Skip to main content

tv   Today in Washington  CSPAN  May 6, 2010 6:00am-7:00am EDT

6:00 am
>> thank you. >> gentleman, i would like to follow up on the questions about corporate governance and compensation, and corporate culture. one challenge is that the financial crisis, one part of this was the wall street culture. this is how people are paid when it comes to taking on risk, and also, the specific issues. this is striking to me, that we have heard from you and citibank, in the same language, that each of these firms have a very robust risk-management systems. . .
6:01 am
>> the rating reflected a higher rating of government risk. a compensation merits a high level of concern. they further along to note that the top five executives are paid almost as much -- from one bonus while everyone is paid from another.
6:02 am
the four executives that immediately report to the ceo makes almost as much as the ceo. in the fiscal year 2006, the combined income of those top five people was $156 million for the year. in 2006, back to our question about return on equity, there is a performance criteria portfolio that the management uses to determine its compensation. there are nine elements of that. in the 2006 year, the management team only chose to use one that was a return on equity. i am curious as to whether you can comment on whether you feel this is an accurate reflection of your corporate governance. if you could start, mr. molinaro. >> i am not familiar with that report. i cannot speak directly to that. you mentioned that the management had selected return
6:03 am
on equity. that is not the case of the compensation board. that had been the criteria from which the executive manager -- management would receive their compensation. we have firm-wide responsibilities. other people in the organization were paid more specifically on their individual contribution to the firm and their business units' contribution to the firm. we spent a great deal of time making sure everything was properly aligned with shareholders. the way we attempted to institute that was requiring significant stock ownership on the part of all the senior managers, as we talked about earlier. we did what we thought was the appropriate course of action. we tried to run the company in a way that some said that wall
6:04 am
street needs to go back to the old ways of doing things when partners'' money was on blubber we attempted to run our company in that way at all times. and >> any comments from mr. friedman? >> of was not involved in the compensation process. other than having been paid, was not a member of the executive committee. i will echo that last statement that speaking for myself and most other people, we felt it was a partnership. we felt it was our money on blood and we behaved as if it were. >> if i recall collect the, you have in the past been critical of the corporate governance of bear stearns. is that not correct? >> as i said earlier in a moment of passion and anger, i was critical, yes. >> that nature of that critic
6:05 am
ism was what? >> i look for anyone to blame for bear stearns. >> can you explain what your feelings were at that moment of passion? >> i felt the firm should have done more at the time to prevent what happened. >> banks. mr. spector. >> what question is it? >> your comments on whether you think these assessments of corporate governance at bear stearns and the court -- compensation structure and or appropriate. >> i am not familiar with this report. various firms wrote reports and made recommendations on whether or not to vote in support of management on various proposals. one thing that was brought to our shareholders every year was the management compensation plan. it received overwhelming
6:06 am
majority every ton. -- every time. the compensation for the senior executives was based solely on profits. it was only paid at the firm was highly profitable. in addition to that, it was approved, reviewed and approved by the outside directors who form the compensation committee of the board. you referred to there being two compensation pools and want to clarify that. we felt it was essential that the executive committee be reviewed by the board and be approved by the shareholders. the other senior managing directors were also reviewed by the board but primarily the work was done by the management compensation committee of the firm. nevertheless, as a firm, one of our target was that we manage
6:07 am
to firm-wide revenues and took in all the compensation paid to all individuals within the firm. >> mr. molinaro , you said it was based on return from equity. >> the executive pool had a variety of potential metrics that the compensation be tied to. my recollection is that the metric that was used by the compensation committee and the board was returned and equity. >> thank you. on the issue of risk at role -- as it relates to government, you felt the government -- the company had a robust risk management process and i assume that when up to the board level. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> there is a subcommittee of the four that dealt with finance and rest? >> there was a subcommittee --
6:08 am
there was the audit committee that dealt with many issues. there was a risk-management committee that was formed to the beginning of 2007 that dealt with market, credit, and financing risks specifically. >> the recall what was formed? >> my recollection is that we felt partially in dialogue with some of the same organizations that rate corporate governance matters that this was enable the best practice. we chose to adopt that and remove the reported many of these items from the audit committee's already full agenda and moved to a separate committee. >> would it be fair to say that this move was undertaken in order to be viewed favorably by rating agencies and corporate governance advisory organizations? >> i don't recall it being done for that reason. i recall it being what we view to be a best practices and other organizations were to get and it made sense to do the same. >> if i could enter into the
6:09 am
record the minutes of the board and which take place of january 10, 2007 which states that it was undertaken to be viewed favorably by rating agencies and corporate governance advisory organizations. how important was the subcommittee of the board. ? how often did they meet? it was comprised of the top five highest-paid employees of bear stearns. what was the relative importance of those two groups. >? >> i don't know if there were the highest paid their reported in the proxy. the executive committee met weekly and more frequently as needed. the board committees you refer to like the risk-management committee met at least quarterly. >> it would appear that in the document i cited earlier from the corporate leverage that the finance and risk committee met twice in the 2007 year as
6:10 am
compared to the executive committee which met 150 times. that would suggest to me that the executive committee was far more influential in terms of determining risk than the rest committee itself. would that be a fair statement? >> yup'ik is a fair statement to say that the executive committee was the committee that was managing the firm and effectively at that time. we were reporting on governance matters. i don't know how many times those committees and in 2007 but we did have frequent dialogue with the board members. >> thank you. >> thank you. gentlemen, a couple of wrap up items. i want to pick up on something that mr. giorgio said. this is about the extent to which bear stearns had a responsibility and opportunity to manage its own affairs in a
6:11 am
way to maximize its potential survival. throughout this whole during process and again today, if you were to listen to all the testimony, it appears the financial crisis was an immaculate calamity and nobody was responsible. even the other eight big investment banks have enormous leverage, very concentrated bet in areas like subprime and reliance on short-term funding subject to a run, setting up a situation where if market turbulence comes, there would be a problem. i want to make this specific. there seems to be this notion that no one could have seen anything. it was all be on people's control. mr. spector, want to ask you a couple of questions produce said that as a result of the mortgage department bosses excess you're given broader responsibility within bear stearns and became responsible
6:12 am
for fixed-income but continued to be responsible for the continued growth in the mortgage area. let me go at you and ask you what did not use the in terms of the risks that were happening under your watch? in september of 2004, the fbi warns of an epidemic of mortgage fraud which could become the next s&l crisis. in june of 2005, and you talk about robust management, "the economist"maggot scene said that the day of reckoning is closer -- magazine said that the day of reckoning is closer. housing price growth is 11% in 2003, 50% in 2004, 15% in 2005, subprime mortgages are growing like weeds, jim grant estimates that aaa traunches of cdo's
6:13 am
indicate that prices owar to fal 10%, investors fretted aaa- would lose their investment. the amount of mortgage debt doubled. americans borrowed more in mortgages in that six-year. and all 225-year history of this country. as late as 2007, you have a dozen subprime lenders who have suspended business. what did you not see? did you not see the red and yellow warning lights and what did you do, responsible for fixed income, to build a fortress of protection? >> first of all, i want to make a distinction between being in the mortgage securities business and having a bed on
6:14 am
housing prices. -- bet on housing prices. bear stearns was in the business of originating or acquiring loans, secured testing them and selling them in the marketplace. we ran a book that had both long and short positions. we did our best to manage our exposure as more information came out in the marketplace on a continuous basis over the years. we tried to help our clients by giving them the best possible analysis we could about the state of the mortgage market as we understood it. we, as a firm, did reduce our market share and position in the subprime market in 2006 and 2007. we focused more of our origination and trading activity on areas we thought were higher
6:15 am
quality. i believe that through my career through august 5 of 2007, we did a good job of managing the mortgage business. i am not saying that when i left we had anticipated a dramatic fall in mortgage prices. i thought we had managed the business well and the firm was profitable through my departure. the business was in good shape. >> and it worked well. >> yes. >> do you have a concluding comments? >> i have a question based upon those responses. i believe it was from commissioner, the question was
6:16 am
-- could you get purchases for your securities. you entered the two had no problem with treasurys them up we were able to finance treasury's. >> usage you could not go through agencies. >> we had difficulty in that week of march, particularly in the last wednesday and thursday because that was a very fast- moving environment. financing mortgage securities and agency securities and non- agency securities. >> to that of any thing to do with what was happening within the may and freddie mac at that time? >> i don't know the answer to that. >> do you know what was happening in terms of fannie mae and freddie mac? >> i do recall but i was not the ones talking to the client.
6:17 am
i don't know what the reasons were. >> it seems to me that the impending failure of fannie mae and freddie mac would have partnered up with the market of agency-backed as opposed to treasurys. ies. mr. specter, i will make sure a personal screen any questions sent to you and it will not include any thing after august 5, 2007 so it will be relevant to your role. >did you ever contrast your cells with other firms? -- yourselves with other firms? did you ever compare yourself as you were getting into this problem area with others and wonder how they were doing at the same time you were worried
6:18 am
about what was happening to you? did you discuss it with anybody in other firms? was there a familiarity with people in your positions? >> we certainly tried to compare ourselves with the other firms as best we could from the standpoint -- >> and did you feel good about yourself credit to the end? >> we always felt good about the way our balance sheet and business was run. >> mr. chairman, want to conclude on a positive note. i want to thank you for coming before us. one of the interests i had and bear stearns was that it seemed to be a very stable company, there was a lot of promotion from within, so your perspective with covered not just as a company but as individuals that all. of a significant shift from the 1980's and 1990's into the 21st century.
6:19 am
we will have additional questions as we learn more based on what you saw during that period. i want to thank you very much for your participation. >> thank you very much. we will take a short break and we will recommence at two o'clock 15. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> british voters are heading to the polls today to elect a new prime minister. learn about the issues on line at the cspan video library. watch what you want, when you want. you can watch election results this afternoon before 5:00 p.m. eastern on cspan 3. >> now, congressman david obey on the decision to leave the house of representatives after his term is over.
6:20 am
he spoke to reporters on capitol hill for 40 minutes. >> i want to introduce the happiest woman in wisconsin, my wife joan. [applause] i deeply resent that. that is more applause than i usually get. [laughter] next, my son doug. [laughter] my son, craig.
6:21 am
[laughter] doug's wife, kate. [applause] and craig's wife kiersten. [applause] this will be a long statement, longer than the press would like. but after 42 years, i think i have burned it. -- i have earned it. i will have been in public service 48 years, over six and the wisconsin state legislator and almost 42 in the u.s. congress. a surge in the house longer than anybody in wisconsin history. my constituents have been incredibly good to me, as well as god. when i was growing up, i did not think i had -- would have had 1/10 of the opportunities that came to me. i want to use those
6:22 am
opportunities for the most that could be done for the causes i believe in, fairer taxes, economic opportunity, better schools, affordable health research that will help us fight diseases likej]x cancer and diabetes and parkinson's, a better health-safety economic -- cleaner air and preservation of our public parks and places. the people of northern wisconsin have given the privilege of representing them. in dealing with the great issues of our time, ranging from vietnam, to watergate, to the iranian hostage crisis, to the reagan deficits, rencontre, the collapse of communism, two gulf wars, the economic and budget reform of the early 1990's, the government shut down, 9/11, and
6:23 am
the economic meltdown of the past decade. for one ticket as chairman of the foreign operations subcommittee i had the privilege of helping to lead the responsibilities to our fellow human beings throughout the globe. they share the planet with us but do not share our good fortune. during that time, we consistently moved money away from support of military dictators through the expansion of long-term development activities and for programs like unicef contributed to saving millions of children's lives. i am especially proud of the role i played in resisting american colonialism in central america, working with people like james baker and others to end to the contra war in mecca about what. probably the most historic role that subcommittee played was a bi-partisan work we did with the
6:24 am
george h. bush administration and officials like the secretary of state to help eastern european countries transition from communist to western democracies after the fall of the berlin wall and the collapse of the soviet union. although it happened a long time ago, i am especially proud of the losing fight that i help wage with congressman henry reuss and others to prevent the passage of the reagan budget which at the time of devastating inflation, cut taxes at the same time the defense budget was being doubled, all paid for with borrowed money, more than tripling the long-term budget picture. the budget at the time was progressive alternative to the budget of both parties would spend less, borrowed less, and produced smaller deficits than either the democratic or
6:25 am
republican-based bills. at the time, our actions were hugely unpopular, about 70% of the voters in my district at the time supported the reagan budget. time has proven us right. today, i am similarly proud that i was the principal author of the much maligned but absolutely essential economic recovery act of 2009 which, in the midst of the deepest and most dangerous economic catastrophe and 70 years, has prompted desperately needed purchasing power into the economy to reduce the number of families whose breadwinner is were thrown out of work. what was passed last year, the american economy was losing 700,000 jobs per month. last month by contrast, the economy added 162,000 jobs, the largest increase in three years.
6:26 am
that could not happen without recovery act. my only apology is that it should have been larger but it was the most the system would bear at the time. i am especially pleased to have had the privilege of presiding over the house when it passed the historic health insurance reform legislation. about a month ago. i have been waiting for that moment for 41 years. the arrival made all the frustrations of public life worth it. during my congressional service, i have also tried to do what i could to keep us out of misguided wars and i fought to reform political institutions, especially to congress, to improve the quality of their work and strengthen public confidence in them despite the misguided and disastrously destructive decisions of the u.s. supreme court that put the system of american elections on the auction block, i have worked
6:27 am
to limit the influence of private money and elections that by definition should be public events. along the way, i have made a difference for the district and state represent and for the country. there is a time tuesday and a time to go and this is my time to go. frankly, i hate to do it. there is so much that needs to be done even more frankly, i am bone-tired. when i first put my name on the ballot for the state assembly in 1962, i was 23 years old now, 48 years later, i will soon be 72. when i went to congress in 1969, i was the youngest member of the house of representatives. as you could tell by looking at me, i am not anymore. since that first day in 1962, i have gone through 25 elections and engaged in countless battles.
6:28 am
i am ready to turn the page and frankly, i think my district is ready for somebody new to make a fresh start not somebody who poses as a fresh face but in reality would take us back to the good old days of bush tax cuts for the rich and misguided iraq war. not someone who's idea of a fresh idea is to say, "let the market to do with." which translated means, "let the corporate elite, big banks and big shots of wall street and insurance company ceo's do anything they damn well please without regulation to protect investors and consumers." there is nothing fresh about that. what the district in the country deserves is for someone to step up who can be counted on to put working people first, someone who will bring fresh eyes and fresh energy to the battle,
6:29 am
someone who will not use salac words and actors' ability to hide the fact that he is willing to god and privatize social security and medicare and abandon working people to the arbitrary power of america's corporate and economic elite. when i first ran for congress, wanted to do three things -- the first was to help make our economic system more fair for the poor and for the middle- class working families of this country. unfortunately, a powerful economic and political forces have largely frustrated that effort. over the last 30 years, we have seen the largest transfer of income topped the income scale. in the history of the country. for six straight years under george w. bush, or 90% of all the income growth in the country went into the pockets of the wealthiest 10%. the other 90% of the population, the regular people of this
6:30 am
country got table scraps. i deeply regret not being able to do more to turn that around. that and the inability of the political system to achieve the public financing of campaigns remain the biggest disappointments of my public life. my second goal was to expand support for education in order to expand opportunity for every american. that has been a hard slog but especially in the last three years, we have been able to move large amounts of federal resources to do just that. this year will greatly enhance federal support for student aid. that is not enough but it has made big difference. my third goal was to help move the country into the ranks of civilized nations by making it possible for almost every american to receive quality health care without begging. for years frankly, i despaired
6:31 am
of ever getting that done. last month, as i said, i add a great privilege of presiding over the house of representatives as a filing completed action on historic health insurance reform legislation. over the past few years, whenever a member of the press ask me if i was contemplating retirement, i would respond by saying that i did not want to leave congress until we passed health care reform. now it has. i can leave with the knowledge that thanks to speaker pelosi and president obama and so many others, we got the job done. i have not done all the big things i want to do when i started out, but i have done all the big things i am likely to do. frankly, i had considered retiring after the 2000 election. i became so angered by the policies of the bush administration that i decided to stick around as long as they were here.
6:32 am
in 2002, after a year long struggle which devoured by time and the time of my colleague, i publicly stated that i did not want to be around for another one. yet, that is exactly what i would face if i returned to congress next year. i simply don't want to do that. many years ago, in an interview with rich cohen, i told him that the way i looked at public service, i believe the job of a good politician was to be used up fighting on behalf of causes you believed in and when you are used up, to step aside and let somebody else carry on the battle. today folks, i feel used up. in the last month, two colleagues have died. both were 76 and for me that is
6:33 am
only four years away. at the end of this term, i will have served in the house longer than all but a teen of the 10,637 men and women who have ever served here. the wear and tear, believe you me, is beginning to take its toll. given that fact, i have to ask myself how want to spend the time i have left frankly, i don't know what i will do next. all i do know is that there has to be more to life than explaining the ridiculous accountability-destroying rules of the united states senate [laughter] to confused and angry and frustrated constituents. [laughter] i absolutely believe that after the economy returns to a decent level of growth, we must attack our long-term budget deficit.
6:34 am
perhaps i expect too much. in addition to an attack on the federal budget deficit, i also want to see an equal determination to attack the family security deficit, the family income deficit, and the opportunity deficit which also play the american people i am frankly weary. all have to beg a daily basis that both parties recognize that we do no favor to the country if we neglect to make the long term investments in education, science, health, and energy that are necessary to modernize our economy. at the same time we decline the revenue needed to pay for those crucial investments. i do not want to be in a position as chairman of the appropriations committee of producing and defending the lowest common denominator legislation that is inadequate to the task and given the mood
6:35 am
of the country that is likely what i would have to do if i stayed. i am also frankly increasingly wary of having to deal with the press which it has become increasingly focused on trivia driven at least in part by the financial collapse of the news industry and the need with the 24-hour news cycle to fill the airwaves with hot air. i say that regretfully because i regard what is happening to the news profession as nothing short of a national catastrophe which imany quality journalists as much as it pains me. both our professions -- both our professions have been battled in recent years and the nation is the loser for it. let me close by thanking some people. first, let me thank my wife john who has put up with so much and endured so much that i might follow my dream of public service. when she agreed to marry me, she
6:36 am
thought she was getting a college teacher. instead, she got stuck with the charms of political life. evergood i did i could never have done without her. let me thank my two sons and their spouses who have also shared the burden of public service. craig has spent his adult life trying to bring health care to people who needed it and trying to protect people in the workplace and protect our public lands by abuse by special interests and their mouthpieces of government and congress itself. doug has spent his life as a working journalist, 1st covering capitol hill and then in forming his readers about the realities of the politics of environmental protection and the interaction between scientists -- science and politics on global warming. let me thank all of those who
6:37 am
worked with me as step through the years. those who worked in my district office in wisconsin, in my personal office in washington, on the joint economic committee, and then my appropriations committee. durability and decency and fierce loyalty to me are gratefully appreciated. you have not been just my counselors but my protectors and my understanding friends. let me thank those special friends to help me get through 25 elections and everything that has happened in between. you know who you are. by giving me your political and emotional support you sustained me through the pressures and ups and downs of political and public life and i will not forget it. i hope you feel your support helped make possible what evergood i have done through the years. i am especially grateful to the literally dozens of calls that started coming into my office this morning when people learned
6:38 am
that i was doing what i'm doing. i am especially grateful that my predecessor called and talked for a good while. both of us are products of the kind of politics in which you may fight like the devil between nine and five and go out and have a drink and be friends afterwards. i wish to god that that era was not already so far from the practical practices of today. let me also thank bob huber and others for teaching me how to be a legislator in madison and in wisconsin. let me express a special thanks to speaker nancy pelosi whose heart, got, and saul have provided the steel necessary to accomplish some extraordinary things.
6:39 am
let me also thank so many of my congressional colleagues past and present who have worked shoulder to shoulder with me in pursuit of so many causes and to have on occasion for given me for my excess of passion. it has been said that in light of our strength can also be our weakness as i have demonstrated on more than one occasion. let me profoundly thank everyone who has ever cast a vote for me for the privilege of representing you in madison in washington all these years. i want to say a special thanks to the staff because we have on the table this packet which lays out some of the things we have been able to do for my district through the years. the fact is that it was the staff that largely made that possible and i appreciate their
6:40 am
efforts profoundly. i hope that in what ever years i have remaining i will still find occasion to move the middle forward but for me, now after 48 years, it is time to pass the torch. i had planned to end this statement by doing a rendition of "god bless america" on my harmonica but given the unanimous request of the press, i have decided to forgo that. [laughter] and instead take a few of their questions. [applause]
6:41 am
[applause] [applause] >> the regular remarks. >> -- thank you very much. >> [unintelligible] >> let me put it this way -- i have won 25 elections. does anybody think i don't know how to win another one or for that matter as anybody ever seen a walk away from the fight in my life?
6:42 am
the fact is, there's not a chance of a snowball in haides of that congressional district who is a poor imitation of george policies policies on a bad day. -- george bush's policies on a bad day. [applause] i have been thinking of retiring for a good long time. if george bush -- if i had not had a meeting in the white house that i had with george bush when we discussed, and security matters after 9/11, if i had not experienced that meeting and experience the absolute stubbornness of the bush administration on that occasion, i would have left this place long ago. i never dreamed -- when i got elected, i thought i was a one- termer wonder. i did not think i would get
6:43 am
reelected i could not dream of being lucky enough to spend 25 years here much less almost over 40. the fact is, i am just plain tired there have been very few people in american history who have served in this institution longer than i have. i think i need a change. my family needs me to have that change. i simply don't want to have to go through another reapportionment cycle. unless you have been for them, you don't know how time- consuming bay are and how frustrating they are and i have already given you my expression of love and affection for the procedures of the united states senate. i just don't have to deal with that stuff anymore. it is just that simple.
6:44 am
>> [unintelligible] >> after 9/11, bil young andñi i were frozen out of our offices because of the anthrax scare. bill and i and our staff talked and we decided we would go around to every security agency in town and try to find out exactly what they thought they needed to respond to 9/11. we did that. bill has been the chairman of the committee and we have always been good friends. bill was the chairman of the committee and i was the ranking democrat. we went around and did just that. we put together a package of additions to the budget we thought we needed for online security. -- for homeland security. we expected to go down to the white house and talk about the.
6:45 am
m. we looked at dulles lest and we told the staff to cut in halves of the road -- we look at the list and we told the staff to cut in half and we went to the white house and the president walked in. he said he understands somebody wants to spend more money than we asked for. the budget director tells me that we have less for more than enough money. he said one of us to understand that if you add $1 to my budget, i will veto the bill. that was virtually what he said. robert byrd expressed to him what he thought about that approach. [laughter] and so did ted stevens. he said, "mr. president, we're not here for argument, we did the work and we are looking for
6:46 am
ways to improve this situation. we already agree there's anything on the list you don't like, we will drop the." bush would not budge. finally, when it came to me, i said, "mr. president, i have been coming down here for almost 30 years for this is the first time i have been told that the president's mine was closed before the subject was even open. i will ask you some questions about things we have been briefed on and i want to know what you have been told and if you have been told about them because i know what we have been told and it scared the hell out of may." e." we went through those items and it was apparent to me that even though we have bipartisan agreement on a number of these things that the president was not interested in listening to anybody else's ideas. at that point, i changed my mind
6:47 am
about what i expected from a whole bush and administration. i thought was gonna be a moderate and a bottle administration and i thought the president had a great sense of humor and would be a great guy to work with. he does have a good sense of humor but his attitude that day convinced me that i was going to stick around for awhile because i could see some things happening that i did not like. that is a long story but i have never forgotten that may be great if it had not been for that meeting, i would have been out of here a long time ago. >> can you name someone who might run for your seat? >> we have six democrats in the stables right now. i have talked to all six of them this morning. i think that anyone of them is capable of winning that seat.
6:48 am
if i hadn't thought so, i would not have done this. i had wanted to do this -- i had hoped that the health care bill would be done by september. then i would have been able to make my announcement vanguard as you know, it dragged on forever and larger than that, it seemed. i did not know until last six weeks or so that the baby was tied down. i also wanted to make sure that the economy looks like it was going to be turning around. even if only slowly. i want to make sure those elements were in place before i did what i want to do a long time ago. i love this place. i love this room. i love most of my colleagues. [laughter]
6:49 am
after 48 years, it does get a bit much. i want to do something else for a few years starting with playing a lot more music and i have played in a long time. >> will you play the harmonica force? >>no. [laughter] >>no,no [applause] the harmonica is not a good solo instrument. [laughter] if i had thought to have craig and doug burton their guitars, then i would have played. i will tell you one thing -- i did play at rows of delauro's
6:50 am
party two weeks ago with agoyarrow and i played with a lot of good musicians. i played with willie nelson, with lots of people. i will do a lot more of that than i have been doing in the last few months. >> how much friction did you have with guest [unintelligible] >> don't overate yourself. [laughter] i have a great respect for the press. you have a tough job and the economics of the newspaper industry are just as devastating as the economic situation facing the economy as a whole.
6:51 am
do i find a press irritating? yes that is a natural state of affairs in a democracy. i was absolutely shocked to have one of my sons become a reporter. [laughter] just as i was shocked to have one of my sons marry a minnesota vikings fan. [laughter] there are certain things you can overcome with help and i have gotten help. [laughter] >> [unintelligible] >> everything. i would hope that we would get real financial reform. i would hope that we would recognize that we have had such demands growth of income for the economic elite in this country that we need to turn that around and began to put the average
6:52 am
middle-class people first. i would like to see us begin to develop a tax code that is a helluva lot more fair to working families than the tax code we are operating under today. we have to attack issues like climate change. after all, this is the plot that sustains us all. most of all, we have got to continue to deal with the jobs problem. we cannot allow half the jobs that we saved in the last year plus stimulus package by the aid package for state governments, we can allow have those jobs to be lost this year. -- we can't allow those jobs to be lost this year because of the congress ceasing to recognize the shambles that most state budgets are still in.
6:53 am
i would hope that we would get something like that done. i would hope we would continue to help states deal with their child health problems. there is no lack of things for the congress to do. >> [unintelligible] do you think the democrats will have less employment going forward? >> frankl, the mood of the country seems to be that -- in some sectors of the economy, receives to have won the economic argument after a long debate in this country. in times of economic recession,
6:54 am
i thought we needed to reflate the economy by providing temporary and i emphasize temporary tax cuts and temporary spending increases. people seem to be so focused only on the federal budget deficit which i agree as a long- term obligation for us to deal with but they seem to be so focused on that in the short term that they are recognizing that the more important problem we facing us is the jobs deficit. i am tired of fighting that five. i want somebody else to step in with fresh legs and a pair of boxing gloves. >> you talked about the health care boat. vote.
6:55 am
tells a little bit about health care at the national level. [unintelligible] what is the net effect of health care? >> in this packet, if you take a look of the page labeled public health care and safety, you will notice a lot of items described that we have been able to its abolition the district. -- we been able to establish in the district. i remember establishing a new dental clinic that would serve a three-county area in my district. i went there and met a woman who told me about her problem.
6:56 am
her husband was sick, i think he hadms, he couldn't work and her son had braces on his teeth and he had come on for a long long time. she called everyone of the 34 dentists in that three-county area who took medicaid patients, trying to find one dentist who would take the braces off the kids to eat. she couldn't find one. she finally held the kid down while her husband took the breezes off with a pair of pliers. i ran into another elderly man who told a step of the dental clinic that he had himself a extracted six of his own teeth with a pair of pliers. because he could not get into a dentist. that kind of nonsense just should not happen paren.
6:57 am
we put an emphasis on providing dental care in as many areas as we could. that is what we did with those nasty things called your marks. --earmarks. >> can you talk about who will replace you? >> that is always up to the caucus. norm dixon is the next person in line. he maybe next in line for the full committee and has become chairman of the subcommittee. it only took him 32 years in order to rise to the subcommittee and i think he will do a fine job. is that it? thank you all very much for coming. [applause]
6:58 am
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [general chatter] [general chatter]
6:59 am
>> our public affairs content is available on television, radio, and online and you can also connect with a son twitter, facebook, and youtube and sign up for our scheduled alert e- mails @ c-span.org. >> coming up this hour, the head of the federal deposit insurance corp., sheila bair talks about market regulations.

72 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on