americans, 53%, feel president obama is greatly or moderately to blame for the economy. more people still blame former president george bush but president obama won't be running against george bush next year. with me, obama's 2008 presidential campaign advisor and now senior white house advisor. thank you, david, for joining us. before we get to the politics of it, which is fascinating to all of us, let's get to the president's jobs bill. wow would you be open to breaking up this bill for the parts that you know you could get agreement on? >> well, the president has been very clear as he's traveled across the country and in the speech to congress that he thinks this -- the american jobs act would have a profound impact on our economy right now. it would put a lot more people back to work, put more money in the pockets of workers, put construction workers, teachers, veterans back to work, help small businesses all across the country. this is what the economy needs right now. the question is, if you think the economy's doing okay, i guess you're not going to act. but if you think this economy is far too weak and needs a jump-start -- so we expect there will be an entire vote on the jobs act in september. these are things that generally would not be highly controversial. things that have brought bipartisan support in the past. >> you and the president both understand politics. there will be things in terms of paying for it that the republicans won't agree to. the republicans say we can agree to certain things, including infrastructure bank which is important for creating jobs. so push coming to shove, would you rather take parts of it, or do you have to have the whole of it? >> again, there's any number of hypotheticals in the coming months, but we're going to continue to demand this type of action that is going to have a profound impact on the economy right now aimed squarely at the middle class. so the question really for folks in congress is, do they want to go back at the end of the year and report back to their constituents that they didn't really do anything to help the economy, create jobs, help the middle class. we think at the end of the day there's going to be some action here. we think it needs to be the american jobs act is aimed squarely at providing the jump-start the economy right now but it is part after long-term economic strategy. get our fiscal house in order in the long term, continue to build new industries in high-tech manufacturing, investment in education, but the economy is far too weak right now. it needs a jump-start. that's what the american jobs act is intended to do. >> the president in his various appearances around the country pushing for the jobs act has been quoting mark zandi from moody's analytics about how many jobs this would create. mark certainly a guy that a lot of people quaut. i want to put up something for our audience that zandi said to the associated press on saturday. when he says he sticks by his numbers for 2012, but he said beginning in 2013, and certainly in 2014, the plan is a drag on the economy, because the stimulus starts fading away. so by 2015, the economy is in the same place as now, as if there was no jobs package. >> well, that statement points out how weak the economy is right now. and i think that if you don't act right now, the economy's going to be in a deeper hole. so we have to do some things right now to immediately jump-start the economy, but that will help lead to more consistent positive economic growth. investments in small business, investments in roads and bridges and ports, our schools. in many states teachers are being laid off. we don't have students learning. listen, they're competing against kids -- >> i guess his point is that they'll still be laid off when the stimulus money runs out. >> well listen. i think that we can act right now or we cannot act right now. if we act right now it is going to be part of strengthening this economy. this economy will eventually begin to fully recover and this is going to be an important part of it because obviously we had a couple of months early in the year where we had some very significant job growth. we're not producing enough jobs, we don't have enough growth. there's a lot of headwinds out there. we see what's happening in europe right now. another significant headwind on our economy. so we have to act right now, and do some things -- listen, mark zandi and others have looked at the american jobs act of the 2 million jobs -- >> has he signed on to what he thinks will happen in the out years? >> we think these things can have a profound impact not in the next year or year-and-a-half but provide foundation for longer term growth as we go through the decade. >> economists i talk to say there can't be any recovery until the housing industry recovers. do you all have anything else in the works, any kind of debt restructuring for homeowners under water or those about to lose their homes? is there something else you can do? >> the best thing we can do for the housing market is to have the economy recover. if you were able to drop the unemployment rate by a point -- >> you all say it will be around 9% this time next year. >> well, the fundamental recovery of the housing market is going to be twin to a recovery in the economy but there are some things we can and have done. we announced additional forbearance so people who have been unemployed have more time in terms of their home loans. the president announced in his jobs speech and plan two significant items. one a neighborhood stabilization fund to allow local communities to rehabilitate, tear down, turn into rental housing refinancing proposal that would allow millions of americans to save $2,000 a year. we'll explore additional ideas. we'll have to throw everything we can at this. >> there are other things you can do, such as? >> as i said, we announced those two in the jobs package. we think a refinancing proposal to give the average family $2,000 a year would be significant taking advantage of these historically low interest rates. we've obviously got in many urban areas in particular, you've got homes that are in need of repair, even demolition, turn them into rental. that would be an important thing to do. obviously we're going to look at every other idea out there. again, there's not going to be a silver bullet. it will take a lot of different things to make an impact. >> you heard that poll coming in to this interview that more and more people think the president is at least moderately to blame for the state of the economy. what then is your pitch in 2012? if it is going to be on the economy, you all know it's going to be slow through next year, have predicted it will be slow through next year, it seems as though you can't run on the economy. >> the american people understand it took us a long time to get to this point. it will take us a long time to get out. for the middle class this just wasn't about what happened in 2008 in the great recession. for a long time they've been seeing their wages stagnate, they are falling farther and farther behind. that's the central mission for our country and for president obama. >> couple quick questions as we close this out. does the president expect to make any major changes in the white house staff or in his cabinet between now and the election? any of that in the works? >> i think the president is very competent in his team, in the direction we've laid out here. we've laid out for the american people a clear plan for immediate action on the economy through the american jobs act. an approach to our long-term fiscal future that we think is smart and balanced. so no, i think he's got a good plan. he's got a good team to execute that. >> so no major changes in either staff or cabinet that you can say particularly on the economic part of the -- >> i don't expect that, no. >> let me ask you about pakistan. we had admiral mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs out there saying, look, pakistan supported the haqqani network attack on the u.s. embassy. you now have the pakistanis firing back saying u.s. policy is confused and in disarray. what is the state of u.s.-pakistan relationships right now? >> we've made it clear and admiral mullen and secretary clinton talked to their counterparts in pakistan as recently as this week, that obviously with the haqqani network there are safe havens there that are being abided and they're links. >> so this seems a little ratcheted up. >> well, the message has been clear. obviously the haqqani network provides great danger to the people of the pakistan, to the people of the united states, to other countries, and those links and those safe havens, we are continuing to insist that the pakistani government make clear and take action to make sure that these safe havens and these links are eliminated because it is providing clearly the situation where they are free to operate in a way that's quite dangerous. >> again that's kind of been so for some time now. this is now saying pakistan -- the intelligence arm of the pakistani government supported an attack on the u.s. embassy. can you let that stand? >> well, listen. we obviously continue to engage in a great deal of cooperation with pakistan. 20 of the top 30 al qaeda leaders have been eliminated, including obviously osama bin laden. so we've made great progress. but obviously we're going to continue to intensify and make the case that any arm of the pakistani government that's provided aid, comfort, providing safe haven for the haqqani network, we can't abide that. >> or else? >> well, we're going to continue to make the case in every way possible -- as i mentioned secretary clinton, admiral mullen met with our pakistani counterparts as recently as this week. we have to continue to make progress on this. >> haven't you been making the case for some time? >> well, we have been making the case for some time. >> does there have to be an "or else"? in aid we give them billions. >> we have. and obviously there's been some i think mention that some aid could be in jeopardy here but i think we're going to continue -- we have to work closely with them obviously in terms of the fight against al qaeda in that region. but at the end of the day, we have to continue to make the point, yes. >> just to pinpoint this. you would think about cutting back aid? >> well, again -- >> you agree to that? >> again, those discussions are happening between our foreign policy and national security teams. obviously we need to continue to have as much cooperation as we can but we cannot abide the situation where the haqqani network is being provided safe havens. any links there need to be decoupled and that's going to be a very important aim for us in the coming period of time. >> david plouffe, senior advisor at the white house, thanks for joining us. >> thanks, candy. when we come back, round three of a looming government shutdown with senators mark warner and lamar alexander. meineke's personal pricing on brakes. i tell you what i can spend. i do my best to make it work. i'm back on the road safely. and i saved you money on brakes. that's personal pricing. joining me to talk about the latest budget showdown in congress, from nashville, republican senator lamar alexander from tennessee and here with me, senator mark warner from virginia. gentlemen, thank you both. we are now in the midst of a discussion about a third government shutdown in a year. let me start with you, senator warner, and ask you if you think there is a point where this is embarrassing? >> yes, it is. >> are we there? >> can we once again inflict on the country and the american people the spectacle of a near government shutdown. i sure as heck hope not. if we're going to have the discussion right now, it is about how we pay for emergency assistance, fema. the senate passed with the support of republicans fema legislation that would point -- >> the emergency management agency which helps people after hurricane irene, anything -- >> disasters. we've seen now come out of the house driven by a small group within the house of the tea party crowd that says hold on here, the deal we cut at the end of july that said we're not going to try to do another fight at least through the balance of this year about the budget numbers, that deal is no longer being put in place and there is this effort that's my way or the highway again. the senate is saying -- we're going to be back in on monday -- why should we in effect rebuild schools in iraq on the credit card. but expect rebuilding schools in joplin, missouri, at this moment in time have to be paid for in a way that's never been in any of the previous disasters assistance we've put out before. i think we need to find a resolution of this. the choices pay for it now or never pay for it. i think there are alternatives. let's do rolling ten-year average for relief. in the end of the day the most important thing is we should not give in to an 11th hour shutdown potential on friday. >> senator alexander, let me ask you if you buy into senator warner's premise that tea party folks are basically at fault but that the tea party backed folks in the house, are the ones behind this stalemate that is now threatening yet another government shutdown. do you agree with that? >> no, i don't. i'll give the senate democratic leader most of the credit. he manufactured a crisis all week about disaster when there's no crisis. everybody knows we're going to pay for every single penny of disaster aid that the president declares. and that the fema certifies. and the house sent over a bill that does that, and the senate should have approved it. what it did was take $1.5 billion of unobligated funds and say instead of adding to the debt we're not going to add to the debt when we do this. now what we should have been doing this past week is all we could do to create an environment so the work that senator warner, senator chambliss and others have done to reduce the debt by $4 trillion succeeds. that would have been a good use of the week instead of this chest-pounding and game-playing that's been going on. >> we kind of are where we are. and monday, as far as we understand it there will be a key test vote in the senate which is not -- the senate version at this point being we will accept the spending levels in the house bill for federal emergency management agency and other things, but we will not do the offsets or the pay-for-it parts of the house bill. it looks like that's not going to happen. it looks like that cloture vote, it is a test vote, will fail. what then, senator alexander? >> well, that's up to senator reid, senator mcconnell and others but let's be clear about this. we spent all week talking about this with senator reid saying we had to have $7 billion. when nobody certified that much damage, then on friday the republicans said, okay, let's vote today. let's not wait over the weekend so puts it off until monday. i don't like this business of sitting around blaming each other over such small potatoes. what we really ought to be doing is spending time to see if we can get $4 trillion in debt reduction. senator warner, chambliss and others have rounded up 37 senators equally divided by party who agree we should do that. we'd like our super committee to succeed. if we could do that, we could begin to get the economy in better shape and gain some confidence in the country. >> senator warner, back to the sort of larger question rather than the inner workings of this bill. and that is secretary geithner actually put it this week, he talked about how our global trading partners think that the u.s. political system looks manifestly broken. is there something that you could -- i mean you hear this. senator alexander saying we're talking about the wrong thing, this was a manufactured political debate, regardless of whether you agree with anybody, you think it was a manufactured political debate, too, only you blame different people. so why shouldn't we look at this and go, this should be the year of the anti-incumbent, just vote for any name you don't know. >> i agree with senator alexander that we need to get back to the single biggest thing we could do to restore confidence, both internationally and domestically, and that is to put in place a long-term, $4 trillion debt reduction plan. i think that would give confidence back to consumers to start spending, businesses who are -- actually large businesses who are sitting on a couple trillion dollars of cash on their balance sheets. i think that would be very, very positive. senator alexander's been very supportive of this effort. we've got an equal number of democrats, republicans trying to do this. but i would say, i mean, one point about who to blame or not to blame on this current, hopefully non-shutdown, is that there is a group -- and i do believe it is mostly centered in the house in terms of some of these tea party republicans -- who say on every issue, we're going to make this a make-or-break. we saw it on the faa when they shut down the federal aviation administration. we're seeing it now on this debate about fema. we should be able to have a legitimate debate about emergency aid. why link that into a government shutdown or not? so my hope is that cooler heads will prevail on this short-term so-called continuing resolution budget extension. but i do agree with senator alexander, we've got to get back to the bigger issue which is how do we send confidence back to the american public and to the markets. the only way we're going to get that done is if we actually, democrats and republicans, start being americans before they put on their partisan hats. >> it's sort of what we've been talking about for a long time now. it never quite seems to happen. let me move you to the so-called super committee which is looking to find -- has to find $1.2 trillion to $1.5 trillion in savings that everyone can agree on by the end of the year. this seems to me to be a very tall order and it also seems to me that we are seeing more and more stories now about how this is not going to happen. can you all afford to not come up with some agreement? because then, as you know, supposedly automatically budgets will be cut -- >> here's the circumstance. every economist that i've heard of has said that if we don't get $4 trillion in debt reduction over the next ten years, then we're not going to put our economy and get ourselves the debt-to-gdp ratio on a sustainable path. the challenge the super committee's got is we've cut about $1 trillion. even if they do $1.5 trillion more, that's really not going to be enough. so we've got to go ahead and say to them, go ahead and take on tax reform and generate some additional revenues, take on entitlement reform and make sure programs like medicare and social security are going to be there for the next 75 years. and what our group is trying to say, democrats, republicans alike, business leaders, if you will do that, we've got your back. if you will go big, we will stand there and be supportive. because this is a once in a long time opportunity, because whatever they come up with will get a straight up or down vote. that doesn't often happen. we can actually then cut out the rhetoric and see where you stand on this issue. >> senator alexander, i'll give you the last word on this. i know you hope that the super committee can go big or can at least go to what it's supposed to be doing. but i want you to tell me what you honestly think will be the work product of the super committee. >> well, i'm not sure exact -- i'm not sure the details but i'm hopeful. i'm optimistic. the budget agreement that we agreed on in august is better than people think. it took 40% of the budget, the discretionary part, everything from national defense to national parks, and it's got it going up over the next ten yea