Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
POLITICS ANDH@ NEGOTIATE AH@ DEO
H@
AVOID THE FISCAH@L CLIFF.H@
H@
JOINING US NOWH@ SENATOR RON
JOHNSON, REPUBLICAN FROM
WISCONSIN.
THANKS SO MUCH FORH@ COMING.
>> GOOH@D MORNING.
>> I'M GETTIH@NG WORRIED H@HERE.
BECAUSE CLOCK ISH@ TICKING.H@
SHOULD WEH@ ALLOW A VACATION
WITHOUT H@LEGISLATION?H@
>> H@NO, I'M HAPPY TH@O STAYH@H
UNTIL WE GET THIS THINH@G FIXED@
UNDERSTAND HOWH@ ABSURD THISH@
PROCESS IS.H@
WE'VE DONE THIS WITHH@ THEH@ DE
H@ILING.
WITH THE SUPERH@ COMMITTEE.
NOW WE'RE BH@ACK HERE AGAIN WHE
WE'VE GOT TWOH@H@ PEOPLE, AND H@
THEY'RE UNELECTEDH@ STAFFS
NEH@GOTIATING THE FINANCIAL FUTE
OF AMERICA.
I H@MEAN THIS IS ABSOLUTELYH@
ABSURD.
H@
AND WHY IS H@THAT?
IT'S BECAUSEH@ THE DEMOCRATS
H@
HAVEN'T SHOWN US THEIR PLAN.H@
WE HAVE NOTHINGH@ TO COMPROMISE
H@WITH.
LISTEN, I'MH@ HAPPY TOH@ WORK W
ANYBODY, WHO'S WILLINGH@ TO FIR
ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM.H@H@
H@D THEN WORKH@ WITH ME IN GOOD
FAITH TO FIX IT.H@
BUT I DON'T SEE THATH@ FROM THE
OTHER H@SIDE.
I MEAN THE HH@OUSE HAS PASSED T@
BUDGETS, INCLUDINGH@ PROPOSALSH
SAVE MEDICARE.
THH@E DEMOCRATS IN THE SENATEH@E
NOT PASSED AH@ BUDGET IN THREEH
YEARS.
THEY HAVEN'T VOTED FORH@ ANYH@
WHATSOEVER BECAUSE THEY H@DON'T
WANT THEIRH@ FINGERPRINTS ON A
H@
PLAN TO SAVE THISH@ COUNTRY.
PRH@ESIDENT OBAMA'S LAST TWO H@
BUDGETS HAVE BEEN VOTEDH@ ON TH@
TIMESH@ INH@ CONGRESS, FINAL VH
TALLY H@0 TO H@610.
UNTIL I SH@EE A PLAN ON THEH@
H@BLE --
>> THE REPUBLICANS GETH@ THEIR
WAY,H@ YOU GET THROUGH THISH@ FL
H@CLIFF, LET'S SAY THERE IS SH@
H@RT OF A H@DEAL, YOU'RE GOING
BE RIGHT BACK IN THEH@ SAME
SITUATION IN SIX WEEKSH@ TALKIN
ABOUTH@ THE H@DEFICIT, THEH@ DE
CEILING AGAIN.
>> IF REPUBLICANS HAD THEH@IR W,
WE WOULDH@ BE SPENDINGH@ H@$7 TN
LESS OVERH@ THE NEXT TENH@ YEAR
THATH@'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THE HH@OUSE BUDGET AND THEH@
PRESIDENT'S BUDGET.H@
$7 H@TRILLION.
WE'RE ALWAYS TH@ALKING ABOUT
MINIMUM OFH@ $4 TRILLION.H@
WELL THEH@ HOUSE BUDGET HASH@
ALREADY DONE H@THAT.
THEY'VE LAIDH@ THATH@ -- PUT TH
TEMPLATEH@ OUT H@THERE, BECAUSE
THH@AT'S WHAT A BUDGET IS,H@ SHG
THIS IS TH@HE MOST YOU CAN H@SP@
NOW TAKEH@ THAT INFORMATION
H@
COMMITTEES AND STARTH@ CRAFTING
THEH@ LEGISLATION UNDERH@ THAT
FISCALH@ CONSTRAINT.
THAT'S THEH@ WAY THE PROCESS OU@
TO WORK.
THH@EN YOU ACTUALLY HAVE ELECTE
OFFIH@CIALSH@H@ DEBATING BACK A
FORTH IN COMMITTEES ANDH@H@
COMMITTEE MARKUP, IH@N THE VIEW@
THE AMERICAN PEH@OPLE, AS OPPOS
TO BEHIND CLOSEDH@ DOORS,
H@
LITERALLY WITH UNELECTED STAFF
MEMBERSH@H@ TRYING TO HAMMERH@
THIS SH@TUFF OUT IN TWO ORH@ TH
WEEKS.H@
H@'S ANH@ ABSURD PROCESS.
>> OKAY, SO WE GOH@ OVER THE CLF
THEN.
H@
WE GET A H@RECESSION.
IT WAS MEANT TH@O CREATE A
RECESSION.H@H@
WHY DIH@D WE GET TOH@ THE POINT
WHERE THE REPUBLICANSH@H@H@H@ A
MUST BE SO H@PRO-BUSINESSH@ TO
TO A SITUATION WH@HERE WE KNOW
WE'RE H@GOING TO HAVE A REH@CES.
WHY DID YOUH@ FIGHT THAT HARD?
H@>> FIRST OF H@ALL, I WASN'TH@.
TEMPORARY TAXH@H@ CH@UTSH@ -- T
H@X CUTS H@ARE NOT WISE.
IT SETS UP THATH@ LEVEL OF H@
UNCERTAINTY.
THE THING HOLDING BACK THIH@S
ECONOMY.
I WAS IN MANUFACTURING FOR 31H@
H@YEARS.
BUSINESS PEOPLE WANTH@ SOME LEV
OF CERTAINTY FROMH@ THE
GOVERNMENT.
YOU HAVE ENOUGH H@UNCERTAINTY I
BUSINESS.
BUSIH@NESS IS HARD, BY THEH@ WA.
PRESIDENT H@OBAMA THINKS WELL
H@ESEH@ GUYS CAN PAY IT,H@ THEY
AFFORD IT.
H@LISTEN, IT IS NOTH@ EASY TO
CONCEIVE OF A PRODUCT, AH@ND TH
PRODUCE THAT PRODUCT AT AH@ COS
THAT IS LOWER TH@HAN WHAT YOU C
GET SOMEBODY TO BUY ITH@ FOR.
THAT IS H@HARD.
THATH@'S WHY MOST BUSINESH@SES .
AND NOW WASHINGTON IS GOING TOH
INCREASE TH@HE TAX BH@URDEN ON L
TO MEDIUM SIZEDH@ BUSINESSES?
NOH@W WASHINGTON IS CONTINUING
INCREASE THEH@ REGULATORYH@ BUR.
THAT'S --H@ THE PROBLEM IS THE
SIZE OF H@GOVERNMENT.H@H@
ALL OFH@ GOVERNMENT'S INTRUSION@
OUR LIVES.
H@
ALL THE RULES ANDH@ REGULATIONS.
IF YOU WANT TO GETH@ THIS ECONO
GOING, AND I THINK YOU COULDH@ T
IT H@GOING,H@ REDUCE THE
GOVERNMENT -H@- THE FEDERH@AL
GOVERNMENT'S INFLUENCE ON H@
BUSINESS PEOPLE'S H@LIVES, ANDH
AMERICAN'S LH@IVES AND WE COULD
GET THIS ECONOMY M OVINGH@ F@
>> WEH@ CUT THE CAPITALH@ GAINSE
PRETH@TY LOW.
I'VE STARTED FIVH@E BUSINESSES.
SOME H@SUCCESSFUL, SOME NOTH@
SUCCESSFUL.
WHEN THEY WERE NOTH@ SUCCESSFUL
H@
GOVERNMENT HAD NOTHING TOH@ DO
H@
WITH IT.
A GH@REAT IDEA WHERE YOU WORH@KD
AND THIS COUH@NTRY WORKS, WHY D
WE TALK ABOUTH@ THE GOVERNMENTH
INTEH@RVENTION?
WHY DON'T WE JUST TALKH@ ABOUT @
GOOD BUSINESS CANH@ BE, WITH OR
WITHOUT THE GOVERNMENT?H@
>> WHAT HAS HAPPENED TH@HE LAST@
YEARS IS WE'VEH@ GOTTEN THISH@
REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT,H@ FOR H@
EXAMPLE, PRESIDENT OBAMAH@'S OW
H@SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTH@RATI
THE STUDYH@ THEY H@COMMISSIONED
COSTH@S H@$1.75 TRILLIOH@N PER @
COMPLY WITH.H@
NOW, THAT'S A NUMBERH@ THAT ISH
H@RGER THANH@ ALL BUT EIGHT
H@ONOMIES IN THE WORLD.
THAT'S THE KIND OF BH@URDEN WE'
PUTTING ON SMALL BUSINESS H@
PEOPLE.H@
LISTEN, IH@ LIVED THROUGHH@ BUSS
OVERH@ THOSE 30 YEARS.
I'VE TALKED TO BH@USINESS PEOPL@
TALK TO H@ME, STARTED THEIRH@
BUSINESSES BACK IN THEH@ '70s A
H@0s AND TELL ME,H@ RON, THERE'
NO WAY I COULDH@ START THIS
BUSINESS AND GROH@W IT THEH@H@
DID IN THE CURRENTH@ REGH@ULATO
H@VIRONMENT.
NOW WHAT ARE WE TALKINGH@ ABOUT?
WHAT IS PH@RESIDENT OBAMA'S H@
DEMAND?
H@T'S INCREH@ASE TAXES, TAXH@ R,
ON THE TOP H@2%.
WHICH IS,H@ YOU KNOW,H@ THERE'S
H@
MILLION SMALL H@BUSINESSES, MED@
H@ZED H@BUSINESSES, INCLUDED IN
THAT FIGURE.
THOSE ARE THE H@SUCCESSFUL ONES@
THAT, BY THE H@WAY, SMALL TOH@
MEDIUM SIZED BH@USINESSES ARE T@
ENGINE NOT ONLY OFH@ ECONOMIC
GROWTHH@, JOB CREATION, BUT
INNOVATIONH@.H@
H@
JUST TAKE A LOOK ATH@ WHAT'S
HAPPH@ENING.
YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THH@E
H@UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THE
TAX INCREAH@SES.
WHAT'S HAPPENIH@NG RIGHT NOW WI
OBAMA CARE ANDH@ THE H@2.3%H@ M
VICE TAX.H@
IH@ SOLD INTO THATH@ INDUSTRY.
YOU HAVE MEDICALH@ DEVICEH@
MANUFAH@CTURERS MOVING H@OVERSE
DEMOCRATIC SH@ENATORS GOING BOY
H@THAT WASN'T SUCH A GOOD H@IDE
LET'S NOH@T ENACT THATH@ H@H@H@
MEDICALH@ DEVICE TAX ANDH@H@H@
H@OSE PRIMARY H@MANUFACTURERS,
H@ST JOBS BUT ALLH@ THEIRH@
SUPPLIERS.
THEIR, YOU KNH@OW, NUMBER ONE A
TWO-TEH@AR SUPPLIERS,H@ THEY'RE
GOING TO BEH@ ABLE TO SUPPLYH@ E
COMPANIES H@ANYMORE.
NOT IN EUROPH@E --
>> I KNOH@W YOU ARE A MAN OFH@
PRINCIPLE.
I KNH@OW THAT YOU FIRMLY BELIEV
H@
THIS IS THE RIGHT PATH.H@
IF THERE IS AH@ DEAL THAT ISH@
CAH@RVED OUT BETWEEN BOEHNER AN
THE PRESIDENT, IF THEH@Y ARE AB
TO REACH SOME SORT OF ANH@
AGREEMENT, IH@T MAY HAVE THINGS@
IT, OR I KNOWH@ FOR A FACT ITH@L
HAVE THINGS IN IH@T THATH@H@ YOT
LIKE.
H@
WOULD YOU GOH@ ALONG WITH@H
SOMETHING IF ITH@ MATCHES UP WI
SPENDING CUTSH@ YOU WOULD LIKE
SEE?
>> INH@ THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARYH
DEBATE WHEN THEYH@ ASKED THAT
QUESH@TION, WOULD YOU TAKE AH@
WHERE THERE'S ONEH@ DOLLAR OFH@
REVENUE FOR TENH@ DOLLARS OF
SPENDING CUTS.
YOU H@KNOW, IF I KH@NEW THOSE W
STRUCTURALLY LOCKED H@IN, THAT @
ACTUALLY FIX THEH@ PROBLEM.
I'D TAKE THAH@T DEAL.
>> YOU'RH@E NOT GOING TOH@ GET
FOR H@TEN.
>> I KNOW.H@
IT'S A HYPOTHH@ETICAL.
I HAVE NO IDEA.H@
LET'S TALK ABOH@UT GROWTH REAL @
QUICK.
A COH@UPLE NUMBERS.
H@
EVEN WITH THEH@ MISERABLE GROWT
WE'VEH@ EXPERIENCEDH@ FROM 2009
2012, YOU KNOW HOW MUCHH@ REVEN
HASH@ INCREASED TO THE FEDERALH
GOVERNMENT PER YEAR?H@H@
$344 H@BILLION.
H@H@ WEH@ JUST RETURN TOH@ AH@
H@ONOMY, WHERE WE HAVEH@ REVENU
GENERATION,H@ WHICH ISH@ H@AVER@
18.5H@%, THAT WOULD ADDH@ ANOTH@
$434H@ BILLION PER H@YEAR.
ADD THOSE UH@P THAT'S MORE THAN@
$750 BILLIH@ONH@ ANDH@ PRESIDEN
OBAMA'S H@PUNISHH@ SUCCESS SCHE
WOH@ULD RAISEH@ SOMEWHERE BETWE4
AND 35 IT'S H@10% -- HERE'S THE
PROBLEMH@ --
>> BRING THEH@ SOLDIERS BACK FR@
KOREA.
H@ATH@ ARE THEY DOING THERE?
HOW ABOUT JAPAN?H@H@
HOW H@DO WE CUT THE DEFENH@SE B@
NOW?
>> JIH@M, I'M NOT H@DISAGREEING@
YOU.
>> WHAH@T'S THEH@H@ --
>> FIRST AUDIT OH@F THE DEFENSE
FIRMS WE DON'T EVEN KH@NOW WHER
THE MONEY IH@S BEING SPENT.
I'M NOT DISAGREEINH@G WITH YOU @
DEFENSE.
YOU WANT TO H@REALLY ATTACK WHAS
GOING TO BEH@ AN EXPLOSION INH@
COSTS, IT'S BROM MA CARE.H@H@H@
OBAMA CARH@E IS SO H@VASTLY ORH
GROCERY UNDERESTIMATED INH@ TER
OF COSTS.H@
I MEAN H@CURRH@ENTLY, THE CURRE
H@DGETH@H@ WINDOW IS $1.7H@ BIL.
WHEN TRUE SPENDINH@G KICKS INH@@
AND THATH@ ASSUMES ONLY 1 MILLI
H@EMPLOYEES LOSE EMPLOYEEH@
H@ONSORED CARE, GETH@ DUMPED IN
HIGHLY SUBH@SIDIZEDH@H@ --
>> SOMEH@ --
>> PEOPLH@E HAVE THEIR HEAD INHE
SAND ON THAH@T ONE.
THH@AT WILL ADD TRILLIONSH@ OF
H@LLARS TO OH@UR DEFICIT AND
NOBODY WANTS TO TALK ABOUTH@ IT.
NOH@BODY'S TALKING ABOUT MEDICA@
ANYMORE.
BECAUSE THE DEMOCRATSH@ HAVEH@ N
H@THAT OFF THE TABLE.
I'M ASKING THE H@DEMOCRATS, SHO
H@ YOUR H@PLAN.
THEN I KNOW WHATH@ I'M GOING TO
H@
COMPROMISE WITH.
>> BUTH@ IN THEORY THERE ISH@ AN
THAT WOULDH@ EXIST THAT YOU WOU
SAY, OKAY,H@ I'M NOT GOING TO G
H@ONG WITH THE PLEDGE H@THAT I
SIGNED, THIS IS A PH@LAN THAT I
THINH@K IS BETTER FOR THE NATIO
AND I'LL DO IT?H@
>> I NEED TOH@ SEE STRUCTURAL H@
REFORM IN SPH@ENDING.
SO I KNOW WEH@ HAVE GOT THINGSH
H@CKED INH@ BUT BECH@KY I HAVEN-
>> -- CLIFF --
>> WE GOT --H@H@H@H@ NEGOTIATE @
MYSELF?
>> YOU'RE H@AGAINST THE RECESSI@
>> I'VE DONE A LOTH@ OF
NEGOH@TIATING IN MY LIFE.H@
I KNOW WHEN SOMEBODY H@IS SITTI
ACROSS THAT TABLEH@ NEGOTIATINGN
H@
GOOD FAITHH@ AND WHEN SOMEBODYH
JUST MOVINGH@ THEH@ H@POLES.
WHH@ERE HASH@ THIS PRESIDENT DO?
>> I'M AH@ PROFESSIONAL FH@OOTB
PLAN I DON'T SH@EE HIMH@ GOING.
I'D H@JUST LIKE TO KNOW HOW TOH
AVOID THEH@ RECESSION.
>> YOU SHOULH@D EXTEND ALL THEH
CURRENT TAX RATES ANDH@ STARTH@
WORKINGH@ TOWARD H@PRO-GROWTH T
REFORM LIKE SIMPSON-BOWLES H@IS
TALKING ABOUT.H@
LOWER THE TH@OP MARGINALH@ TAX
BECAUSE THATH@ ISH@ THEH@
INCENTIVIZING NATUH@RE OF THE T
CODE.
I'M HAPPY TOH@ GET RID OF SPECI
H@ALS.
I DIDN'T HAVE GOVERNMENTH@ AFFAS
OFFICE LOH@BBYING ME IN CONGRES@
I'D BEH@ HAPPY TO GET RIDH@ OF
DEDUCTIONS, LOWEH@R THE TAX H@R.
AND HERE'S SOMETHING IH@'M REAL@
CONCERNED ABOUT.
IF WE INCREASE TAXESH@ ON THE T
2%, YOU'RE GOINGH@ TO BEH@
INCREASING TAXESH@ ONH@ SUB CHA@
H@
SLLCs UP TO H@40% WITH THEH@
MEDICARE TAX.H@
THE NEXT SHOE THAH@T WILL DROP @
CORPORATIONS, THE LARGE H@C-COR
H@
ARE GOING TO BEH@ GOING COME ON
YOU'VE GOTH@ TO GIVE H@US, GOIN
H@H@OM 35 TO 20H@ NOW YOU'VE GO
SMALLH@ MH@EDIUM BUSINESSES THE
INNOVATORSH@ COMPETIH@NG ATH@ A
TAX RATEH@H@H@ --
>> FEEL LIKE GH@OING TO ANOTHER
COUNTRY I'M AT H@48%, SIR.
H@I THINK A LOT OFH@ PEOPLE ARE@
ME.
>> SO WHATH@ WE NEED TO DO,H@ T
MINIMUM IF WE'H@RE GOING TO
INCRH@EASE TAXES ON THE TOPH@ H
SURE HOPEH@ WE DECOUPLE BUSINH@
INCOME FROM THAT.H@
I'D LIKEH@ TO COUPLEH@ SUBH@H@ @
H@D LCH@ BUSINESSH@H@ TAX WITH S
SO WE DON'TH@ HAVE THAT H@DISPA.