tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN December 17, 2013 8:00pm-9:01pm EST
i know how hard justice ginsberg works. i have every respect that she would take her time to be here with us. it is not her favorite hour of the day. [laughter] we owe her a great deal of thanks for her time and her remarksul and revealing about the court. thank you, justice ginsberg. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> thank you. >> the senate voted today to advance a bipartisan budget deal. 67-33 to cutgreed off debate on the agreement
reached by congressman paul ryan and senator patty murray. final passage is expected tomorrow in the senate and we will have some of the debate in a moment. on tonight's first ladies, a look at the life of helen taft. investigates panel be navy yard shooting. three house members announced today that they do not intend to run for reelection in 2014. a republican from northern ,irginia, jim matheson of utah and tom latham all announced their retirement. politico said that the most again begin departure came from utah where jim matheson is vacating a conservative seat, almost certainly handing it to republicans in next year's midterms. democrats got good news in iowa where tom latham declared that he was retiring from the swing district he has held for two terms.
virginia, another gop congressmen announced that he would not be running for reelection in and up for grabs district. oft announcement marks three the most high-profile congressional retirements ahead of next year's midterms. raise therying to deficit the face in the house. >> help republicans -- 12 republicans voted on the budget measure. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell voted against the bill. the house approved it last week. here is some of tuesday's senate debate. >> the budget conference did not meet. leaders discuss the legislation that is now before
us. it had a number of problems. this is not the right way to conduct this process. the question is, should we advance with this legislation, even though it needs to be improved. believe it can be improved, and it should be improved. soneed to amend the budget that it can successfully maintain the growth of the next few years. it should not be lightly amended. i would suggest that we vote against it. we say to the leadership and senator reid that we want to have amendments on this legislation. we are about to have a significant reduction in the retirement benefit of military -- disabled military personnel, people deserve 20 years in the united military. their pay is going to be cut as
much as $70,000. we need to think about that. legislation, amazingly and disappointingly, it offers the ability of the senate to block entry in spending. we have a budget like the border today that allows an objection to be raised. votes in order to spend more than we have agreed to spend. --s legislation amazingly perhaps the house did not understand the significance of it. it is very significant. we have loaded three separate times to block this legislation in the last year or so, successfully. we want to stay with the commitment that we made to the american people to keep spending at a correct level.
collings, there are a lot of problems with this bill. we should say to senator reid and the leadership here in the senate, the democratic leadership, that we must slow down and have a chance to have actual debate stop let's fix some of the problems. there are plenty of times to fix those problems and send the bill back to the house and pass it before the deadline of january 15. i think the chair -- i think the chair and i yield the floor. >> the senator from washington. >> we have lurched from one budget crisis to another. from one fiscal cliff to the next. when one countdown clock stopped, the next one got started. the uncertainty was devastating to our very fragile economic recovery. the constant crisis costas ilion's of dollars in lost cost usnd jobs will --
millions of dollars in lost growth and jobs. it is hurting our families and our communities. it is cutting off investments in growth and national security. after the completely unnecessary government shutdown and the debt limit crisis two months ago, the american people are more disgusted than ever. partisanship of and sick of showboating. they are tired of turning on the televisions at night and seeing elected officials saying, it is my way or the highway. they had no more patience for politicians holding the economy and the federal government hostage to extract concessions or score political points. when the government was finally reopens and the debt limit crisis was averted, people across the country were hoping that democrats and republicans could finally get in a room,
make some compromises, and take a step away from the constant crises. that is why i was so glad that part of the crisis ending deal was creating the budget conference that many of us here on both sides of the aisle have been trying to start since the senate and house passed their budget seven months ago. the budget conference began at a time when distrust between democrats and republicans could not be higher. in two months to get a deal. assumed that there was no way that this could be done. the chairman ryan and i got together and we started talking. we decided that instead of trying to solve everything at once, the most important thing we could do for the family we represent was to end the uncertainty and start rebuilding some trust.
we weren't going to spend the next eight weeks in partisan corners. we were not going to use what was said in the room to launch political attacks on the other. we were not going to try to tackle the larger challenges that we both knew were critical, what we were going to start right now. we focused on what was attainable. we work together to find common ground and we look for ways we could compromise and take some steps toward the other. we both thought that the least we should be able to do was to find a way to replace some of the across-the-board cuts from sequestration and agree on a spending level for the short- term so we can avoid another crisis. i know some of our colleagues want to keep the sequester cap. democrats and many republicans believe that it makes sense to replace these cuts with smarter and more balanced savings.
we have spent seven weeks working on this. i worked closely with the house budget committee rating member chris van hollen and my colleagues here in the senate on and off the budget committee. i'm proud to last week chairman ryan and i reach an agreement on the bipartisan budget act of 2013. this bill passed the house of .epresentatives on thursday it was a vote of 332-94. we had overwhelming support from democrats and republicans. i come to the floor today to urge my colleagues to support this bill here in the senate consented send it to the presidents about it can be signed into law. act itsrtisan budget job and economic growth first by rolling back sequestration's harmful cuts to education, medical research, infrastructure investments and other areas for the next two years.
if we do not get a deal, we would have faced another continuing resolution that would have locked in the automatic cuts over a potential government shutdown in just a few short weeks. over the past year i have heard from so many people in washington who have told me that sequestration has hurt their families, their businesses, and their communities. head start programs were shut down. had to wonder if meals on wheels would continue. ,he sciences, the doctors investments and cutting-edge research were cut off and friends. construction workers lost their jobs. .- and threatened construction workers lost their jobs. small businesses declined due to cuts. then the cuts from sequestration wereey were real, they
hurting, and it would only get worse. i am proud that our bill 2/3 cuts ofost discretionary investments. as will not solve every problem sequestration has caused, but it is a step in the right direction. it is a dramatic improvement over the status quo. over the last year, i have talked to workers. they have been very much impacted by these sequestration and very worried about how another round of cuts will affect their jobs and families. i have heard from military leaders who told me that ourestration would impact national security if it continued. and from companies that do business with the defense department. the uncertainty and the cuts toe hurting their ability hire workers invest in future growth. i'm glad that this bill will prevent the upcoming round of sequestration and provide some
certainty for the pentagon for the upcoming year. andetary of defense hagel secretary dempsey have expressed support for this bill, as have a number of college here in congress who have spent their last few years highlighting the impact of continued sequestration on national security. the increased investments we get from rolling back sequestration are fully replace of a smarter balanced mix of new revenue amorous possible spending cuts. responsible thing to do is to increase investments now weller economic recovery remains fragile and workers are fighting to get back on the job. this bill moves is in the direction of exactly that. we have cut our deficit in half over the last few years. this bill adds to the $2.5
withion done since 2011, an additional $23 billion in evenings over the next 10 years. the bill is not exactly what i would have written on my own. i am certain it is not what chairman ryan would have written. i asked for three additional minutes. >> any objection? hearing none -- >> this bill is a compromise. neither side got exactly what they wanted, and both of us had to give in. i was disappointed that we were not be -- we were not able to close a single tax loophole. i hope we could extend critical support to workers who are starting to get back on the job. i was disappointed that republicans refused to allow that to be part of this. i certainly would have liked to replace sequestration. i know it was difficult for many republicans to accept any increases in the cap at all. i know many republicans had
hoped that this would be an opportunity to make benefit cuts. i fought hard to keep them out. this deal is a compromise. it does not tackle every one of the issues that we face as a nation, but that was never our goal. this bipartisan bill takes the first step towards rebuilding our budget process. hopefully towards rebuilding congress. we have spent far too long scrambling to fix artificial crises instead of working together to solve the big problems we all know we need to address. we have budget deficits that have improved, but they have not disappeared. we have deficits in education, education, infrastructure -- innovation, infrastructure, and there is much more we have to do to boost our economy. we must tackle our long-term
fiscal challenges fairly and responsibly. so mr. president, i am hopeful that this deal can be just the first of many bipartisan deals. i hope that he can rebuild some of the trust and bring democrats and republicans together and demonstrate that government can work or the people we are representing. i urge my colleagues to support the bipartisan budget act of 2013. mr. president, i want to thank chairman ryan for his work with me over the last several months. i want to thank a number of members who have worked very closely with us including ranking member chris van hollen and every member of our budget committee who work hard to pass a budget, started conference, and getting by partisan deal. when we come back next year, i am ready to go to work. i will work with anyone on either side of the file who wants to build on this bipartisan foundation to
continue addressing our nation's challenges fairly and responsibly. it is not going to be easy, but the american people are expecting nothing less. thank you. consent andanimous that the rule be waived. >> i rise today tuesday on the bipartisan budget deal. we have seen true leadership on the divisive issues. beforeislation we have us today is the embodiment of compromise. it is something that unfortunately has been absent in washington as of late. the bill sets forth the guidelines for sending for the remainder of this fiscal year. it also sets up the platform for the next fiscal year. this deal will set overall discretionary spending at 1.0 -- $1.01 trillion.
it is halfway between the senate budget number in the house budget number. this number is also less than for2000 spending level set him chairman ryan's 2011 budget. the overall spending numbers higher than what i would have wanted, but the house and senate budget committee chairman crafted a deal that produces $23 billion in deficit reduction. billion with the deficit that we have been running is a mere amount. all of us who are concerned about this country would like to see that number higher. but more importantly, they have produced a budget that will set in place some fiscally responsible spending policies and give as a way forward. of how each member of this chapter feels about the resulting policies, we should all recognize the importance of
this agreement and thank the chairman for their work to end this chapter of political disagreement. athough i would still prefer grand bargain to solve our fiscal crisis, this deal marks the first step in that journey. congress will now be in a better position to tackle the issues of taxation and entitlement reform in the short term. hope that the committee postures diction will take this as a sign that does need to be what happens next if we will truly address our fiscal issues. the budget deal before us is not perfect. there's a lot in this proposal to light, there is a lot to dislike. related toue military retirement pay will have to be addressed after the --sage of the no passage passage of this bill.
i'm told a pentagon officials that this provision basically came out of nowhere. tohink it is terribly unfair our men and women in uniform. they should not have a disproportionate share in our deficit reduction measures. however, i feel confident that this issue will be resolved in the near term. i have had conversations with the chairman of the committee of mand services, as well as a -- number of other members, who are committed to making sure we address it and that we will come up with some alternative. this does not happen until december 2015. many georgians have served with honor in our military. our annual cost-of-living increase may appear insignificant on paper in this money,ut this is real promise to those who put their life in harm's way in defense of
this nation. i want to share to our servicemen and women that there is ample doubt to address this issue before takes effect. i'm committed to addressing, and i will not turn my back on those who fight and have fought for this country. that said, this budget deal is a necessary and crucial step towards a functioning congress. with passage of this budget deal, we can close the vote on discretionary spending arguments for the next couple of years. we can turn our full attention to entitlement reform and tax reform. congress will debate raising bc debt ceiling -- raising the debt ceiling once again next year. we will no longer need to provide additional flexibility for defense spending. this bill will give the defense community the resources they need and conversations with top officials at the pentagon and
within the intelligence community over the weekend, they have urged the support of this address they to current budget crisis. i am extremely synthetic to both those communities and want to make sure that whatever product -- sympathetic to both those communities and want to make sure that this bill does address the shortfalls, as well as the flexibility issues in the defense community, as well as in the intelligence community. approachased with the that the budget chairman took to not turn off sequester, but to instead extending mandatory cuts for an additional two years, the odds what the budget control prescribes. this is an $85 billion fix on the sequester that keeps it from going too deep into the defense budget. it has the potential for causing real problems within the pentagon and within the defense and intelligence communities.
with this budget deal, we can also put in place a budget allocation. it will be a number that congress can spend on discretionary spending. this well, for the first time in several years, allow the appropriations committee to do the job it was intended to do. our operators have previously been forced to make spending decisions without a top line number. and through continuing resolutions, they have no information and no guidance from congress. it is no wonder that are spending is out of control. when congress approaches the appropriations process to regular order, and not through last-minute continuing resolutions, this agreement makes that process more likely. the budget committee chairman has also made a good-faith effort to attack the real problems on her budget i cutting money for mandatory programs
rather than searching for more discretionary cuts. in their agreement, they took note of how often the federal government is giving special treatment to certain groups. they have taken efforts to curb that. well many outside group attack these reforms, they are representative of the types of reforms that will have to be included in any future agreement to achieve entitlement reform. at the end of the day, that is where the real problem in our federal budget lies stop mr. president, this deal does little to address the $17 trillion debt. it is a start down that road and i truly hope that this will lead to more serious discussions on the floor of the united states senate and a solution for how we are going to see that $17 trillion repaid. deal represents a partial completion of the work the american people express from us.
while far from perfect, it leaves much to be desired. the prospect of compromise on the single most important issue of our time requires the ofention and serious work every member of his party. i will vote for the passage of this bill because it lays the groundwork for the next chapter in our pursuit of fiscal sanity. now, we have been involved in seeking out a much larger debt and deficit reduction deal than what is currently before. we know that the american people are tired of out-of-control spending. they do not understand why congress cannot address debt. it is not rocket science. we got a roadmap three years ago this month. the white house is not following the leadership of its own commission. this bill represents a small
step towards the type of cooperation that will be necessary to comprehensively address our debt and deficit. it is my hope that this agreement will allow the effort to restart. flooresident, i yield the and suggest the absence of a court. morning, theis senate voted to advance the agreement that passed the house last week. a topicslation has been of much discussion over the last couple days. there have been many arguments on both sides. while i appreciate the challenges, the house and senate negotiators faced in crafting these budget guidelines, i voted against this legislation because shouldiew, congress continue to adhere to the fiscal restraints that both parties agreed to under the budget control act. i was the principal republican
negotiator in. i've been particularly invested -- in that agreement. i've been particularly invested in that. twobudget declined for years in a row since the korean war. this was hard-won progress on the road to getting our nation's fiscal house in order. appreciatei fully what chairman ryan and chairman murray faced in their negotiations. there are clearly some good things to be said about their agreement. but in my view, we should not go back on the commitment we made under the dca -- vca. nevertheless this has been a very important public debate. are interested in having substantial debate on this or other substantive issues.
obamacare, which has been wreaking havoc on our constituents for months now, but which democrats seem entirely --nterested in discussing, the democrat-run senate has decided to a vote is attention to pushing through nominations. they would rather do that than spend time ceding political appointees to places like the department of the interior. these are positions that may be important, but are not in any way an emergency. they do not need to be attended to right this second. in the real world, millions of americans will continue to suffer under a law they told washington not to pass in the first phase. it is a law that washington democrats have refused to change. our colleagues on the other side seem to think that they have no responsibilities to do anything about the impact of obamacare since the white house issued a
press release declaring a partial victory. a partial victory in fixing the website. all of these approaches were a disaster. but the white house deflects on any problem that arises until people forget about the last one. --t some web can technician they basically do nothing. we are now three months into this national calamity. what are democrats doing about this national calamity? they have issued a lot of powerful points and some have issued apologies, and they have mentioned private sector philosophy is, but they have feared the political impact of leaving the wind place. there is hardly been any accountability for the massive consequences faced to the american immersed. in other words, they have not done much of anything. they have treated this whole thing like a public relations
problem to get past, rather than a real life problem for middle- class americans. they are engaged in a daily battle. they have one overriding goal. protect the law. nearly every day, we hear more about its painful impact. rollout, millions of americans have lost their insurance plans. more than 280,000 have lost coverage in kentucky alone. so many are feeling the squeeze of this law. mom from kentucky who told me that the annual out- of-pocket expenses for her family rose from $1800 to $7,000. -- $1500 to $7,000. in another part of kentucky had a health plan that he liked and wanted to keep. it was a 500 and $40 monday
policy that was perfect -- 540 dollars a month policy that was perfect for his family. the government thought that they knew better than he did about the case of their family. he lost it. his is what he had to say. my plan is being eliminated because of the eighth the a. aca, obamacare. it will cost is $1400 next year. we can keep the plan until the end of next year, but we will have to pick a new one. we do not need the extra coverage for maternity, vision, or dental, but we will be forced to pay for. then he continued. these changes are absurd. most people in this country who are content with what they had are now paying for what obama is trying to do for a very field. he closed his letter by asking me to work two or peel obamacare. work to repeal obamacare.
every american should note that we are not going to give up this fight. no matter how much the other side tries to distract the country's attention, we will not be fooled. we know that you will not be either. wereolks that each of us sent here to represent, not the government, should be the ones choosing plants that make more sense for their families. what our colleagues honor other side -- our colleagues on the other side referred to as junk, that is because it is beyond offensive to the people we represent. lot of ivory tower thinking that goes on in this city. there's way too much of it. it is time for our washington democratic friends to climb out of the ivory tower and see the reality of their ideas in action. the failure of their
policies firsthand. it is time for washington democrats to drop their refusal to change anything of substance in obamacare and it is time for them to listen closely to the people in the first place. here is what so many americans are saying. here is what they are saying. if they want democrats to start working with republicans to improve our national health care way, ton a positive help us implement real patient- centered areas that can lower costs and improve the quality of care. we were sent here to solve problems, not to make them more. that is what obamacare does. let's get rid of that mistake and start over with real reform. let's work together and we can do it. >> the senate will continue debate on the house passed bill tomorrow.
majority leader reid said that updates are possible throughout the day, but did not set a time. on capitol hill today, senator tom coburn released a report on what he said deals with government spending. tookepublican senator questions on this daily briefing. >> good morning, and sorry to keep you waiting. i just loaded on a bill that raises 68 million dollars in spending. bill that raises $68 million in spending. whether you agreed my opinion or not is not an issue. if you look at the $700 billion , someicits and the debt grown up in the room has to question whether or not we are spending money wisely and
effectively. $30 billion of what i would consider stupid or poor judgment when it comes to spending money in a time when we have very little money to spare. we have also had the defense department and people in nondefense discretionary fund screaming about the cuts. there's nothing else to cut. that is not true. congress is probably going to , the houseill already has in the senate probably will today. it shows you that congress does not have its eye on the ball. we are not spending money in an appropriate way. money to studyed romance novels. we provided money to the state department so that they could encourage people to like their facebook page. we even help nasa fund studies
of us, congress. my congressmans focused on doing its job of setting priorities and oversight and cutting wasteful spending, we could have avoided both the government shut down and the budget deal that we are now considering, which actually grows the government and raises the burden on the american taxpayer. my favorite client in the program -- point in the program of this is that they spent millions of dollars on airplanes and as soon as they were delivered they ship into the desert. this is the same agency that will leave $7 billion worth of equipment in afghanistan. it is wasted, valuable equipment. but it is too hard to utilize it in some other area of the world.
this report speaks folly is about why the american people have lost confidence in government. is congress lost reading that 6.0%. we would much -- congress's rating is at 6.0%. the american people have a right to expect much more from us. we have seen waste. increasing thed burden on the american people. it is republicans and democrats alike. now i will take your questions. yes ma'am? can you tell us if anything has ever resulted -- has congress ever taken a look at the military? >> what is happening with these airplanes for example, they are not going to be transferred.
they are going to get used to eventually, but not in a way that is most efficient. it is interesting if you dig into the background on these airplanes, they were bought -- the military comes up with all sorts of reasons why they don't want to use them full the afghan them.itary wanted to use so we will give them to them. we're going to waste another $400 million by giving these aircraft to them. here is my point, does congress hold the administration accountable? does it hold itself accountable? who makes that decision and are they still the ranks that they were? are there supply problems? wethere were, why are holding the contractor accountable. there is no accountability and that is a function and result of poor leadership.
will give you a controversial one that didn't make much sense. political science funding of congress, it is pretty obvious what congress's problems are. the american people have figured it out. should we be spending money that we don't have? we passed that last year. we got rid of political science funding. chagrin of the political science professors around the country. it is not whether something is good or bad, it is whether we are to be making those decisions on a time when there are not begin amount of money. surplus, and we asked what shall be of the surplus, what is the appropriate thing to do? we are not in a surplus. we are in dire straits.
we will not recognize now and in the short term -- the way you get out of trillion dollar debt is cutting a billion dollars at a time. cut $30 billion at a time. whether you agree with me are not that some of this should not have been done, you cannot disagree with everything. should we have eliminated a bunch of these things instead of raised $24 billion off the american public? >> i'm just wondering in regard to the budget, some people are saying, it allows us to return to regular order of the budget. should congress start looking at something? >> they could have already. we could have done appropriations bill last year. why did we do them? came out of the committee. you are asking the wrong person.
that is a decision fully made by the majority leader. he chose not to put an appropriations bill on the floor. the one he did put out, he pulled after two days. regular order is a question of leadership. it is not a function of a budget deal. caps. cap, the sequester -- congress'ss willingness to live within the means is not there. republicans and democrats alike. the department of defense appropriators do not like our spending. but they will not do the hard work in eliminating the foolishness that is in the expenditures every year. if you actually did the oversight, this is not hard to do. this is all good. willingakes is someone
to say, maybe we ought to get rid of these aspects of the bill? it comes down to leadership. committee leadership, subcommittee leadership, it requires people to do the right thing for the right reasons. >> you highlighted a bunch of things that have to do with the military. that we are supposed to be scaling down in 2014, and you expect more cuts for the military? -- a have not begin sit gun to uncover where the waste is. military, and the you put in modern management techniques, which she did, and we continue this process of -- that is, leadership exerted by one woman in her branch. she let that. ,e are to be doing that
praising general to get up and do the right thing with the right skill set. they actually save the american people money. in my mind, if you wanted to save $100 billion, you could do it without any difficulty. it would not affect our readiness, our training, or hours of eiffel's -- our supply. it has gotten worse, not better. a lot of people would agree butt finding efficiencies, what about the approach she -- appropriations deadline being in january? can you address this issue? >> i think the committee is coming to congress. they are charge of doing oversight first. i will give you a great example. the workforce committee in the house. we put out a study on job
training, we all heard it, we got all these job-training programs, but we don't have any metrics to say that they are doing with the others do. they took 36 programs and converted it into six. we have done nothing with that in the senate. here's a way to save billions of dollars a year and the house had done it. i would go back and make the wouldthat the charge i make to the appropriations committee is stick to oversight and find the waste. where can you consolidate programs? where can you streamline things? , whatwhere we are today we have tried to do is create new programs. we have not looked at the --grams we have running, >> [inaudible] >> you bet. if you want to oversight this,
if you want to read some of the 50 reports that we put out the last five years, if you were a curious appropriator, you might find some valuable information in there. everything is, like else, no one looks at it. no one does it is hard work. it is hard work because somebody gets gored. somebody doesn't get money. what does that translate into? it means somebody is not happy at home. the real problem is that most members of congress are more interested in getting themselves reelected then helping their constituents. i wondered what the debt ceiling -- will it come up again? what is your approach to that question mark -- what is your approach to that?
are they going to vote to raise the debt ceiling? >> the american people do not is a debtat there ceiling issue here. at the never not been passed? if they lied to the american people to say that there's a debt ceiling. every time the career politicians in the town figure out a way to increase the debt ceiling. fact, you did the 1.0% role that has been posed and you cut the budget by 1.0% every year, in 10 years you would have a balanced budget and you would not have to increase the debt ceiling. that does not say anything about reform to the taxpayer. i have not voted for a debt ceiling increase because i do not feel it is honest with the american people. it is meaningless. we should not spend money we do not have. we ought not to spend that money because all we're doing is increasing the standard of
living of the president upcoming generation. -- present, upcoming generation. , and weion in spending should be able to find 1, 2, 3, 4%. the othereven include thing that reasonable people with any common sense and work history would say, that is not good value. that is not why spending. , where ison is everybody else asking these questions as we continue to borrow ourselves into oblivion. billion, think about that. required ofg to be his country just to service that $700 billion?
to me, this is a moral issue. it is a political issue. when you are spending money you do not have on things you absolutely need and the results of that is lowering years entered of living for the young people in this country, i think that is immoral. it is not just wrong, it is morally wrong. we should not be responsible with their futures. how weys nothing about take advantage of how this country has is partly been set up. it is a beneficial place to start a life. >> a follow up. will other republicans continue to demand cutbacks? >> i do not know. historically, i have not been a good spokesman for other republicans. let's put it that way. --what will congress do
there are a lot of research projects in these reports. are those decisions made for a competitive -- through a competitive grant process? what can congress do about that? >> that is a good question. historically it has been a problem with congress. you can take the affordable care act if you want and say that it is a great example. you congress legislates, if watch the legislative process, most of the time they legislate without having the knowledge of what they're doing. but they lack the knowledge, they leave up to the bureaucracy of stop and that is 80% of the time. real legislators know their issues, and other programs, know-how they were, and direct agencies on what to do. that requires work. you need to know the programs.
we are gettingm ready to reauthorize. i know that program. i know how it works and i know where it is not working. we're going to be very specific on what we tell homeland security to do. that requires hard work. most people around here do not want to go to the depths of knowledge or law. that is why you have the nih immigrants out for things that would seem to be very questionable to the commonsense person and the average american. it is because we have not reined in their power to do those kind of things. when we reauthorize and we re- appropriate, we want to make sure that something comes into as district that is not seen an earmark. we will not do anything about how to make a judgment that is based on sound principles and good finance.
the problem is congress. you cannot blame the bureaucracy, you muslim congress. >> is wasteful spending got better in your time here? >> people are looking at it more appropriately. i am not sure i can quantify it. the budget is larger than it was. we are twice the size we were in 2001. the budget in terms of total quantity is better. wasteful spending is twice as much or not, i am not sure. whether washington knows or not, the american people know it. if you look at all the surveys of what they think is wasteful ending -- what are they to think? were going to get airplanes, and half of them we will put in the desert. what do they think about that?
it does not fit with common sense. it is not a good enough answer. it will not be a good answer in the long run, because it will directly impact these ended up living. should we have $9 trillion worth of savings? years? should we not raise taxes and spending? we have done is what the career politicians want us to do. that is what will go down on the senate floor today. is stupid for the young people of this country. side, wherefense any of the amendments that you are hoping to see incorporated? >> my amendment will not be
considered. think what we ought to do is hold contractors accountable. there are three sides to defense spending. there are things that have nothing to do with defense. we ought to get them out. it is not fair to say the defense budget as this, when 10% of the budget has nothing to do with defense full that is number one. number two, how do we buy major weapons systems? you will not solve the problem of cost to the pentagon until you make it where the contractors in this country have capital at risk. we do not have any capital at risk. 35 -- 35 -- see the f-35, and the contractors are making money every time the dollar goes over.
,ntil they have capital at risk they know how to milk the system. there is no penalty for milking the system. on sinceas been going $500 hammers and $600 toilet seats. there does not seem to be any progress. how is this going to change? >> this is not going to change it. he only thing that will change it is for the american people to quit sending people up here with the motivation to reinstate it. the reason i am a term limit senator is that i don't want to fall into that habit of making that decision based on what is best for my political career, rather than what is best for the country. term limits is something that has to happen in this country. if we had really strong term limits, the people who would be here would not be the people who are here today. it would be a different set of
people. it will be people who know the hard knocks of life. they knew that life wasn't fair, and they would apply the judgment that they learn from life in terms of the rest of it. you have a lead of them in washington that absolute stinks. it comes from careerism. >> you are talking about professional organizations, and i was wondering if any progress is made on that? they put out a nice piece on it that talked about -- the fact is, if you're in a state that has a pro football team runs a protocol torment, the career politicians are afraid to touch you. that is $100 million. that hundred million dollars that is given to these very
elite groups of people in these major leagues, it is money that you are paying in taxes to make up for it. do not havet we another cosponsor speaks volumes about the characters in washington. is a tax earmark specifically for some of the most well-to-do people in the country. and i cannot get a cosponsor? what does that say to you? i would recommend that you go and look at what espn did on it and have it lay this out. it is a sham. it goes back to the question that the gentleman in the back asked. football, but i don't that a person making $40,000 a year should pay more
in taxes because the elites get a special tax break to take him millions of dollars each year. we are asking a regular joe to have less so that they can have a whole lot more. it is not right. it is not any different than your mom and spending bill. in a spending bill. >> [inaudible] >> i'm sure is like the real estate agent and architects around the country. they work on commission in terms of their compensation. weaponse destruction of , i don't know but i imagine that in some of these cases it would cost more to bring them back home then to destroy them.
they don't want these falling into other people's hands. that wethat says is will not need them again in some other areas of the world. about oureaks volumes ability to contract. history of what happened in afghanistan and iraq and rita cigar report that you read the cigar report associated of military per torment and the fact that we rush to build all of these emirates that we could tear them up and cut them up, but we might need them somewhere else. is the consequences of making a good decision now based on what was a stupid decision or. dust before. -- before. when the history books are written about iraq and
afghanistan, it will be a case history and what not to do in terms of how you supply troops and how you do it. costn you comment on the of the obamacare website? where did that come from? it is all footnoted. safety million dollars is in advertising for the website. million dollars in terms of the actual cost. it is close to $600 million. i am not critical of spending a lot of money to get the website built. they will get it fixed. the incompetence of rolling it out, nobody could be -- not be critical of that. and you talk to people who actually do this for a living, and know how to do it, we will pay for-five times more than what it should cost. that is waste. lacking inis what is washington. in members of congress, and in
the heads of a lot of agencies. their political jobs, instead of competency jobs. whoe took the people actually ran large organizations and brought them into run large organizations here -- we don't do that. we bring in people who have political experience. then we put them in a position of responsibility. competency to be evil to do the job. it is not any wonder that we fail on both capability and leadership when it comes to a lot of positions and agencies. >> thank you all very much for being here. i appreciate it. journal, ashington district court ruling on the constitutionality of the nsa surveillance program. will have someone from
the center for strategic international studies. have comments from the 113th congress. you can see washington journal each morning at seven eastern on c-span. teenager, helen taft wanted to bash wanted to live in the white house. she got her husband williams have to turn down his job of being a supreme court justice and so we can focus on a run to the presidency. taft. -- like of helen the life of helen taft. later, a conversation with supreme court justice ginsburg.