Skip to main content

tv   FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace  FOX  April 7, 2013 4:00pm-5:00pm PDT

4:00 pm
>> chris: i'm chris wallace. today, the show down on gun safety. pass new restrictions or beef up security? ♪ >> if you are going to stop something horrible from happening in a school, put police officers or certified armed security in every school. >> chris: four months after newtown an nra task force says the key to making schools safe is to put armed guards in them. we'll sit down with asa hutchinson, director of the task force. it is a fox news sunday
4:01 pm
exclusive. plus, the president takes his push for gun control on the road. >> president barack obama: there is no reason we can't do this unless politics is getting in the way. >> chris: the white house tries to shore up fading support in congress for new gun restrictions. and make a deal on immigration reform. we'll discuss both with the president's senior advisor, dan pfeiffer. and the obama budget two months late. we'll ask our sunday panel about the president's offer to cut entitlements. is it the start of a grand bargain? and our power player of the week, running the paper of bradley, woodward and bernstein in the age of the internet. all, right now, on fox news sunday. ♪ >> chris: and hello, again, from fox news in washington. after more than 100 days of intense lobbying on both sides, the senate is about to take up legislation to impose tougher gun controls.
4:02 pm
but, in the months since the newtown massacre, support for those measures has faded on capitol hill. in a few minutes we'll talk with asa hutchinson, head of a task force on school safety funded by the nra. first, the president's senior advisor, dan pfeiffer, joins us from new york and, dan, welcome to fox news sunday. >> thanks for having me, chris. >> chris: before we get to guns i want to ask you about breaking news. the pentagon has delayed a test-firing of a minuteman icbm, intercontinental ballistic missile this week fearing it would ratchet up tensions with north korea and the young dictator, kim jong-un. does the obama administration risk looking like it is caving to threats from kim. >> absolutely not, chris. take a step back and look at the whole picture here. we have a situation where north korea is engaging in the kind of behavior we have seen for many, many years, provocative actions an bellicose rhetoric and the onus is on north korea to take
4:03 pm
the step back and meet their international obligations so they can undertake what they say is their number one goal, which is economic development. it will only happen if they rejoin the international community and that means by honoring the international obligations. >> chris: having said that, north korea moved a medium range missile to its east coast and jay carney said he wouldn't be surprised if they fired the missiles and south koreans seemed to expect it. it is within range of guam. how would the president regard that, given the fact you have delayed the u.s. missile test by the u.s. if north korea guess ahead and fires its missile? we have seen the reports you cite there. as jay carney said, we wouldn't be surprised. missile launches have been part of this repeated pattern of behavior for the north koreans and like i said, the onus is on the north koreans to do the right thing here. they are the source of the problem, and, the only way to solve it is for them to take a step back. >> chris: when you say -- >>... continuing to make.
4:04 pm
>> chris: you say the onus is on them. what if they don't. >> they'll continue to isolate themselves in the world and hurt themselves further. and their people are starving because of the things they are doing right now. >> chris: let's turn to guns, just after newtown, the president told the families of newtown, the victims, that he'd use all the powers of his presidency to push for new gun control to try to prevent more massacres like this. now as the senate takes up the bill, and, maybe this week, the ban on assault weapons is dead. a plan to limit the size of the high capacity -- excuse me -- magazines is in great trouble, and, even the idea, although it has broad public support of expanding background checks, is in trouble. question: why has the president been so ineffective, apparently, in pushing his plan? >> well, it isn't a -- let's be clear. the president has pushed very hard, he was in denver last
4:05 pm
week, and is headed to connecticut on monday, too, to make the case and marsh shelled the american people to his side and, 90% of americans support background check. and he has made tremendous strides and the question is, do congress and the republican congress in particular, listen to the american people and do the right thing. >> chris: you blame republicans, but, i want to put up what harry reid, the senate majority leader said, talking about dianne feinstein's plan to ban assault weapons, when he said about that. >> right now, her amendment is the most optimistic numbers -- has less than 40 votes, that is not 60. >> chris: if they don't have 40 votes in the senate for the assault weapons ban that means at least 15 democrats have joined the republicans in opposing that. why has the president, dan, been unable to marshal more support
4:06 pm
from democrats as well as republicans. >> two things here. first is on all of these issues, the majority of democrats are supporting it and a tiny minority, if any republicans are supporting common sense measures completely consistent with supporting the second amendment and where we are now and the focus is on passing -- what the president wants to sign is a strong bipartisan bill with enforceable background checks. and that has 90% support and can get done but what it will require is the republicans to not filibuster, and it requires 60 votes. when the president gave the state of the union, with the newtown families in the audience all of the republicans stood up and applauded when the president called for an up and down vote and now the cameras are off and the families are not there they are engaging in legislative tactics to make it harder and as the president said politics is the only reason it won't get done. >> chris: but again on the assault weapons ban part of the president's program, harry reid says it doesn't have 40 votes. even if you didn't have a
4:07 pm
filibuster, it still wouldn't pass the senate because you don't have democrats, which raises the question: why didn't the president go harder at democrats from red states, states with a lot of people who support gun rights and try to persuade them to get on board? >> well, it is important to understand. when we put forward our package, this is the ideal package, what, you know, conferring with law enforcement, community leaders and gun right advocates and gun owners and sports men and the best response to newtown and gun violence in the country and where we are right now, there is a bill in the senate, which is the most progress we have made legislatively in many years to try to address gun violence and that and the crux of that bill is what many advocates said is the most effective thing we can do, which is universal enforceable background checks and so, the question is, are we going to pass that bill? or are republicans going to block it? that is the fundamental question facing folks, right now.
4:08 pm
>> chris: we're talking with asa hutchinson, the head of the nra-funded task force on school safety in the next segment. they say -- the task force hutchinson led -- put armed guards in every school. what is wrong with that? >> well, first, there is no one who thinks that -- who worked with the issues, not law enforcement or anyone else thinks that is the best response to this and the president has been very clear in a significant piece of the recommendations he put forward in trying to get passed involves school safety and giving communities the opportunities and resources to make decisions whether they want to put a trained police officer in schools. we should do more to make our school safe, absolutely, no question but doesn't mean we shouldn't take other common-sense measures supported by the majority of americans, by overwhelming majority of americans, majority of republicans, and majority of gun owners, the right thing to do and there is no reason not to do it. >> chris: the president submits his budget wednesday, and we already know a good deal of what is in it.
4:09 pm
he offers to cut social security and medicare by more than $430 billion over ten years. if -- if -- republicans agree to $600 million in more taxes. couple of questions, first of all, is it a final offer on entitlements or is the president willing to negotiate and, for instance, consider putting his earlier offer to raise the eligibility age for medicare back on the table? >> well, what the budget is, is we have taken the final -- the last offer we gave to speaker boehner before he walked away from the fiscal negotiations on these efforts and put in the budget, one, to show the president is serious about addressing our deficits and our economy in a comprehensive waynd but also to show that it is -- there's a false choice between deficits as far as the eye can see and job creation and economic growth now. you can do both. that is what the president's budget does and what you will see on wednesday and, look, the president is having dinner with senate republicans on wednesday night, we're continuing to talk with folks, and we are open to
4:10 pm
conversations, but, now, the approach of many republicans, particularly the leadership in the house is my way or the highway. their view is the only acceptable plan is to try to cut away prosperity and turn medicare into a voucher program and essentially enact the romney economic plan and the american people rejected that and republicans shouldn't be doubling down on that. >> chris: i want to ask you, you are exactly right. house speaker boehner as soon as he heard the reports of the obama budget flatly rejected it because he said it called for new taxes and he will not go along with that end as you point out the president will be having dinner wednesday at the white house with senate republicans. question: do you think, does the president really think he can go around the leadership of house republicans and senate republicans, go around the leadership, deal with the rank-and-file members, and get some of them to support him on the budget? >> well, what we're looking for is what the president called a caucus of common sense. folks who are willing to compromise and who understand that in divided government both
4:11 pm
sides will not get everything they want. there have been willing partners in the senate republican caucus and we have had good conversations with them and there's a lot of work to do before we get there and i would say to speaker boehner's statement, if you are looking for the answer to the question as to why the approval ratings, for republicans is at a historic low, look no farther than that statement, their view is my way or the highway, do exactly what i want and massive tax breaks for the wealthy and, asks the middle class to pay the freight. that is not what the american people want and, if the republican party wants to reach out to americans, as they say, they should start by listening to americans. >> chris: the march jobs numbers came out friday. and i think you would agree they were grim. just 88,000 jobs created, 496,000 americans left the job force. labor force participation is now 63.3%. the lowest since jimmy carter was president. the white house on friday was blaming the sequester and republicans for supporting the sequester.
4:12 pm
but a lot of independent analysts, dan, say bigger problems are the fact the payroll taxes have increased and also, the fact that the cost of hiring new workers under obamacare is keeping some employers from getting new people. aren't those more serious problems than the see requester. >> the ere is less money to spe on small businesses and less money to spend while they are shopping. so, that does have an impact. no question about that. i think it is important to look at the overall picture on the economy. we have made a lot of progress. 6.5 million private sector jobs created over the last three years. the housing market is coming back, manufacturing is coming back. but there is more to do and, we shouldn't focus on any individual month. if we created 290,000 jobs this month, i would have given you the same answer, we are making
4:13 pm
progress and are hoping to do more. >> chris: on immigration, before i let you go, the total number of jobs created the first three months of this year -- and there were two pretty good months before march -- is still less than the total number of jobs created the first three months of last year. it is not a roaring recovery. >> no, it -- we have to do more. that is the president's point and why when you see his budget on wednesday you will see a comprehensive plan that foces on creating jobs and growing the middle class. we have to do more and what we can't do is cut away the prosperity, as some republicans are suggesting. >> chris: finally, the bipartisan gang of 8 in the senate is expected to come up with its release, its immigration reform plan this week which will include a trigger on border security before illegal immigrants can move towards becoming citizens. but, secretary of homeland security janet napolitano says relying on one thing as a so-called trigger is not the way to go, and a draft of the president's -- the president's plan on immigration reform, does
4:14 pm
not make a link between border enforcement and the bapath to citizenship. would the president sign an immigration reform plan that does make that kind of link, citizenship but first border security. >> we have been working very closely with the gang of 8. this is one of the -- a bright spot in washington where republicans and democrats are coming together. trying to find common cause. you have the afl/cio in the chamber of commerce working together to agree to some portions of the bill. that is progress and we feel good the product they are working on is completely consistent with what the president put forward, what he ran on and will address immigration reform in a common sense way and feel good about where it is going. >> chris: to answer my question would the president sign a bill that mandates that kind of trigger on border enforcement. >> what they are looking at and what has been talked about in the gang of 8 proposal, is 100% consistent with ha twhat the president is doing and, they are
4:15 pm
looking at it the right way. >> chris: thank you and we'll stay on top of all of these stories in the week ahead. >> thank you, chris. >> chris: up ahead we'll talk with the head of the nra-funded task force on how to keep our schools safe. look, every day we're using more and more energy. the world needs more energy. where's it going to come from? ♪ that's why right here, in australia, chevron is building one of the biggest natural gas projects in the world. enough power for a city the size of singapore for 50 years. what's it going to do to the planet? natural gas is the cleanest conventional fuel there is. we've got to be smart about this. it's a smart way to go. ♪ [ male announcer ] how could switchgrass in argentina, change engineering in dubai, aluminum production in south africa, and the aerospace industry in the u.s.?
4:16 pm
at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. with investment information, risks, fees and expenses i've always had to keep my eye on her... but, i didn't always watch out for myself. with so much noise about health care... i tuned it all out. with unitedhealthcare, i get information that matters... my individual health profile. not random statistics. they even reward me for addressing my health risks. so i'm doing fine... but she's still going to give me a heart attack. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. well, dad, i spent my childhood
4:17 pm
living with monks learning the art of dealmaking. you've mastered monkey-style kung fu? no. priceline is different now. you don't even have to bid. master hahn taught you all that? oh, and he says to say (translated from cantonese) "you still owe him five bucks." your accent needs a little work. >> chris: as the senate prepares to debate new gun controls a task force funded by the nra has
4:18 pm
come out with its response to the newtown shooting. put armed guards in every school. former congressman asa hutchinson is head of the task force and he joins us from little rock, arkansas. congressman, welcome. >> good to be with you, chris. >> chris: critics say, congressman, that you are just responding to the last attack. they note that before newtown, a gunman killed two people in a shooting at a shopping mall in oregon and before that, james holmes killed 12 people and wounded 58, in a movie theatre in colorado. so, they say all you're doing is shifting the target. >> president clinton first initiated cops in schools or armed guards in schools and it has been a very effective program but it is not received -- only a third of the schools. and our recommendations are much broader than simply an armed guard in every school, and it is also about new resources for schools to add to safety from
4:19 pm
on-line assessment tools to best practices, so the report, which i hope everybody reads, is 25 2 pages, very comprehensive with the armed guards part of that. and let me emphasize, it is not about arming teachers. teachers should teach and others should protect, it is about providing armed officers first and, secondly, if that is not available to have an armed school staff trained and selected. >> chris: but, congressman i guess my point is, if you did harden the schools, and, lord knows we don't want people going into schools and shooting young kids, a demented shooter could still go to a shopping mall, a movie theatre or playground or down the street. so are you really stopping the problem if you just harden one target? >> well, you are protecting children and that is a huge objective in life. certainly, whether you are a shopping mall -- and they already are having off-duty
4:20 pm
police officers protecting shopping malls, should we not provide and have the greatest responsibility for protecting our children as they go to school for education? so, to me it is a common-sense approach that is really happening, whether the federal government gets engaged or not. every school district in america is looking at ways to better protect the students at school, just like the private sector from shopping malls to movie theatres are considering the same thing. >> chris: let's talk about the broader ideas that the obama administration is pushing. the nra opposes the president's plan to expand background checks. but, since that went into effect, in 1994, 1.9 million gun sales have been blocked because the person trying to make the sales showed up on a record as either having a criminal record, or a history of mental illness. here's what president obama said about that this week. >> president barack obama: why wouldn't you want to make it more difficult for a dangerous
4:21 pm
criminal to get his or her hands on a gun? >> chris: even if the nra is right and we have had wayne lapierre on the show and he says, look, if a bad guy wants a gun he'll find a way to get a gun. the fact is 1.9 million sales have been blocked. why not make it as hard as possible for people to get their hands on a gun who have a history of criminal record or mental illness? >> well, if you take those statistics at face value then the current system in place has been effective in blocking people who are not entitled to obtain a firearm from getting one. so, that is effective and the question is, do you want to expand that system from where it is right now. and i think in general concept, americans, everybody would like to see effective background checks so that criminals do not have access to firearms but as a practical matter -- and i read the bill last night, if you are a farmer, 30 miles from town and
4:22 pm
you want to transfer a shotgun to a neighbor, you've got to go 30 miles into town, find the federal licensed firearm dealer, fill out the paperwork, pay the fee, have the background check and then you have a responsibility to keep those records for inspection by the government and that is a huge burden on citizens. so, my look at that is, i don't know whether that will pass or not but it is not going to address the problem of safety in schools. i'm not a spokesman for the nra on this topic. i'm expressing my views but i want to look at things that work and keep children safe. >> chris: let me ask you about one thing senators are considering that might work. they say that you expand the background check to all commercial transactions, at a gun show, on the internet, if somebody put an ad in the newspaper, but you except the kind of situation you are talking about, where it is a transaction between friends, or between family where it is entirely private. is that something you could get
4:23 pm
on board with? >> well, again, i read the bill last night and i didn't see that in the legislation -- >> no, but the bill is certainly not a final measure, and, this is one of the ideas that is being actively considered in the senate. >> from my view, sure. if you go to a gun show and you are buying a firearm from a licensed dealer and have a background check but you also go out to somebody's vehicle and you get a firearm there and purchase it and you don't have a check, there is inconsistency there and certainly from my personal standpoint that is a fair debate. and again americans would like to see that, but let's don't put the burdens on the casual sale. let's -- and as you, we do need to make the system better. the senate bill does provide incentives for the states to put more information into the instant check system to make them more effective and that is a step in the right direction. >> chris: but, again i want to make it clear and i understand you are not a spokesman for the
4:24 pm
nra though they did appoint you to run the task force, on school safety, you are saying that you would support expanding the background check to include nondealer sales at gun shows and, also, for instance, sales on the internet, which are now not covered. >> i can't speak to all of those just because, you know, it is all in the fine print. these are very difficult things to accomplish an objective without burdening the average citizen and bringing the government intrusively into their lives and you have to look at the language. i could look at the gun shows and sales that surround that and that environment, if we can make sure there is a comprehensive check and we keep criminals from obtaining guns, in that environment, then, those checks would seem appropriate. >> chris: let me ask you about this, because instead of expanding background checks, the nra is talking about limiting
4:25 pm
them even further. they are saying -- and in fact have put forward legislation, that some opponents of the president's plan are now supporting. that would say that if you are a veteran or someone else who has been deemed to be mentally ill and, therefore, would fail a background check, if you are said to have recovered, that you would then be able to get a gun. do we really want to open that door? >> well, chris, this is where the president has taken the debate totally in the wrong direction. i really believe that our focus should be on the school safety. that is an objective that we can accomplish. it is not that difficult to increase safety. it's not even the most substantial cost measures that a local school has to do and whatever you do, in terms of legislation, even if you had all of your universal background checks, bad guys will get guns and it is not going to solve the problem of the schools and it is not going to diminish the need
4:26 pm
for greater skew -- security in the schools and i hope that becomes the focus of the debate because that will solve problems long-term for the safety of our children. >> chris: i understand that and, obviously, newtown was the precipitating event but you certainly agree making schools safer will not protect the afternoon citizen going to the movies or a shopping mall or a playground or even kids on a school bus going to school. >> well, you can't address all the problems of society, i mean, you are talking about why do we have a violent society? is it video games? the mental health issues? and how do you deal with those? and, no. i mean, government has certain responsibilities in transportation. in protection. education is a special environment. but, you can't expect the federal government to solve this problem because it is not solvable in that fashion. it is dealing with the hearts
4:27 pm
and minds of people. it is dealing with giving people the ability to protect themselves. and, so, you talk about movie theatres, you talk about on the streets, these are law enforcement issues, primarily but it is also societal problems that have to be addressed. let's take one thing at a time and after newtown the focus has been schools and safety and let's get this right. >> chris: in the couple of minutes we have left, why do you think it is that president obama's efforts to prevent more acts of violence appears like it is going to accomplish so little? >> well, because to me, it is a political agenda. it is more divisive to america and the wonderful newtown parents that have gone through such an incredible tragedy have not even reached unity among themselves on what needs to be done. because america's divided on that point but there is a unity that, whether it is mental
4:28 pm
health concerns, that we can do better on, or whether it is providing more safety for our children in schools, that is the crying need of our country and something we can agree upon readily. there is no dispute about that, but very little has been done and so i'm disappointed the president has not focused the debate on the right issue for america. >> chris: less than 30 seconds left. picking up on that. what do you think the president should have done differently after newtown? >> well i think that he should have come across with a strong program of school safety. you look at the senate bill right now, it is $40 million. that is not going to solve anything. and, because it is -- and so i would like to have seen the president say, we want to have each of the school districts to do more in safety, the states to be engaged in it and the federal government can provide additional support for technology grants. i think to open up the homeland security grant fund which is
4:29 pm
even more money and also we have three different agencies involved. let's get it more organized and greater leadership. >> chris: congressman hutchinson, we want to thank you so much for joining us today. always good to talk with you, sir. >> thank you, chris. >> chris: up next, two months late, the president puts his budget in writing. we'll ask our panel, is it enough to put a grand bargain back in play? ♪ tdd: 1-800-345-2550 searching for a bank designed for investors like you? tdd: 1-800-345-2550 schwab bank was built with tdd: 1-800-345-2550 all the value and convenience investors want. tdd: 1-800-345-2550 like no atm fees, worldwide. tdd: 1-800-345-2550 and no nuisance fees.
4:30 pm
tdd: 1-800-345-2550 plus deposit checks with mobile deposit, tdd: 1-800-345-2550 and manage your cash and investments tdd: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab's mobile app. tdd: 1-800-345-2550 no wonder schwab bank has grown to over 70 billion in assets. tdd: 1-800-345-2550 so if you're looking for a bank that's in your corner, tdd: 1-800-345-2550 not just on the corner, tdd: 1-800-345-2550 call, click or visit to start banking with schwab bank today.
4:31 pm
4:32 pm
4:33 pm
>> president barack obama: it's not my ideal plan but, in order to move on short-term, crisis-driven decision making and focus on growing our economy and middle class for the long run. >> chris: president obama defending his new budget, which calls for entitlement cuts and more taxes and is already drawing criticism from both the left and the right. it is time for our sunday group. brit hume, fox news senior political analyst, back from his winter break. kirsten powers of "the daily beast" web site. jennifer rubin from the "washington post" and fox news political analyst juan williams. so, two months late. the president will finally submit his budget this week, and we know some of what is in it. let's put it up on the screen. he cut spending 1.1 trillion dollars including cuts to social security and medicare. and he gets $600 billion from
4:34 pm
more taxes. brit, how big a compromise, the president is putting entitlement cuts in writing. >> i think that is a step not inconsequential. it is a little odd the way he presented it. is it a proposal or a concession? nonetheless, there it is. this is the first time he has been willing to put the adjustment and the cost of living increase in writing and that is all to the good. i think a lot of the new taxes in there are unpassable. so the question arises: if nothing else passed would the president sign the adjustment in the cost of living increase which gets, what, $130 billion over ten years? not a lot of money but, nonetheless, not nothing. would he sign it by itself, is he proposing it or offering it in in tandem with another -- >> i think from everything i read, the president made it clear it is all a package and if you cut entitlements you have to have the tax increases or else, they are off the table. >> well, you know, no president's budget ever passes
4:35 pm
intact. so, i think that is a nonstarter but we'll see how it goes, congress is up and running and working in the normal processes. so, have to see what comes out of that. i think the president putting that on the table is not big, but it is not nothing. >> chris: kirsten, we know, and quoted with dan pfeiffer, that a lot of republican leaders are happy with the call for new taxes. john boehner immediately rejected it on friday. how much heartburn is there on the left, the idea that their democratic president has in a sense taken away from them the issue that these entitlements are sacrosanct and untouchable? >> there is a lot of heartburn. the white house says this is not a menu, it is a comprehensive package and doesn't have the all go together and i think that is reasonable. the left is very angry. bernie sanders has come out and dead -- >> from vermont. >> everything i can to stop it from going through and
4:36 pm is coming out and they are angry about it. but, look, these are actually -- the offer is the offer that was made during the fiscal cliff talks. and is actually not new. i guess maybe they are concerned it is actually going to actually happen this time. but, i think the president should get a lot of credit for coming back and basically trying to do a grand bargain, even though it will upset his base and upset some democrats and look, both sides will have to do something they don't want to do, republicans on taxes, democrats on entitlements. if there is going to be a deal. >> chris: jennifer, all over this comes and again as i pointed out with dan pfeiffer, it comes as we got a bad jobs report for march. only 88,000 jobs created. and, five times that on the path of a million jobs, workers left the workforce looking for jobs. and, the president calls for some new spending in this plan. more stimulus, if you will. for short-term economic growth but as we say he also wants to raise taxes again, is it the
4:37 pm
right prescription, the budget, in these economic times? >> well, it strikes me a number of things in the president's plan are -- these plans are long in the making and the parties have gotten stuck in their traditional positions. but on tax increases, we have, as you mentioned, have had a rough month and aside from that it is an anemic recovery and on top of the tax he put in in january, another 1.6, however you want to count the dollars and a lot of people will have trouble with that, particularly since the employment sector, the falling in that is attributable to the increase in the payroll tax and adding more is going in the wrong direction. >> chris: i was going to say that, the white house blames the sequester and at the republicans for pushing it, a lot of independent people and you heard the concession from dan pfeiffer on this, saying it is the payroll tax and obamacare is beginning to kick in, because
4:38 pm
there are limits, if you have a company with 50 employees, you fall subject to the mandates, that, if it is 49, you don't fall and maybe you don't have much of an incentive to hire somebody new. >> it has been the complain of the republicans since the beginning and a number of items of obamacare, for example the medical device tax which acts as a deterrent, if you will, on technology comes, and, democrats don't like that. so i think there are a lot of factors conspiring to prevent hiring or suppress hiring and the budget doesn't go to that. on the other hand, we also have defense spending which is cut again. we have the north koreans going nuts and the iranians and, yet the president is insisting on cutting more from defense. that doesn't seem connected with our current situation. >> chris: juan, the budget, the economy... >> i think this is a terrific step by the president and he's taking a political risk. i think what you heard from kirsten, and what we have heard from brit, look, there is a consequence, the republicans have been saying, if you really are subscribing to the idea of
4:39 pm
doing changes to cpi on social security and buying into the idea that you are willing to make changes in the way medicare is structured, we'll take the risk, mr. president, say it to your democratic supporters, to your base, say it to the seniors in the country and the president has said it and he's taken a first step and i think the dinner coming up wednesday night, johnnie isaacson the senator from georgia is putting together is an -- >> let me explain it. a bunch of senate republican back benchers, not the leaders, will have dinner with the president. >> right. and i think it is an opportunity there for the president to begin using the senate as a key, if you will, to unlock the house. because, he can say, i'm being reasonable, here's a balanced approach. it is 2-1, in terms of cuts, to new taxes. and, i'm willing to buy into this and, if the -- if he can get republicans in the senate in sufficient numbers to buy into the deal he can say i've got something on the plate. why won't you house republicans come along and the difficulty --
4:40 pm
and i think you heard this morning from dan pfeiffer -- is that, well, so the democratic senate plan seems to be out the door and republicans may see what the president has proposed, as brit said, as a starting point rather than a package. >> chris: british i want to talk about, though from the republicans' point of view, because we have had senate republicans on this program, like bob corker of tennessee who have said if the president gets serious about entitlement reform and goes out and speaks on behalf of it and gives us all political cover, does he and other senate -- that he and other senate republicans would consider more revenue. does his concession force them to make a concession of their own. >> he'd have to go farther than the proposal goes, make no mistake, adjustment in the cost of living increases is a sensible step and has been recommended for many years by economists who say the cpi indicator we use now is out of whack with the way people really live and you might think it is something the president would propose as a stand-alone but he
4:41 pm
doesn't. nonetheless, there it is and the rest of the cuts, as i gather, in entitlements have to do with cutting, for example, providers to medicare. >> chris: companies... >> on this issue, and has been true for some time, is a fantasy world in which you can cut the painless to the providers without depriving the recipients of anything and they keep saying it and people say it all the time, it is not -- if you stop paying for something you get less of it. and there is nothing about that -- >> here's a possibility, of efficiencies -- >> efficiencies are wonderful and so on, but, one of the problems we are having is, you try to find yourself a general purpose physician. it is hard to find them. life for doctors ain't what it used to be attend the profiles anniversary cuts coming in will not help us get any more doctors and we are developing a doctor shortage now and it will get worse and that may be his idea
4:42 pm
of a way to cut spending on these programs. and pretend the beneficiaries won't be affected but they will. >> chris: let's understand, brit and i... we have to take a break here. but when we come back, north korea's sabre rattling seems the world on edge. ♪ made a commitment. and every day since, we've worked hard to keep it. bp has paid over twenty-three billion dollars to help people and businesses who were affected, and to cover cleanup costs. today, the beaches and gulf are open for everyone to enjoy -- and many areas are reporting their best tourism seasons in years. we've shared what we've learned with governments and across the industry so we can all produce energy more safely. i want you to know, there's another commitment bp takes just as seriously: our commitment to america. bp supports nearly two-hundred-fifty thousand jobs in communities across the country. we hired three thousand people just last year. bp invests more in america than in any other country.
4:43 pm
in fact, over the last five years, no other energy company has invested more in the us than bp. we're working to fuel america for generations to come. today, our commitment to the gulf, and to america, has never been stronger. how old is the oldest person you've known? we gave people a sticker and had them show us. we learned a lot of us have known someone who's lived well into their 90s. and that's a great thing. but even though we're living longer, one thing that hasn't changed: the official retirement age. ♪ the question is how do you make sure you have the money you need to enjoy all of these years. ♪ >> the web site is our future.
4:44 pm
>> baron has been in newspapers his whole career. >> where readers are going. go anywhere and people are loo ñáçwçñ
4:45 pm
>> the united states will defend our allies, we will not be subject to irrational or reckless provocation. >> secretary of state john kerry reacting to a series of threats and military moves by north korea against the u.s. and south korea and we're back now with the panel. well, here is the latest from north korea. they move at least one medium range missile to the east coast of the country, potentially putting guam within reach of a strike and advised foreign diplomats to consider evacuating their embassies. brit, what do you make of the string of provocation coming from pyongyang? >> you have to sympathize with any administration trying to deal with north korea, particularly now with this new
4:46 pm
young leader, about which not much seems to be known, we know he was educated in the west, and think he might have been more -- a more sophisticated observer of the worlds and yet is accounting as crazy as a june bug and the administration is trying on the one hand to show firmness as witness the military exercises with our old froeiend, south koa and at the same time have had a cancellation of the test, long-planned and i -- my own sense about it is if you send signals to the regime about what you should, they shouldn't be mixed signals and that is what is worrisome at the moment. i mean, the north continues these provocations and, it is always blackmail to gain on sessions to ease the woes on the inside of that country, which are terrible. but, who knows now? >> chris: let's talk about the mixed signals, kirsten, the initial u.s. response was to send the war planes, b-2s and f-22s, and various stealth planes over south korea and that
4:47 pm
seemed to ratchet up the tensions and the last couple of days the word this is administration is now trying to dial back as we heard overnight, they have delayed this missile test that was scheduled for this week of an icbm missile and we have just learned general james thurman, the head of all u.s. forces in korea, who was supposed to come back to washington this week to testify before congress now said it is too tense and he needs to stay in south korea. and he's delayed his trip. the obama administration has a tricky balancing act here and does it run the risk as brit suggests of sending mixed signals? >> well, it is a balancing act and they are balancing on the right side. we don't know enough about the leader to know what he'll do. it is easy to dismiss it and say he won't do anything but he is -- from everything i have read and everyone i talked to is basing his leadership not on his father but his grandfather and what was the first thing his grandfather did? he invaded south korea and we
4:48 pm
don't really know what he'll do. is it just bluster? and i think the administration, what they are trying to do is get with the people like china, their focused ally, who is expressing that they are really kinds of fed up with this and they are willing to start putting pressure on north korea and they'll go that diplomatic route and get them to ratchet it down so the worst of the worst doesn't happen. >> chris: let's pick up on the diplomatic route and, particularly, china, jennifer, the obama administration has reportedly said to china, look, either you crack down and somehow get your regime, because they are the main sponsors of north korea, under control, or you can expect an increased u.s. military presence in that part of the area. we are already moving missile defenses to the pacific and warships to the pacific. what do you think are the chances that we can get china to help us in all of this? and, what do you think -- more broadly of the idea of going the diplomat ute here. >> is a little like charlie brown and the football.
4:49 pm
we have tried to get china to take care of these people forever and china either doesn't have the will or ability to do so and i think the mixed signals we talked about are also mixed signals to china. how serious do we look to them? how serious does it look that we'll be increasing our military presence there and increasing pressure on north korea which is a problem for them? the last thing they want is that regime to fracture and have a refugee problem pouring into china. so, i was struck by your earlier guest about how little the administration has to say. ho how little planning they've done and they are back funding missile defense which they cut earlier in their administration. i see confusion and i don't see a balancing the budget administration but a complete lack of answers and strategy and lack of consistency. we've done nothing to do, for example what we did with south korea to really completely isolate these people, economically and all other terms and i think it is a mistake,
4:50 pm
they are floundering around and looking for a policy and haven't come up with one yet. >> chris: juan. >> we have a policy and you have to have a diplomatic approach to engages china and tries to reestablish communication with north korea and now we don't have those communications. you don't want to enter into a situation where, for example china becomes alienated from us in the course of this and right now, china backed us in the united nations and is helping to enforce some of the banking sanctions. and i think what you are seeing is when you talk to people, depending on if -- look, we don't see logistics moving on the ground to allow for some kinds of assault on south korea and it could be that we are in a cycle, i think what dan pfeiffer suggested earlier, that we're in a cycle where these people bumbecome bellicose and threateg and it seems like someone wants something from north korea and invade -- it seems a little bit as, the great britain human would say, he seems crazy as a june bug and, we don't want to raise up kim jong-un to see you are an important guy and we see
4:51 pm
you as a great threat. i think a responsible world superpower, the lone world superpower, the united states should act in a reasonable manner and say, we understand what you are doing as long as you don't take any, you know, untoward actions, we're not going to act in some way as to make you into this grand threat that you really are not. >> chris: jennifer, did he persuade you? >> not really, though i appreciate the sentiment we'd like china to solve the problem because it really is their problem as much as ours. unfortunately, when we do nothing, that communicates a different message to these people and that is, that we don't want to take action and cancelled a missile ton done previously? i think that read that as weakness and it is not as if the status quo is acceptable. this is a prison and a gulag country and it is important to highlight this more and, put the screws to them and demand more from china in terms of their reaction, and, they have helped with sanctions, but they need to do more and to subsidize the
4:52 pm
country, to the hilt... >> chris: i want to switch a little in the minute-plus we have left. brit, while all of this was going on this week, almost ignored the fact that the u.s. and our allies met with the iranians in kazakhstan to continue those nuclear talks which apparently went absolutely nowhere and the question then becomes, is iran watching how we're dealing with north korea very carefully, and, perhaps, are they -- >> there is no way to know that, chris but i think it is a sign that this whole effort to get iran to forsakes its nuclear weapons ambitions by diplomacy and sanctions simply isn't working. while we know the sanctions are pinching in that country, it does not seem really seriously to deter the regime there. and, it remains a continuing threat and i have to say, it is
4:53 pm
a foreign policy failure and look, it is not easy. you can't look back at any prior administration and say, they did a great job with iran. nonetheless we are where we are there and it is not a good situation, and, there is no way to know how iran reads our actions towards north korea but there it is. >> chris: all right, panel, thank you, see you next week and don't forget to check out "panel plus" where or group picks up with the discussion on our web site, and we'll post the video before noon eastern time and make sure and follow us on twitter twitter, @foxnewssunday. up next our power player of the week. ♪ tch out for mysel. with so much noise about health care... i tuned it all out. with unitedhealthcare, i get information that matters... my individual health profile. not random statistics. they even reward me for addressing my health risks. so i'm doing fine... but she's still going to give me a heart attack. we're more than 78,000 people
4:54 pm
looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. [ male announcer ] how could a luminous protein in jellyfish, impact life expectancy in the u.s., real estate in hong kong, and the optics industry in germany? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. the world needs more energy. where's it going to come from? ♪ that's why right here, in australia, chevron is building one of the biggest natural gas projects in the world. enough power for a city the size of singapore for 50 years. what's it going to do to the planet? natural gas is the cleanest conventional fuel there is. we've got to be smart about this. it's a smart way to go.
4:55 pm
♪ . >> chris: over the last 40 years in washington presidents have come and gone but one institution stayed steady. now a new man is in charge. here's our power player of the week. ♪ >> i want to do the same work and hold powerful institutions and powerful individuals accountable. >> chris: martin baron is the new executive editor of the "washington post." the paper of ben bradlee and bob woodward and carl bernstein, the paper that brought down richard nixon, which raises the question... how in tim dakt was it -- intimidating to follow in their footsteps. >> it is an institution, that played a singular role in american journalism.
4:56 pm
>> chris: he knows all about taking on the powerful. before coming to washington he was editor of the boston globe for a decade when it won 6 pulitzer prizes including one for exposing sex abuse in the catholic church. >> a pattern, they knew priests abused children they continued to reassign the priests and the priests continued to abuse children. that was a pattern of, i believe, misconduct on the part of the church. and, it was another story that we needed to do. >> chris: before that, he ran the miami herald during the 2000 presidential election. >> the supreme court ruled there would be no recount and we felt there should be one. >> chris: who won? >> the results showed joush won by a very narrow margin. >> chris: bush beat gore in florida. >> yes. >> chris: but there was a problem, he hired an accounting firm to do the recount and told his bosses it would cost $250,000. >> chris: how much did it cost? >> well, it cost $850,000. by the grace of god and by the grace of the ceo of the parent
4:57 pm
company, i continued to be employed there. >> chris: but, money is no laughing matter at newspapers now. he had to cut his staff at the boston globe by 40%. circulation at the "washington post" is down 20% in the last four years and the paper is losing money. >> you talk about the decline of circulation, but, i think of the incredible audience that we have on-line. >> chris: that is what struck is during our time at the post. >> not too much has happened yet this morning... >> chris: while he was discussing what would be on tomorrow's front page. >> the number is lower... >> chris: other staffers were editing videos and producing reports to put on the post web site. >> the web site is our present and our future. it is very much our future. that is where readers are going, go anywhere and people are looking at smartphones all the time. >> chris: the post has been giving away content on the web but, like a lot of papers it will start charging this summer. he has been in newspapers his
4:58 pm
whole career. even as the business changes, the appeal is the same. >> i am sort of a nonjoyner and as a journalist you can be a nonjoiner and participate in public afierce. >> chris: do you fear for the future of the post. >> i'm an optimist and we are as a profession more resilient than you may believe, even though we face tremendous challenges. >> chris: they are launching an on-line video channel devoted to politics, part of the trend of moving resources from print to the paper's web site. and that's it for today. have a great week and we'll see you next fox news sunday. have a great week and we'll see you next fox news sunday. ♪ captioning by, closed captioning services, inc.
4:59 pm


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on