tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN December 11, 2013 8:30am-10:31am EST
agenda. whether it is around immigration reform, investment in infrastructure, our trade agenda. there investment in innovation and our national manufacturing initiative. there is so much that we want to get done and this is, you know, a first step. >> so last question, on this, this assuming this deal gets passed, looks like it is going to, come back in 2014, what will be different about the relations between the two ends of pennsylvania avenue? >> i think that you know we have a lot we want to get done and i think there's a lot of commonality of purpose. i certainly know from during -- i've been in office a little over five months. i've met with over 700 business leaders and i know what they want, they want more certainty from government. and they're quite clear about that that, that's important part
of their feeling confident and to grow and invest in this country. we know if that happens, that is good for job creation. i think that is what is being asked of us. >> we want to welcome our c-span viewers around the world. c-span is big on front pages. this is the front page of print "politico" about the budget deal being reached. madam secretary, lead headline in the "wall street journal" is the deal brings stability to the u.s. budget. we can get a little carried away, too far what this deal means. it is not a big deal. >> well, but what it does is, as we were talking about it evidences that there can be regular order. it means that we could then proceed and a budget is a big deal frankly. we've been living far too long, far before i was involved here, without you know the kind of budgets and ability to predict. so imagine as a manager, which is where i come from, if you don't know what your budget is or not sure what the budget is for a year or two from now, how
do you know exactly what you can get done? so i do think it is a big deal. >> i'm wearing a boot. you're wearing a button that says, open for business. that is also a sign i believe you have in your office in the commerce department. >> yes. >> tell me where that came from. >> well, when i took this job, the president asked me to be his, a bridge for him to the business community and it is very important to me that i signal to the business community that we are open for business. that we're there to work with them on an agenda and that's led us to our open for business agenda we developed for the department of commerce where we're focused on trade and investment. we're focused on innovation. we're focused on data as well as building all of that on a good management platform. so we've got a lot we've got going on. the sign is really reminder to anybody who walks into my office whether it's a ceo, a head of
state or it's the person cleaning my office that this is what we've got to get done, our agenda. >> now as part of this, you went on the road. you took office in june. so you've been there close to six months. took a listening to tour to 13 cities, 12 states, what did you learn? >> i learned so much. i learned really what is on the mind of the business community first of all. we were all over the country. we, as you said, 13 cities but really geographically quite dispercented and what i learned there is a commonality of what people want to see us get done. they want to see implementation of the president's growth agenda. they want to see investment in infrastructure. they want to see us, you know, trade with the number one issue. trade and investment was the number one issue that business leaders brought up to me. they want to see us get trade
agreements done. even small business, it was so interesting, whether you were talking to a large multinational or talking to guys running small bicycle manufacturing shops, they're all interested in trade agreements because what they realize the supply chain now is global. parts are many coulding from all over. getting what you need in order to create your product whether it's a good or a service requires integration around the world and that requires more trade agreements. so trade was big. immigration reform was huge. uniformly among business leaders they're in favor of immigration reform of so this is again talking about what do we have to get done? we need to work with friend on capitol hill to get that done. david: i am in i phrase is important but there is no sign it is nearing getting done by this house. >> well, i'm an optimist and i believe that there's a recognition of how important it is and an important part --
>> recognition by who. >> i think there is recognition on the hill by how important immigration reform is for the economy. border security and a path to citizenship. but immigration reform is worth $1.4 trillion to our economy over the next 20 years. that is huge and we can not afford to be leaving these things on the sideline as we move forward. we need growth in this country. >> something you heard a lot during the president's first term was, he needs to get a ceo in there. he needs to get somebody who knows business. you heard a lot about that from your friend during the re-election campaign. so now you're here. you started five companies. you've been on the board of four companies. been an executive chairman of transunion. what do you bring that somebody who has not worked in business wouldn't know? what can you tell the president what's the point of view that you bring. >> well i think that what i can
bring to the table for all the stakeholders, the president included is the perspective of the business community because i have lived there but also i can translate back and forth. what the president asked me to do is be a bridge with the business community, a two-way bridge. in other words bring to the administration a point of view of the business community and be able to explain, you know, why that's important and how it fits into a growth agenda, jobs agenda, et cetera, et cetera. be able to explain to the business community, look, we have to take into account things that are just not about business growth but there's a much bigger agenda that the administration has to be responsible for. >> now, as you were sitting in chicago for the last four years you must have been shaking your head about some of the things that you read about, saw. what is the biggest thing that surprised you now that you can see it from the inside? >> you know what i think has is
not well-understood? how well people actually work together and get along. the cabinet, it has been really terrific the kind of partnerships that are going on throughout the cabinet. i'm working closely with secretary of perez. the secretary of labor and are i joined at the hip when it comes to skills and workforce development agenda for our country. it is imperative for him and it is imperative for the business community that we have a skilled labor force to help businesses grow. it is great for americans if we get them the training that they need so they take the good jobs that are available. we have four million open jobs in this country. that is crazy at a time we still have 7% unemployment. to me one of the big surprises has been people, both the way we get along. and i think that, i find the coordination, collaboration, has been very positive.
for me. the second thing that i'm surprised about is also, and i'm a believer in people, is the quality of the people that work at the department of commerce. terrific. i mean, it has been, and everybody, whatever preconceived notions exist in the business community about people working in government i will tell you talent, there's a lot of talent here. >> what kind of boss are you? >> i, that's a good question. i tend to try and surround myself with people who are good at things i'm good at and good at the things i'm not good at and i try to give them a lot of rope so that they can go and -- >> hang themselves? >> no. so they can, so they can have plenty of runway to get things done. then i try to, i believe as a leader it is very important that you support the people that you're at the bottom of the pyramid if you will and that my
job is to support the key people we put in place because their job day in and day out is execution against, you know, hundreds of initiatives. we at the commerce department do everything from the census to patents and trademarks. >> you're responsible for the weather. >> and the weather. no, if i was, we are responsible for reporting information about the weather. if i was responsible for the weather i might be doing something else in life, you know. >> when you came into the commerce department at the end of june, what's the biggest thing that you changed? you looked around. you said wait, this does not work. i know from my experience, i know from business, there's no way we're going to do this, do it this way. >> the biggest thing that i've been trying to do is to empower the people who actually are executing. execution -- >> but what does that look like? what is an example of that? >> that means we put together a
strategy, our open for business strategy, and that, trade and investment, innovation. innovation being around advanced manufacturing skills and the digital economy. developing a data, you know, what are we going to do with all the data that we have. these are ideas that came from working together with the people leading the various bureaus of the commerce department. this is not, it is funny, when i came in, people kept saying what is your agenda? what is the secretary's agenda? no. we need a department agenda. and then what i'm going to focus on are the places where i can singularly in my world move the needle. get the word out or very different places where i can be effective and useful so we can move forward. all the objectives at the department of commerce. i think that's not been the way it has been done before. so i think that is the thing that is unusual. >> how is it different? what had been done in the past? >> i think it tended to be very
top-down as opposed to the goals and objectives being bottom-up. frankly what we need to do is, and there's a lot of focus what we can get done in the period we have left as an administration and from my standpoint there's a lot that we can get done. you know, take the advanced manufacturing agenda. there is a bipartisan, bicameral bill on the hill to support something called the national network of manufacturing innovation. this is a great idea. this is where federal dollars are matched by local dollars but the local dollars are a strategy, created regionally, around innovative manufacturing. that is what it called pre-competitive innovation. before semiconductor companies or 3-d printing companies compete with one another they need to come together to get
with the academic community, the local academic community as well as supply chain and trainers, to come together to move forward innovation. for example, we've done one in young town ohio. there are three more institutes being competed for right now that will get announced by end of the year or first part, in january. this is great return on investment for the taxpayer dollars. >> we're not short of ideas for congress. congress has plenty of ideas of the what is the thing you're most excited about doing that you don't need congress for? >> one, i won't say most, but we have many things, the skilled workforce agenda. >> to give people context on this is something you were passionate about in private life. i remember talking about this with you at the aspen institute. you funded something in this area. talk about how this came to be
your passion. >> the history actually started in 2009 when the chief of staff, rahm emanuel, and i were sitting around and talking about how i could be of assistance to the administration. at that time i was part of the president's economic recovery board. i said i want to focus on something, try to get something done. it was really area of skills mismatch that exists in this country. we still have as i said, four million open jobs and obviously too many people that want jobs that don't have them. this is an area where we don't need congressional action but what we do need is to take the best practices where businesses is leading. business need to play a leadership role in what are the skills that they need locally and regionally in order for them to grow their businesses? another area of opportunity that doesn't need congressional action is around the national export initiative. we're really thinking about what can we do. america, we export but 95% of
customers and consumers are outside of the united states. and we need to change the dna of the way business thinks. only 1% of american businesses export and 60% of them to one country. there's a huge marketplace out there. we need to help, and that's right in the wheelhouse of the department of commerce. we have our foreign commercial service. we have our usiacs. we can help you locally as a business to figure out where your product is competitive around the world and introduce you in those markets to the right distributors or suppliers, financiers, et cetera. so this is the kind of thing we're going to get done. >> as i dove into your record and talked to your colleagues about your agenda the topic that was most exciting to me, one i'm most looking forward to talk to you about is unlocking data and this goes back to your experience i think the first company you started. tell us about that. >> so the data agenda, my first
company was in senior living and what we needed all kind of information where do seniors live and -- >> back up for a second. you have grown up in business. you worked with your father, uncle, very successful large family corporation. when you started senior living you started it with? >> myself and a secretary. so it was a startup business and i was trying to, this is before, senior living today is an industry but 25 years ago there was no industry. there were a few of us around trying to figure out what, there is a marketplace of aging americans, what kind of housing and services might service them. and i got almost all my data from the census. i didn't really know it was coming from the census department but it was about who lived where. what their age was. what their income was. what kind of housing they had, et cetera. so one of the things that struck me coming into this job is, the department of commerce is a treasure trove of data.
we are full of, just to refer to the national weather service. every day we create 19 terabytes of data at the national weather service. we only use 2 terabytes a day we make available to the public. what is in that other 17 terabytes of data that industries or information or good decision making could be made on that? that is one part. there is american census data. we have american community service data. we have economic data that we collect. so we are full of information that is not easily available to the public. so we're trying to figure out what do we do with that. what we know from the weather data is, huge industry, multibillion-dollar industry is built using our data. and so what should we be doing? this is asset, the taxpayer's
asset we should figure out how we make more available so we can get more return on it. >> in a minute i will call on tom copeland from "politico" who has a question but what is the biggest impediment to government from smart decisions is? >> i think that, you have to have real will to move forward and you have to bring a lot of people with you but that's what government is. that's what a democracy is. you know, it takes a group and it sometimes takes a very large group called congress or the, you know, or the president and congress to get something done. and so i think that's not always appreciated that when you want to get these complicated things done, you have to really convince a lot of people. having said that, that's the best kind of government that any country could have. and so, you know that's what we
do. >> say same thing in a different way. if you were mackenzie or some other consulting firm coming in looking at u.s. government, the executive branch, what would you say needs to be fixed to be smarter, more efficient, more effective? >> i'm sure if i were mackenzie i would have thousands of ideas. you know what i would say that is actually functioning well, that has been really positive thing for me, has been, communication is really pretty good. in other words there's, we're communicating well. it's complicated. think about the fact that you have, i don't know, either 15 or 20 cabinet secretaries and if you have -- many of these issues cross many boundaries. when i get up in the morning, you know, my job is to worry about how do we grow the economy and how do we achieve opportunity in this country
through economic growth? that's what i'm supposed to do and in the department of commerce we have 45 plus thousand people working on various aspects of that. whether giving you, you know a patent or giving you the weather service or weather information. and, you know, and at the department of defense much, much larger, much different brief. we have issues we have that overlap. we have country that is we work with that overlap. government works in a three dimensional aspect. i think the biggest challenge is making sure we're coordinated. i think we're doing a pretty good job of it. that's the part, what, i'm sure there are lots of things that we could fix. but we also have to remember we have a limited budget. >> how optimistic are you that something will happen on tax reform before the president leaves office? >> i am optimistic that we can,
you know, that we have a good shot getting corporate tax reform done. and the reason is -- >> how could you be? >> well the reason i say that is the first, to me the first ingredient necessary to get corporate tax reform done is the business community. and you say the business community. there are thousands of industries in this country, right? we have everything from bicycle manufacturers to semiconductor manufactures to songwriters, right? think of the breadth. if you really step back and think of the bret of the american economy. we talk like it's a whole. it is not a whole. it is made up of a lot of different pieces. to get corporate tax reform all of those pieces have to come together to say we're going to compromise. otherwise they will go to capitol hill and fight it. at which point why would you do it if the business community
isn't in favor? there seems to be more agreement in order for america to be competitive we need to bring our corporate tax rates down and we need to change the different deduction, to pay for it. that seems to be. that hasn't really existed, at least, that i can tell, for sure over the last decade and probably much longer than that. so, i think that it, that therefore, i'm optimistic because it requires all those different industries to realize, we're going to have, some people will have a better deal and some people will have not such a good deal but they all see it as a positive. >> so as someone who is a cabinet member, key member of the president's economic team, the face of business for the president, somebody who knows business, somebody with a lot of friends in business, what can you personally do -- you know you're being set up here. what can you personally do to help make that happen? >> i think what i can do is is a
couple of things of the be very clear with the business community. okay, what you're asking for is not free. right? we have to pay for, if we want to bring rates down, we have to find ways to pay for it. that means people are going, the rules are going to change. do you get that? >> you, you get that. you think that needs to be said bluntly? >> well, i tend to be a pretty straightforward person and so i tend to approach things in that fashion. and i think it's really important -- >> but excuse me, does business not get that or don't want to believe it or? >> when we say does business, it isn't a monolith. some people understand it, some people don't. i think we have to make it clear so that, and that's something i can do, right? that is not, that's an important communication role, that i can play in, and so it depend on who
you talk to. whether they completely have internalized the implications of what they want, right? and how it will affect -- of course everybody has different people have their parochial interests, right? and then they have the better good interests and some tilt more in one place and some tilt more in the other and certainly if you're a ceo, you have a duty to your business. but many are looking and saying, okay, i'm willing to sacrifice this, because i think it is better in the long run for competitiveness. >> you think that's a growing view or you would like to grow that view? >> i think it is a growing view and we have to keep growing it. >> okay. tom copeland from "politico" has a question. i think he has a microphone. >> hi. moving to more of a bit of your personal background, you're a very prominent chicago juan as president obama and michelle.
they say may not move back to chicago after the white house depending on their daughter's school and feelings. what you feel about the chicago losing the obamas and your own plans if you go back. >> tall work for abc and fox affiliates in chicago. >> i will start with myself because i can speak about my husband and i. we're thrilled to be here and we're all-in here in washington for our tenure here and i serve at the pleasure of the president. i will be here as long as he wants me to be here. chicago is where, you know, we have lived for 27 years and i have ever intention at this point to, you know, go back to chicago, be a part of the that great community which i really love chicago but it's a great honor to be here and do this job right now. vis-a-vis the president and first lady, i'm a mother and so i appreciate the stresses that
come when you have a very busy life and you love your children and try to balance what is in the best interests of your own activities and your children's. i totally respect the fact their daughters want to make sure they get through high school and are well-settled. so i think it is absolutely, i completely understand the calculus that they're going through. >> so in just a second i'm going to come to "the chicago sun-times" for a question. i will ask you about a story on the front page of your hometown paper, "the chicago tribune" and a lot of papers around the country today, gm named its first female ceo. we're both blind up here. mary barra. what do you think this means? what is the important symbolism of that appointment? >> first of all, i think it is fantastic. she is obviously extraordinarily
qualified. >> came up through the company. >> came up through the company, 33 years and knows the company inside and out and for any business to promote from within is just an incredible statement about, you know, the strength within a corporation. that you feel you're able to grow your own leadership. so i think that's really wonderful. it's statement not just about here. but it is also about where the company is at. obviously a company that was in serious trouble five years ago some this is, i think very good news. you know, judy woodruff said something that really rings true to me. we have extraordinary country with great talent. and we need to use 100% of our talent. making more women leaders in all different fields and particularly in the business community i think is something that is really important. we should use 100% of the people who are available to lead. >> now of the fortune 500 companies, 23 of them now have
women ceos. is that a lot or a little? >> that's too few. that's -- as i said, women are greater than 50% of college graduates today. we're at least, we're roughly half the population and we're less than 5% of the leadership of the fortune 500? what's wrong? >> and also out today, some of you saw this in playbook this morning, fascinating study by pew that came out at midnight and talked about the closing wage gap for women, younger women, millenials, make 93% of what men make. certainly much closer than that gap has been over the years. what accounts for this and what will it take for it to be 100%? >> well it should be 100%. let's start what's fairness, let's go to fairness first of all of and it absolutely needs to be that way. i don't understand how you can run any kind of business and not
pay an equal wage for an equal job. so to me, and certainly i've done that throughout my lifetime and it's extremely important. women are just as capable of leading, if not more capable, of leading and running any kind of organization and if we have we do, obviously in business we're not getting enough women into senior leadership's positions of our largest companies. why is that? are women given the opportunity to run division that is have serious p&l responsibility? are they, you know, being channeled into areas where that's not a path to ceoship? we need, you know obviously there are many, many organizations taking a look at this and other issue is mentorship. frankly i was very fortunate. i was mentored by members of my
family, men who were very successful. had leadership positions of their own. frankly, as you might imagine i was a bit persist tent and tenacious about it and wanting them to help me and i sought out that mentorship. so opportunity, mentorship, equal pay, absolutely all important to achieving these goals. >> okay. a couple of witter questions coming in at #playbook breakfast. let's hear from you, eric. will jcc meeting with china lead to forming a timetable for the bilateral investment treaty talks? >> the jcct is an upcoming meeting we have next week as you know between the u.s. and ambassador problem man -- froman, our u.s. trade rep. i will go as well as secretary vilsack.
>> at you recommended someone? >> we are in the process. >> lynn sweet of the chicago sun-times has covered this for a long time. >> good morning. i want to follow up on the question to clarify the question on the chicago homecoming came up, the talk about the answer in the short term about the calculus for high school so what do you see in the long term future if there is a homecoming and what do you see? do you agree with a lot of people in chicago who think and obama presidential library should be in the city and where should it be? >> all politics is local. i am very hopeful. i have no inside information but i am hopeful the presidential library will be in chicago.
the kit is very important, and the leadership in chicago both political and lay leadership would very much like that. it would be a tremendous asset and a great legacy for the city. i am hopeful that that would happen. i respect the president and first lady as they decide where they want to live. they are young and first of all, i would not focus on where they would live afterward. i am focused on we have three more years. i am not really planning to or thinking that much about everyone's future after the three years. we have a lot to do in the meantime. >> another question. a good bit of infrastructure is a priority with the experience
of 21. how will the commerce department encourage this? >> we have been part of a proposal, part of the corporate tax reform where there would be increased resources but toward infrastructure. we have trillions of dollars of what i call preferred maintenance in this country. we need to invest from broadband to bridges. at the department of commerce, we have put in 100,000 miles of broadband over the last several years so that is a place where we play a very much functional role but we also play a role in helping, working closely with different structures on how to finance infrastructure. we are involved in this. it is necessary for our country to stay competitive and let me tell you which is not just bridges and broadband. we have a travel and tourism
agenda. this is the first president who created travel and tourism strategy for our country. we have a goal to reach 1 hundred million visitors a year to the united states. airports have to be expanded in order to reach that goal. we are doing a lot of things that don't require investment. in order to accommodate people and the fashion they are used to around the world, we need to invest in our airports and broadband and bridges. >> to catherine whose story runs in the central times around the country but first another twitter question with hash tag playbook breakfast how can nonprofits be bolstered to grow the economy and create job opportunities? >> there is a great opportunity in the skills area. we created a nonprofit in chicago called -- called skills for chicago land's future, they are working with glenn tilton,
former ceo of united, with jpmorgan chase, chairman of the board. they are working with local companies, everyone from united and jpmorgan to small-businesses to help the unemployed get the skills they need in order to move into jobs and local companies. that is a great opportunity for nonprofits to play, a round skills training. identifying the job opportunities through business leaders, finding the individuals, making sure they have the right skills and helping them get into these jobs. >> another twitter question. what role do you see the u.s. playing as we move forward with economic recovery on the local and regional level? >> guest: the economic development administration is playing an important role. i announced last week and effort where we are working with regions to identify regions of the country that have the best
strategic plan to attract manufacturing. this would be manufacturing community partnerships. in order to be designated a city or region as the manufacturing community partnership you up law and we are going through the process now and judged on your regional strategy about infrastructure work force development, six different criteria you would be judged on. that will designate 12 different regions. that designation gives you a preference for federal dollars with a come from the transportation label or across 13 different agencies and makes you eligible for $1.3 billion. that is a strategic role eda can play. >> host: you have been a proponent of public education. how have you been and will you be working your connections in education to drive the economy?
>> guest: it goes to secretary duncan, we are working together in order to have a skilled work force that we need it really starts with k-12 education which obviously secretary duncan, that is his area of focus and he does a terrific job promoting as well as race to the top, has been unbelievably influential in getting us to have a common core standards and raise the level of our k-12 aspiration. s >> yesterday we learned another chicago president coming to washington, the chicago symphony, taking over the kennedy center in september. you are a former board member, trusty at the kennedy center. what do you think of this appointment and would you think priorities should be at the nation's largest performing arts
center? >> guest: the appointment is fantastic. another chicagoand is good news. she is a great leader. it is a complex organization, $180 million year annual budget. it is everything, the kennedy center is everything from theater, opera, symphony, a big part of the agenda is also making more available to the public. there is a redevelopment of the site that will include edition of more space that will allow performances to be scared -- shared with the public and more rehearsals space administration space. david reubenstein is taking a lead in this as lead donor to the capital campaign but the capital campaign will be the number one big priority. very exciting to have another leader from chicago.
>> host: david reubenstein's involvement is extraordinary. what do you make of a role that he plays, the civic role he plays? >> guest: the fact that he has focused on helping washington, whether it is the washington monument, bringing the magna carta here or the kennedy center, these are iconic assets of our countries that need to be presented in absolute best fashion and the fact that he is willing to underwrite or support these efforts is something not just to the benefit of washington but the nation. >> host: you mentioned mentoring earlier. when you talk to young person who is speaking of going into business what do you tell them about how to succeed? there are a lot of people here and on c-span and around the world who want to be you. >> guest: the first thing to
think about is i grew up in a household where my dad was starting a business, a hotel business. what i got to see were a couple things. one is the excitement at building something. the other thing that i saw was a real recognition. you don't do anything alone. you have to surround yourself with the best people. the things that i would advise any person going into business is it is fun to build a business. it is exciting. you are contributing to the economy. cit is a very positive thing to do. you can't do it alone. i don't care how good you are or how smart you are. start out and surround yourself with really good people. a higher than you think because you are going to get there faster than you think. make sure you really plan for that. >> host: good advice if you are
head to the top. what if you are on the bottom? what does that person do to succeed? >> guest: had lots of interns in my shop and my kids have been in turned. internships, i am refuge proponent of internships and apprenticeships. if you put yourself in the shoes of and in turn, what i said to the experience you want the in turn to have, you want to see the intern and see is this a place i can envision myself growing and expanding whether it is manufacturing or media or politics, if this is what you want to be, see if this feels right as a young person because you will spend a lot of energy and a lot of your life trying to get ahead and how do you get
ahead? you have education, right? as our parents said to us, all you have in life is your education and your reputation. get yourself the best education that you can. the second, to get ahead, it is hard work. it is a lot of work and look for people who are willing to open up and mentor you. ask a lot of questions. be inquisitive and work overtime because you don't get ahead, it is not easy. >> host: penultimate question. you have known the president and first lady for a long time. you were a leader in the first campaign, you have known them from chicago. tell them something about a president we don't know. >> guest: that is probably impossible. he has been under the microscope
certainly throughout his presidency and far before that. here is what i would say. the president, in my mind, back to what i'd do, has a very ambitious agenda, a growth agenda. >> host: what are they like as people? on a plane, in a restaurant, in privacy? >> guest: they are to me, my experience is the president and first lady have been warm and supportive, they care about my kids, they have been appreciative of the effort that we put forward to help them and in this job he has been very supportive of what i need. >> host: something every single person says about a first couple wherever they are on the
spectrum, however they felt about the election they say every indication is they are a remarkable pair under very difficult circumstances. how do they pull that off? raising these daughters at this age in these crazy times in this crazy place? >> guest: they have a commitment to each other. this is the job we talk about the president, but first lady is important to the success of the presidency as the president is. she plays an extraordinarily important role and they have a really amazing commitment to one another in the way that they work and also have a commitment to their family and the support they have gotten from the first lady's mother as well as her brother and the fact that they cherish their family such that
they vacation together and their extended family and that they have found a way to protect that from everybody's inquiry. i respect that. i respect what they are trying to accomplish and the values they are trying to instill within their children. that is hard with this kind of public eye they are in. >> host: last question, something you and your husband did to get when you were recording the couple with your two children. what do you have for people who want to integrate business and to their family life for a couple's relationship? >> guest: i believe you have to take care of your body and your
mind in order to be -- sort of the foundation of building a successful life. it requires creating time every day to do that which isn't easy. it is not easy. it is not easy in your job. is not easy in my job and certainly not easy in many people's jobs when they are working two jobs and trying to do that but you have to be very intentional about it and we tried to be that way, my husband and i and with our children as well because we know it is of foundation, foundational for life. >> host: what is the longest race you have done? >> guest: the i can man. >> host: is that how long is a run in that? >> guest: it is a long race.
i hope to do some running races. folks at the commerce department and i will run in the spring. >> host: how long? >> guest: we signed up for ten model. >> host: cherry blossom? >> guest: yes and the couple other -- we are very aberrational right now. it is easy, it is december, not march. lana 19 how do you do that on a road? >> guest: first thing in the morning. however -- however it needs to be to do whatever it is we need to do so it tends to be very early and tends to be on the treadmill for security reasons or whatever. >> host: tell us something you like about washington, a restaurant? >> guest: the national archives.
i went to the national archives on saturday and i'd think it is one of the most exciting places we have in this city so i had lots of fun. >> host: we concede the declaration of independence? >> guest: they are just opening up magna carta today, yesterday. i would go see the magna carta, the foundation of democracy. >> host: your favorite place here? >> guest: probably my favorite place is -- >> host: name of place you like, doesn't have to be your favorite. >> guest: suite greens. >> host: what do you get there? >> guest: i like the tail salad with chicken. too much information. >> host: we are here. would like to thank c-span, our viewers around the world, those watching in live stream land, i thank my political colleagues who worked so hard on this
[inaudible conversations] >> several live events to tell you about. health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius is on the house side the capital to testify about the implementation of the health care law. then on c-span2 you can join the conversation during the event at hash tag c-spanchat and facebook. un c-span3 at 10:00 eastern the senate finance committee continues its confirmation hearing for the internal revenue service. also on c-span3 at 2:00 p.m. eastern the son of judiciary committee will look at the activities of surveillance agencies. witnesses will include nsa director daniel keith alexander and deputy attorney general james cole. and we will continue to take your comments-hash tag c-spanchad and on facebook.
>> this is in georgia. the oldest building here. tables and bed and phones going gotten letters coming in and out of this area and this rosen was helping run the campaign from this building. this is where rosalynn carter helped organize the peanut brigade which was an offshoot of the high neighbor campaign technique used in his run for governor. it was basically a way to get the word out about jimmy carter using volunteers going door to door, shaking hands, giving out literature and spreading the word. was a method so effective it helped him get elected to the presidency. >> watch our program on first lady rosalynn carter on c-span.org/firstlady and c-span at 7:00 eastern and monday will start our encore presentation of
first lady season two, edith roosevelt to grace coolidge at 9:00 eastern on c-span. >> it is are rare constant in american political life. if you look at congress, 1901, less than 2% of members came from working-class backgrounds, got into politics and wound up in congress. flash forward to the present day the average member of congress spent less than 2% of their career doing manual labor jobs and service industry jobs and this is one thing that hasn't changed. lots of different aspects of the political process, broadcast television, cable news, the rise of candidate centered elections, big money, the decline of unions and all of this is happening, one of the constants during that, during the last hundred years or so is working class people are not getting elected to political office.
>> does it matter there is a socioeconomic disparity between most elected officials and citizens they represent in nicholas collins looks at a white collar government sunday night at 9:00 on afterwards. in january, in depth with radio talk-show host marc levin. he will take your questions for three hours beginning at noon eastern jan. fifth. all part of booktv weekend on c-span2. online for december's booktv book club. we want to know what your favorite books were in 2013. jo lin king other readers to discuss the notable books published this year. go to booktv.org and click on book club to enter the chatter. last night house budget committee chairman paul ryan and his counterpart, in the senate, patty murray announced they reached an agreement on a budget plan that would fund the government could two years and also restore some government funding that was cut by the sequester. the plan does not include extension of unemployment benefits which began to run out at the end of the year. senator murray and congressman
ryan spoke with reporters about their plan. [inaudible conversations] >> good evening. i am happy to report senator murray and i have reached an agreement. we have been talking to all year and this week that hard work of the two of us sitting down and talking to each other as they of. first it started because we passed budgets. senator murray deserves credit for passing a budget through the senate. that got the ball rolling so the two of us started talking and the reason we are here tonight is to explain what we have agreed to. this bill reduces the deficit by $23 billion. it does not raise taxes. it cuts spending in a smarter way. on the outset we news that if we
force each other to compromise a core principle we would get nowhere. that is why we decided to focus on where the common ground is. that is what we have done. that means the budget agreement that reduces the deficit without raising taxes and replaces the arbitrary across-the-board spending cuts with smarter permanent reforms that caper this relief. the house budget reflects the ultimate goal. it balance the budget with ten years, pays off the debt. that is not going to pass in this divided government. i see this agreement as a step in the right direction. divided government, you don't always get what you want. we still can make progress toward our goal. i see this agreement as that kind of progress and a step in the right direction. the arbitrary cuts make smart targeted reforms, and eliminate waste, stop sending checks to criminals, cut corporate welfare, reform mandatory programs, start to make real
reforms to auto pilot programs that are the drivers of the debt in the first place. is agreement is an improvement of the status quo. this agreement makes sure we don't have a government shutdown scenario in january. and make sure we don't have another government shutdown scenario in october. it makes sure we don't work from crisis to crisis. also allows congress to finally exercise the power of the purse. we are both from the legislative branch. the constitution says the legislative branch should exercise the power of the person and we want to reclaim that from the administration instead of these continuing resolutions. we can work together to get our government functioning at its very basic level. that we think is a step in the right direction. that we thing gives us some confidence. that brings some normalcy back to our government. i want to take a moment to thank senator murray. she is a tough and honest negotiator. she fought hard for her principles every step of the way. i commend her for her hard work.
all of the summary document in legislation will be texted, placed upon our budget website by the end of the night. with that i offer senator murray. >> for far too long washington d.c. compromises have been considered a dirty word especially when it comes to the federal budget. over the last few years we have lurched from crisis to crisis and from one cliff to the next and when one countdown clock was stopped wasn't long before the next one got started. that uncertainty was devastating to our fragile economic recovery. the constant crisis cost us billions of dollars in growth in jobs and continue across-the-board cuts from sequestration, forcing families and communities to pay the price. i am very proud to stand here today with chairman ryan to announce we have broken through the partisanship and gridlock and reached a bipartisan budget compromise that will prevent a government shutdown in january.
our deal puts jobs and economic growth first by rolling back sequestration, harmful cuts to education and medical research and infrastructure investment and defense for the next two years. i know some people thought these cuts should continue but i am glad we increased these key domestic investments and averted the next round of scheduled cuts to military programs, baseds and defense in our country. this deal builds on the $2 trillion in deficit reduction we have done since 2011 and continues the precedent we set in the fiscal cliff deal, sequestration shouldn't be replaced with spending cuts alone. this bipartisan deal will help millions of americans who are wondering if they were going to keep paying a price for d.c. dysfunction from the workers at military bases and construction projects who were furloughed or laid off, the kids who lost head start programs to seniors wondering if they would have meals on wheels, the families
who were praying for medical research programs to get back to work on a cure and so much more. because of this deal the budget process can start pushing from crisis to crisis by setting bipartisan spending levels for the next two years, this deal all-out congressional committees to proceed under regular order and give government agencies and companies that do business with them the certainty they need to hire workers and make investments. this isn't the plan i would have written on my own and i am pretty sure chairman ryan wouldn't have written it on his own. there are obviously differences between our parties when it comes to our budget values and priorities. i was disappointed we weren't able to close a single corporate tax loophole. many republicans hoped this would be an opportunity to make the kinds of changes to medicare and social security they advocated for but congressman ryan said aside our differences. we made some compromises and worked together to get something
done. this doesn't solve every issue in front of congress. we made a conscious decision in the few short weeks we had to focus on where we can agree and not get bogged down in larger issues that while important won't get solved right now. we need to acknowledge that our nation has serious long-term fiscal and economic challenges this deal doesn't address and budget process has been broken. many people believe congress is broken. we did spend years scrambling to fix artificial crises while our debt piles up at the economic foundation middle-class families have depended on for a generation continues to crumble. ..
nothing is easy here but i know the american people expect nothing less. i want to take a minute to especially thank chairman ryan. he and i do have some major differences. we cheer for a different football team clearly. we catch different fish. we have some differences on policies but we agree that our country needs some certainty and they need to show that we can work together and i've been very proud to work with him. i also want to thank congressman van hollen who worked very hard to help make sure this deal reflects the values that he cares a lot about and all of our
budget conference committee, everyone who has been involved on the committee has been very hard-working with us to get to this deal. i'm hopeful we can get the bipartisan deal through the house and through the senate and get home in time for the holidays that think everybody deserves this year. >> chairman ryan? so tomorrow morning presumably you will go before the house republican conference and pitch this. i talked to a coup senior house republican aides they thought they would lose a healthy chunk of --, what do you say to folks who are skeptical realizing this is not one of your budgets that has nearly unanimous support and agreement and compromise with senator murray and there will be concerns that they say no, this ain't for me. >> as conservative i think this is step in the right direction. what cam i getting out of this? i'm getting more deficit reduction. the deficit will go down more than if we did nothing. that is point number one. point number two, there are no
tax increases here. number three, we're finally dealing with autopilot spending, that mandatory spending not addressed by congress for years of the this isn't easy. this is the first divided budget government agreement since 1986. the reason we haven't done a budget agreement when both houses done by other party since '86 because we know it is not easy to do. we know we'll not get everything we want and she knows she won't goat get everything she wants. >> why should conservatives vote against it. >> i think they should vote for it. we'll go first given our schedules. we'll post this on our website today, this evening and with we intend to bring it to the house floor later on this week. i have every reason to expect great support from our caucus because we're keeping principles. the key here, nobody had to sacrifice their core principles. your principles are don't raise taxes, reduce the deficit. we also have a lot of concerned members about defense. the next hit from the sequester was going to hit solely on the
military, starting in january. a lot of our members were concerned about that. so what we're doing here is providing for some sequester relief for 2014 and for 2015. and we're paying for that with more permanent reforms on the autopilot side of the spending ledger in excess of the sequester relief which results in net deficit reduction. that to me is a good deal. >> chairman ryan. also for chairman murray too. what extent this represents agreement between the two of you versus an agreement you can know you get through both chambers? how much vetting have you done? >> well i can tell you that i've been in close contact with my leadership and a number of members since we've worked through this issue. i expect that chairman ryan and my job will be the same as we leave here tonight which is to talk to everybody about our deal and to work to get the votes. i'm confident that we won't have 100% of the senate or 100% of
the house. this is a bipartisan deal. we both had to move to get to where we are today but i think what the american people ought to know is that this congress can work. that people can come up together from very different corners and find common ground and bring some certainty back to our jobs and our economy. that is what we have continually focused on. >> to your specific question, david, we've done this in consultation with our leadership team which is in support of this. i consulted with every committee chairman whose jurisdiction is involved in this because this spans as you can imagine lots of different committee chairmen. so this has been a participatory process. this has been a process where in the house we consulted with numerous colleagues to get their ideas, their input, feedback and support and that's why i'm very confident where we stand in the house. >> how much sequester relief is there? >> $63 billion. >> 63 billion? >> $85 billion in mandatory savings. $63 billion in sequester relief. that results in about
$22.5 billion in deficit reduction. >> 45 billion for the first year and the rest in the second year. >> 10, 12, i know we're getting in the weeds here, a trillion 12 billion for fy 2014 and a trillion 14 billion for fy 2015. the chad's earlier question why would a republican support that? the budget that i passed last session with near you nan mittty in the house with most republicans voting for it is trend 19. the budget we fought in in the last session won't be hit until 2017 in this agreement. this is why i think house republicans should be supporting this. >> chairman ryan, talk about the effect on -- also any military payee effect that is might be in this? >> this, you will all have the details of this agreement if you don't have them right now very shortly. one of the most difficult
challenges we faced since we worked through this was the issue of federal employees and military and congressman ryan and i both have worked on this a lot. he is a tough negotiator in case any of you want to know and started out very high at $20 billion. it is down to $6 billion for federal employees and 6 billion for military and we will have the details of those proposals out to you very shortly. >> reason those numbers equalize because we think it is only fair that hard-working taxpayers who pay for the benefits that our federal employees receive, be treated fairly as well. we also think it is important that military families as well as non-military families are treated equally and fairly. so what we're asking here, is that the people who work for the federal government, we thank them for their work, they're hard-working dedicated people we respect but we think it is only right and fair they pay something more towards their
pensions just like hard-working taxpayer that pays for the pensions in the first place. >> i want to add one other part to that. if chairman ryan and i didn't reach agreement we would be at sequestration level very shortly and many of these same people would be facing furloughs, layoffs and uncertainty. we have brought certainty back to all of those people. >> is there also understanding that you will have a separate vote on unemployment insurance. >> that is not part of this agreement. >> that is not part of this agreement. the leaders -- >> that is not part of our agreement. >> chairman ryan, there haste been a lot of uncertainty in markets due to the last government shutdown, threats of government shut downs and but other government shut downs but what do you think the message to the markets and business community as a whole, congress, not just now and january but going forward through the rest of the fiscal 2015. >> well, look, all along i thought it was very important that we do what we can to show
this divided government can work and by doing this we're showing divided government can work at basic functioning levels paying the bills. both republicans and democrats think it is important that congress retains the power of the purse and that we set priorities on spending. that is after all, what the constitution says we should do and that's what we're elected to do, we're doing this agreement in large part because what that will do is avoid the government shut downs. because we're doing a two year agreement here we avoid a possible shut down in january and another possible shut down in october. we think that provides certainty and stability to the not just markets but the country and people that deal with the federal government and get congress to set priorities to spending instead of giving basically a blank check of discretion to the executive branch the government. >> chairman ryan the debt ceiling is not dealt with. that is -- >> that is another press conference subject matter. >> have you really alleviated
the uncertainty in the economy if -- >> alleviating government shut downs alleviates a lot of uncertainty in this country and capitol and not doing this violating any core principle. >> chairman ryan you are a darling of right. a number of groups came out aggressive against this plan. are you prepared to take all that incoming fire? >> look as conservative i deal with the situation as it exists. i deal with the way things are, not necessarily the way things i want them to be. i passed three budgets in a row that reflect my priorities and my principles and everything i want to accomplish. we're in different i had haved government. i realize "time" not going to get that. so i will not go in a mile i direction i want to go but take a few steps in the right direction. this agreement takes news the right direction from my per specktive for very reasons i laid out before. this says let's cut spending in smarter way, permanent spending cuts to pay for temporary
sequester relief resulting in net deficit reduction without raising tax. that is fiscal responsibility. that is fiscal conservatism and it adds a greater stability to the situation. it prevents government shutdowns which we don't think is anyone's interest. that to me is the right thing to do. that is conservative looking at situation it is making it better. >> you don't think as a -- [inaudible]? >> again that deal announced yesterday of course it has to be agreed to by both bodies. "politico" has a story about reaction to the budget deal. alabama republican jeff sessions you see on the screen is featured in the story on "politico", the top senate republican on budget negotiation committee, he says before the deal was announced is made he doesn't know whether he will
back the agreement. i don't think anything is a sure thing in the house or senate, sessions said. hopefully it will be something people can support but i'm uneasy about it because democrats are deamending a lot of things that i think won't be supported. read more of that story in today's "politico." in a moment we'll go live to capital hill for testimony from hhs secretary kathleen sebelius that will be live at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2. the latest on budget negotiations. we spoke with a reporter covering issue on today's "washington journal." >> host: jeremy herb with the hill joins me on the phone to talk about this budget deal. so jeremy herb, what did they get owl of this? what did the two sides agree to? >> guest: this is modest dial. this is some sequester relief. $63 billion in sequester savings over next two years, half for d half for discretionary. sets funding levels at
1.02 trillion, the number right in between where the house and senate wanted bill. house want ad budget sequester lowered spending levels where the senate had higher level. they picked a number right in between the two. >> host: when it comes to sequester, the automatic spending cuts agreed to under thema budget control act of 201, how did they, how do they deal with it? 63 billion is restored. what does that mean then? there is still some sequestration that happens and how much and when? >> guest: yeah, that's right. they're going to, youw know, ge back some of the sequester cuts but still not all the way there. for pent gone for instance, they are going to reduce sequester by 22 billion next year which would haveeq meant that the budget lel that they're at this year under sequester wouldet be cut by an additional 22. still it is $30 billion lower than the budgets proposed by the pentagon and house and senate at the pre-sequester spending
levels. they will have to find a way to lower spending levels under sequester. the military long warned about the pain and damage that the sequester is going to do. this will allow them to really avoid a lot of that in terms of types of readiness and cuts to military programs they say will come in 2014 without some kind of a deal. >> host: what did you make that this is two-year deal? why did they go from two years? >> guest: we've gone from crisis to crisis all these 11th hour deals and if this goes through i think we really will see that go away for the next year. there are some issues that will have to be dealt with. this does not address the debt ceiling for instance. that's coming up in the spring. even if we do get this budget deal passed. but you know, every october, instead of we're always getting to a cr and have to pass a cr and if this got passed for the first time in a while we would not have to worry about that
come october. a lot people who said we should be budgeting two year cycles anyway because congress can't work quickly to pass a budget every year and they haven't done it. done it for military leaders and leaders on the hill. if this gets passed that erase that is crisis to crisis governing mode a little bit. >> host: jeremy herb, what is not in this deal? >> guest: a few things aren't in the deal. debt ceiling one of them as i said. democrats also wanted to get an extension of unemployment insurance into the bill but that also is something that the patty murray and paul ryan decided not to touch. it is a very modest deal. it is not the grand bargain long been sought from president obama and speaker boehner but it is a step forward in terms of actually, you know, trying to get some agreement. they didn't really tackle entitlements. they didn't tackle t revenues. but they did at least find a way to come to agreement on something which they hadn't been
able to do before. david: david: as you said, 63 billion in sequester cuts. the automatic spending cuts are restored. it prevents a government shutdown through october 2013. no unemployment benefits extended. long term unemployment benefits extended. deficit cut 22 billion over a decade. how did they do that? >> guest: they found a way to cut $85 billion over the next two years. in a few ways. they are making federal workers and the military pay more into their pensions, $6 billion in savings that way. they also used a budget trick really to extend the 2% sequester cut for medicare spending another two years. now that lasts until 2023 instead of 2021. there are other fees in there a way to raise revenue. a couple of environmental provisions. there will be higherwi airline fees as a result if that goes
through guest. >> host: what does that mean. why did they do that? >> guest: to get money without raising revenues, without tackling entitlements they had to look under every nook and cranny to find ways to get, basically toin get deficit reduction both sides could agree through without tackling those bid things. that is not easiest task. airline fees, travelers is not what they want to hear but it's a way for them to get money to get that up. the key for this is that paul ryan can now go to his conference who does not want to increase spending and say it is okay because this deal reduces the deficit as well and reducing deficit by 23 billion. so you will hear paul ryan saying that a lot over the next couple days. >> host: what happens next, what happens next, jeremy herb up on capitol hill? >> guest: ryan is budget chairman. he is pretty well-liked by conservatives. his job is to sell it to his
conference. they have a meeting this morning where we get a first sense whether republicans will go along with this we got statements of support from speaker boehner, from leader cantor but you know the house wants a vote on it this week to get it done which we could see probably friday, maybe thursday. this, on democratic side too, this is not something they're crazy about because of unemployment insurance. because of the, you know, making federal workers pay more who have been hit by sequester. chris van hollen offered tepid support. he isbe budget, top democrat on the budget committee. there is going to be, there is going to be a lot, a lost lobbying. we have seen conservative groups, tea party groups come out against it. marco rubio potentially opponent of paul ryan's in 2016 issued a statement within half an hour of the deal being announced. this is no sure thing yet but the leaders want to move quick
on it. >> host: we're learningya the house rules committee may take it upte later today to get it on the house floor quickly this week and have the senate vote on it next week. you mentioned the tea party, folks. here is tweet from congressman tim huelskamp reacting to yesterday's announcement saying, sending more money to washington with these so-called fees, aka, taxes is what he tweeted out. you also had congressman walsh put this out on twitter yesterday. the only good aspect of this budget deal we'll find out who the true conservatives are when it comes to a vote. what do you make of that jeremy herb? >> guest: that shows this is no? going to be an easy sell despite ryan's pledge that this cuts the deficit. conservative tea party republicans like sequester. for the first time in a long, long while they have cut government spending. they're doing it because of the sequester. this deal raises the levels up from $967 million in
discretionary spending to 1.012 trillion. they'reon clearly not happy abot that. it doesn't tackle entitlements. it doesn't really get at what they fear is the biggest driver of the debt. and you know, you heard, it was congressman huelskamp call the fees taxes and if that is certainly going to be an argument we hear from conservative w critics. heritage action what they do on this will be real interesting. americans for prosperity and how hard these groups try to lobby against republicans supporting the deal. i think it will need democratic votes as well as republican votes to get passed in the house. >> host: jeremesy herb with the hill, the hill.com is where you find their reporting. thank you, sir. guest guest thank you. >> we'll have live coverage on testimony of hhs secretary kathleen sebelius. she is appearing before the house energy and commerce subcommittee on health.
ap is reporting that secretary sebelius is asking an investigation into the administration botched rollout of healthcare.gov. she wants the department inspector general look into the management and performance and pay issues that may have contributed to the flawed launch. that hearing set for 10:00 a.m. hearing on c-span2 a discussion on volcker rule on capitol hill yesterday, reining in risky invests by financial institutions. >> host: what is the volcker rule and why does it matter? >> guest: hi. on.ks for having me the volcker rule is really a central part of the 2010 dodd-frank financial regulation overhaul. what it does, it says that banks can't make risky trade with their own money basically and basically the idea is that banks that count on federal backstops like deposit insurance and
borrowing at the fed's discoupled window and that kind of thing shouldn't be able to use their own money to make speculative bets that get them into trouble that is the gist of it. >> host: this is proposed as part of dodd-frank. why is it just being approved just now? >> guest: that's a great question. it has been three years since dodd-frank passed andth took a long time to get this thing finalized. i think there are two things important to know about the genesis of the volcker rule. the first thing is that the rule was proposed in 2011 but the proposal include ad whole lot of questions about how the rule should work. like, for example, banks need to be allowed to buy and sell stocks and bond and things that their clients can buy from them. it is hard to distinguish that fromen making bets with their on money so how do we do that? there are a lot of questions in the proposal that regulators had to work through and they got
like 18,000 comment letters and some of the comment letters were hundreds of pages long so it is a long process. other than that it is important to know that is that the jpmorgan "london whale" situation in 2012 where jpmorgan lost you know, billions of dollars off one guy, trading in london, really sort of made regulators rethink the way they were working on this rule because at the time jpmorgan said that those trades would have been allowed under the volcker rule and that was something i think regulators really wantedal to address. they sort of had to rethink the way they were approaching the rule. >> host: why is it called the volcker rule? why is it named after paul volcker? how long is this rule? >> guest: so he is a former federal reserve chairman and he is the person who sort of came up with the idea for the rule predodd-frank and pushed for it to be included.
how long is it? the rule with the all the instructions to banks is something like 950 pages long or something like that. it is a huge block of text. >> host: is it complicated? are there carveouts? >> guest: it is very complicated. that's a very good question and one of the things really interesting about the volcker rule right now is that we have the final rule but we don't really know how it is going to b' applied. we sort of have to wait and see how federal reserve bank examiners and fdic bank examiners in the banks to look at them to see if they're in compliance with the rules we have to wait the instructions to them will be how it wilting enforced. >> host: president obama yesterday put out a statement after it was approved, this, it will make it illegal for firms to use government insured money to make speculative bets that threaten the entire financial system. he went on to say, i encourage congress to give regulators to effectively and efficiently
implement this rule. is there a question whether or not congress does that? >> guest: that is particularly an issue for the cftc and sec. cftc regulates derivatives and sec regulates stocks companies. cftc have severe budget crunch. they're asked to do a whole lot under dodd-frank. they said they can't do it with the funding they're getting. they're asking for more none any. as you know that is always a fight with congress. >> host: emily stephenson with reuters. thank you for your time. >> guest: thank you. >> a rare constant in american political life, if you look at you know, say congress in 1901, less than 2% of members came from working class background. got into politics and then eventually wound up in congress. so a flash forward to the present day. the average member of congress spent less than 2% of their career doing manual labor jobs, doing service industry jobs. and so, this is one thing that really hasn't changed, you know.
lots of different aspects of the political process have changed. broadcast television, cable news, the rise of canned today centered election and big money and clients of unions and while all this is happening one of the constants during that, during the last 100 years or so is working-class people are not getting elected to political office. >> does it matter that there is second quarter yo economic disparity between most elected officials and the citizens they represent? nick cast carnes looks at a white-collar government. sunday night at 9:00 on "after words." in january, in department with radio talk show host mark levin, will take your questions three hours sunday, january this. all part of booktv weekend on c-span2. on line for december's booktv book club we want to know what your favorite books were in 2013. throughout the month join other readers to discuss the notable
books published this year. go to booktv.org and click on, book club, to enter the chat room. live now to capitol hill. a few minutes just ahead of this house hearing with health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius. who is on the hill today to update lawmakers on the health care law's implementation. she'll testify before the house energy and commerce subcommittee on health. her testimony coming as the centers forfor medicare and medicaid, cms, continues to make fixes to the healthcare.gov website. representative joe pitts is the chairman of the subcommittee while representative frank pallone shifts as the ranging member. this hearing should get underway in just a few moments.
[inaudible conversations] >> again we're live on capitol hill waiting for health and human services secretary kathleen sebelius to testify before a house health subcommittee. her testimony coming after she blogged earlier today according to the associated press, hhs secretary kathleen sebelius saying in a blog post early today that she's asking the department's inspector general to investigate the contracting process, management, performance and payment issues that may have
contributed to the flawed launch of the healthcare.gov website. the announcement comes as secretary sebelius heads to capitol hill for another round of grilling today according to the associated press before the house energy and commerce subcommittee. lawmakers want explanations for dozens of questions about the website's design, workability and security. they also want to know why secretary sebelius and other top officials repeatedly assured them everything was on track. again that according to an ap story today. we're waiting for this hearing to get underway. our live coverage here on c-span2. . .
[inaudible conversations] >> the subcommittee will come to order. the chair will recognize himself for an opening statement. throughout this year, various administration officials, including you, madam secretary, have sat in this room and repeatedly told the american people that implementation of the affordable care act was on schedule. as we have seen from the disastrous rollout of healthcare.gov and documents showing that the october 1 deadline could not be met, that was false. in fact, every major promise the
administration made about the aca from being able to keep your health plan if you like it, to being able to keep your doctor if you want to, the very premise of health reform in the first place that the affordable care act would make health coverage more affordable has proven to be wrong. my constituents have repeatedly expressed to me that they feel they were lied to by the administration about the real effects of this law. in addition we are also learning that millions may be improperly enrolled in medicaid. as result of the disastrous rollout resulted in washington yet again squandering the hard earned dollars sent to the federal government by our constituents. words start to lose their meaning when they're delivered by individuals who have either misled this committee or were woefully ignorant of the disastrous consequences that have unfolded since enactment of
the aca. the last time you were here, madam secretary, you said quote, i know that it isn't fair to ask of the american people to take our word for it. well, millions of americans are being harmed by this law. my constituents do not trust the administration when it comes to the affordable care act, and it is they who are suffering because of these broken promises. i will yield to the chairman of the full committee, mr. upton. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this committee has conducted extensive oversight of the president's health care law. many of the administration's top health officials have testified over the last year, including secretary, they repeatedly looked us in the eye, spring, summer and fall and assured us that, in fact, everything was on track. but our oversight has produced documents showing the frantic
chaos, ms. deadlines and delays behind the scenes. sadly come it seems the administration's assurances about being ready to launch were just as ink as the president promises that this law would mean lower costs while allowing americans to keep the coverage and doctors that they have in life. and millions of americans are now in during the harsh reality of canceled plans, the burden of finding a new doctor, and the financial strength of higher premiums set to shock family budgets. far too many americans who were happy and satisfied with their health care coverage on january 1 of this year have had the world's turned upside down as we approach january 1 of 2014. this is a matter of trust. it is time for the administration to be honest with folks like mary swanson in kalamazoo, michigan, my constituents who, along with her husband, had an actual plan. no more false promises, no more
political gain, no more questionable testimony. it is time for transparency and the truth. a yield accountable time to dr. murphy. >> thank you, chairman upton. thanks for being here today, secretary sebelius. as the chairman of the subcommittee, i work with my filamentous to conduct oversight of the president's health care law. we've had people before our committee who talked about its implementation. some of the concerns raised in the first part of this year increased premiums, the burden of this law on small businesses, whether the implementation was on track and the costs have come to fruition. documents uncovered by the subcommission of the administration months before the october 1 start up of open enrollment had problems with a federally facilitated market place. yet every administration official can be forced testified before the committee this year that implementation was on track. we are two weeks from the genuine start of coverage in what you. >> and public expect?
unfortunately, the record of transparency has not improved. the administration has continued delays, and mostly select the one you delay of the online enrollment to the shop program. failed to punch pro -- problems with writing on wall. millions have received a pink slip from their insurance plan and others are facing unaffordable care with the new higher rates. last month a top seed this official said 30-40% of the website to get to be built. i hope you can help us provide get some answers for today and commit to help speed up the response to document requests, two boxes of documents into months is not a good response. thank you. >> now recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee, mr. pallone, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me just say i'm sorry that you can find a way to accommodate members to attend the nelson mandela memorial and not miss today's important but many of the democrats are at that memorial service today, and i know that mr. waxman made a
reasonable request that was denied come and i wish this hadn't been the case. but in any case we are moving forward. i listened to what my republican colleagues just said about the affordable care act. and i don't know whether reality is on their part. sometimes i think that they're living on mars rather than earth. i heard consequences, things like disastrous consequences, harm, suffering, harsh reality, world turned upside down. i mean, they should event at my forum. i had a forum monday night in highland park which was one of my towns on the aca. i heard just the opposite. people were happy because they were able to enroll. some were medicaid recipients who were not eligible for medicaid before. me of them, you know, were remarking about the ability to get insurance for the first time. so you know, it just boggles my
mind to hear these republican comments about a world turned upside down when the reality is the affordable care act is working. people are getting interested didn't have it. people are getting affordable insurance with good benefits. i mean, that's the reality that i hear when i'm home, and i'm not making it up. i'll take any of them to my forum if they want to. regardless, let me welcome you, madam secretary, for joining us can. i understand you've been in front of our to me more than any other and we're grateful for your service and your valuable time. i'm eager to hear what i know it's positive about the enrollment of coverage under the aca and the law's implementati implementation. republicans seem to be saying that things have not improved. they have improved a lot and certainly the website has improved a lot. it's unfortunate the republicans continue to focus their time and efforts trying to obstruct and sabotage the aca rather than working on a constructive way too big sure that as many americans as possible are able to benefit from it.
i'm proud of this law, and i wanted to mention a story. one of my constituents wrote a letter to the editor of a local newspaper describing his experience with health insurance pre- and post-implementation of health exchange. i asked cutler be said for the record, mr. chairman. >> without ejections ordered. >> this gentleman found a plan that was less than his previous plan. better coverage, better deductible, better out of pocket maximum, better prescription drug. his expense demonstrates that this is a quality product that people want to sign up for. i lived that because unyielding now to mr. waxman. >> -- i will leave it at that. >> thank you for yielding to me. i want you to go your statement about the regrets that we have that the majority wouldn't postpone this hearing so that all members could attend the memorial for nelson mandela. obviously, more democrats feel
the reason they wanted to be there was more important than to be here and they shouldn't have had to make that choice. madam secretary, want to welcome you back to our committee. healthcare.gov is much improved since he last appeared before the committee. millions more have applied for coverage and signed up. in fact, we just learned today that enrollment in november quadrupled over the october enrollment. all told as of november 30, 365,000 people have enrolled in private coverage, 1.9 million were through the process, just waiting to pick a plan, and enrollment has been speeding up each and every week. as a result we are beginning to the stories of people finally getting the security and peace of mind that comes with quality health insurance. some of these stories are very powerful. barbara from a district recently found out that her policy was going to be canceled, and she
had been rejected in the past for more affordable policies because of her back problem. in her new policy she went -- she obtained on the exchange, her deductibles were cut in half, she will save hundreds more on free preventive care and are premiums will never shoot out if she has a serious health event. these excess stories are happening in every state and district in the country. you wouldn't know it from the republican members comments. joanne from florida had been uninsured and hadn't seen a doctor in years. she has repaid we try to enroll without success, it in this which he purchased a plan for only a few dollars a month. win that finally occurred she burst into tears. our exchange director in california and said that this is a common experience. i know this law is controversial, mr. chairman. that's because hundreds of millions of dollars opponents
have spent trying to demonize the law, i think republicans are afraid that this law is going to be popular when it's fully in effect. republicans are tired of the partisanship of divided congress. i want to make one request and this will be the last statement i want to make now. i hope that the secretary gives more respectful treatment from all members at than she received after last visit, and at a minimum shot to be allowed to answer questions. this last time she was interrupted over and over again. there are more republicans here today than democrats. we are all going to get a chance to ask questions. a lot of democrats won't because they chose to be at the memorial service, but who ever ask a question, the secretary should be able to answer her questions and not be rudely interrupted. and not have -- she had to endure last time. >> the gentleman's time has expired.
without ejections all members opening statements will be made a part of the record. on our panel today we have the audible kathleen sebelius, secretary of the department of health and human services. thank you again, madam secretary, for coming. i urge all members to use proper decorum to permit her to respond to the questions. but we only have so many minutes. i understand members will be trying to get as many questions in as they possibly can. and we will try to operate the gavel strictly and fairly, but madam secretary, thank you for coming. you have five minutes to some russia testimony. your written testament will be placed in the record so at this time the chair recognizes the honorable secretary, five minutes. >> well, thank you, chairman upton and ranking member waxman, mr. pitts, mr. pallone, members of the committee.
since i was last year on october 30, our team has and working around the clock to improve healthcare.gov. we committed to making the site work smoothly for the vast majority of users by the end of november, and after several hundred software fixes and hardware upgrades, we have achieved this first benchmark. while there's still more work to do, we've made great progress. healthcare.gov is working faster, respond more quickly and we're able to handle larger volumes of concurrent users. pages that once took eight seconds to load are not responding in under one second. the sites air raid which wants top 6% has been driven down to below 1%. the system has more redundancy and stability and we can now handle 50,000 simultaneous users and more than 800,000 daily visitors. as more americans get healthcare.gov a second look, they're finding the experience is night and day compared to where we were out in october.
they are respond by shopping plans and enrolling in greater numbers, as mr. waxman has said more than four times as many enrolled in the federal market place in november as enrolled in october. in the first two months, nearly 1.2 million americans either selected a marketplace plan or received a medicaid or chip elderly determination. with no thread safety 5000 people selecting a plan and 803,000 receiving a determination. an additional 1.9 million people have made it through the application and determination but have not yet selected a plan. we expect that as more folks talk things over with the families of learn about their new options, more will enroll. to those who have been frustrated with the experience so far, we are asking you to come back to it's not easy than ever to shop for plans and enroll online, over the phone, in paper, on -- more than
5 million americans have dialed into our call center in the first two months, 450,000 have received assistance from more than 19,000 trained assisters. and in the first week of december alone, healthcare.gov received nearly 5 million visits. open enrollment for health insurance continues for 3.5 more months. so there's still time. to put this in perspective, most private insurance plans offer open enrollment for only a few weeks. we continue to be relentless in our efforts to improve healthcare.gov, and we're committed to learning and adapting, improving and acting on the feedback we received from consumers and issuers alike. as i told this committee at the end of october, the initial launch of healthcare.gov was flawed, frustrating, and unacceptable. i believe strongly in accountability and our obligations as public servants to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars.
now that the website is working more smoothly, i've determined it's the right time to begin a process a better understanding the structural and managerial policies that led to the flawed launch. so they can take action and avoided these problems in the future. today i'm announcing some initial steps i've taken. i passed out inspector general to investigate the development of healthcare.gov, including contractor acquisition, the overall management of the project, and performance and payment of our contractors. i best cms administrator marilyn tavenner to create a new position of chief risk officer at the centers for medicare and medicaid services, and to expedite the search and hiring. this will be a full-time employee charged with assessing risk management practices and developing strategies to minimize those risks. let me be specific. i will instruct this officer to look at i.t. and contracting management practices starting with healthcare.gov, and the risk factors that impede a
successful launch. outdoes for an initial report in the first 60 days with recommendations on how we can mitigate risk as we move forward. i've instructed cms to update and expand their employee training. they are required to adopt best practice for contractor and procurement management rules and procedures, including internal communications and processes. these actions build on reforms we've already made which have led to significant improvements in the website, includes the addition of the management expert and consultant, administered have any, selecting systems integrator and changing the day-to-day cms management of healthcare.gov. fixing a flawed website has proven challenging, but it's nothing compared to the challenges that american families face every day. particularly those families who don't yet have health coverage. families who are one medical bill away from bankruptcy, one
diagnoses away from not being able to afford their mortgage or the rent. and these efforts are about them. before the affordable care act, as many as 14,000 of our neighbors were losing their coverage each and every day. the market operated inefficiently. we as a nation paid more and got lower health results. today, health care cost growth has been driven down to the lowest levels in 50 years. and millions of americans are already benefiting from new rights and consumer protection. with a new marketplace, choice and competition among private market plans is now available to millions of americans. but our work is not done until every eligible america has the opportunity to access affordable coverage -- coverage. thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair thanks the gentleman you. out begin questioning, recognize myself five minutes for that purpose. madam secretary, based on current trends is likely that more individuals have lost coverage on january 1 been one
of gained it under the law. hhs released data this morning stating that approximate 364,000 americans have selected a plan or a state or federal exchange. is that correct? >> yes, sir. >> of these 364,000 americans, do you know how many will actually have coverage in effect on january 1, 2014? >> once they pay th their premis they will have coverage in effect. >> so you don't know? these are the ones who just selected a plan but haven't paid the first payment on a premium? >> some may have paid, some of not. we are giving the enrollment numbers. >> this is a critical statistic. it's clear a chess knows the number of americans essentially put a plan in the shopping cart. your testament includes data on the number of users who can use
healthcare.gov simultaneously and the number of website hits. however, this most critical statistic, the number of americans who will actually have coverage effective january 1, do you have an estimate? >> sir, i think 365,000 through the end of november have enrolled in coverage and we're getting with issuers to confirm the actual -- >> would you define enrollment? define what you mean by -- >> we are giving you the numbers of individuals who have chosen a plan spent but not actually paid the first -- >> that's correct, through the end of november. payment isn't to as you know until mid-december in order to be fully covered. so we don't have those numbers and i think most americans probably will not pay and till their money is owed. owed. >> so you can't guarantee the actual number of constituents who have coverage? >> not until they pay the
premium. >> and october the ap reported a september 5 memo sent to your list of monthly enrollment targets for the exchanges, and this number indicates that your target enrollment number for the end of december is 3.3 million, based on hhs is released this morning, your department is more than 3 million author target number, isn't that correct? >> to the end of november that is correct. >> some reports have indicated as many as 5.6 million individuals have had a policy canceled. isn't it the case that on january 1 more americans will have their coverage canceled than will have enrolled in an exchange? >> well, sir, i don't know where the 5 million number council. i know people have been told that their health plan doesn't necessary match the aca compliant plans. they're not in a grandfathered plan. a number of individuals have already reenlisted and enrolled in plans to so losing coverage and being know if i'd that the plan they have doesn't exist anymore are two very different
things. >> much like the millions of cancellations in the individual market, the affordable care act requires group coverage to also comply with aca standards. many of these plan plants coulde canceled next year as well. madam secretary, the issue with the canceled plans and the president's broken promise that if you like it you can keep it, it's because some of those individual plants did not comply with the health care laws 2014 requirements, correct? >> that is true, or they did not stay in a grandfathered plan. with a lawsuit from the outset is if insurers left a plan in place that an individual had in march 2010, and our millions of americans are in those grandfathered plants, that the plan state in effect through the application of the affordable care act spent what about small group market plans used by small businesses and their employees? >> in the same way. at the grandfather plan state in
effect, they could still be in effect. if not, the consumer protections that are available through the affordable care act would come into play. >> at some small group plans be council because they do not comply with the aca? >> yes, sir. again, injures council plans each and every year. a change plans, networks. that's part of the market strategy. >> madam secretary, before passage of the health care law, president obama routinely promise that the average fan would save over $2000 on their premiums. would you agree today that it simply is not true every family will see premium decreases? some will see increases? yes? >> well, mr. pitts, i think that the president talked about health care costs going down for americans. i think that we have adequately documented that health care costs indeed have gone down based on the trajectory that we
would've seen thousand the affordable care act. underlying health costs are rising at the slowest rate in 50 years. medicare costs have risen at the slowest rate. medicaid costs have actually come down per capita throughout the country, and private insurance rates are rising at the lowest level that they have in decades. so americans are seeing a very different cost trajectory than they would have after the passage of the affordable care act. >> my time is expired. think you madam secretary, for your responses. now recognize ranking member, mr. pallone for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and again, madam secretary, i don't want to keep beating a dead horse here, but this whole idea that we have from the republicans that the world is turned upside down and aca is a disaster, it's just the opposite. as you point out, health care costs, you know, are going down, rates are rising at a less other level. this whole idea of the president
saying if you like it you could keep it, the president didn't say that if you had a lousy health insurance policy didn't cover everything, that he was suggesting that insurance companies continue to sell it and, therefore, you buy it. i was that the rules committee the other day when the president issued his executive order, and i had one of my colleagues from florida, one of my republican colleagues talk about how his constituents should have the freedom to use the word freedom, to keep his or her health plan that cost $60 a month but and i asked, well, what is this health plan? it didn't include hospitalization. don't think the president meant that you should have the freedom to keep a health insurance plan that didn't include hospitalization. if you want it, his executive order says you can do it, but i think it's absurd to keep arguing over those lousy, skeletal plans. in any case, the reality is that
enrollment is accelerating and i want to ask you about enrollme enrollment. the numbers released today are impressive and i wanted to get some broader context from you on how enrollment is progressing. we expected enrollment to be slow in the early months, and that's what happened in massachusetts when they implement the health care reform. in the first month only .03% of people in massachusetts who ultimately signed up actually enrolled. but the clear trend in the report that enrollment is searching. in november there were four times more enrollments in private plans than in october. october. more than one point to many enrolled in private plans were found eligible for medicaid, and more than 1.9 million people are eligible for marketplace coverage and can enroll as soon as they select a plan. 3.7 going to have applied for coverage, but the most important fact is the trend, the pace at the end of the month was double the pace at the start of the month. that trend appeared to be continuing. press reports have indicated
more people signed up for private coverage through the federal marketplace on november 30 and december 1 and signed up for all of october. another press report noted more people selected a plan in the first week of december. these are exciting science. such as a given the technical issues we've had in the corresponding delays, much of the outreach campaign, how would you measure the progress this morning in terms of enrollment? >> well, i don't think there's any question that flawed launch of the website put a damper on people's enthusiasm about early sign-up. we had a lot of visitors early on who got very frustrated, and have none reengaged. we have been inviting them back to using newly improved site and we're seeing some very, very positive trends trend in that direction. so i don't want to minimize the debt in effect that a flawed
technology had, notches on the federal website but i think on the news reports also i think dampened cms is level, it was hard for california, for instance, to assure people that their site was fine blow there was a lot of news day in and day out about the plot site. having said that, we are seeing very, very positive trends, a lot of people reengage. and it's about not only just the numbers of individuals but at the end of the day, hopefully getting the right mix of individuals and we know that a lot of younger americans are greek text savvy, what a very fully functioning easy site. so getting healthcare.gov up and running correctly also helps with some of those targeted numbers. >> i appreciate that. let me just say, i only have 50 seconds, at my forum which was a successful in highland park, and people were happy with what we were doing, the other night, they were particularly pleased
that you have that option where you didn't have to basically provide all your information but good comparison shop without actually enrolling. i thought that was very good. and still, to encourage people to use alternatives. i know you're right. a lot of people like to use the website, but i know there a lot of people at my forum who were, you know, calling the 800 number, going to committee health centers. and also we had some interest agents and brokers there and i think, i know, i think we should encourage that as well as alternatives. >> we have been conducting some pilots with a large number of insurers in key states. i think they have gone extremely well. we are encouraging insurance companies to have their agents and brokers directly enrolled. and i think that experience has been very productive, and we're working closely with them on the kind of