Face the Nation (CBS) - 2009-03-01

Channel: malgent

Transcript

Language: English (YouTube automatic captions)

[0:00] Today on Face the Nation, an exclusive

[0:02] interview with Rahm Emanuel, the White

[0:05] House Chief of Staff. Last week,

[0:07] President Barack Obama submitted a $3.6

[0:10] trillion budget, marking the biggest

[0:13] shift of resources since the Reagan

[0:15] days. An increase Republicans say will

[0:18] expand the size of government by 1/3 in

[0:22] 1 year. But can the President get it

[0:24] through Congress? Where will he

[0:26] compromise? And given the disastrous

[0:29] economy, is what he's proposing too

[0:31] expensive and based on overly optimistic

[0:35] economic forecast? We'll ask the White

[0:38] House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, who

[0:41] was instrumental in getting the huge

[0:43] stimulus bill through Congress. I'll

[0:45] have a final word on a "Who da thunk

[0:48] it?" week. But first, Rahm Emanuel on

[0:51] Face the Nation.

[0:55] >> [music]

[1:00] >> Face the Nation with CBS News Chief

[1:03] Washington Correspondent, Bob Schieffer.

[1:06] And now from CBS News in Washington, Bob

[1:09] Schieffer.

[1:10] >> And good morning again. Rahm Emanuel is

[1:13] with us in the studio this morning. Good

[1:14] morning, Mr. Emanuel. It was a big week

[1:17] last week. It's going to be another big

[1:18] one this week. When the President told

[1:21] the joint session of Congress on

[1:22] Tuesday, there was nothing more

[1:24] important than bringing the deficit

[1:26] down. House Democrats led by Speaker

[1:28] Pelosi jumped to their feet with

[1:31] applause. Yet on Wednesday, those same

[1:33] Democrats passed a spending bill to keep

[1:36] the government running for the rest of

[1:37] this fiscal year that contained 9,000,

[1:40] count them, 9,000 earmarks costing

[1:44] nearly $8 billion.

[1:46] The Senate's going to act on that bill

[1:47] this week. We'll send it to the

[1:49] President for his signature. It looks

[1:51] like most of those earmarks are going to

[1:52] stay in. Is the President going to sign

[1:55] this bill?

[1:56] >> Well, as you noted, that's last year's

[1:58] business.

[1:59] Second is when President Obama came to

[2:02] office, two major bills were passed

[2:04] without earmarks.

[2:05] The major recovery economic recovery

[2:07] act, earmark free. The children's health

[2:09] care bill, earmark free.

[2:11] He has said clearly his policies about

[2:13] earmarks, which is got to be more

[2:15] accountability, more transparency, and a

[2:18] reduction. This bill has some of those,

[2:21] but he has enunciated his view and given

[2:24] indication when he was a senator, he

[2:26] like I when I was a member of Congress

[2:28] put his own individual request on his on

[2:30] his own webpage. That policy's now been

[2:33] adopted because the most important thing

[2:35] is to be transparent and accountable for

[2:37] what you ask. Because what the American

[2:39] people want to know is do these

[2:41] individual congressional earmarks meet a

[2:44] worthy public objective or they just

[2:46] individual desire of a member of

[2:47] Congress? And that's why transparency

[2:50] and accountability are so important.

[2:52] >> Well, I understand that, but why didn't

[2:53] he just tell the Senate, "Look, take

[2:55] these things out of here. I told people

[2:56] we were not going to have these

[2:57] earmarks. Then send it back to me."

[2:59] >> What he has always said is and what he's

[3:02] clear is again, the economic recovery

[3:04] act, earmark free, a major bill. Second,

[3:07] is this is last year's business. And

[3:09] third, most importantly, we're going to

[3:10] have to make some other changes going

[3:11] forward to reduce and bring more reduce

[3:14] the ultimate number and bring the

[3:16] transparency. And that's the policy that

[3:18] he enunciated in the campaign.

[3:19] >> to me like what you're going to

[3:21] what he's about to do here is say,

[3:23] "Well, I don't like this, but I'm going

[3:24] to go ahead and sign it, but I'm going

[3:26] to warn you don't ever do it again." Is

[3:27] that what's about to happen here?

[3:29] >> In in not so many words, yes.

[3:31] >> All right. Well, let's talk about this

[3:33] budget because it was a whopper that he

[3:36] outlined this week. Republicans say it's

[3:38] going to increase the size of government

[3:40] by 1/3

[3:42] just next year alone. It produces a

[3:44] deficit of 1.75

[3:47] trillion dollars. That's the largest

[3:49] since World War two, larger than the

[3:51] last five combined. On our webcast

[3:54] Washington Unplugged, I asked former

[3:56] Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich on

[3:58] Friday about it. Here's what he said

[4:00] about it.

[4:01] >> I think that what President Obama has

[4:03] done is

[4:05] outlined the boldest effort to remake

[4:07] America since Lyndon Johnson's Great

[4:09] Society in 1965. I think he he he has

[4:13] courageously laid down a challenge to

[4:16] the whole country. He said, "I want us

[4:18] to become a more left-wing country with

[4:19] a bigger government with higher taxes.

[4:22] Now, do you want to go that way or not?

[4:23] And I think the challenge will be for

[4:25] those of us who don't want to go that

[4:26] way to articulate an alternative vision.

[4:29] But, I think this budget sets the stage

[4:31] for the biggest fight over the future of

[4:33] America since 1965.

[4:35] >> The biggest fight since 1965.

[4:38] >> Yeah. Uh three quick points, Bob. Uh

[4:41] first,

[4:43] this is a 1.7

[4:45] trillion-dollar deficit he inherited.

[4:47] Let's be clear about that. We inherited

[4:49] this deficit and we inherited $4

[4:52] trillion

[4:53] of new debt. That is the facts. Second,

[4:56] this budget is very honest with the

[4:58] American people. It's honest about the

[4:59] cost of the war, which we have never

[5:01] been honest for 7 years. It's honest

[5:03] about the alternative minimum tax, which

[5:04] we've never been honest with the

[5:05] American people about.

[5:07] And that in this deficit reflects what

[5:09] we inherited at this point. Second, I

[5:12] happen to think that

[5:14] Newt is right about one thing.

[5:16] There's a challenge now to the

[5:17] Republicans.

[5:19] Cuz the president's very clear.

[5:20] We can subsidize the HMO industry on 114

[5:23] cents on the dollar rather than pay 100

[5:26] cents on the dollar for health care.

[5:28] Will the Republican budget continue down

[5:29] the path of subsidizing the health care

[5:32] industry and the insurance industry in

[5:34] particular while in fact coverage and

[5:36] premiums lack of coverage for the

[5:38] uninsured continues to go up? That the

[5:41] fact is that premiums go up for the rest

[5:42] of America and also America's life

[5:45] expectancy goes down. Will they continue

[5:47] to subsidize the big oil industry while

[5:49] we send over 700 billion dollars

[5:52] We're saying but while we send over

[5:53] about 700 billion dollars of our wealth

[5:55] overseas.

[5:56] They have a challenge. Will they

[5:58] subsidize the banking industry rather

[6:00] than helping kids go to college? We've

[6:01] laid out a vision. Start to invest in

[6:03] America, invest in your middle class,

[6:05] make the tough choices, be honest with

[6:07] the American people. And the challenge

[6:08] will be as he said there which is will

[6:11] the Republicans meet the challenge of

[6:12] future or keep us on the path

[6:14] that they have set for the last 7 years

[6:16] that got us to this point of reckoning.

[6:18] >> You cannot say though, can you, that

[6:20] this is all something he inherited, this

[6:22] deficit. I mean there are things in this

[6:24] budget that were not in George Bush's

[6:26] budget. Talking about health care

[6:27] >> Right, right,

[6:29] but what we are doing as we did in the

[6:31] economic recovery act and it's

[6:32] fundamental to our goal. First of all,

[6:34] we bring the deficit down.

[6:36] That's different. Second is we and the

[6:38] president the president was very clear

[6:40] in the economic recovery act as he is in

[6:41] this economic program. It is time to

[6:44] invest in our energy independence, which

[6:46] is why in the economic recovery act we

[6:48] double the size of alternative energy.

[6:50] It's time to invest in our our kids

[6:52] ability to go to college, which is why

[6:54] we don't subsidize banks but we

[6:56] subsidize kids ability to go to college.

[6:58] It is time we start ensuring and and

[7:01] bring cost down, the premiums as well as

[7:04] expand coverage. Those are the type of

[7:06] investments that are key for America's

[7:08] economic growth and competitiveness

[7:10] going forward. The health care system is

[7:12] particular example where America's

[7:14] economic competitiveness is strength

[7:16] around the world is sapped because we

[7:17] have a health care system that doesn't

[7:19] allow American workers and businesses

[7:21] compete and it is the key to our

[7:23] long-term

[7:25] putting our fiscal house in order. And

[7:27] the Republicans will have an opportunity

[7:29] not just to criticize, but to propose.

[7:31] And the question is will they continue

[7:33] the path of the 7 years that have got us

[7:35] to the point of basically a culture of

[7:38] rising deficits

[7:40] and more and more consumer spending.

[7:42] This budget deficit This budget and

[7:44] economic program fundamentally changes

[7:46] the culture in this way.

[7:48] It rejects the past

[7:50] and says we're going to be a culture and

[7:52] a society that invests and saves.

[7:55] >> What the Republicans also say it raises

[7:57] taxes on everybody. I think everybody

[8:00] expected that

[8:01] taxes on upper income people were going

[8:03] to go up. Barack Obama said during the

[8:06] campaign that that's what he planned to

[8:07] do, but Newt Gingrich and some of the

[8:10] other Republicans say when people find

[8:12] out that when you're talking about these

[8:15] things you're talking about on the

[8:17] energy front, it's going to be a new tax

[8:19] on everybody that uses electricity, who

[8:22] drives a car, and there going to be tax

[8:24] increases in in myriad other ways.

[8:27] >> Well, first of all,

[8:29] let's be very clear

[8:30] cuz I've seen these scare tactics

[8:32] before. You've seen it too, Bob.

[8:35] 95%

[8:36] of Americans, working Americans, will

[8:38] have a tax cut.

[8:40] As the president said Tuesday night, 95%

[8:42] of Americans will have a tax cut. And

[8:44] starting April 1st, they'll see it,

[8:47] which the Republicans voted against in

[8:49] large measure in the House and in the

[8:51] Senate.

[8:52] Second, nobody will see a tax increase

[8:55] for 2 years.

[8:56] When we get out of this recession,

[8:58] and he ran on, as you noted, the fact

[9:01] that the wealthy 2% will have their

[9:03] marginal rates go back to where they

[9:05] were under Bill Clinton

[9:07] when we produced 22 million jobs,

[9:09] and their deductions will go back to

[9:10] where they were under Ronald Reagan.

[9:13] That we're going really just back to

[9:16] that point, that starting point. So,

[9:18] there will be the scare tactics trying

[9:19] to talk about the fact that everybody's

[9:20] going to see tax increases, and the

[9:22] president could not have been clearer

[9:23] Tuesday night that working middle-class

[9:25] families will get a tax cut. In addition

[9:27] to that,

[9:29] more and more will be get assistance so

[9:31] they can go to college in in a society

[9:33] in a time economically where you earn

[9:35] what you learn, we're going to help more

[9:36] people go to college and have the most

[9:38] educated workforce. We're also

[9:40] fundamentally, the most important thing

[9:41] economically, is getting an energy

[9:43] policy and a healthcare policy that

[9:45] ensures that the economy and the

[9:48] members of our society and our country

[9:50] can get a healthcare system that works

[9:52] for them rather than them working for

[9:53] that healthcare system. And an energy

[9:55] policy that weans us off dependence on

[9:57] foreign oil and toward an independent

[9:59] policy on energy.

[10:01] >> Uh

[10:02] aren't there more tax increases in this

[10:04] in this uh plan than than Barack Obama

[10:07] talked about during the campaign? For

[10:09] example, on on upper-income people

[10:11] talking about reducing uh the deductions

[10:13] they can take on charitable giving.

[10:16] Uh aren't you going to get a lot of

[10:18] opposition from uh places like where

[10:21] Barack Obama used to work, charitable

[10:23] enterprises, when he was a community

[10:25] organizer?

[10:26] >> I there'll be, you know, voices of of

[10:29] criticism, but I want to I want

[10:31] everybody to be reassured by the fact

[10:32] these are the rates that were under

[10:34] deductions that Ronald Reagan had. And

[10:36] the marginal rate is where Bill that

[10:38] Bill Clinton had in the time in the '90s

[10:40] we had. That's what they are. There's

[10:41] not like just something totally

[10:43] radically new. We're going back to those

[10:45] points. And if and making sure but what

[10:48] do we do?

[10:49] We reduce the deficit and we make

[10:51] critical investments that are essential

[10:53] for the economic strength of this

[10:54] country. Uh and what has not happened

[10:57] over the years, when we were subsidizing

[11:00] these powerful interests, is in fact we

[11:02] went farther and slid farther and

[11:04] farther behind while we were piling up

[11:06] record amount of of debt and deficits.

[11:09] And the question is and the challenge is

[11:11] that day of reckoning can not can no

[11:13] longer be put off. And the president's

[11:15] very clear.

[11:16] He ran on this. And one of the big news

[11:19] is here in Washington is not only did he

[11:21] run on it, he then proposed it. And what

[11:23] is always a surprise and I think one of

[11:24] the one of the gas that you hear here in

[11:27] Washington, people expect you to run on

[11:29] one say one thing in the campaign and

[11:30] then govern different. I think what's

[11:32] woken up Washington is he's been

[11:34] consistent from the campaign all the way

[11:35] through to his economic program and he

[11:37] said these are the challenges we have

[11:39] and the day of running away from those

[11:40] challenges and not meeting them while

[11:42] America slid behind economically is no

[11:44] longer feasible or is no longer smart.

[11:47] >> Do you think you're going to get more

[11:48] Republican support than you had for

[11:50] example on passing those stimulus

[11:52] packages? I noticed you said in a

[11:55] article in the New Yorker

[11:58] when somebody asked is bipartisan ship

[12:00] dead? You were quoted as saying the

[12:02] public wants bipartisanship. We just

[12:05] have to try. We don't have to succeed in

[12:07] getting it. What does that mean?

[12:09] >> slightly a little more about that. First

[12:10] of all, we did succeed.

[12:13] Number one in bipartisanship.

[12:14] >> We got three Republicans.

[12:15] >> no, well, let's do the score Let's do

[12:17] the entire scorecard.

[12:19] Uh on on the Ledbetter legislation,

[12:23] number of Republicans in both the House

[12:24] and Senate voted for it.

[12:26] On the Children's Health Care bill,

[12:28] number of Republicans voted for that.

[12:30] You are right on the Economic Recovery

[12:31] Act because of its boldness, we had

[12:33] three, but we had governors throughout

[12:36] the country who supported it. Republican

[12:38] mayors throughout the country supported

[12:39] and Republican voters who supported it.

[12:42] Going forward,

[12:43] the president's been very clear. He

[12:44] called on the National Service bill that

[12:46] Senator Kennedy and Senator Hatch,

[12:48] Republican for Utah,

[12:49] had proposed. He has been clear about

[12:52] wanting a stem cell legislation that a

[12:55] number like Senator Specter, Republican

[12:56] from Pennsylvania, as well as Senator

[12:58] Harkin, a Democrat from Iowa. So, we

[13:00] will continue to reach out as we did in

[13:03] the fiscal summit

[13:04] this early this week as we will in the

[13:06] health care summit on Thursday. But, our

[13:08] goal our goal, Bob, is to continue to

[13:10] reach out and it's our desire that the

[13:12] Republicans would work with us in trying

[13:14] to be constructive rather than adopt the

[13:17] philosophy of somebody like Rush

[13:18] Limbaugh who's praying for failure.

[13:20] >> Rush Limbaugh,

[13:22] we've talked about Newt Gingrich a lot

[13:24] this morning

[13:26] and now you bring up Rush Limbaugh. Who

[13:27] do you think now speaks for the

[13:29] Republican Party?

[13:30] >> You just named him. It was Rush

[13:33] Limbaugh. I mean, he has laid out his

[13:35] vision in my view, and he said it

[13:37] clearly, and I compliment him for that.

[13:39] He's been very up-front, and I

[13:41] compliment for that because he's not

[13:42] hiding.

[13:43] He's asked for President Obama and

[13:44] called for President Obama to fail.

[13:47] That's his view.

[13:48] And that's what he's enunciated. And

[13:50] whenever a Republican criticizes him,

[13:52] they have to run back and apologize to

[13:54] him and say they were misunderstood. He

[13:56] is the voice and the intellectual force

[13:59] and energy behind the Republican Party,

[14:01] and he has been up-front about what he

[14:02] views and hasn't stepped back from that,

[14:05] which is he hopes for failure.

[14:07] He said it, and I compliment him for his

[14:09] honesty, but that's their philosophy of

[14:11] that as enunciated by Rush Limbaugh, and

[14:13] I think that's the wrong philosophy for

[14:15] America because what Americans want us

[14:17] to do and what President Obama's been

[14:18] very clear about is work together,

[14:21] setting our goals. We may take different

[14:23] roads to get to that goal, but be clear

[14:25] on what we have to do to build this

[14:27] country by investing in our people, make

[14:29] changing the healthcare system, having

[14:31] an energy independence policy that

[14:33] clearly weans America off its dependence

[14:35] on foreign oil.

[14:36] >> he's that important that other

[14:37] Republicans are paying that much

[14:38] attention to him?

[14:39] >> Well, he was given the keynote basically

[14:42] at the Conservative Caucus to speak.

[14:45] When a Republican did attack him, he was

[14:47] he clearly had a turn around

[14:50] and come back and basically said that

[14:52] that is he apologized and was wrong. And

[14:53] I do think he's an intellectual force,

[14:55] which is why the Republicans pay such

[14:57] attention to him.

[14:58] >> All right, we're going to take a break

[14:59] here, and we'll come back and talk about

[15:00] this, about drawing down the troops in

[15:02] Iraq, and a whole lot more when we come

[15:04] back.

[15:06] >> [music]

[15:11] [music]

[15:16] >> Back now with the White House Chief of

[15:17] Staff, Rahm Emanuel. Mr. Emanuel, Uh,

[15:20] General Motors is now

[15:22] losing $100 million a day. Uh, they have

[15:26] already spent, we are told, 2/3 of what

[15:29] they have already received from the

[15:31] government, and we're hearing they want

[15:33] some more. They're now asking for

[15:35] another $16 billion. Is the president

[15:38] going to do that? Because the question I

[15:40] have is how long does this go on?

[15:44] >> As you know, the panel of experts we've

[15:46] assembled on the auto industry is

[15:47] working with GM and the others on their

[15:49] plan. President's been very clear though

[15:51] what his priorities are. They have to

[15:53] have a viable business plan going for on

[15:55] a going forward basis, and it's going to

[15:57] require sacrifice from all the parties

[16:00] involved to do that. But here's the

[16:02] other thing I I think that people should

[16:04] see in the both GM as well as the

[16:06] others.

[16:07] They never invested in both alternative

[16:10] energy cars. They got dependent on big

[16:12] gas guzzlers.

[16:13] They didn't do They have a health care

[16:15] cost structure that's outdated, and as

[16:17] an example, we talked earlier, Bob,

[16:19] about the fact that their health care

[16:21] system is affecting their business and

[16:22] their employ and their employers and

[16:24] their employees, rather.

[16:25] And it's an example, in my view, of what

[16:28] the president's saying for this country.

[16:30] We have the day of reckoning of making

[16:32] sure that we were had a policy on energy

[16:34] independence, a policy that ensured that

[16:36] our health care costs were under

[16:37] control, our ability to make sure that

[16:38] we had coverage was expanded to those

[16:40] who are uninsured as one way to also

[16:42] bring costs under control. That is the

[16:44] challenge we face as a country.

[16:46] To the GM specific,

[16:48] president wants to see a business model

[16:50] that's on a going forward basis,

[16:52] is cognizant of the market, and they

[16:54] that all the parties made the sacrifices

[16:56] necessary for that independence. The

[16:58] panel experts are now meeting to go over

[17:00] those plans and help them develop

[17:01] something or look at review what they're

[17:04] doing before any other decisions made.

[17:05] >> So, you're saying unless they change

[17:07] their ways uh drastically, unless they

[17:09] come up with a new model, no more money.

[17:11] >> They kicked down Basically, over the

[17:13] last 20 to 30 years, they had a strategy

[17:15] that has gotten them to I think a very

[17:17] unfortunate position both on health care

[17:19] costs, new types of cars,

[17:21] weaning themselves off of basically gas

[17:24] guzzlers to energy efficient cars, and

[17:26] they're making those changes now when

[17:27] everybody said for the last 20 years,

[17:29] but it's a wake up call

[17:31] which is clear of what the president

[17:32] said on Tuesday night. It's a wake up

[17:34] call to America. Do we want to have an

[17:36] energy policy that's different?

[17:37] >> have to do something different.

[17:38] >> They have to

[17:39] The plan weighs it. The plan is in front

[17:40] of the

[17:41] the panel of experts, which is where it

[17:43] should be. I'm basically making sure

[17:45] that the restructuring is a is a viable

[17:47] restructuring plan.

[17:48] >> Let's talk about the president's

[17:50] announcement that he is going to draw

[17:52] down the troops in Iraq, that he's going

[17:54] to leave 50,000 there in support roles

[17:57] before he made that talk. Nancy Pelosi,

[18:00] the Democratic leader in the house, said

[18:03] that it's 50,000 sounded like too much.

[18:05] Let's listen to just what she said. This

[18:07] was just before he spoke.

[18:10] >> I don't know what the justification is

[18:11] for 50,000 a presence of 50,000 troops

[18:14] in Iraq. I do think that there's a need

[18:17] for some,

[18:18] and I don't know that all of them have

[18:20] to be in country.

[18:21] >> So, there you have it, and that seems to

[18:23] be most of the criticism now coming from

[18:25] Democrats, not from Republicans. John

[18:28] McCain likes the way the president's

[18:30] doing this. The Republicans, I mean, the

[18:31] Democrats seem to be saying though we

[18:33] need to get more troops out of there

[18:34] quicker.

[18:35] >> Well, first of all,

[18:37] as you noted earlier in the question,

[18:39] President ran on this policy. Told

[18:42] American people what he wanted to see.

[18:44] Said on day one I'm going to have a

[18:45] meeting with my national security staff

[18:46] to begin the process to evaluate how we

[18:48] can come out in 16 months.

[18:51] That's what he did on day one. And about

[18:53] a month later, he, as you saw on Friday,

[18:55] he enunciated that policy because they

[18:57] came back, the entire apparatus of the

[18:59] national security

[19:01] apparatus for the president, on how to

[19:03] responsibly draw down our troops.

[19:06] By August of 2010, the combat mission

[19:09] will be over.

[19:10] We will have a residual force of

[19:12] somewhere between 35, and 50,000 troops.

[19:16] Mainly dealing with training, protecting

[19:18] our diplomatic and civilians in Iraq,

[19:21] and some counterinsurgency.

[19:23] The president has been very clear that

[19:26] going on a going forward basis as we

[19:27] draw down that the Iraqis must

[19:30] politically and on a security basis take

[19:33] ownership of their country. So, there

[19:35] will be an intensified effort on the

[19:37] diplomatic uh and political side, which

[19:40] is why we sent Ambassador Hill there uh

[19:43] to work with our general and our entire

[19:45] >> Do you think the Democrats are going to

[19:46] go in the end going to go along with it?

[19:48] >> well, first of all, there's uh

[19:50] the speaker I I

[19:51] spoke to her concern about 50,000. There

[19:53] have been other uh Democrats also

[19:55] including who have been uh supportive

[19:58] and understand where we are. The speaker

[20:00] has a right to question uh that size.

[20:02] The president said, "This is what I

[20:04] think is a responsible both plan for

[20:06] withdrawal and a responsible residual

[20:08] force." And has worked it through both

[20:10] with the commanders, the diplomatic

[20:12] core, and the political uh apparatus to

[20:14] make sure we had a comprehensive view.

[20:16] >> Let me go back to the budget for just

[20:18] one kind of clean-up question. You set a

[20:20] kind of a deadline for sometime in April

[20:22] to get most of this done. Am I correct

[20:24] in that?

[20:25] >> Congress is working on that. They said

[20:27] >> realistic?

[20:28] >> Well,

[20:28] I I Yes, in this sense, Bob. I mean, you

[20:31] you There's a lot to compliment what

[20:32] this Congress has just pulled off. They

[20:34] passed a Ledbetter legislation on pay

[20:36] equity uh for women. They passed a

[20:39] children's health care bill that your

[20:41] that 11 million children of working

[20:42] parents are getting now finally get

[20:44] health care who because of no fault of

[20:45] their own did not have health care,

[20:47] passed in a bipartisan way. And then in

[20:49] 2 weeks later, they passed an impressive

[20:51] economic recovery act that begins to

[20:53] invest in our in our country once again.

[20:55] And they did that in a month. The

[20:57] president laid out uh his budget, and

[20:59] this Congress is already beginning the

[21:01] work, and you'll see uh the president's

[21:04] OMB director Peter Orszag up this week

[21:05] testifying, and the activity will go

[21:08] forward in both the House and the

[21:09] Senate, and we are confident because

[21:11] this Congress is here understanding the

[21:13] extraordinary time we find ourselves in

[21:15] to meet that challenge and meet the

[21:17] president's objective of sending through

[21:19] an economic program.

[21:20] >> ask you quickly, we hear these horror

[21:22] stories coming out of Mexico. Nearly

[21:23] 7,000 people killed in these wars

[21:27] between these drug cartels. They forced

[21:29] a police chief of Juarez, just across

[21:31] the street from El Paso, across the

[21:33] river, out by threatening threatening to

[21:35] kill a police officer a day until he

[21:37] left, and he left after they killed four

[21:39] or five people. It just seems worse and

[21:41] worse. Does the administration consider

[21:44] Mexico a national security problem for

[21:46] the United States?

[21:47] >> Well, as you know, the first foreign

[21:49] leader

[21:50] that the president met with was the

[21:52] president of Mexico. Attended that

[21:54] meeting. And both committed to working

[21:57] to stabilize the border, which is

[21:59] exactly what Janet Napolitano, the head

[22:02] of Homeland Security, said this week in

[22:03] congressional testimony.

[22:05] They want to clearly stop the guns from

[22:08] the United States going south. We want

[22:10] to stop the drugs coming north, and we

[22:12] have a mutual interest in working to

[22:14] secure that border, and that's why the

[22:16] president of the United States had a

[22:17] meeting with President Calderon in his

[22:19] first meeting with a foreign leader, cuz

[22:20] that border is important to us, and

[22:22] Mexico is a key ally of ours.

[22:24] >> All right, we have to stop there. Thank

[22:26] you very much, Rahm Emanuel, White House

[22:28] Chief of Staff, and

[22:29] >> I actually enjoyed it.

[22:30] >> [laughter]

[22:31] >> It's Sunday.

[22:31] >> We'll be back with a final thought in

[22:33] just a minute.

[22:40] >> This portion of Face the Nation is

[22:42] sponsored by IBM. Let's build a smarter

[22:45] planet. Visit ibm.com.

[22:54] Finally today, we have just come through

[22:56] one of those who'd have thought it

[22:57] weeks, as in who'd have thought that way

[23:00] back when Barack Obama began his

[23:02] campaign for president that his first

[23:04] State of the Union speech would hardly

[23:06] mention Iraq. Who would have thought

[23:08] back then that the state of the nation's

[23:10] economy would be so bad the president

[23:12] wouldn't even call it a State of the

[23:14] Union speech just so he wouldn't have to

[23:16] finish the sentence that begins the

[23:19] State of the Union is. Who would have

[23:21] thought the Republican Party would be

[23:23] laying some of the blame for the bad

[23:25] economy off on their recently departed

[23:27] leader? Or I guess that's what GOP

[23:30] stalwart Newt Gingrich was doing when he

[23:32] talked to me and others this week about

[23:34] what he labeled the failed Bush-Obama

[23:37] big spending strategy. Who would have

[23:39] thought that when President Obama, who

[23:41] campaigned to bring the troops home from

[23:44] Iraq, announced his withdrawal plan that

[23:46] it would be the Republicans who liked it

[23:48] and the Democrats who didn't. And who

[23:50] for that matter would have thought that

[23:52] when the withdrawal was announced that

[23:55] it would not be the lead story on the

[23:57] evening news. Not only was it not the

[23:59] lead, two or three stories about the bad

[24:02] economy came ahead of it. Nor did it get

[24:05] above the fold in many newspapers.

[24:08] Yes, Barack Obama campaigned on change,

[24:10] but I doubt he expected a lot of that.

[24:13] Who would have thought it?

[24:15] Back in a minute.

[24:21] >> This portion of Face the Nation was

[24:23] sponsored by your locally owned Sitgo.

[24:26] They're at every turn.

[24:33] >> That's our broadcast and we'll be back

[24:35] [music] right here next Sunday on Face

[24:37] the Nation.

[24:40] >> [music]

[24:47] >> This broadcast was produced by CBS News,

[24:51] which is solely responsible for [music]

[24:52] the selection of today's guest and

[24:55] topics. It originated in Washington,

[24:58] D.C.

[25:04] >> [music]

[25:13] [music]