meant to guard taxes like we saw at opm. tell me that you are going to continue to strengthen these efforts and protect american cybersecurity? >> i hope to be able to do just that. senator we saw something similar to the opm. we did the hearing on the leaks that are out there and one of the things we have learned is the defense department does a pretty good job defending against cyber attack some that's in large part because of the culture that exists. we know they are under attack all the time but for some reason that culture does extend to the
other non-defense agencies. they really should worry us because there is a great deal of information about you, me and our children at the department of education, at the internal revenue system. there is real information out there that we need to protect. you can get mike commitment to improve in those areas. >> i think you'll have a great opportunity when confirmed to not only change the outcome of the results but also change the culture and i look forward to working with you in doing so. >> i realized i mispronounce your name. i will do better next time. >> you said opm instead of omb. we all get -- senator hassan. >> thank you mr. chair and
businesses were impacted when people don't have their page to include in -- in gauging consumer activity so in light of your earlier comment dilated here already about the shutdown being good policy, adjust to understand when people live through it never hurts our economy and a hurdle lot of people and it compromises my stay with the national guard said you don't think it was the policy? >> end to hear those criticisms i don't believe shutdown is a strategy.
it was the result not being able to agree for the shutdown. for the bill that did not pass. and not to use that as a tool. >> it is not only dead in effective tool at hertz people and our job is not to refer to as unfortunate but the impact and importance of medicaid that my state and others are facing. the drug overdose death killing more than 50,000 per year more than other causes of death such as a car crash
and as well as the business community thousands are getting coverage and experts have said it is a critical tool to address the epidemic. and now under attack the administration talks about repealing the affordable care act and that would likely result 2030% cut of medicaid funding switch has raised concern for republican as well as democratic as those who are speaking out against the block grants. he has supported those medicaid cuts in the past so it is medicaid response will
for the crisis or from substance use disorders quick. >> and if the rule sets out of policy. and then to implement that with the federal agencies involved to meet the president's policy. and i defend those votes. i see my role teaching to a wider presidential policy. >> got laski you to consider me have medicaid expansion in place in my state it has
helped us begin to build that infrastructure that we need even if you replace it with something else. and i wanted to touch on one other area that perhaps at odds with club pastor''. -- with the past about. talking about planned parenthood who the goal is to assess the agency programs and procedures. of to indicate the record and a biased like the title 10 family planning program imprinted health services nationwide. and i believe if we award grants to organizations to
provide those services they should be awarded based on the ability to serve patients not based on the political heat motivated agenda. do you agree? >> a do agree it should be on to serve patients but the president pass said, during the campaign except when it comes to abortion. in for the of fully qualified. >> with those qualified health center savings previews planned parenthood don't have geographical
proximity. one of the centers there a couple of weeks ago most of what they do for women who cannot get care other bias because they said the care was so superb and planned parenthood also takes care of women during their pregnancy of women who want to continue. it is an important resource and cost-effective and then we can make those stated driven decisions with those providers nationwide. and i find it ironic that
mantra on the affordable cat -- affordable care act is if you like your doctor you can keep it except if employed by planned parenthood. eric is hypocrisy to that statement. one of the things to examine on social security mitt pled not require to basically access that oil-rich arab worker led now have to work until they are 70. that is hard work. i can tell you that with lots of problems with health care and maintaining the yet my husband who is a physician is not a mouse to
sacrifice he can clearly work and tell he is 70 i am not sure i understand how that philosophy could be consistent with the president who has spoken to the oil-rich a worker to say we year on your team we are on your side. with everybody here getting a tax break if they reach the catholic at solving the problem we recognize you all took a pledge is that a good public policy? we have to solve the of problem but we have to be intellectually honest so in
response to senator retain discussion with mccain we will brush up on the defense side to share an opinion that it is real money but let's examine on the domestic side non defense domestic. where are you cutting because programs are critically important to those two did infix housing without a flood program. we have to be really careful how we do this and respond to the needs of the american people so right off the bat
bat, where would reduce the opportunity to cut domestic spending quite. >> i have read some of the things you have put i would not be involved. for what those proposals are. the rules are i am supposed to be excluded. >> i am concerned. take a look at medicaid funding if we stop research on alzheimer's and parkinson's you think you have a funding problem right now? let's not be so quick to criticize the domestic programs because those are investments to save the
budget but don't have a lot of time. let's get to the ex-im bank but i do not look understand for the life tiffany those who write things like crony capitalism with every the opposition we have billions of dollars of financing in the pipeline right now that could mean american jobs in your own state we have lost thousands of jobs in south carolina. this should be a no-brainer so explain your opposition. >> you are asking what i did if the president said what do you think of the ex-im bank i would lay out the
impact on the of market over domestic producers if we are both in the business and she exports hers and i do not beat compete domestically she has advantages she could use to compete against me to put those domestic producers that risk to a larger point is there a better way to do that? into talk to the president that came out of a bipartisan group one of the things i rallied support was lender of last resort. >> i am curious because i was heavily involved in the
reauthorization and i am very concerned what is happening with export finance. i could talk to them president elect trump who have varying opinions but what to extend the opportunity is puerto rico in discussions that there is a real opportunity to have sooner rather than later with the process to provide a real opportunity cost benefit analysis. the last point is carried interest. the same raid worker pays a
higher percentage of tax of somebody born into a family. there is some problems with that. so just consider the other side to eliminate to the inequities of the working people of this country. your about to join the ranks of the omb. >> sni sings about you. >> it is also the worst job in washington because you are in the position to tell cabinet members with their grand ideas and we have a budget we have to keep this under control.
with 1.$4 trillion per year we are looking at another $8 trillion on top of that. is a tough job i wish you luck but we have a great opportunity and we did a permit bill together making a difference that is streamline putting it into the highway bill with one agency in charge that anybody can go online
reducing the statutes of limitations her also that omb was not wild about this council and we have been concerned that the administration was not moving quickly enough and to work with us on that to ensure that we find that strong executive director to ensure that it is better spent. >> i can concur that we can do that. >> with regard to regulation as senators are interested
in this bill over the past six years the first major reform with the administrative procedure act it basically says cost benefit analysis test to be more rigorous to go through a much more transparent progress with a separate hearing and also do you agree agency should reduce that best available data when righty in the rules quite. >> absolutely iowa surprise they were not already required to do that. >> also that codifies the famous executive order that president reagan issued so
it puts into statute a cost benefit just like those executive branch agencies? >> that isn't the of legislation look forward to working with you on a number of items assuming working with my colleagues it has passed the house before that frankly you had a partisan atmosphere with bills that were not bipartisan. talk about the omb focusing on the management function to reduce cost that something you have talked
about. we took a full review of the effectiveness and it took a lot of time not everybody loved it. some thought it was too consuming but the rating tool helped to dig more deeply into every program. also osama where increased others were eliminated altogether. have you consider that initiative? >> talk about the importance of adding that a dead tuesday analysis. hugh cannot manage exclusively it is difficult to manage at all.
to do something similar. >> we will love to work with you on that there is some what we shared use as your quantitative data because those priorities are difficult. >> it is hard to measure without a yardstick cutting taxes while important creates of budgetary challenge to know the specifics that the situation is getting worse, not better they also tell us a security is projected spending over the next decade when a depressant to that increase is projected over the next
several decades that is where we see the baby increase without some sort of reform but they have to be reformed as you know, we look at the social security trust fund that would lead be devastating to millions of seniors does that remain a priority quick. >> i plan to make that a priority we have had a chance to talk with the ramifications if we don't do anything here is what happens that the trust fund will go to zero up if you
don't do anything 11 years from now across the board cut it to make improvements not only to make sure they're there for the next generation what you laid out . i suspect to be having reagan their conversations with of president park of it is ultimately up to the president but it is my job to understand that evil eye and fiscal ramifications. >> congressmen mulvaney we have talked and i told you in the budget committee hearing it is so hard to get information at of the government so certainly in
terms of this committee these are sources of good information that yet we don't implement to the full extent those agencies implement 41 percent of those recommendations saving $6 billion with the projection of another $69 billion. senator grassley and i asked the of to report and it was over 50,000 of the cost savings. what are your thoughts to utilize information or but pressure on these agencies to say more than $100 billion greg.
>> one of the things that jump out is the return is like 14 / one that is a pretty good return. the of those positions to set on the council we deal with this then negative house as well and they are abusing the inspector general but the concept to have this person and that agencies to give as good information we cannot tell you that most of the day negative that be have are driven by inspectors general we don't have the ability to
do the oversight that we want to do their job to get information to make good decisions and an accord to making that a priority is frustrating when inspectors general are ignored from the previous hearing with the inspector general has no authority at all and that is news to me so i look forward to reinvigorating the inspector general's office and with that critical function to make them more accountable and more efficient. >> from my standpoint it is
the difference of the dynamic and a status quo coming back to the benefit of growth if we don't take into account to decrease taxes to introduce more revenue, give us your thoughts? >> that the thought did dennis play a process to the short answer is we live in a dynamic world. with of bias into a static model it is difficult to measure future economic growth if you have that $16 trillion economy and double your taxes you will take a in for. those are the of misleading results that model gives it
is very difficult the key at $18 trillion. but to complete the ignore macro economic feedback i look forward to bring reforms to that area. >> one area to go back to office of management and budget you did not vote for the shutdown but to explain that in greater detail. that is a better representation of what you are doing. we never shutdown of full government just a relatively small portion. talk about exactly what have been. >> going back in time with obamacare coming in bit one negative bits and pieces the president issued waivers and
delays to corporations also the word given and special privileges that was violating principles of people protection under the law. that should affect businesses across the nation the same. we decided to try to make a point with a one-year delay of the individual mandate that is what we bogged down over the us senate did not because it is real with
impacts is in your state and my state why we passed a series of smaller bills like funding planned parenthood believes it cannot. also tried to drive that discussion of equal protection and fairness. >> by the way the way the process should work if you try to do that to take it up in the senate. >> i hope to have an ad opportunity to drive home to both parties of that process i think we need to do what we can to encourage those to get back to the properly function process.
>> this is equal opportunity have heard for years the democrats have not done a budget that the republicans take over in what happens? so the partisan back and forth sometimes it is hard especially around the subject of food is failing with the regular order because from where i stand democrats have been guilty the so have republicans i know how we get that fixed. so the hiring freeze do have any idiot what percentage of the workforce is contractors quick. >> i do not know. it is more than you think the department of energy is primarily contractors. there is not that many employees.
what is so frustrating people believe this government frankly a during the bush said ministrations did a pretty good job to limit the growth so what happened they blew up contrasting total homeland's security or department of defense i cannot tell you how many times i have passed giant agencies how many of your workforce in is contractors? >> i don't know. there was no freeze. >> i am not familiar with the freeze imposed just today but i can look into that. >> the wisconsin analysis the doors needs to swing both ways. of the private workers compared it has not saved us the time that has driven up
costs. so on the backs of federal employees do know what will happen to the virginia positions? they will hire contractors. it is not like we stop the hiring of workers would implore to explain to the president may be freeze contractor's first because settled think we have had that oversight like employees. >> we had a chance to discuss this indicted reid. the response that i gave that with the broad brush ran not be the most effective way to dry that discussion that is the economic consideration by a greed there may be circumstances that it is
better for the taxpayer to use t20 and double the that discussion. >> if the weekend work together. i am worried about data coming out of your shop is awkward and uncomfortable but it is important to put on the record i have been astounded what has occurred. sending the press secretary out not old the photographic evidence to show that was not true the advisers goes on television to say alt fax and then to be denied that of popular vote but there was not one iota of evidence to back up the claim.
i get campaign and campaign promises if the president asks not to issue issue real data or altered data according to his nate blue negative narrative flooded your reaction''. >> the credibility i bring to this job but i will be very firm real numbers. my job is to tell you the truth. >> what if he tells you to say something? >> i don't think he would tell a lie. >> i beg your pardon he told john spicer to say things that were not true. >> i am not privy to those conversations i cannot comment on that to. >> okay. you get my point and you will not do what. >> by value is my
credibility with numbers. fein have been one of of biggest critics i don't plan on exposing myself. >> a thing that is great ip appreciate that answer on of record. >> he is not divesting in his made very clear he is going back to his businesses win he leaves office so in the meantime that will directly impact how much money he has. he even said of igo back to my businesses if my son is not done a good job bible fired him. between now and when he leaves office it will impact is fiscal bottom line so that means every regulation
that is enacted could have an impact on the finances of the president of the united states when did you analyze those with the president will make money? >> i am not familiar. >> but let's assume he has licensing deals and hotels and loved of employees we know what these are and they are impacted by rule changes >> i am not sure how i can do that might job is to explain the general impact but i look at the macro economic implications.
>> the duty the american people have to make money off the changes of the regulations. >> i believe in transparency but not how to conduct himself. >> would lead you urge to receive more transparent? >> i am not sure if that is the of role but to say that is how this will affect the economy. until it is the proper role of the director to do more than that. >> this is completely and chartered territory where a government run by a businessman who has not divested could enrich itself you understand that has not occurred before? to make it has been a long time.
>> tell me who that was. >> i can. i don't remember. >> before i turn over, for accuracy, republicans took over control of the senate be did pass a budget 2015 uh budget deal set the topline figure. >> i am talking about last year. >> we did pass a budget agreement for by believe senator your of the appropriations committee be passed all 12 bills and were blocked from bringing those onto the floor in the senate >> we could go back and forth repass all the appropriations bills you block did i remember the day at happened there was no budget last year to be accurate. >> senator? >> congress banned thanks
for being here and welcome to the senate. i do we get to on top? to have the of rule if confirmed with that big of a tory burden and the second area had been get the debt and deficit down and under control? obviously far he familiar with the p3 projects with the partnerships into cut into the backlog of those leveraged resources. so we can start with the regulatory burden d using that one size fits all or should we have flexibility
for what goes on? because there is differences in those laboratories of democracy. >> and looking for ideas to be creative about medicaid there may be ideas out there how to use in carolinas and the dakotas in a different way that is so is something we should explore. of but to get on top of that burden regarding the retroactive analysis of regulations for we have not clear that off the books. thank and, with the system
with best of intentions and at the end of the pipeline the regulation that comes out that doesn't who accomplish and with that certainty to help encourage and empower investment? >> absolutely that goes to the second point to get the debt under control, a tb perfectly e candid perfect sizes to grow the economy. >> moving from 2% or 3% growth in terms of the size
of the of by a it is better from a balanced budget perspective of $32 trillion. >> talk about your role of savings and reform to grow the economy? how do you go about that? >> that is one of the things sign of the most excited about where so many of us the number one complaint is this is how regulation is crushing me provide get that more than questions about taxes. they have finally gotten to the point maybe the bird is out of control.
you have a president for the first time for regulatory reform with various agency heads that the senate has confirmed putting efficiencies it is a priority going back to that discussion with general mattis to look at the top line defense needs we can look forward to being his partner to reach critical mass to reform the regulatory process. >> don't you have a reputation speaking truth to power and be more than willing to say exactly what you think and be transparent about it quite.
>> that is the nicest way anybody has described that laugh laugh. >> talk about p. three projects they have a huge backlog the we have an opportunity for states and localities with that infrastructure project to reduce the cost share to build infrastructure badly but that is a priority for us. >> at only did they make it a prior 30 but to seek to hire people with a great deal about this to figure out new and creative ways
and under the theory speaking truth to power but to make sure to partner with private industry to do so that is entirely transparent to well-connected corporations with fewer relationships. >> transparency is very important in at once to move forward on infrastructure that is a key role to do that right calf for to have the big role to play for of looking at these innovative ways to tell these folks would support the infrastructure program i and
interested how that would be paid for but i will give up of a transition team and some credit including the private public perdition up but i think it all those together. >> i a totally agree it is almost universal to reduce of reagan the tory burden only 75 percent reduction. >> thanks for putting up with of long stretch of questions i just want to follow-up quickly and ask
one question there is a lot of discussion about performing medicaid and flexibility should you be confirmed i would be willing to work with you there has been a lot of flexibility that allows us to integrate behavioral health and primary care in ways that are promising you might want to learn from governors that they are willing to be quite flexible. >> the question what to araskog and climate change it is my vendors standing i was not there but you're
told the climate is changing but it is of unsettled quick >> federal think that is verbatim. >> i am little concern to first of all, omb director does have a significant role to play you need to know the science to run the process effectively into the good exchange about senator portman american association of investment of science says the site is as clear global climate change caused by human activity is occurring now with a growing threat to society and
observed a repressive years to bear can be rolla chill call society says it is clear that the dominant cost of the rapid change of the half century is human induced atmospheric greenhouse gases the panel says it is unequivocal so i would like to understand what is about this science with the nonscientific background in the area of expertise. >> everytime i have a conversation and try to figure out that the way we
do that is to recognize the fact omb with regulation regarding discussion and then my role as omb director it is my job to look at what you've laid out and those who have the other sides of that opinion to balance the cost of regulation to bear in mind those were some of those regressive cost. it is a complex stance that they have to do. i do bring a certain bias but my job is to take information to bring the very best summary that i can.
>> angela get peer reviews science and with those industry based attends and with the richer a burden and when you talk about when we have polluted air more kids get asthma than was specially of low income if we repealed the affordable care act without access to primary care that costs money in different ways. to understand the value and costing low income families
so to think of the balance in terms of regulation and how hard to regulate the impact that it can have. there is an impact on families and natural resources i can tell you the maple sugar to feel the impact of climate change the predictions about uh human behavior and maybe we should start listening and also with us the budget hearings
and to subject yourself to this process for your willingness to sacrifice your time we appreciated of nominee will provide responses to questions of the committee without objection it will be a part of the of record on file with public kicked - - inspection until be dead that background check and you will agree to answer any questions that would arise from that to let the record remain open and threw 5:00 p.m. tomorrow we are adjourned. [inaudible conversations]
>> every weekend booktv crazy 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors. here is what's coming up this weekend. saturday and eight at 830 eastern peter hayes academic committee chair the us holocaust memorial museum and author of why explaining the holocaust. >> so why were the jews killed? because a long-standing tradition of hatred activated under particular political circumstances. fermented by a regime that was capable of whipping up the population to participate in it. then, took the world into a
region where there were hundreds of thousands of people defined as enemies. and it resolved and the conditions of wartime. to wipe these people out. >> at 10:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards, alfred university professor everest ãblessed the philosophy behind frugal living. why less is more, more or less. he is viewed by michelle singletary "washington post" syndicated columnist. >> the crucial thing isn't to never spend money in any kind of luxury at all. the crucial thing is to be self-aware about what it is you really, what is really worth spending on. what is something where you just are wasting money or you are just spending it because people tell you this is the kind of thing you want to be doing the kind of thing you ought to be buying. >> said that 7:30 p.m. eastern georgetown university professor michael eric dyson author of
peers we cannot stop. instruments white america looks of the country's racial divide. >> and so what we want is a cessation of the velocity of stereotype and a granting to us of the same humanity that you grant each other. >> go to booktv.org for the complete weekend schedule. >> coming up on c-span2, kevin brady on changes to tax policy. any discussion on russian cyber hacking and the us elections. that is followed by a pair of state of the state addresses. first from california governor jerry brown and then the state of the commonwealth address for massachusetts governor charlie baker. now, house ways and means chair kevin brady on tax policy. he spoke at the roundtable event. this is an hour and 10 minutes.