tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN February 5, 2016 12:00pm-2:01pm EST
tweet out-of-state endorsements don't often move the needle, but if charlie baker gets chris christie on boston tv coup. if a coup -- it's a >> moore wrote to the white house coverage coming up here tonight. is the democratic party dinner coming up at 7:00 eastern and will feature hillary clinton and bernie sanders. we will have live coverage. the citizens of the granite state are not easily one. -- won. ♪ voters braved snow and sleet to cast their vote. >> thanks to the people of new hampshire. >> new hampshire.
>> is from new hampshire. >> it is great to be back in new hampshire. >> one reporter has called new hampshire's primary the most cherished. >> governor kasich, thank you so much for coming to new hampshire. >> this is a place where you can observe the candidate in the heat of dialogue and getting tough questions about their position on the issues. it is a place where there's scripted speech. >> new hampshire takes its first in the nation primary status very seriously. this is my 20th town hall meeting. 115th townto our hall meeting in new hampshire.
♪ >> in washington today, secretary of state john kerry is meeting with the colombian president. they were hold a joint press conference today on c-span at 2:00 p.m. eastern. ahead of that, we will hear from president obama and will make a statement on the economy, probably talking about the unemployment rate dropping 24.9% in january. -- dropping 4.9% in january. while we wait for that, a look at the history of the new hampshire primary in the latest polls from today's washington journal. g us this morning, mr. smith. we want to talk about this new ndll you put out for cnn ad wmur. bernie sanders has 61% in new
hampshire. hillary clinton has 30%. >> we have seen that lead never quite some time. sanders pulled ahead of clinton back in the fall. i think the clinton campaign made a enormous mistake ignoring sanders as a challenger, thinking he would go away. or the democrats would not support someone who had just recently become a democrat. on andnders has held extended his lead. he has tremendous support among younger people and people who have not voted in the primary before. the only saving grace you can see for hillary clinton right now is those people are the least likely to show up in the election next week. host: who are those people? ted chung: people under the age of 25 or 30 and people who have not voted in a primary in 2008 or 2012. we know younger people are less likely to vote than people who are in their 30's, 40's, or
50's. voting is a habit and if you have voted in the earlier primaries, there isn't much better chance that you will vote in the current primaries. host: have somebody who has observed, covered and research into politics for a long time, mr. smith, what if bernie sanders wins by 10 points or what the wins by 30 points? what is the significance? >> it is not if you win or lose, it is if you manage the expectations set for you by your campaign, and by the press. clinton is in the polls right now. in singleable to lose digit, that is almost a victory. her husband bill clinton had been losing by up to 16 points and pulls rugby for the primary. helost only by eight and claimed that was a victory and claimed he was a comeback kid. he used that to build momentum
primaries.equent she could plausibly make the same case. however, if this lead for sanders holds up, it will be difficult for her to explain away a 20 point loss. it was because sanders is from a neighboring state. what we have seen historically is candidates from new england do better here. the major reason isn't because they are better known. the democrats for example, in new hampshire are very similar berniedemocrats sanders is used to. a hard timeve explaining away a large loss. that would damage her and build momentum for bernie sanders and make him a much more credible candidate in states like south carolina. host: we have left the line open.
the number to call on is on the screen. you write that there is some importance attached to the new hampshire primary, but that it could be overblown. >> that is true. there used to be a new hampshire slogan that read "new hampshire first, always right." we saw that bill clinton finished second in 1992. first w bush was blown out by john mccain. hillary clinton beat barack obama here in 2008. all three went on to win the presidency. candidatesf those who won the party nomination, have won new hampshire. it is not as important as it used to be, but it is still the
single most important dates in the nomination process. iowa is important, but because iowa and new hampshire have campaigns going on at the same time, they are like parallel campaigns. new hampshire can often stop the momentum of the candidate who wins iowa. the electorate in iowa and new hampshire are so different that the new hampshire candidate is typically the one who gets the momentum going forward. it is not the dominant state it used to be in the early part of the 1970's and 1980's when the parties and candidates were just process out the primary . it is still the single most important state. host: let's look at the republican side. here is the most recent poll. donald trump, 29%.
marco rubio up to second place with 18%. ted cruz, 13%. john kasich, 12%. chris christie and carly fiorina each have 4%. what is significant in that to you? mr. smith: the takeaway is that donald trump's numbers have not budged before or after iowa. that is typical. even though he did not win in iowa, it has not impacted voters here. it is also not surprising that ted cruz who won iowa is not getting much traction here. it is not been a republican theidate who has won both iowa caucuses and the new hampshire primary in the same year. mainly because the iowa caucuses are dominated by more socially conservative and evangelical voters. 45% of new hampshire voters are moderate to liberal and are not that concerned about social issues.
it is not surprising that ted cruz is down fairly far. marco rubio is the one to watch. rubioe have seen is marco is one of those candidates who is pretty accepted with the conservative wing and the mainstream wing. they like him and have not had much to dislike about him, yet. io is getting a bit of a bounce from his third-place finish in iowa, the unexpected third-place finish. what that is allowing voters in new hampshire to do is to take a second look at his campaign to see if he might be the more mainstream republican, who are right now bunched altogether. if you get behind marco rubio and ted cruz, use the john kasich, jeb bush, and chris christie bunched together. we expected one of those candidates to pull away from the others over the last weekend.
buto may be that person, it is still too early to say. host: the population of new hampshire is about 1.3 million people. voters or registered undeclared. 30% are republican and 26% are democratic. can anybody vote in any primary? mr. smith: new hampshire is a semi closed primary. if you are registered as a republican you can only vote in the republican primary. it is the same with democrats. those we call independents can vote in either. using that term makes many people outside of the state, as well as people here in new hampshire, that they are free agents. in then choose
republican and democratic primary. that is true, but most of them are democrats and republicans. 38% are really democrats and 33% are really republicans. undeclared voters that are really democrats vote like other democrats. they will vote primarily in the democratic primary. similarly, dos about the same as registered republicans. those people who could truly pick up a ballot from either party makeup a very small percentage of the overall electorate, somewhere in the 3%-7% range. it is nowhere near as large as the 44% that is thrown around as the big block of independence that will sway the election. andy smith has been the director of the university of new hampshire survey center since 1999.
he also teaches political science at that university. the first call for him comes thank you forand taking my call. i would like to ask you to what do you attribute the bernie sanders-trump phenomenon? i was raised to believe that we if you arefficials qualified for a job because of recommendations, experience, proven records. in both of these men, there is not much of that. heartband is a purple recipient from the korean war, and bernie sanders was on the committee for veterans quagmireation and the resulted in men dying, not getting treatment and we are only hearing about it.
what did he do for the veterans to change that? host: thank you. mr. smith? guest: it is interesting. we have come around to think that the qualifications for a president means you must have office,revious elected governor or at least a senator. that is a more recent phenomenon. the founding fathers outlined what the characteristics were for office, and they were integrity, strength of character, honesty and wisdom, but they do not say anything about elected office. century, we often elected generals who had not been political at all. even as recently as 1952, we elected dwight eisenhower who had no previous political experience. democraticthat the and republican parties were recruiting him in 1952 simply on
the strength of his celebrity and being able to prosecute the war in europe. said, i think some of the anger you are seeing expressed in both republican and democratic electorates has its roots in economic stagnation that has taken place over the last 20 years. people are working more now, and even in new hampshire, we have an unemployment rate of 3.1%, but there are people angry about the economy. we are anxious about the economic future and they have a lot of debt. younger people in particular have not been able to get jobs here and in other parts of the debtry and have enormous out of college. i think it is the anxiety leading people to say, ok, we need somebody different, outside of the normal political structure to look at. i think that is why you are seeing trump and sanders. not that the trump and sanders voters might switch over and
vote for the other guy, the partisanship really prevents that from happening, but i think that is one reason you are seeing these outsider candidates, candidates not in the mainstream of their parties, having more success. host: carl is in baltimore and a republican. caller: hi, how are you doing? host: please, go ahead. caller: thank you. -- i have been g and six college credits. i get looked for a job, the job because i qualify for it. the president of the united states is the commander-in-chief. he didn't really answer it. you run for president because you are in the military, it is a military job. in thee a problem
nation, we have congress. you vote for people who believe in what you believe in and will accomplish what you want to the congress. congressmen, senators, house of representatives, they will the country. we put too much on that. he is there to protect you, the commander-in-chief, like george washington said, i don't want to be a king. the military, of your commander-in-chief, that's it. host: who are you currently supporting for president? caller: i am a republican, so ago with republicans. term does not qualify. none of the front runners qualify. they are not military people. host: that is carl in baltimore. he is right. throughout the 19 century and starting with george washington, people with military experience have often served as president and they pointed to the military experience as a major
qualification. since we have gotten to the 20th century and the later part of the 20th century, the role of the president has expanded the on the traditional and more constitutionally-based role as dealing with foreign policy, primarily with outside relations , and letting states deal with what happens in terms of domestic policy as federal government become bigger and bigger, the president takes on the role as chief executive more than the commander-in-chief of the united states. he has been seen as the person who is essentially a giant governor of the country. i think that is one of the reasons you see governors be more successful in 20th century. hadof those people have military experience, but if you look over the past several presidents we had, barack obama did not have military experience, george w. bush was in the national guard, bill
clinton did not have military experience. george h.w. bush was the last you could say it really had military experience with his time in world war ii as a pilot. host: how important our military issues to new hampshire voters? jeb bush talked quite a bit in this town hall last night about veterans. speaking, foreign affairs and terrorism related issues are the top issue on the republican side. the democratic side is economic. it is important for republicans, and we have had republican candidates talking very tough on things like what they would do it isis if they were elected, how do it feel with the soviet union -- showing my age -- how they would deal with russia and how they might deal with china. donald trump is made this essential part of his campaign and he wants to get the u.s. military where everyone will fear us and no one will mess with us.
that is attracting veterans and nonveterans. the whole issue about veterans affairs and dealing with veterans has been interesting in new hampshire. one of the issues we have appeared, we are fairly suburban and if you live in southeastern parts of this day, you have access to veterans facilities in massachusetts or new hampshire, but a lot of the veterans of the rural parts are stuck. it is a long way for them to get to a veteran facility, so there are efforts to make it easier for them to go to regular hospitals and get treatment. host: four days out, what percentage of voters are undecided? guest: historically, anywhere between 35% to 45% of primary voters have told people and then suppose that they made up their minds in the last three days. 15% to 20% said they made up their mind on election day. the polls we see right now on the republican side shows that 40% ofnly about republicans say they firmly decided who they are going to
vote for. that is about 65% of democrats who say they decided to they will vote for. not surprising that the democrats are more's decided since they'll have two people. we could see a a lot of movement over the past weekend -- over this weekend because many have not made up their minds. host: bill on the independent line. caller: good morning. thank you particular call. for taking my call. i follow mr. sanders closely and listen to his speeches. what hetand completely is saying. he articulates his positions extremely well. see all ofis that i the republican contenders calling themselves conservatives, but i don't
understand what they are this leftwardmbat shift in the democratic party. are they purposely avoiding these issues and waiting for the general election? exactly what the with the are to deal challenge that mr. sanders is presented. also, hillary clinton. i am confused. all of the republican candidates seem to be running at the right and is the republican party, but when they come to the election in the fall, whoever is the nominee is going to have to run from the center. host: i think we got the point.
andrew smith? guest: that is the contrary -- politicals quandary are in. you have to run as far to the right and then run like hell back to the center and i think that is the case in both parties. the republicans are trying to out conservative each other, whatever that definition might be, and on the democratic side, there is quite a debate on so which of the candidates is the two progressive, meaning, further to the left. in primary nomination processes or schedules, typically, with the notable exception of new hampshire, only the most activist voters come out and vote. those activist tend to be far more to the polar extremes of the parties. the voters appeal to during the primary process or the nomination process and then you have to hope that the things that you said during the primary
do not allow you to be tainted too far to the extreme or the more moderate -- for the more moderate general election voter. both parties are having trouble with this right now. bernie sanders has forced hillary clinton to run further to the left then wanted to. sanders does not have problems with that and he is doing quite well among democrats who want to hear that. on the republican side, they're moving to the right, many different versions of conservatism over there, but the notable exception is donald trump. wins both party nominations, they will have the challenge of moving back to the center because these processes have made the move to the extremes of the parties. host: what if it snows on tuesday? how does that affect turnout? to still are used appear, even though we have not had much this year. it might dampen turnout a little bit but they would have to be an
dampens snowstorm to turnout significantly. last year, we had over 100 inches in new hampshire, so we are used to it and we have people who know how to get about the streets and their sidewalks quickly. host: record turnout for republicans in iowa at the caucuses. what do you predict poor turnout this year? -- for turnout this year? we had recordght turnout in new hampshire. we had about 54% come to voting eligible population voting turnout. in 2016, it was record turnout me,republicans -- excuse 2000 12 was another record for republicans and opera democrats because they did not have a competitive primary. this year, both are competitive. i think we might see another record turnout, so that if 24% range could happen again. that is important because in new hampshire, we don't really have just activist determining who wins the primary.
it is regular voters, people who don't pay as much attention to politics, who don't know the candidates as well, the issue positions of the candidates. i think that is the major reason why you see the new hampshire electorate the more volatile than the electorate in other states because you have people who are essentially choosing flavors of ice cream when they choose a candidate and they don't see a lot of difference. they will be happy with whoever wins the party nomination. host: we have said aside our fourth voting line for people in new hampshire. (202)-748-8003 is the number to call. sue in new jersey. democrat. caller: good morning, gentlemen. that theve an opinion party is nothing but actors and they always try to use situations to their benefit and convince the voters that they
are the best for the country. there is not a single person in each party who has the best of the people in their hearts. therefore, my question is -- is there any chance that someone with a good heart and a love of god in their heart and they care about the people in this country and this people that are suffering around the world that they can come together, both parties, and bring the world to a calmer situation. host: that is sue in colonial, new jersey, any comment? guest: after watching presidential elections for many decades, i think that come to a cynical conclusion that you have to be have crazy or certainly somewhat psychopathic to run for
president and to think that you are the person who deserves to be most powerful person in the world and that you alone are qualified to do that job. i think sue has a point that the people who run for office are only out to tell the people what they want to hear or what they think they want to hear and get power for themselves. the most important role in any elected office or any elected government is to get elected. if you are not elected, you don't have the ability to affect a change of up to make. that is the trade-off that you have in any democratic system. you have to appeal to voters first. edmund burke talked about this in his letter to the people of bristol that basically says, you are elected me for my wisdom and judgment, not to do what you necessarily want me to do and you can always throw me out if you don't believe i am living up to what you wanted me to do. he was thrown out of parliament after that. [laughter] it is a problem in a democratic society -- what do you have to
do to appeal to the voters and how do implement what you think is best for the country once you are elected? debate one is a saturday night, a republican debate, but some candidates have events this weekend. andy smith is someone who has observed this process for a long time. ,hat will make more difference the debate or smaller events where new hampshireites can meet the candidates? guest: we don't know really. the debates have the potential and having artant significant impact, but we don't know. we have seen sometimes which debates have been hugely important. i think the debate in 2008 with hillary clinton was important and that helped her secure the democratic win that year, but there are other times when debates are more the same, so it remains to be seen. shaking hands and meeting with people is important, but most voters really don't ever
have a chance or don't bother to try to meet a candidate and shake cans with the candidate. you have the opportunity to do that in new hampshire you want to, but most voters don't take advantage of that opportunity. i think with the campaigns are makingtrying to do is sure their get out the vote machines are ready to go and identify the number of voters they think they need to have to get to their level of success. they can really turn this people out on election day. -- campaigning is designed obviously it is designed, you want to meet people, have them have a good sense about you, gave the media attention in local media and national media from that campaign stop, but it is really making sure that your kid out the vote machine is ready on election day. host: amber is in pittsfield,
new hampshire, democrat. have you ever attended a candidate event? caller: good morning, gentlemen. one way, i did go to back when, but i just had a quick question. if someone is registered in new hampshire as democrat and they wanted to vote independent, will that be a problem? guest: if you are registered as a democrat, you can only vote in the democratic primary. if you wanted to change a registration to independent aren't declared, you would have had to do that back in october and early november before the filing period for candidates was open. if you bow, you can change your status to undeclared or independent after you vote, but if you are a registered democrat before the election, you will only be able to vote in the democratic primary. gopaul is an national.
caller: -- host: is in nashville. believe bernie sanders being a socialist will not be able to make deals for the country work for him, so what is your opinion, sir? that: that is the argument the clinton campaign has been making. clinton has not been making it has directly, but the rest of the campaign and the surrogates have been making that case. one person earlier referred to the potential republican ad against sanders as standing next to a hammer and sickle, referencing the soviet union, so it is something central to the minds of a lot of
the unemployment rate has now fallen. this is the first time the unemployment rate has gone below 5% in almost eight years. americans are working. businesses have added 14 million new jobs. 71 straight months of private growth.ropped gross -- jobsusinesses added more than any time since the 1990's. importantly, progress is finally starting to translate into a bigger picture. wages have grown at their fastest rate since the crisis. policies i will push this year are designed to give workers more leverage to arm raises and
promotions. deficit, gas prices are all down. the, wages, and the rate of insured are up. i should mention by the way, that since i've signed obamacare into law, nearly 18 million americans have gained coverage and businesses have created jobs every month since. as i said, at my state of the union address, united states of america right now is the strongest most durable economy in the world. i know that is still inconvenient for republican stump speeches with their doom in despair in new hampshire. i guess you cannot please everybody. that does not mean that we do not have more work to do. there is softness in the global
economy. china is going through a transition, europe's economy is still slow, a lot of the emerging markets are challenged. that is creating headwinds for a lot of u.s. companies to do business overseas. it makes it more difficult for us to sell exports. we have to pay attention to this and take smart steps this year to continue congress -- progress. we also have more to do to make sure that the progress we do make is broadly based and impacting folks up and down the income scales. the budget i sent to congress on tuesday -- i will send on tuesday is to make sure we will continue that progress. talking down the american economy does not make that progress. my budget will offer more toortunities for americans give education and job training and new ideas and protection to provide people with the basic sense of security. we will create more good paying
jobs not by subsidizing the task , but investing in the future. that is why we are going to be placing a big emphasis on clean energy. private sector solar jobs are growing 12 times faster than the rest of the economy and they paid better than average. that is one reason why might budget will double -- my budget will double by the end of the decade. create help businesses more jobs faster and lower the cost of green -- clean energy faster and help renewable power compete with fuels across america and a more effective way. those are some of the steps to make sure our future is even stronger, a future worthy of the hard work and determination of the american people. the progress we have made going now 205% now 205% --
-- to under 5%. my hope is that rather than hinder the progress, we will continue to help them make progress. with that, have a great weekend, into the super bowl. ,'m not telling you my pick because the bears are not in it, but i'm hoping for a great game. josh? josh, take it away. [indiscernible] let me take a couple of questions. you were implying yesterday in a joking way that you do not get enough credit. pres. obama: this is what i was talking about with the warriors. >> were you referring to republicans and their message, which you could say could be
expected during an election? where you also referring to thinkand how americans things are not going well for this country. why do you think that is? pres. obama: at the time, i was making a joke with a basketball doubt --ut there is no while we have made significant anxiety, there is still and concern about the general direction of the economy. if you look at some of the , people for better about their circumstances and finances but not sure about the future. part of it is there is still a carryover from the devastation that took place in 2007 and 2008. --your value drops and half and half or you lose a job you thought you were secure in or your pension suddenly looks
horrible, you will remember that and a lot of people still feel that. they are right to recognize that there are longer-term economic trends that we still have to tackle. the economy is more dynamic and pressurefaster and the on companies to maximize , the lack ofturns loyalty to workers who have dealt with those companies and threatened to be laid off, the fact that up until the last six months wages have not gone up as or benefitsits have at the very top. all of those things people feel. even though things are better, they're worried about where we are going. i think that the argument i'm making and will continue to make
during the course of this year is we should be proud of the progress we have made. we have recovered from the worst economic crisis since the 1930's and the worst in my lifetime and we have done it faster, stronger, better, and more durably than just about any other events economy. adopted some of the policies that were advocated by republicans over the last six years we know that we probably would've done worse and we know that because a lot of the european countries adopted those policies and they have not yet gotten to the same place they were before the crisis. sidence, facts are on our in the shop reports gives you one more indication that facts are on our side. i think it is important for others to understand how do we take the next step and make people feel more secure and more confident about the future.
that is why investments in education and job training, going after the high cost of education and making sure that issues like paid leave and family leave are put in place. raising the minimum wage so that if you are working full-time you are not a property. -- poverty. after the jobs of the future and investing in technology. all of those things are a recipe for increased security. tell, those who are running down the economy and adding to the anxiety don't seem to have any plausible, coherent recipe other than cut taxes for the folks up and doing the best in this economy and somehow magically that will make other folks feel good. thatnatively, they argue
the reason you are feeling insecure is because immigrants or poor people are taking more of your paycheck and that is not true. up,facts don't bear that that is not where the weakness is in the economy. i want to keep making that argument during the course of this year. we should feel good about the progress we have made, understanding that we still have more work to do. now, so i have to work out harder to stay in shape. gym'm feeling good in the and i want to knowledge that what i'm doing is working, otherwise i would have those
bacon double cheeseburgers. if it is working, we should be staying on that same path. that does not mean that is where i necessarily want to be, it does not mean that i've stopped doing hard work to get where we need to go. make two. going to >> how can you improve workforce participation levels? as people talk about the recovery, so few americans are in the job force compared to 2008. if you would not mind, can you please comment on the $10 barrel fee? pres. obama: on the first question, part of what was good --this job report was that
more people are entering into the workforce in a feel more confident and they are finding work. we are at a is that point where the labor participation rate is lower than it has been historically. some of that is explained by demographics, the population is getting older and you would expect that there is some decline, but it is not fully explained by americans getting older. some of this is still the hangover from what happened in 2007 and 2008. this is part of the reason why we have to keep our foot to the accelerator in terms of doing the things than he is to be done to keep the economy going and strong. we should not let up from the progress that has been made so that the labor market continues to make people for more confident that if they going to
for work and they can find it. there are particular cases where some folks have just been out of the labor market for a long time and may not be equipped for the jobs of today. that is where we have to target some special interest. i get a lot of letters from middle-age workers who got laid off and are not confident about their current skills and have not yet reentered the workforce. they need to get retrained. that is a special group of folks who are in their late 40's or early 50's and far away from retirement, but feel like they cannot adapt. obviously, there are young ,eople, high school dropouts folks in both rural communities and inner cities that became of age in the middle of this terrible recession and have not
gotten attached to the labor market yet. we have to make special efforts to figure how do we get them into job-training programs or community college and allow them to get skills. there is a wide set of strategies we can take on that, overall al require strong labor market for them to .eel like it is worth it we want to keep making sure that the labor market is a strong as possible. energy,pect to oil and i will probably make a larger speech about that in the direction we need to go on this. the basic proposition is that $1.80 and gass is
prices are expected to be lower for a for stable future. that overall can be a good thing for the economy, but what is also important is that we use eriod were gas prices are low to accelerate towards a cleaner energy economy because we know that will not last. has seen cycles were gas prices go down and then they hop backup. -- olda is that companies by the we got a and allowt benefit them for the first time to export oil. point, domestic oil producers could not export. now, we knowthem that prices are low right now and you are allowed to export, we are also saying we are going
to provide -- impose a tax on a barrel of oil imported, exported so that some of that revenue can ,e used for transportation investments of basic research, and technology that will be needed for the energy sources of the future. now or 20 years from now, we will be in a much when oilposition starts to get tight again and prices start going up. we will have further leaned our economy off of oil fuel. we would have not just make incremental progress, but also a much stronger economy and stronger infrastructure. we will be creating jobs of the future and i think we will look back and say that was a smart investment and a wise decision. that it is right to
do it now when gas prices are really low. they will be low for quite some time to come, it will not be a disruptive factor in terms of the economy. i always ask two questions, but i will be guys have a wonderful super bowl party. thank you guys. >> with that out of the way and -- that will be ok with me. maybe we can go quickly and see
if there are questions we can get through. >> a follow-up on the oil question. there's something like that were to get through this current congress, within asking companies to pay $10 more, wouldn't that somehow deborah the progress -- damper the progress? think that it doesn't likely that will companies will pass on that, but i think the president's point is that we are seeing energy costs are lower than they have been in quite some time. this is precisely the time when we should capitalize on that opportunity. stronger whens energy prices are at an all-time high. we are now in a situation where energy prices are lower and it
is a smart time for us to consider how we can make fiscally responsible investments in new technology and more modern infrastructure and transportation systems. investments that will allow us to strengthen the economy, but also allow us to transition to the low carbon energy economy of the future. >> are you aware that the budget committee are not going to have -- [indiscernible] >> i did see that announcement. of the document i've referred to in this briefing a couple of times. ,he day after the election
speaker of the house john boehner wrote an op-ed that appeared in the wall street journal and the headline was that now we can get congress moving again. this was their commitment to try to bring about some resemblance of legislative order to the congress. they've done that with mixed results and i guess the future is pretty dim if you have republicans in congress unwilling to talk about the budget with the white house. we do see that republicans are eager to leap to the defense of the world energy, but they are ,ot willing to have a serious detailed conversation about our country's budget priorities. things and itof certainly does raise some questions about health care -- it also raises some questions about how confident they are in the concert arguments that they could make about the budget. maybe they are taking the donald
trump approach to debates about the budget. they are just not going to show up. >> is that something that you are hoping to get in this final year? what sense of purpose is putting it out there knowing the reaction from the republicans? >> the purpose of a policy proposal like this, it will be included in the president's budget next week. if you lay out your agenda and you lay out what you think is the best task force for the country. thatnk this is the reason you have budget hearings in the first place. the budget proposal we will put forward will reflect with the president wants to move the country forward.
our expectation is not that ,ongress will pass everything we should have a debate and because republicans are in charge of the congress, we are ultimately going to have to have a copper mines. we were not surprised that republicans leaped to the world industry. people who are looking out for them in the united states congress, they are all republicans. the president is the one who's looking out for middle-class families and we will continue to put forward ideas that we believe is in the best interest of our economy. many of those ideas will be included in the budget and it is unfortunate republicans will not have a conversation about it. >> tuesday is the day of the new hampshire primary. is there not another budget that can be made? >> the was a conversation about releasing it on monday, but we
do not want all of you to have to work during the super bowl. we were looking out for your best interest. on to syria, how concerned are you that russian and -- thousands of syrians are flaring -- lean -- fleeing the city and is it like that country could fall under a government siege. >> it does look like a terrible humanitarian situation inside of syria and it could get worse. that is something that we continue to see -- to be quite concerned about. we have been concerned for some time that the assault government has been targeting innocent civilians and areas held by the opposition by opposition forces.
those operations are leading to the loss of thousands of innocent lives and violence that has caused the displacement of millions of syrians from their homes, it has created a refugee migration problem not just in the region but around the world. support by the russians of the assad regime makes it possible for the assad regime to expand that violence and it sets back our efforts to try to reach the kind of political transition that the russians themselves acknowledge is necessary. , but it is not to prevent the united states from continuing to push forward the political transition progress. to try to get assad out of power
and get to the political chaos that is the root of so many problems. , there is ar topic story about mutual fund investment and it revealed that president obama has a stake in --makers indirectly through how does the president feel about the fact that all of these mutual funds and other investments are being made into gun companies? they have become profitable during his administration. it is something that you have given any thought about? is it difficult for people who want work on controller may be imposed -- opposed to the investments because so many mutual funds are involved with these companies? >> i have nothing that report
and i'm not aware of the details --the presidents investment might be partially invested in a gun manufacturer. i know there has been a grassroot attempt on college campuses to encourage mutual funds and other institutional investing in gun manufacturers. president has not hid from a willingness to criticize gun .anufacturers has been on commonsense things that can be done and we would welcome more support from gun manufacturers for some of the commonsense measures that we advocate.
things like closing the gun show loophole and closing the no-fly buy loophole and i would allow terrorists to come in and purchase a gun. .here are things that we can do i do not know for have taken a specific position on grassroot efforts, but i will say that the we arent does believe going to receive more passion behind the grassroots movement to bring about change meant income policies. that is where we are on it. i want to go back to something the president said. when he spoke about the imported and exported barrels, it is
different from what was said -- i want to check that. i want to make sure we get some clarity about how the policy would be applied. if the u.s. levies attack -- is there a possibility that that is a violation? take both of those questions and give you a direct answer to that question. >> i want to ask you about the explosion on the plane in somalia. i'm wondering if you can confirm --t the bomber was related if the u.s. is doing any investigations? >> i don't have an updated assessment to share. i know there's been some work
done to try to learn more about this particular incident. sil affiliated organizations against commercial aviation. we are mindful of this risk, but at this point i do not have a firm assessment. >> as we learn about what happened on that particular flight, we could update our posture. if there is a book announcement about a change in security threat airports this necessary, that would come from dhs and the tsa but i'm not aware of any announcements that they are planning in the short term as a direct response to this
particular incident. >> the cdc released a document that said women of childbearing age should not consume alcohol unless they're taking birth control. this is generating a lot of controversy. i will let the cdc described the science behind this. their general effort was to try to communicate with the public about the significant risks associated with consuming alcohol early in a pregnancy. for the most effective ways to prevent that, i differ to the expertise of the scientists at the cdc. are they saying that women of childbearing age should not consume alcohol? >> this is a guidance by the cdc can people should certainly consider that view and that
guidance. ultimately, people make up their own minds. yesterday, we barely needed listen to theo republican leadership that said the oil deal was doa. does that mean the administration is standing by the proposal? >> absolutely. >> you are the leadership position? >> it will be hard to do if they don't even meet with the budget director because this is included in our budget. if republicans are scared of that debate, it's something you'll have to ask them about. continuesition we were to advocate. it's in the best interest of our economy. when you consider the need to transition to a low carbon economy of the future and the need to do that in the fiscally responsible way, that's exactly what we are laying out.
we would welcome additional republicans. if they say they have a better and more fiscally responsible way to make the investment needed in modernizing our infrastructure, we're happy to consider their ideas. this is an idea we think is good that we are putting on the table. no, i don't think anybody was surprised about the fact that the republican party, republicans in congress, are eager to lead to the defense of industry. if only they share that passion for defending the middle class, our job numbers would look better than they already do. >> they say they are because they say will raise the price of gasoline by $.25 per gallon. >> you would have to ask the oil industry if they are good to pass that on to their customers. i would not be surprised if they would say yes. there are they would be surprised if
-- i would not be surprised if they would say yes. what this debate also in covers is that there are currently significant costs that are incurred by middle-class families and businesses and by our economy based on the infrastructure we currently have that not updating our infrastructure has a significant cost. secretary fox talked about this yesterday. american businesses lose almost $30 billion per year because they do not benefit from a modern infrastructure, shipments are delayed, that products don't move as efficiently through our transportation system or that the cost associated with moving those products is higher because the system is not as efficient as it could be. that is a class that could be eliminated or significantly reduced if we were making a
smarter investment in our infrastructure. where will this cost? are view is that by investing in infrastructure, we can lower these hidden taxes but also a jobs and improve our economic prospects over the long-term by having a modern infrastructure. mentioned wages rising but is there more evidence in the report that the income inequality gap is narrowing? don't know whether it's for not that there is more progress at the bottom than at the top. >> i did not look that deeply into the numbers but i'm sure we can have an economist talk to you about that. the president said over the last six month, we have seen wages grow at about 2.5% which is the fastest they have grown in recent years. it's a positive indication we're
seeing wage growth starting to accelerate. towant to try to continue maintain and build on that momentum. given the context of the political debate, trying to upward pressure on wages has been a core component of the president's economic strategy and it's satisfying to see we are starting to make some progress. many of the proposals the president discussed would have the positive impact of continuing to put upward pressure on wages. veryat about people at the bottom, at the poverty level? be ford news seems to the economy broadly but not for at the very bottom. >> the increase in the participation rate is an indication that people up and down the income scale are entering the workforce.
the good news is that last month 158,000 private sector jobs were created so they are finding jobs. increased wages is something that will help those at the bottom but there is more we can do. the president talked about raising the minimum wage. if you have a job and you are working full-time, and you try youaise a family of four, are raising that family below the poverty line if you are admitted on wage. that does not reflect the values in this country where hard work should lead to a good project. -- a good paycheck. this is not something that republicans by and large support. the president talked about longer-term things like early childhood education, opening the doors to a college education to middle-class families and those trying to get into the middle class. i would not expect that would have an impact on months jobs numbers or next year's job numbers. if we want to make than a
generation of americans has access to more opportunity, there is common sense things we can do. >> there is a report that the saudi's are going to mobilize a ground force of several thousand intervene in syria, is that true? >> for what they meant and are up offer, you should check with them. what they are responding to is a specific request that secretary whor made of countries fit in the counter is campaign to ramp up their commitmentl. we welcome the announcement from our partners in saudi arabia that they would be prepared to ramp up their commitment militarily to this effort. thisnot clear whether would be a significant --tention of ground loops cubs or they have special operations forces like the commitment the u.s. recently made. for the texture around that, i
would refer you to the saudi's but this is a positive indication that our requests for greater commitment are being answered in the affirmative by ouri partners in the countersl coalition. >> other other commitments you can doubt be on that? >> i have nothing to announce but i believe as early as next week, -- i am just looking at this -- next week, secretary carter will travel to brussels. he will meet with about two dozen of his counterparts from nations are part of our counter isl coalition and the saudi's will be part of that and will be an opportunity for r secretary carter toe-up for more commitments. i don't know if we will have more commitments but that's a good place to look. seems tothat aleppo be about to fall in the article processing to be called that it is increasingly clear that there needs to be a bigger military
response on the ground from the us-led coalition in order to not lose the day there? aleppo is there is the possibility that government forces backed by the russians would encircle that city and lay siege to that city. that would obviously exacerbate a terrible humanitarian situation there. that is something we're concerned about. we haven't talking for a long , four or five months, about how the russian military strategy inside syria undermines the goals of their political strategy. there is no denying that the efforts of the russian military to buck up and strengthen the power onlye grip on
gives that regime less seven incentive to come to the negotiating table and act constructively in conversation. point -- sticking process -- it impedes is making progress. because of their respect for the assad regime, we hope they can use their influence to get the government to be more constructive at the negotiating table. we also need to do some work with opposition forces to get them. to engage in this process they obviously have concerns about engaging in this process at the negotiating table went back home, they see their fighters subjected to intense shelling and other violence and they see the territory that they hold is also the scene of innocent civilians being slaughtered.
concerns about this process are entirely understandable but everybody needs to come to the realization that we clearly have which is that there is not a military solution that can be imposed on the on syria. we need to solve these political problems in many to get started on that or continue to put on the progress we have made in the last few months so we can move this process along. wrong, whene if i'm thepresident talked about stagnation outside the u.s., he talked about headwinds. at what point does the strong dollar and weaker demand -- when will the white house. that will affect exports in the economy? >> let me start by saying is not much i can say about the value of the dollar. the only government official that talks about it is the treasury secretary. we value the independence of the
fed as far as monetary policy. i would be interested in what the fed has to say about your question. you should ask them but what i is that theeneral top economist of the president has been observing that the biggest risk to the u.s. economy now is economic weakness and instability around the world. we are encountering some headwinds in our economy because we are not seeing other economies grow as we would like them to be. i think the question for the united states is what is our response going to be. the president's view is that there are a couple of things we can do. weekend the our connections with those economies that are growing robustly right now. we see that many of the
economies included in the transpacific partnership our economies that are quite dynamic. let's deepen those connections and level the playing field and get american businesses more of an opportunity to compete in that region of the world. that is the one way we can start to compensate for some of the weakness on volatility we see in other markets. that's not the entire solution but that should be part of it. the other thing we can do is some of the ways we can prep for the u.s. workforce to be even more competitive and even more productive. why longer-term investments in things like job cutting and college education development,and advanced manufacturing -- of those investments of never been more important. even in an economy where we are seeing -- even in a global economy where many of our customers of american businesses
offering them, better products in more advanced products and being more competitive is a way to further solidify the position of the united states in the global economy. that means making investments now that will pay a long-term investment in a better skilled workforce and in certain sectors of the economy like technology and advanced manufacturing where we can strengthen the kind of competitive advantage we already enjoy and that has led to or at least contributed importantly to the kind of economic success we have seen in recovering from the worst economic downturn since the great depression. we hear about different cities and populations being isolated and starving to death. you say the u.s. is the most important humanitarian donor. to airdroption
humanitarian aid to these populations? giving this to refugees outside the country and abandoning the other ones? guest: >> we talked about this a little bit yesterday. the u.s. is the largest donor of ofateral assistance humanitarian assistance to syrians fleeing violence and that means making contributions to countries in the region that are already bearing a significant burden of caring for these refugees, countries like jordan, lebanon, turkey and others. the other thing we have done is tovide significant resources the aid organizations that are able to operate in syria. it's a dangerous environment there. there are not many that have the capacity to do that but there are some and we seek to support them by providing them
resources. the other thing we have been focused on is trying to negotiate cease-fires so that these aid organizations can operate safely on the ground to try to bring badly needed food and water and medical supplies to innocent civilians who get caught in the crossfire. there has been an aggressive to try to enact humanitarian cease-fires that would allow for some of this assistance to be provided. when it comes to humanitarian airdrops, that is something we have done in isolated situations in the past. i cited the example yesterday of providing humanitarian supplies to religious minorities that sinjaren isolated on were tens to be true of those for obvious reasons, the amount of supplies you can include in the humanitarian airdrop is pretty limited.
impacts the longer-term of those supplies is limited and the number of people you can bring relief to his limited. that was ok in the situation in those mountains because we had a good sense of the population of people up there. it came on the heels or around the same time as a coordinated military action to free them from that siege. they can monetary and supplies needed to get them through a couple of days until we could get them off the mountain. we seed of situation inside syria now is different than that. are talking about larger populations of people and we are typically talking about people that have been isolated and under siege for a long time so they have pretty grave needs. outuld not rule humanitarian airdrops in the future but our focus right now
is on trying to get the kind of cease-fire that would allow aid organizations to provide that relief and assistance on the ground. you can move a lot more through a convoy of trucks than you can through ballots dropped out of a military transport aircraft. >> what about negotiating with the assad regime? >> it implies getting them to abide by a cease-fire agreement that would allow for the basic humanitarian needs of innocent people to be addressed. it would also advance the political negotiations. if we are trying to reach a political solution, let's stop the firing and try to broker our differences. that has been part of our strategy. we have made a little progress in this regard but there is a lot more that we can do and we want to build them up progress we have seen thus far. aleppo, you said it's a
terrible humanitarian situation that will get worse and the loss will be low on the moderate level. >> this is one of the largest cities in syria. setback to the opposition. is the want to prevent kind of humanitarian disaster that could result from this situation. a also want to try to prevent further setback to the political process. thessad,e confident the less seven incentive they have to engage constructively in the article process. isn the russians, this something president and said directly to president obama, he acknowledged a political transition in syria was
necessary to solve these problems. given the significant investment that russia has made in syria when you consider their military installations, they have their own incentive to try to bring this violence demand. -- bring the's violence and and they have made a significant gamble by immersing themselves so deeply in the sectarian conflict. i just have to reconcile the contradictions that are inherent in our strategy. >> i'm interested in what you aboutbout the saudi offer a ground force specifically you said you welcome stepped up saudi aid, specifically ground forces. is that something the united states supports? >> the united states, secretary carter made a request of it a number of his counterparts including the saudi's. he asked them to consider ways ending isenhance contributions to our counter isl
efforts. those requests have included additional military support. that's why the secretary of defense was asking. in terms of what kind of commitment the saudi's have in mind, i would refer you to them. i cannot speak for them about whether or not they were talking of saudietachment ground combat troops or if they had in mind a commitment of saudi special operations forces. they have up the advanced military in saudi arabia and they have special operations forces that have unique capabilities that could advance goals ofi our counter campaign. s as far as whatl they are prepared to commit, you should check with them. part ofl certainly be the discussion the secretary carter has been his counterparts in brussels. countries willr
see the significant contributions the united states has made and see this new commitment the saudi's have made and that they, too, that other countries also ramp up their commitment to this effort. >> on wall street, when the president was talking about the globe economy and looking street's warning of a recession in 2016. is the white house ruling that out? the president's economists can give you a better assessment of this and arrange for a conversation. in general, we are mindful of the risks. the u.s. economy is not impervious to the weakness we that areher economies closely intertwined in hours. the reaction of some people is to say maybe we should sever
those ties or take a step back from the international economy. the president of view is that can protect the ability of american businesses to do business overseas, the more customers they will have. that means if we start to encounter some headwinds from china or some european economies, that creating additional opportunities in places like vietnam and singapore, all of a sudden, that becomes appealing. that really needs to be a part of our strategy and that's part of the president's approach. the other thing we can do is invest in those areas where we know we have a competitive advantage, that investments in new technology and research and development and the medical field or advanced manufacturing, these are areas where the united states leads the world. we're at the cutting edge of these industries. we know that these industries generate economic activity inside the united states.
they also create good jobs so let's make sure we are investing in those industries and make sure we are investing in our workforce so that american workers are positioned to capitalize on those opportunities that are available. >> does the president think that democrats are talking down the economy? especially the democrats running for office? would he be including them? whatthink he was because both of those candidates have said generally is that our economy has made important progress over the last seven years and they want to build on that. they said the same thing the president just did. there is more work we need to do here. the president is not suggesting that somehow we don't need to worry about the economy or we don't need to take additional steps to support the private sector and support the american workforce. what he is most concerned about is making sure the cap was in
the progress we have made as opposed to what the republicans are advocating which is taking us back to the policies that led to the great recession in the first place. president keeping his super bowl fix confidential? --he will be best positioned you will be best position to draw that out of him maybe that's a challenge. we will see. on the us more details larger discussion on [indiscernible] this point.at there is nothing on the books right now but this is something that has been on the president's mind and something we have been talking about. we will keep you updated on when something like that comes together. the president is saying is he has been thinking about this a lot. he wants look for an opportunity where he can give a more full some response to the good question that kevin asked. >> back to the question about
democrats capitalizing on the hillary clinton said the economy is not been working for most americans. is she wrong? i only watched part of the debate last night. there are parts of it that i did see and she went to great lengths to say that the progress we have made over the last seven years has been important and has led to the kind of economy in the united states that makes our economy the in the of the world. as the president said, it is the strongest and most durable economy in the world. that speaks to some of the polities the president put in place of those policies were in place to support american businesses and american workers that have let our economic recovery. the question is, will we keep those policies in place to further support american businesses and workers and
doubled down on those policies? we take those policies away and take us back to and era that led us to the greatest economic recession. i think the democratic candidates would agree with that description of the president's strategy and their support for and how it stands in stark contrast to what's being advocated by republicans. >> on immigration, there have been several pieces of officers moving forward on deportation that don't meet the president's priorities. is the administration confident dhs and its agencies are following the president's suggestions? >> i cannot speak to any specific enforcement action. those enforcement actions are decisions made by law enforcement officers. that's not something we can or should or try to dictate from the white house. what the secretary of homeland
security can do is lay out in general some priorities for how he believes our limited law enforcement resources can be used to protect the american public. the priorities the secretary has laid out are consistent with the kind of priorities the president has in mind. as it relates to pacific cases, i would refer to dhs. i don't want to interfere. us more aboutl the presidents meeting with senator casey and what was on the agenda? >> i don't have a lot more about the meeting. one of the reasons the president may have been a good move today is he saw senator casey on his schedule. he got to know him pretty well not just when they served in the senate together but campaigned together in the state of pennsylvania. the president shows a lot of loyalty to senator casey who stuck his neck out and took a
significant political risk by endorsing than senator obama in the 2008 presidential primaries. that's a time when president obama was not at all leading in the polls in the democratic primary in pennsylvania. senator casey stuck by the president's side and campaigned across that state. i don't have a lot of details to share about their conversation. if there's anything else we can share, i will you know. >> will the president return the favor? >> we will see. >> another meeting, it was reported he met with senator reform, on the justice is there anything from that meeting? i don't have a lot of details from the specific conversation but i can tell you what the president, the message the president delivered. we have been trying now for i guess more than one year to
agreemente bipartisan on capitol hill about the benefits of criminal justice reform. if you enact criminal justice reform and the right way, you can accomplish a lot of goals i think democrats and republican share. you can make the criminal justice system warfare and save taxpayers cost in terms of the amount of money we pay to lock up low-level drug offenders. you can also make our communities more safe. if you reform the criminal justice system in the smart way, you can reduce recidivism rates and time. that's the goal the president has in mind and that's the goal with senator grassley and chairman goodlatte have in mind. gearednversation was toward continuing to nurture the bipartisan pursuit of this kind
of legislation. consistent with any bipartisan legislation, there will be compromises involved. it probably will not yield a perfect piece of legislation but i think we can produce a bill that moves in the direction of the priorities i laid out. the president wanted to have a conversation with senator grassley and chairman goodlatte to encourage them to continue to move in that direction and frankly, these are the two suchiduals who have played an instrument auroral on capitol hill to make by started -- to make bipartisan progress. the president wanted to encourage them and thank them for their hard work on this important issue. that is notable because we disagree a whole bunch of other things with senator grassley and chairman goodlatte. to their credit, they are taking to heart the responsibility they
have not just try to find areas where they disagree with the president but try to find areas were democrats and republicans might be able to agree and make progress for the country. that is a good thing and we hope they keep doing it. >> i understand they are ready and willing i to send ground troops to fightsis. are forcesse troops of infantry, is it safe to say you would welcome that as soon as possible? is the u.s. going to ask for that? >> we certainly have asked the saudi's four in increased contribution to our efforts. this is a response to that specific question. those commitments will be discussed in greater detail by secretary carter with his counterparts in brussels next week. he is sitting down with two dozen of his counterparts from nations who are of our counterisl coalition and the
other thing we've gone to great lengths to do is make sure the contributions made by different partners in our counter i coalitionsl are integrated with the efforts of everybody else. saudi'sns that the cannot just next week sending troops into syria. we want to make sure that their commitment is integrated into the overall effort and integrated with the contributions made by other countries. i don't envision a prolonged delay but we want to make sure that our resources and the resources being committed by our partners are paying leveraged to maximize the kind of outcome we would like to see. isisuld you say that cannot be defeated without ground troops? >> we have acknowledged in the past a couple of things. while we cannot impose military solutions on the problems in
syria and iraq, we can have a significant impact using some of our military strength. the airstrikes, for example, that our coalition partners have carried out have resulted in isl fighters and leaders being taken off the battlefield. they have enhanced the effectiveness of ground forces i that are fightingsl on the ground. we have said that the ground come what is critical to our military success. buttrikes are important airstrikes,up by that kind of coordination is the best way to leverage our contributions to achieve our military goals. arabia andsaudi
other arab counties, you want to work with them on to writing and sending troops. had they made this offer a year ago or shortly thereafter, to you think things would be different on the ground than they are today? >> it's hard to make that kind of assessment. ,he thing we have also said particularly when you talk about iraq but it's true in syria as ultimately, what we need is fighters on the ground fighting for their own country. iraq hey, the government and security forces operating under the command and control of the iraq he central government have greater capacity to do that than opposition fighters in syria. that is why we have always had the ground campaigns inside iraq. carried out by forces under the command and control of the iraq he central government. the u.s. and our partners will support them in a variety of ways with equipment and training
and some assistance. we can carry out airstrikes in support of their efforts on the ground. ultimately, our strategy is predicated on iraq he's fighting on iraqi soil for their security it would need to see something similar inside syria. it's harder because we are not working with the syrian central government. the syrian government has lost legitimacy to lead so what we seek to do is build relationships with and support the efforts of opposition and,ers on the ground ostensibly, a greater commitment from saudi arabia would be integrated into that effort and to support and enhance the performance of the syrian opposition fighters. lisa monaco talked about the response to zika and she contrasted it with a bola - ebola./ transmitteds mainly
through mosquito bites but on the same day, we see scientists say the active virus is detectable in saliva and urine. do you see that is potentially changing the game? , part of the problem was how extreme of god. there was a slow response worldwide. the urgency was not there in the beginning. if things are going to change based on where the virus is contracted, is the urgency there that should be now? not just the u.s. response but the world response. has learnedhe world from our experience with ebola. we have learned a couple of things. taking aggressive action early is important. building up the health care infrastructure in the countries where the disease is present is critical to our success.
thegood news here is that health care infrastructure in many of the countries in the western hemisphere where we see the virus is better than the kind of poker infrastructure we saw in some of the countries in west africa. one thing that is necessary about the to learnuses we need more about it and it's not that there is much more research and on the virusmed asebola. bola fatal disease for just about everybody that contracts it. the risk from zika is much different. let me reiterate quickly -- i feel like i need to. i will keep it short. risks z of our different thanika ebola.
some don't show any symptoms at all in those that do show andtoms last about a week they are things like relatively low fever and some swelling. the concern we have with zika is that it is potentially particular.e birth defect when pregnant women contractzika, there appears to be a correlation with the children being born with this post defect. that is what has attracted the world's attention. that is what we are trying to counter but that's what makes it material different than the ebola situation a couple of years ago. the presidents announced of the oil -
is that is a dent in climate yolo mood and to what extent is the budget puzzle serious? nothose two things are necessarily contradictory. i think you can expect to see a budget that has simply bold and ambitious ideas included. this is one of them. the president is quite serious about them. we often say budgets are an opportunity to be quite specific about where your priorities lay. that certainly will be included in the president's budget proposal. i think the republican response made clear what republican parities are. based on the voracious response
to saw, it's clear their priority lives with defending industry. the president's priority lies with defending the middle class in trying to expand economic opportunity for the middle class and that will be in the budget proposal that will be released tuesday. help me understand the political thinking. it seems to be the budget increasingly, you're becoming increasingly disconnected with legislative reality and you are concerned in the past about making puzzles you felt had a chance on capitol hill. now it seems that you are making proposals that you know have no chance. is that because you simply want to lay out some markers for this party and this country about aat should happen or is it political strategy to put pressure on republicans to go along with things you make sense? been previous
were either ils or one of my is hazardous stood up there and said the budget proposal reflected a genuine effort to compromise and factored in priorities that republicans themselves had identified. the fact is, we often saw that republicans turned up their nose at that. i guess my point is that those that webudget proposals acknowledge on the front end for a genuine effort to compromise did not result in greater congressional action. it certainly did not result in a more productive conversation with republicans. i think you can expect to see simply bold ideas.
i would not expect republicans to endorse every single component of those ideas. but there will be many things in there that republicans should be able to support. we have talked about the pretty ambitious agenda we have for this year that is populated primarily, that republicans say they support. criminal justice is one and the transpacific partnership is one of them. there are ideas around the earned income tax credit and that paul ryan spoken favorably of in the past. if that is all is included in the budget but we will talk about that more on tuesday. the other thing included in the budget that gets attention now is the idea that medicare should be able to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies on drug prices. there is at least one leading
republican presidential candidate and sets a good idea. that's something we have included in our budget for the last couple of years. it will be included this time as well. that we willsting have a budget puzzle that will budgetorted -- a proposal that will be entirely supported by the conflict and opportunity for the president to make clear what his priorities are in some of those priorities that republican say they support. unfortunately, we see republicans are going to even have a simple conversation with the president's budget director about them. i think it raises questions about how serious republicans actually are about using their new found majority in congress to run the country. they seem to be using their majority in congress to run campaigns. then't think that's what voters intended when they elected the representatives in these positions. >> the president has said he
clearly wants to continue putting on these priorities after his presidency. is this budget in some ways the transition from president obama to the beginning of that transition to citizen obama where you are laying out some of these markers that he intends to continue to on after his presidency? >> i would not draw the linkage that directly. benefits of of the being citizen obama is that you are unconstrained by the kind of responsibilities you had in your previous position. said, the budget that will rollout next week will codify the highest priorities the president has the country in the middle class. i would certainly anticipate that when the president talks about public issues after he is left this office, that he will
participate. i don't know if he will attend. his office can confirm that for you. i think the best thing to point you to was the last opportunity that president obama had to meet with prime minister modi was in paris in the context of the climate talks. time was a sense of the that the indian government might be the chief implement to the successful completion of an ambitious climate agreement. that ambitious climate agreement was completed less than two weeks after that meeting. i think that should be a good indication to you that while takesminister modi seriously the responsibility as to advocate for the citizens of this country, he can advance the interest of the people of india by working effectively with president obama. that is a good thing.
to good thing for our two countries and a good thing for the citizens of our two countries. i would expect the president will continue to look for ways to strengthen the relationship not just put the lives but in our two countries during his final year in office. according to a history report, there are about 11 million undocumented immigrants here. they say most of those here in taxes andry don't pay they are contributing to the economy. [indiscernible] they say there might be a light at the end of the tunnel. president obama is the only president who can bring light into their life. what you think of the future? >> president obama has been a leading advocate of immigration
reform, the kind that would bring undocumented immigrants out of the shadows and would require them to undergo a ,ackground check, to put taxes and we know this would have a positive impact not just in the come of those immigrants in many of them are american in every way except their papers but would also have a positive impact on our economy because you obvious he have a larger taxes.ople paying it's harder fronts could was employed to try to take advantage of the undocumented workers to pay them lower wages. we can put upward pressure on wages and we can collect more taxes. that is good for the economy and the country and would make a difference in the lives of some of these immigrants. campaign, whatis message are we telling to the people. one indian american with a
turbine was asked to leave a rally. obama has been in baltimore and he said this is not america. an attack on one religion is an attack on all the world's religions. it's a clear message. i think you summarized it well. the president's comments in baltimore and yesterday at the breakfast clear indications that it is a core american value that people should not be targeted or marginalized or ridiculed because of the way they choose to worship god. and didht to do so on by anybody let alone somebody who aspires to the highest political office in the united states is a direct contradiction of a core american value. i think the president spoke of
quite forcefully about his commitment to defending that value for everyone. one.l give you the last john goes and then kevin goes. >> has the white house sought a meeting between the republican leaders and the white house budget director? what typically happens is when the president for his budget, the respective leaders of the budget committee -- committee in the house and the senate would invite the president's budget director to testify about the budget. faith in the research we have done, that has happened every year for the less 16 years and we assume it goes back further than that. we continue to do that research. even before the president put out his budget, the leaders of those committees who happen to be republicans said they were refusing to invite the budget director to even come talk to them. like the donald
trump approached of governing and i don't think many will support that. will the white house proposed a budget any differently because of president obama's last year in office and it's an election year? maybe he was to get things done in his final year. >> our goal in laying out this budget proposal was to lay out the priorities of the president for the country and the priorities for the middle class. that's what will be included in the budget agreement and i recognize that not every out of element of the budget proposal will be's up by republicans. there should be plenty in here for republicans to like. that's why it's unfortunate the republicans are not willing to have a conversation about it with the president's budget director. >> kevin, you get the last one. >> a little bit of housekeeping on gitmop - any announcements in the next week? >> nothing i'm her to preview.
the department of justice continues to work on the much discussed plan we will present to congress. i don't have updated timing but i know that they are working on it even today. when that plan is presented to congress, we will make sure you get a copy. >> the national polls seem to suggest that senator sanders and senator clinton nationally are almost neck and neck. does this debunked the idea among democrats that he's not electable? one lesson i learned in the context of the 2008 race is that national polls can make for good fodder for conversation around the water cooler. what really matters for the strategy of these campaigns are the pleasant individual states that are coming up. these are state-by-state contests. the smart campaigns are the ones focused not on the national polls with the work they need to do in the upcoming states.
national polls can be the subject of an interesting discussion but they are not particularly relevant to the strategies made by the smart campaigns. super bowl 50, 1 of you got? >> i know you have a vested interest in the broncos. i think the truth is, the carolina panthers had a great year and i only lost one game. i we give a narrow edge to the panthers. we will see, maybe the broncos will put out and iran. that peytondoubt manning has had a remarkable career. i don't know this will be his last game. he has traditionally and well when he is in the spotlight. carolina has a great defense but expectation is that peyton manning will perform very well. let's do the week ahead and get started on your weekend. on monday, the present will host elliident sergio monterr
of italy. meeting, they will discuss our shared efforts to counter .sl they will also exchanged views on economic develop its in europe and the importance of transatlantic trade and investment partnership and other mutual issues. on tuesday, the president will attend meetings at the white house and that is the day that the budget will be released. wednesday, nine years after he announced his candidacy for president, the president will travel to the place where his political or began by traveling to springfield, illinois. in the final year of his second term, he looked forward to addressing the illinois general assembly about what we can do together to build better politics,. one that reflects our better selves in the evening, the president will travel to the san jose, california area where he will spend the night.
on thursday, the president will attend a d&c event in the bay area and later that day, the president will travel to the los angeles area to take an up ellen show and spend the night there. thursday will be busy. on friday, the president will travel to palm springs, california where he will spend the night. of the summitance he will be hosting on monday, february 15 and february 16. the summit is with leaders of southeast asian leaders in rancho mirage. it will continue important conversations about the asia-pacific region following the conclusion of the summit tuesday. the president will then return to washington for it we will have more information for you about the agenda at the summit early next week, i hope. the other scheduling matter -- i want to major that those of you follow the white house closely are clued in.
both president obama and first lady will be sitting down for a conversation with from cbs ga that will air during the super bowl pregame show. yle king the president will be sticking around for a taped conversation on sunday that will air during the cbs early show on monday morning. cbs this morning. i'm going to get e-mails about that. as a regular viewer of "cbs this i would encourage you to check it up that conversation will be taped sunday but will air first thing monday morning. tune in for that. >> are those fundraisers were closed? i don't know what the press access is but we will make sure it is consistent with what we have done the past and will follow-up on that. thanks everybody, have a great weekend host: caller:
. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] secretary of state john kerry's meeting with the president of colombia is an washington, d.c. and we will take you live to the state department for their joint press conference. it's running a bit behind schedule that will be here on c-span. before we go live there, we will take a look at the road to the white house and the jeb bush campaign in new hampshire. this is from today's "washington journal." gary lambert joining us, a bush campaign supporter, former new hampshire state senator. senator lambert, why you supporting jeb bush? guest: i think the main thing is i have spent 35 years in the marine corps and i am looking for commander-in-chief, someone who will keep our country safe, make us safer than we are right now and i think jeb bush is that man. host: why? guest: he has a great plan to the beat isis, a great plan to take care of veterans. if you take a look at the field out there right now, unfortunately, there are some
folks who are do not think should be our commander-in-chief and i think jeb bush is the man to do the job right. host: jeb bush is in fifth place. according to the most recent poll, is support when from 6% to 10%. is this place good enough? guest: it depends what point you take a look at. i just saw one, i think harper pulled, it hasn't in second place in new hampshire, so -- it has him in second place in new hampshire, so i think you would do quite well and i think momentum will pick up across the country. host: gary lambert served as deputy legal counsel and acting chief counsel to the commanding general of the multinational force in iraq. he served in the marine corps for over 35 years, retired in 2014 as the kernel. he was awarded the bronze star for his iraqi service. what about some of the other candidates? arer