 We're nothing if not topical and today's panel was one of the best yet because we had four of the sharpest minds in Washington all of them former members of Congress or the Senate and They really laid it out in straight talk about what to expect now in this big battle over the budget And whether the debt ceiling limit is going to be raised And welcome to the Center for Strategic International Studies. My name is Andrew Schwartz I'm senior vice president for external affairs Welcome to the great and cheaper series. We will ever have all of our heroes are here and you just can't top this I'm also especially pleased because I wouldn't be standing here without Senator Johnston who I interviewed who I interned with I was out of Tulane in 1990 and so it's great to have Senator Johnston here I'll let Bob introduce the rest of the panel, but I wanted to thank you for coming out Look at us on Facebook. Look at us on Twitter. Look at us on csis.org because you'll be able to see this session replay it on all those mediums and thanks for coming Bob Thank you very much. Well, this is really gonna be a lot of fun for me because I have to make a Confession upfront these these gentlemen are all friends of mine, you know, I covered Capitol Hill for 15 of the years that 22 years It's still the best the it's still the best assignment you can have People say well the most prestigious is the White House and and it's fine White house you get real nice luggage tags And all that but if you really want to find out what's going on in Washington You have to go up to the hill and it's still now one of the few places left in Washington Where you have direct face-to-face contact with the news makers and And that's that's what makes being a reporter the fun that it is. So is my mic not on? You got to go over the whole thing again I was like And people say no how do they know you know, I mean they say they can hear that they know I mean But anyway Tom Daschle who right here Was the leader the Democratic leader for a lot of the time when I was up covering the hill We all know he's from South Dakota he In 2007 he joined with former Majority leaders George Mitchell and Bob Dole and Howard Baker to create a bipartisan Policies Center an organization dedicated to a finding common ground on some of the pressing Public issues at the day. He's now senior policy advisor D. L. A. Piper In their government affairs practice. We're glad to see him Bennett Johnson Pride of Louisiana is well there. He is right over there. I know which one He was one of the senior appropriators when I was up covering the hill he was a chairman and I guess of the energy and policy entry natural resources natural resources committee for a long time and it's interesting Senator Johnson either directly or indirectly was responsible for all energy legislation considered by Congress from 1973 to 1996 Oh buddy John Warner right here a senior senator serve what four terms? by As a senator from Virginia was always a major influence and voice on Foreign policy and defense policy because he was always and how long were you chairman of the arm services three times? I don't add it up and ranking of the three times I had my every share Privilege responsibility and then of course then Weber down here and I told then the other day it was getting so Last couple campaign years he'd be on CBS more than I was because Whenever somebody wanted to know what the inside story was on politics, they'd always go to then Weber he's now managing partner of wine stock and He served in the house from a 1981 to 1993 represented Minnesota's second congressional district and was always Somebody on the hill. I mean the best thing I can say about it when you want to know something about something You'd go to then Weber and he would give you a straight story about it and he's one of those Members of Congress that the kind I really like because most of them you can find them when the news is good But when the news is bad you could find them and those That had the most credibility with me. I think I appreciate that So I want to just start why don't we just start with you senator Johnson So the president's going to make this speech tomorrow and he's going to tell us what he plans to do about the Raising the debt ceiling and in the new budget. What do you expect? He's going to say well I think he's going to say that We need a commission or a group like the gang of six to study the matter and to come up with the recommendations Because there is not enough time between now and the election to put together what needs to be put together and To educate the public about it because you've got to have taxes which are anathema to the Republicans You've got to have cuts in the healthcare, which are anathema to Democrats It's going to take a a long period to educate the public. So I think he's going to Give some general parameters along those lines But say this commission or this group don't we already have a commission? Well, we've had one and maybe he'll say we'll have to vote on it But I don't think it's possible for him to come up with a detailed list And and really expect that to be the basis of a of an agreement. What what do you see as his? hardest task Well, bubba, I don't this president has never really been comfortable getting into too many of the details and public Pronunciation like this. So if I had to guess I would say he'd probably do three things and and they're all going to be difficult One is he's going to probably more publicly than ever before embrace the Simpson bulls commission work I think you can expect that the second thing I think he's going to try to do is make the case that all five categories have to be on the table by categories I'm talking about discretionary non-defense defense mandatory spending entitlements and revenue that all five of those are going to have to be on the table and He's going to be working to with Congress and then if I had to guess if he'll probably make a an effort to say that the gang of six in the Senate is Onto something procedurally that they've been working with all five of those categories and that he would like to see that expanded Maybe has been a suggest to a more formal effort, but if I had if I had You know any kind of appreciation of where he's going to go. I'd be those three things I think My formal leader has it about right as we say associate myself with your Categories and things like that, but I really believe this commission thing Bennett You got to start with a fundamental principle if it's a public commission then every deliberation has got to be open He if he does a Commission behind closed doors will be suspect so I don't know how you You know from experience that many things that we all settled it was behind the doors and now 4 a.m. In a conference between the House and Senate and we did it so I just I'd like to say one other word Frankly you mentioned I'd serve five terms when I had the privilege of serving those terms and stepped down after 30 years I also concluded 50 years as a partisan politician I went to work in the Eisenhower White House in the spring of 1960 So I said at that time as I say today, I'm a political I pass a torch to the next generation to do the partisan things What I say is coming from knowledge and speech How will that be received what the president says tomorrow night then what do you think he's going to say and what does he need I agree with about 90% of what Tom said with one exception that I'll get to I hope that he says Basically what Tom said about the five categories and everything's got to be on the table because that's what the Democrats believe and that'll take I mean Paul Ryan took us a certain distance by putting a couple of issues on the table. It have not been Put on the tables and entitlements particularly President can take us a step further by talking about how the Democrats view about those five categories The only thing I hope the only place I disagree with my friend times I hope he doesn't talk about The the gang of six because I think it'll weaken them. I think gang six we can damn them Damn, I think they are playing. They can play a tremendously important role Coming in after this with a bipartisan approach, but if the president embraces them too much Republicans will look at him and say well, that's just turned into a stocking horse For the administration and that's too bad that that's what people will think But we're in a very polarized environment to try to get to a point where we actually have a big deal And that's what we're talking about. I think it's a very delicate path So I hope the president does everything that Tom said and then stop short of embracing the gang of six And then I hope the gang of six which I think could become the gang of 20 or 30 If what I'm hearing is right comes out with something that takes us the next step and we actually get to do Senator Dachel just tell us Exactly the who the gang of six is I think I know but I mean this is what three Democrats and three republics three Democrats three Republicans Mark Warner, Saxby Chambliss Tom Coburn Conrad Conrad and Conrad is he part of he's he can't run this is part of it, but it's there. Oh, they're right and You know they've been meeting now ever since the Simpson-Bowles Commission finished their work and I don't disagree at all with what Ben said I think I've heard some of the Republic are seeing some of the Republican comments about how they hope that he doesn't Give too much of a of a bouquet at what they're doing because it could it might hurt their credibility and selling that the Whatever they come up with on the Republican side on the House side, especially But I think what he's gonna say it without hopefully without getting them in too much difficulty or trouble is It's got to be a bipartisan effort and that you know He may want to talk around the gang of six But I think he needs to cite efforts on the hill that whether it's Simpson-Bowles or the bipartisan policy center Or the gang of six, you know those are all illustrations of what needs to happen process wise for us to get to the next step Let me say one thing About the process. I was on the last Economic summit under Ronald Reagan and it was private as a matter of fact, there was a vow of secrecy and We came up with a proposal which senator Benson or Lloyd and childs and I presented to Ronald Reagan he We call it the 2% solution. He didn't he didn't like it But in any event, I think the negotiations have to be private Because there's got to be a principle of simultaneity The Republicans and Democrats Eventually have to join arms, but you can't do that during the negotiating process because you know Whatever Republicans comes up and says I'm willing to go along with tax increases. He's going to be excoriated So it's got to be quiet and then have the package presented as a joint package I agree with that and I agree with the gang of six, you know if I'd run again Mark He's a fine man, so I can very much all of this is playing out against They're gonna have to vote. When was it it may I guess or whether or not to raise the The White House as of now is Publicly saying they want a clean boat. Let's just vote up or down or whether to raise the debt ceiling Republicans say no way no how What do you all think is going to happen here on that banners out front settle it and I think and the president has opened The door slightly on the weekend talk shows and so forth through his emissaries In all probability, they will be not of what they call us straight up down That ceiling got to have it But they'll put something on there, but let me just if I might take a minute I had a very interesting morning this morning in the cold rain I went to the World War two memorial in honor of Bob Dole whom I served with and he worked so hard But I watched vice president was there and Tom Brokaw was the emcee I watched the speakers in this rainy cold morning framed against that statue and It came back to me. I was a young 17 18-year-old sailor in the last year of the war Glory, but I did my duty like a 16 million But I said to myself, you know that country That great country at that time were all united We all had the same rationing card Richard poor We all had the same gas rationing all of these things We need to unite this country to solve the enormity of this problem It's coming and that means every one of us whether rich or poor or otherwise Has got to have some measure of sacrifice. So I'll go so far as to say I Think one of the revenue sources should be a consumption tax. Oh, everybody's tax now That would say to the fellow that has to spend another nickel or something not a great big one Well, I'm in it too. So every American is Participating in resolving a fiscal problem. It's every bit as serious as the challenges We had as a nation to secure our freedom in World War two. So how do you feel about that about the consumption tax? Yeah, I think we're getting one right now imposed by OPEC, but beyond that But you know, I I I think that there's I Think at the end of the day you have to you have to in this discussion You have to differentiate between what you would like to have and what you think is possible I don't think it's probably possible to do the deal that needs to be done without a revenue component I agree with that doesn't mean that that's what I would write if I could do it all by myself I probably wouldn't but I think that the Republicans are gonna have to figure out how to come to grips with a revenue component of it and The one thing that they can't do I know is what the president probably like which is get rid of the Bush tax Cuts and raise the top rate. That's a non-starter Really if in my view that that is the least possible of all difficult options But you know whether it's a broadening of the base as the Simpson-Bowles Commission talked about Or maybe even a consumption tax center warrant has talked about if it's in the context of a growth-oriented reform of the tax code I think there's a chance of getting a revenue increase built into the plan I don't think the possibility of raising tax rates on the top income groups is gonna get I'll get voted on very quickly in the house and we'll be done with this discussion So I hope president doesn't quite go there. Let me just go back before before we get past it too far and talking about what's coming next The leadership and the White House have all agreed on a budget Basically for last year to keep the government funded until October with pretty good-sized cut in there Are you all all confident that that's going to pass the House and Senate would I think so Because not to pass it. It's just impossible They may have to do it with Democratic votes as well as a split Republican caucus, but I think it'll pass senator Bob I think it's going to be very close. I think especially in the house. It's going to be close I I don't think there's a lot of enthusiasm on either side if I had to really give you an answer today I'd say it probably will but it's there's going to be You know, there's there's been some rumors in the last 24 hours that if there's a little bit of unraveling around the edges Well, that's already and that's what I'm beginning to wonder if this thing is actually gonna pass I think it's gonna pass because they're saving They're bigger for the death I I still think it's gonna pass although it's a little dice here than it used to be Let me say I think conservative Republicans in the house could be making a big mistake in voting against this We were talking a minute ago about the debt ceiling vote than the Democrats desire to have this be a clean vote Which is inimical to Republican interests not the raising the debt ceiling is but they need They need the leverage of a spending bill to accomplish anything policy-wise if John Boehner cannot pass The the continuing resolution with Republican votes when he sits down to negotiate the debt ceiling He's in a much weaker position because they're gonna say well What do you mean? You have to include these riders in order to get Republican votes You couldn't get enough Republican votes to pass the continuing resolution So conservative Republicans who are intending to vote against the debt ceiling are right Pardon me against the continuing resolution are making a very serious mistake in terms of their own interests Talk a little bit about who has the hardest job here Boehner Harry Reid or President Obama? Really President Obama Bob, I mean As our distinguished leader said he doesn't get out Early enough I believe in some of these major issues It's hard to sit back that Congress work its will but every now and then President's got a lead as I said we got to unite this country and that doesn't mean it's all his problem It's as much my problem as it is your problem We've all got to come together but his strong leadership is essential make that happen. I agree with John I think it goes to as you look at At the entire challenge that one of the questions It's not it may not be it's certainly not the only one but one of the questions is who pays How do you get from here to where you need to go and who pays? The more equal it is along all five of those categories that I mentioned The more you spread the political risk and the political Difficulty the more you ask one constituency over the other To pay more Which is what happened in my view during the debate on the continuing resolution You're asking a certain constituency to pay more If that happens again, it's going to be a lot harder for the president and for the Democrats If you've got Revin on the table, it's going to be equally as hard for the Republicans But I think it's it comes down to the question. So who's paying but I I must say Seems to me John Boehner Had a pretty tough job here. I mean when he's got these people on his right and and and then he has people to the left I mean keeping that proud together. He's got the most labor-intensive job I don't know if it's in some sense. It's more difficult than the president's but it certainly requires a lot more work He's got 87 freshman Republicans and it's not just I mean the the the perception or the media commentary office Well, these are all tea party radicals and that's his problem Oh, these are just brand-new members of Congress that don't know the process He's got to go through a significant process just of educating him. What does the debt ceiling mean? Why does it have to pass? How come we weren't here to vote for these spending bills in the past? How come we've got to vote for the debt ceiling? What is a CR? How come we're voting on the FY 12 budget when we're only an FY To educate his caucus one-third of whom are brand-new members is a difficult task Yes, made more difficult by the fact that you got a very energized Conservative constituency which we sort of euphemistically call the tea party, but it's a labor-intensive job for John I'm a very good job though. I think we all agree. I agree. It's not a great job Remember when we came to the Senate Bennett The first year you were to be seen and not heard you remember that right and we'll tell you when to do Your maiden speech now. That's changed quite a bit. Well, I say Banner's got the toughest job because The tea party can veto I mean he can't go without his right wing The Democrats cannot veto the president. They're stuck with the president and there's we're all going to be with him, you know, no matter what and He all he has to do is show leadership, which is very hard But he doesn't have to bring any particular group with it. He hopes they'll be there, you know And and Senator Warner brings up an interesting point and I'd like just gonna Elaborate on that a little bit. It's not just The the rules of the Senate that are more relaxing than where it's a whole political process where it's not just Be seen and not heard now people are tweeting there. You know going through all this stuff. I mean we have this this business I mean I go to news conferences now and you know There are six people that are putting out something before the guy finishes the first sentence of what he said has that made politics How what's been the impact going? I'll tell you I'm saying of all that it has driven the money issue of Elections my first race less than a million dollars. I portend the coming Race in Virginia and not saying anything other than I bet they both of them have to raise close to 20 25 million To be able to get that Ability to project an answer and do it very quickly whether it's on television or Facebook Twitter They've got to have a team 24-7 quick reaction not go to sleep and wake up and see the paper in the morning. Oh, well, I can change it well to underline that Yesterday when Mitt Romney formed his exploratory committee and I think it's pretty clear He did that because he's just got to get going on raising money They were talking about that the president Obama's expected to spend a billion dollars on the presidential campaign this year But John is right. I mean this I think that it's that the blur that has occurred between news and entertainment is troubling because I think it's caused more hyperbolic Rhetoric and and the environment is so much more polarized today in part because of all the sources that are as much entertainment As they are news today, so it's it's sorted it out and that polarization Plays itself out every day on the floor of the house in the Senate and you know senator It's not just the blur between news and entertainment. It's the blur between news. It's true And I said, that's right. I mean I noticed I'd like everybody I have one of these Google alerts and I got a thing where it said cheaper says he's okay with Soros taking down the government now What is that? So that's not true. No, it is I mean I have no I said somebody walked up to me in their airport and asked me a question and I said no No, I don't I don't I know about that, but we're not going to a story about it Well, I don't remember anybody walking up in an airport. I don't remember anything But I mean that's just you know a very minor example of How all of this is really changed One interesting aspect of it Bob and if you think about this way is we're we're decrying the increased partisanship in Washington And I I I do too. I think that's true, but maybe we're using the wrong words because Paradoxically one of the reasons we have what with the phenomenon of what we call increased partisanship in Washington It's because the political parties themselves are weaker Interest groups Loggers talk radio those that's where the centers of power are now in the days when the political parties actually had real strength And we're able to exert some influence on the process. It actually produced somewhat less polarized environments Then we feel today, but I was of all of this We'll never go back to those days where you have a strong political party And I think also it means it would be very difficult at least in the house Which I know best it would be very difficult to have a speaker of the kind that we had under speaker Rayburners people in the past It's everything's transparent now John Boehner can't come in there and just crack heads and wrap knuckles and force people to do What he wants them to do it's not going to work and the interest groups are a lot stronger because of the power of money I mean, I think the Supreme Court had it dead wrong when they said money a speech and speeches money but that's another that's something for another day, but It makes interest groups so powerful Because you know they can ignore the party and give their money direct. We had more discipline You know when I came there were about eight chairman of your party Democrat Party who really Controlled the Senate with their good eight Republican senior that they worked together and had a little drink together And their wives got together and everything worked out So that's the way to say and you did not go arrive those chairman Either or your senior Republican leader. Why do you think it is and I'd like to get all of your takes on this I have my own thoughts on it. Why do you think? That it's not that way anymore I mean, I remember when I came to Washington and we would have Democrats and Republicans over for dinner and now I Find elected officials don't like to be invited to the same party with people of the other party because they don't want people back home They Democrats don't want anybody to think they're running around with Republicans and and vice-versa. They don't have time They got they don't have time to go to dinner. They've got to go to fundraiser They got to spend all their time raising money. It's corrupted the process. That's a part of it I think a big part of it and I also think I say it's the airplane because what the airplane has done is Given everybody the capacity to go home. They don't even move their families to Washington That's a warm and as a result they leave their families at home So there's a pressure to get home not only from constituents, but most importantly from your family So they don't have the opportunities to socialize like they used to and then I think the party is a result They don't know what they don't know one another and then I think there's there's more ask Bob Bennett about the political pressure About reaching over to the other side Bob the senator from Utah who was castigated for working with Ron Whiten on health issues I mean, it's just There are some in the parties that that really don't want to see that any longer Tom is totally right about the living arrangements Well think of the number of members that we know or read about or think what they don't live with their families here anymore They live in a in a they share an apartment Oh, well some of them are living in their offices right that never happened before I mean it just wasn't they were part of the Washington community Yes, they were in their districts, but they were also part of the Washington community and after hours You know the they they had a social relationship With members of Congress on the other side of the out Maybe their kids went to the same school or something like that That doesn't happen much anymore people are in here as late in the week as they can get Tuesday morning maybe and out as soon as they can leave Thursday after Thursday evening preferably Does anybody think they are not going to vote to raise the debt ceiling because if they don't I mean You can talk about what the impact on the economy would be if you can't pass a budget resolution But if you don't raise the debt ceiling, what do you think and it doesn't have to come to the vote? I mean just the if people get the idea around the world. They're not going to raise the debt limit What do you think the impact of that piece? I think it'd be absolutely catastrophic Bob I mean, I've heard people say that it would be many many times worse what we've experienced in the last two or three years That it would just destroy our credibility financially It could mean I ran into a bank one of the very well-known bank president a couple of days ago He said it would it could mean bankruptcy for his bank Almost immediately Bob. You gotta remember it. We're borrowing. I think up to almost 40 cents on the dollar what we've been in and As Tom Daschel correctly said we're looked upon as the leader of the world in so many ways and Financials want we've got to keep that borrowing capacity To fund what is it several billion dollars a day almost that we have to borrow and we have to borrow From abroad now abroad gonna lend money to a government that can't function and there's bankrupt No So let's let's talk about what do you all think? The final deal is gonna be here. I mean if in fact you do you think they're gonna come to some kind of agreement On the FY 12 budget around the debt ceiling on well I mean something's gonna be attached. We'll take them see quench what I that's first I mean the next the yeah, I think that they're gonna pass the debt ceiling they have to pass that thing I think just sort of repeating what I said about the CR The question is how are we gonna reconfigure power on Capitol Hill? Is is that gonna have to pass through the house with a lot of Democrat votes because Republicans don't vote for it Which case as we go into the FY 12 negotiations? Republicans are seriously weakened. Yeah, they don't get that but they are or is Bain are gonna be able to get a majority of the Republicans to vote for this and show that he's got some strength of this caucus He'll do the very best that he can and I hope he comes out of it strong because I want Republican position to be dominant or at least as strong as it can be in those negotiations I think then we've got we have a chance of doing a deal. I'm Optimized a big deal on FY 12. I Am encouraged by the White House's response to Paul Ryan. Yes, they said they don't agree with him and they actually Disagreed strongly, but they avoided some of the more inflammatory political rhetoric that with which they could have described his budget Which said to me we're gonna keep the door open to sitting down and doing some kind of a deal down the road So I'm hopeful that that can happen. I think you're gonna have a house budget resolution pass a Senate budget Resolution pass and no conference committee think of the vast gulf between Ryan on health care You know and and the Democrats on health care. I mean that is that is a Huge thing. It's gonna take too much time There's no way in my judgment, but they could do that before the election and they shouldn't it shouldn't try they ought to let This process work so the public can be educated. Well, what what do you do in the meantime in between? I mean, is it just a budget resolution? I mean you pass resolutions Yeah, you you continuing resolutions all the way up to to the election next year. Yeah, you know Cut it cut a little more out of discretion. It just it's just too big a deal Even the Democrats don't have a good way to cut health care I mean nobody has come up with that magic formula other than really Single-payer which the country will not go along with so I have to disagree about it I really understand what you're saying senator, but I I really think if we don't if we're looking for a big deal I think it's this Congress or it's going to be forced on us by a fiscal crisis That's correct, and I wish that were not the case. I wish we had the time to educate and go through the next election I've heard the argument about why we need to wait till after the next election spun so many different ways Some people say only a reelected president Obama free of election concerns can do it I would say only a newly elected Republican president with a fresh mandate can do it people in the Congress We need we had one election on deficits. We need a second one to strengthen the mandate. I don't I don't buy any of this I think this is the Congress and however difficult it is if it's not done here I think it's going to be precipitated by a crisis Is this Congress going to be able to come up with taxes on the rich? Maybe well taxes You know look at the polls the polls say the public supports taxes on the rich More than cuts in Medicare and you think the Democrats are going to let it go by without taxes on the rich Not a chance and takes education. It'll be no different after the 2012 election I do think that there's going to be a game of political chicken going on for the next couple of months because Nobody wants to see the debt limit, but everybody's going to use the debt limit as sort of their leverage for trying to Get as much of their agenda included in the overall agreement as they can but I think at the end of the day The real question is can you deal with? entitlements with mandatory spending with all of the controversy around revenue in a time frame that Really starts ticking seriously May 18th. That's that's less than a month away And that's all that's a huge agenda. We've not been able to do that in 30 years So to be able to do that in 30 days is going to be a real reach But the pressure is there and the question is whether or not they might be able to agree to a framework That would allow them more time to work out the details But I don't see how you get all those details locked in by May 18th or sometimes shortly after that And you say 30 days, but that's minus yet another congressional recess, right? Before July is pretty well get the dates a little Tom. I don't think it's a couple of months I've got to play around well maybe July when the clock starts ticking. Yeah, there's 81 billion left Before we hit the debt ceiling so we've got to go with it and make these tough decisions I agree revenue because it hit me So security that is look at it figure out what we're going to do Medicare Medicaid all of these things have got to be addressed. I think by fall we should have Before the fiscal year starts a bill in place. I really do. I'm optimistic like you this Congress It is now is the time you cannot kick the anybody want to ask some questions. We'd love to have some from the audience We have microphones here if you'd like to do it Do you does it and I while you're thinking about your questions? Let me just go back to the panel here Let's just talk about the entitlements a little bit Does anybody think that there will be a serious effort to reform social security? I Think there'll be an effort word is serious, but go ahead Tom Listen, I agree with John and I think that I Think that social security in some ways is the easiest of the entitlements to deal with because there are fixes that Most people shouldn't have that much difficulty agreeing to I actually personally think aging You know the age limit ought to be looked at again, but that's just there's just one one piece of it But whether it's age or whether it's means testing or bumping up the cap that now exists with regard to revenue I mean there are a lot of ways to changing just changing the cost of living calculation is a very Profound way to take out the longevity of the trust fund a good deal So but there are things you can do the thing you are not mentioning is political will that's right That's that's the ingredient that they can't I don't think it takes any more political will though more or less Bob Then Medicare or what revenues or maybe even defenseman, but but Tom's exactly right the point about social security Is we know how to get money out of social security. It's not complicated when you get to Medicare It's much more difficult. We're not sure some of the things we're suggesting will save money over the long term We're not sure how to do it. I think there's a big distinction and I just just emphasize There's a big distinction in health issues between cost saving and cost shifting if all we do is put a limit on Medicare and Medicaid we're shifting all those costs on to the overall health sector and And not saving anything. So you're saving the government technically, but you're not saving the system or the American people a thing Should be somewhat reformed absolutely. Well, I do from the floor Max Entman CSIS. Thanks so much for coming and joining us tonight gentlemen We actually had a question from our Facebook page and they were asking about the fact that there's a lot of people in this Administration who've worked on economic issues in the previous administration. They were wondering if that You know contributes to the fact that there's this kind of partisan deadlock And maybe there needs to be an infusion of new ideas new financial and economic thinkers To kind of work towards fixing the budget Do you have any comments on that and by that but I mean the Clinton and the Obama administration? Sorry Who'd like to tackle that? Well, I think it's always good to have new ideas and new blood. I mean, it's you know, there's You get kind of wedded to ideas sometimes and you don't want to move off them because you've made the same arguments for so long So having an infusion of new and innovative thought is always welcome. It seems to me. Well, you know We've had two Or tsunami elections back-to-back and And both of them had the theme of change. I mean they won't change because they don't like What the choices are? I mean, that's the problem. That's why it's going to take time people don't like these choices They don't like the idea of the cuts in their Medicare or whatever And so changing the cast of characters is not going to change the difficulty of these choices I disagree with Bennett a little bit Bennett look there was a big change and what happened We're where we are today. Now that was caused by the infusion and new blood now. It's a problem. We got to solve But we got to solve it. We went through the lame duck and made Very important games the president he led and got done We didn't close the government. Those were decisions that were made the republic is still carrying on Just think of how they felt and what 1787 in September the 17th. They finished the constitutional convention. They carried on This idea that we're gonna wait until the next Congress is wrong. We've got to do it now I'm thinking that some of the freshmen a year ago were being told that they couldn't win And they didn't think they were gonna win and I wonder if some of the people who ran Were more likely to be business owners and not longtime state senators. I wonder if some of them don't care Oh, yeah, if they get along with people, they're not trying to learn the system. They're here on a mission They're gonna vote against everything and then if they go home, that's okay. That's what they came here for I am I don't know all of these freshmen republicans, but I've spent a lot of time getting to know some of them I think that they're maligned in the press by this description of them as quote the tea party class These are pretty good solid folks. Yes But I think you identify one key thing people in this town including people like me don't quite get this I can't tell you how many conversations. I've said saying well, what is the game these freshmen are playing? Well, how do they think this is going to advantage them? I've had so many con conversations with new members of Congress They really believe they're here on a mission. You may think they're right or wrong about that But they think they are they think they got to save the country from fiscal collapse And if they have to go back home and get beat over that they're ready to do it I've never heard these kind of conversations from members of Congress in the past. Well, that's kind of a healthy thing. Oh really? I think we need a healthy thing if they're willing to agree if not you think if you have not you think that they're rigid ideologues But if you know if you agree with them, they're principled folks. They they are they're good folks Arlie Johnson with the National Association State Community Service program along the same line I was listening to you Mr. Schieffer talk about the things are in the blogs and lies in the media What I'm confused by is it is good to hear you gentlemen speak you're out of office now And you speak so eloquently and just speak like statesmen and you seem to be able to cover both sides of the aisle That's obvious that those that are still in the boolean pot can't do that But where are the statesmen are speaking up when these lies and things are towed and put in the media? It's obvious the media the forfe rails not answering it and I mean I'll keep hearing this stuff about a president not having a birth certificate This other idiotic stuff just keeps coming back and back and George Bush You know blew up the Twin Towers that stuff is just ridiculous. Why does it keep filtering through our system? We're don't we need states like you out to be standing up saying we need to stop this foolishness So we can get on with the business of the state Well, everybody has a newspaper now I mean in the old days it used to be you know, you had a newspaper and you had an editor and Sub editors and you had reporters and they went out and checked out things But now everybody that has a computer has a newspaper and and you know the internet The interesting thing about the internet is it is the only vehicle we've ever had to deliver news that has no editor You know stuff right the worst newspaper in the country the smallest radio station has somebody on the stamp that knows where the stuff comes from Stuff pops up on the internet and you don't know if it's true You don't people believe up and and there are a certain number of people that as long as they see it written down They're gonna believe it and so that's that's what everybody know Bob Bob You're that you're the journalist, but I would say one interesting factor to me It seems as the media today in in terms of the phenomena is described is more like the media at the founding of the country When you had overtly partisan media really in Lincoln's time. Yeah, we're up to Lincoln's time We we were all luckered lucky to grow up at a time when media was more objective How do we come back that is that with statesmen like yourselves and you'll have to have a larger voice I mean, where's the meat? I mean, where's the governor who well It's very difficult. If I had an answer for you, I'd probably be Richard and Bill Gates because I would have taken advantage of it Donald Trump Speaking of birthers is now, you know trying to become the champion of the birthers a change in our culture Yeah, I mean the violence on television. That's what sells regrettably. I don't care for it I don't tell but we we shouldn't leave without touching one other subject here Bob And that is what about the level of defense spending and having devoted much of my career to that subject and frankly As I look at this problem. We have today. It started Way back maybe touching your leadership period as the leader I don't know but it isn't can't be all heaped on this. No, that's Congress or that is true It started back there and I'm partially responsible because I was always in there trying to get more money for defense spending the care for the families and I Got that big help get that big GI bill through and things like that So I'm partially guilty of this excessive spending we have today I admit it because I'm two years out of the Senate But we better I think with Gates. He's done very sensible Recommendations, I think where he can make cuts in defense now Recently, I think they've got the budget five hundred and thirteen billion two billion cut out I mean Gates could work with that, but we gotta look at that I think that should be on the table, but done under the closest of scrutiny, but it shouldn't be Yes, thank you. My name is Jim. I'm a reporter from Singapore I was wondering if the panel could address, you know, whether there are any foreign policy implications if any to all this Budget cuts that we're seeing a lot of people of course say that the cuts Dead on the table right now are less than meets the eye But you know, what about the next two to three years or five years as this process get its momentum What's going to be the impact on America's leadership in the world? Especially at a time where you have competition from a rising China one answer And I just to follow up on what Senator Warner said. I I think In the sometime in the future not too distant We're going to see a debate within the Republican Party that we haven't seen for a long long time About national security defense spending foreign policy The Republican Party has pretty much been a lockstep on those issues for decades really maybe since Ronald Reagan's like But you look at what's happened in the last just look at little sort of straws in the wind in the Republican Party over the last Year or so you got the members of the deficit reduction Commission Republican members who voted for significant defense spending cuts Senator Coburn is vocal about it. You have one of our leading presidential candidates Haley Barbara former chairman of the Republican Party Sitting governor in Mississippi who's talked about cutting the defense budget and questioned our mission in Afghanistan Michelle Bachman a little less mainstream, but Has come out against the intervention in Libya So you're and then of course you get outside of government You got George will and Tony Blankley and various other commentators on the right who are questioning Afghanistan Intervention and the whole Republican approach to foreign policies. You may see I don't know where it leads your questions What are the implications? I'm not sure But I think we may have a debate within the Republican Party Maybe playing out in the presidential campaign that we haven't had in a long time And we should have been it's even broader than the defense and I agree completely with what then just said But I think it goes to What is our international presence going to look like as we go forward? I mean this the current agreement has an eight billion dollar cut in foreign aid And of course foreign aid is the easiest thing to attack and cut because it doesn't involve any domestic constituencies to speak of and so it's it's easy to demagogue it and it's easy to to make assertions about What little value there is but there is a huge value and I think the questioner was citing China as as we travel It's amazing to me the Chinese presence in Latin America and in Africa and in places all over the world I mean we have to be engaged now with Northern Africa and the Middle East and all of the turmoil there It's all the more important It seems to me that we not pull back but that we stay engaged and be full-fledged partners here And I think that's going to be in jeopardy if we don't have the resources to do it, right? I agree a hundred percent and we got to remember this is a global economy that we're competing and we cannot withdraw In that sense. Well, that's true But also we've got to fix our own economy because if our budget if our economy is not fixed We don't have the strength to do to do anything once the tsunami hits You know just let me throw a couple of figures out here just in very round terms to show you how much the world has Changed I looked this up the other day in 1962 entitlements took up 20% of our budget discretionary spending took up 20% of our budget and 60% of the budget was the fence spending today 20% of the budget is the fence spending 20% is Is discretionary spending and guess what entitlements are now? 60% of the budget those are just very round terms that just gives you an idea of Where we are and how serious this all is now and how difficult it is going to be to make The kind of cuts to get this all back in the balance. Yes Thank you, my name is Bill Brear. I'm a retired Foreign Service Officer, but it occurs to me that Something that has been missing from the discussion. I'm going back to domestic Affairs right now and that is the cost of medical medical care our cost is per capita roughly double the rest of the civilized world and our Results are not necessarily any better We many people on the hill boast that we have the best medical care in the world But we don't have the best longevity and we don't have the best Input mortality one of the worst infant mortality rates And that's that's fixable. I think the cost could be reduced by there are a lot of suggestions out there But Medicare I think delivers medical Services with a smaller overhead than most of the private health insurance companies do for example And and there's there many many ways we can cut that back without destroying the Medicare care system. Thank you Well, that's a single payer system Jack Marsh My name is Jack Marsh With the Freedom Forum in New Zealand and a former constituent of senator dashels I was really struck by the comments that all five of you made about this breakdown of civility really On among members of the house and the US Senate fact that people come in on Tuesday leave on Thursday families don't socialize They just don't they don't connect for goodness sake. They don't even accept a dinner invitation from Bob and Pat Schieffer I mean that's appalling We don't serve very good food But a serious question down drinks a serious question, how do we return civility and An honor in some cases in respect to the process on capital I think it's an excellent question and I'd like to hear all four of our panelists This will be our final question, but I think it's a very important question start with you Senator John Well, I think the public has got to understand to value it more and I think the public is beginning to understand that People need to meet in the middle and be more civil and I when the public the man now they think compromises a bad word a lot to a lot of people here a lot of people are understanding that That you can't have too much partisanship, and I think they think it's too much. I Would say that that if you could do one thing I mean Bennett made such a good point about the money I think John mentioned this to the money chase and how much time has to be spent raising money And I don't know until we deal with that issue I don't know how you ever get back to where we need to be But I will say that what I worry a lot about is the lack of socializing Outside of what happens on the floor of the House and Senate there ought to be more effort If I were the president I would I would bring people up to Camp David almost every weekend just to develop a relationship there has to be more communication more inclusion and you know the leaders can do that we used to take some times and Try to get out and around and see the sites, you know the beautiful Facilities we've got in Washington most members of Congress drive by them every day, and they never get in the buildings I mean, it's amazing how few members actually have been in the National Archives or you know some of these gorgeous Facilities we've got in Washington. There ought to be more of an effort to Explore this great city and to socialize and to build the kind of relationships that Oftentimes just never get get done. You know I will as we go around. I'll just say at my two cent worth here I was at a Symposium honoring Sam Nunn down at Georgia Tech Recently and Sam Nunn in my view was probably among the most productive senators that That I have I've ever been around or ever covered and and we were talking about this very thing and he He said to the audience and he brought up Saxby Chambliss who's part of this gang of sex the Republican Sam of course is Democrat and he said, you know Saxby is really doing some some fairly remarkable things with this group and they're really bringing people together And he said I'll tell you something else. He said he's getting a lot of heat from the people back home that they're really Pouring it on and he said how many of you have either called or emailed or written Senator Chambliss and said, you know, I really appreciate what you're doing I know this is a hard thing and I appreciate to what you're doing He said and he's and he asked how many know maybe two hands rose and in the audience and he said, you know I think one of the things that that we can all do is when When our elected officials are doing these kind of hard things He said it doesn't hurt to let them know because he said they're they're getting plenty of comment and plenty of attention That the people who don't approve of what they're doing and and he just threw that out I thought it was a rather good suggestion Well, he was he's truly a beautiful man and I was privileged to be the ranking member I know that for his entire period of I think eight years as chairman and he's one of my dearest friends But I want to take a statement you made The public doesn't like compromise Now the government is functioning today and not closed down because of compromise I'm telling you the majority of the Americans breathe the sigh of relief I agree. I think most people do like compromise, but I mean people come to Washington and think they're elected not that's all right That's what I'm saying. I think every cloud dark cloud has its silver lining this crisis that we're in Could well begin to bring back a measure of civility after they settle if we can get the bill Which I think the two of us want to make sure is in place by September for the new fiscal year Then they will look back and with a sense of accomplishment and say, you know somehow we made it happen together Because it's only going to happen If you can get the votes to pass these various things and that takes compromise then so that's a silver lining in this dark cloud I Don't think it can happen very easily. I don't hate Democracies not a pretty I think we can accomplish what senator warranton and I have talked about what other everybody wants But in terms of your broader question, how do you restore civility? I speak about it a lot and have for a long time Like 15 years It's not easy if I were to say one change that I think would be helpful I think if we change the congressional schedule But we have people now who don't have families here. They're all back Can you imagine trying to force a change in schedule on them that would basically be saying you're going to be spending a lot less time with your Family, it's not easy and I so I you know the a harsh reading of history Says you go through phases and it just takes a lot of time And I I wish I thought that there was some way we could easily solve this problem I think we're living in a Polaroid because of the schedule and the media and social issues the Tom talked about in terms of People in Washington and and the influence of interest groups and everything we've talked about We're living through a period of polarization and we better figure out how we can make it work Through that polarization as opposed to trying to figure out how we're going to stop it because I just don't think we're going to end that So once again, we have not solved very many problems here But we have at least given you I hope a better understanding of what the problems are and and only an understanding the problems That's that's the beginning in solving them So on behalf of CSIS and TCU and the Schubert School of Journalism. Thank you all for being with us Thank you Bob Great Bob