And, our power player of the week can tell you almost everything the president does. And, how often he does it. All, right now on Fox News Sunday. Chris and, hello again, from fox news in washington. When president obama delivers his state of the union speech tuesday, one big issue will be sequestration. 85 billion in automatic spending cuts, due to kick in, march 1st. The white house now warns this will mean damaging layoffs of teachers, Law Enforcement and food safety inspectors. And, the pentagon will be hit, too. They propose a mix of spending cuts and, yes, more taxes, through limiting deductions, for the wealthy. I sat down late friday with House Democratic leader nancy pelosi and asked her about the fastapproaching deadline. Congressman pelosi, welcome back to Fox News Sunday. Welcome to the capitol. Chris the white house says, sequestration will have a severe effect on many americans. House republicans agree. But they say the answer is to find other spending cuts, not tax hikes. Well, i think that the sequestration is a bad idea, all around. It is something that is out of the question. The fact is, we have had plenty of spending cuts, 1. 6 trillion in the budget control act. What we need is growth, growth with jobs and if you have spending cuts, education of our children, other investments, where you are hindering growth, you are no going to reduce the deficit. So, what w do need is more revenue, and more cuts, but i would like to see that a big, balanced, bold proposal. And short of that, we must do something to avoid the sequester. Chris heres what House Speaker boehner said this week at some Point Washington has to deal with its spending problem. I watched them kick the can down though road for 22 years i have been here and i have had enough of it. Chris congresswoman, lets look at this numbers. Are you really saying in you a goment that spends 3. 5 trillion a year, that increased federal Discretionary Spending by 14 , over the last four years, you cant find 8 8 85 billion to cut, to avoid sequester. We have cut agriculture subsidy, tense of billions of dollars in cuts there and that should be balanced with eliminating subsidy for big oil. Why should we do why should we lower pel grants instead of eliminating the subsidies for g oil. Chris why not just cut spending, 85 billion in a 3. 5 trillion government. Lets back up from with all due respect to the speaker, what he said is not the gospel truth. The fact is, that a lot of the spending increases came during the bush administration. Two unpaid for wars we got ourselves engaged in. A Prescription Drug plan that added enormous amounts to our spending and the tax cuts at that d not 5 trillion, since this president came in. Part of that is from the what we had to do to avoid going over the cliff of the recession. Depression. Yes, we had the recovery act which saves or created 3. 5 million jobs, you know the record of job growth in the private sector has been consistent for many Record Number of months. So, again, we have to make a judgment about what how do we get growth with jobs, that is where the revenue comes from. You dont get it byutting down your education and cutting back on investments in science and National Institutes of health, food safety, you name it. So, it isnt as much you a spending problem as a priorities and that is what the budget is, setting priorities. Chris but you talk about growth. Even christina romer, the former head of the council of economic advisors for the president says you increase tax, that also hurts growth. Well, it is about timing. It is about timing. And it is about timing as to when make cuts, as well. Chris the fis cliff, you raised taxes 650 billion, right away. Yeah and that was a very good thing to do. On people making over the high end in our population. So, heres the thing, though we are here to have a budget that has revenue coming in, that has investments made, into the future. We also want to make decisions in those two areas where growth with jobs are created, because, more jobs, more revenue, coming in. Nothing brings more money to the treasury of the United States, than investment in education, of the American People. We need to recognize that. Which cuts really help us and which cuts really hurt our future. And, cuts in education, Scientific Research and the rest are harmful and they are what are accepted by the sequestration. It is almost wrong to say it is a spending problem, we have a deficit problem, we have low interest on the National Debt and it is a good time for us to act to lower the deficit. We think the deficit and the National Debt, we think they must be reduced and are sick and tired of paying interest on the National Debt and the 15 is a large percentage of the budget, the interest on the National Debt. It is lower now because of the lower interest rates. Chris again, all i would say is we have a 3. 5 trillion budget and they are talking about 85 billion in cuts. Lets go to the taxes, though we, we agreed to 1. 6 trillion in spending, discretionary, domestic spending. Chris the sequestration is just spending cuts. Secondly, we have gone to medicare and had savings of over a trillion dollars, in medicare already. And when i say we, i mean, the democrats and what the republicans are proposing is to make a voucher of medicare, no longer making it a guarantee. But to the things in this discussion, that i think American People understand what it means in their daily lives. Chris lets talk about taxes, you keep talking about raising taxes and you talk about making the wealthy let me ask the question first, let me ask the question you keep talking about making the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes. Right. Chris the top 1 , pay 37 of all federal income taxes. The top 5 , pay 59 of all federal taxes. If you took the total income of everyone making more than a Million Dollars a year, taxed it all, at 100 , that is only 726 billion. Which is less than the projected deficit for the year. I mean, the bottom line, congresswoman, is, you cannot raise taxes enough to solve the deficit problem. Nobody is saying that. We are saying it has to be balanced. Now on the subject of the high end we are not talking about raising rates. We did that. Reeliminated the high end tax cuts of the bush years which only increased the deficit, and didnt create jobs. We kept the low income tax cuts and the what we have in our proposal, that comes from our top democrat on the Budget Committee is to say well eliminate subsidy and it gives us a lot of money, eliminating subsidy for big oil. We also have the buffett rule which says all of the high income people will pay a minimum of raising tax on the wealthy. No, you are saying they should pay their fair share, which is 30 , which is lower than 39. 6, which is the rate the bracket they are in. Chris but you say, if they have a deduction. Take advantage of so many loopholes. Chris deductions on the books. The point is 30 . Chris the point is, that you cant raise enough money i mean, the main driver of thet0 r budget, our spending is entitlements and when medicare started Life Expectancy was 70 and now it is 79. Dont you have to raise the eligibility age and slow the growth of benefits, as a way to deal with the deficit . Im glad you brought up medicare. Dont you think to address your question, dont you think you ought to see it at the age where it does save mone those people will not evaporate from the face of the earth. Theyll have medical need and have to be attended to and the earlier intervention for it, the less the cost will be and the better the quality of life. I do think we should subject every federal dollar that is spent under the harshest scrutiny and i think the challenge with medicare is not medicare, the challenge is rising medical Health Care Costs in general. And, Prescription Drugs and the rest of that, that driver those costs, that is what we have to address, which we did in the Affordable Care act and we are ab to see some reports from the institute of medicine, about how we reduce the cost of health care, in medicare, because we are paying for quality, not quantity of procedures. But, quality of performance. And, i think that there is money to be saved there. And i dont think it has to come out of benefits, or beneficiaries, and i dont think you have to raise the age. Chris gun control will be a big part of the president s agenda in the state of the Union Address tuesday night but i want to ask you about another part of the effort to stop these horrible, repeated acts of mass violence. As part of your plan, you call for more Scientific Research on the connection between Popular Culture and violence. We dont need another study, respectfully. I mean, we know that these video games, where people have their heads splattered and the movies and the tv shows, why dont you go to your friend in hollywood and challenge them . Shame them. And say knock it off . Well, i do think whatever we do, when you talk about evidenc evidencebased we have it throughout our proposal. In other words, we dont want to just anecdotally laying bills anyway you have a lot of friends in hollywood. Why dont you go to them and publicly say i think challenge you to stop the video games . I do think i understand what you are saying, im a mother, im a grandmother, but, they, not hollywood but the evidence says that, in japan, for example, they have the most violent games and the lowest death, mortality from guns. I dont know what the explanation is for that except they may have good gun laws but you took one piece of it and we are talking about we are talking about no further sales of assault weapons. What is the justification for an assault weapon . You know, no further sales of those, no further sales of the increased capacity, 30 rounds in a gun, we are talking about background checks which is very popular, even among gun owners, and, hunters. We avow the First Amendment and stand with that and say that people have a right to have a gun to protect themselves. In their homes and their jobs, whatever, and that they and the workplace and that they, for recreation and hunting and the rest. But we are in the questioning the question is i think a lot of people say, here it is, liberals like nancy pelosi want to go after gun owners. But, when it comes to Mental Health laws, when it comes to their liberal friend in hollywood, they dont want to make them ante up. Mental health laws, i have to tell you, when i was ser and we couldnt get a hearing on it before that we passed the Mental Health parity act and, in the Affordable Care act we took it to the next step and in another year you well have many more services available, because of Mental Health parity. We certainly have to do more. And, i salute the applaud all of those who say we have to do more in Mental Health but we have to do it, i think, we have to do it all and that is why we said we included in there we have to look at what these games are. I dont think we should do anything anecdotally. We have a saying here, t. The anecdote is not evidence and we have to be comprehensive. Chris finally, president obama predicted this week that you will once again be speaker. His words, pretty soon. What do you think of the chances of you regaining the majority in the house and you, once again being Speaker Pelosi after the 2014 midterms . Well, it is nice he said that but the fact is, what is important, the democrats regain the majority in the house, between now and then we have a lot of work to do. We want to pass comprehensive Immigration Reform and, pass keep our kid safe and initiatives that relate to gun violence, prevention, we want to create jobs and have initiatives for growth with jobs, we want to make our country more democratic in terms of how elections are conducted. Reducing the role of money, increasing the level of stability so young people and women participate. It is confidence in our children and our economy and confidence as to who we are as a people and so we have plenty to do, before then. But the president said was complimentary but as far as im concerned it is about the issues and the issues are better served by a democratic majority in my view and that is what im hoping well achieve in 2014. As i say, we have a lot of work to do, hopefully in a bipartisan way, between now and then. And i think the issues i named, we could get bipartisan cooperation. Congresswoman pelosi, thank you. Lovely to see you. Chris always a pleasure to talk to you. My pleasure, thank you. Chris up next, senator john mccain gives us his take on spending cuts, drone strikes and more. [ male announcer ] how can power consumption in china, impact wool exports from new zealand, textile production in spain, and the use of medical technology in the u. S. . At t. Rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. Its just one reason over 75 of our mutual funds beat their 10year lipper average. T. Rowe price. Invest with confidence. Request a prospectus ummary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. I work for 47 different companies. Well, technically i work for one. That company, the United States postal service®, works for thousands of home businesses. Because at usps. Com®, you can pay, print and have your packages picked up for free. I can even drop off free boxes. I wear a lot of hats. Well, technically i wear one. The u. S. Postal service®, no business too small. No they dont. Hey son. Have fun tonight. Back against the wall aint nothin to me aint nothin to me [ crowd murmurs ] hey [ howls ] chris and were back now with senatohn mccain. Senator, welcome. Thank you, chris. Chris you just heard nancy pelosi talk about these automatic spending cuts, that kick in on march 1st. She wants a mix of cuts and, yes, more tax. Which i know you dont like. On the other hand, if you go to the automatic cuts, sequestration, you get a 13 cut over the rest of the year. In the pentagon. Which i know you also dont like. If it comes down to that, higher taxes, or sequestration, the pentagon cuts, where do you go . Where do you come down . Well, obviously, i dont want to see tax increased. But what i would like to see is the president call the leaders over to the white house and say, look, we have to solve the problem. The sequestration, secretary panetta, one of the most widely respected men, person in washington, d. C. And he has been saying it will devastate our National Security. We are republicans and democrats are responsible for the new cliff and ill take responsibility for it for the republicans but we have got to avoid it. We have to stop it. Chris the president says the price of that i more taxes. The president is the same person who during the Campaign Said it will not happen. Remember that . He dismissed it and a lot of us, Lindsey Graham and kelly ayotte traveled around the country warning about what will happen as a result of sequestration. And the world is very dangerous im sorry im emotional about this but this men and women serving in the military deserve better than what we are giving them. They dont know what theyll be doing tomorrow. We deplayed the deployment of an aircraft carrier. The cuts are coming across the board. The consequences are severe and it requires bipartisanship and, will i look at revenue closers, maybe so but we have raised tax. Why do we have to raise tax again . Chris in the state of the union speech, aide say the president is going to call for new investment spending on education, and energy and infrastructure and manufacturing to try to boost the economy and to boost the middle class. Will you go along with that . As long as we pay for it. We have seen this movie before. We saw it with the socalled stimulus package, back in the beginning of the administration. And, we saw the longest, most stagnant economy in history and now a debt and deficit, that is 51,000 for every man, woman and child in america. The size of the government has grown exponentially, we are, for example on sequestration, we have a proposal for every three federal retiree, we hire only one and that would take care of the sequestration problem and there are simple answer to many these problems that we can address the problem without raising peoples tax. First we ought to sit down across the table, the president should with us and work it out. All he does is go out and make speeches. Chris the president s nominee for cia director, john brennan, testified in his confirmation hearing, this week, faced tough questioning, especially about the administrations targeted killing program for terror suspects, even american citizens. What do you think of this idea which is gaining currency on capitol hill of what is called a d court . Where before the president puts a targeted terrorist and, especially an american citizen, on a kill list they have to get approval from a judge . I dont agree with it because i think it is an encroachment on the powers of the president of the United States but what we need to do is take the whole program out of the hand of the Central Intelligence agency and put it into the department of defense. Where you have adequate oversight and committee oversights and all the things that are built in, as oversight of the department of defense. Since when is the Intelligence Agency supposed to be an air force of drones that goes around killing people . I believe it is a job for the department of defense. Ch