And seniors are very hostile and the chairman of the Republican National committee attacked him the fix day for this assault on seniors. So i mean both sides do this. They say we want these cuts in general but when you get specific about it its very, very hard to do. Rose because of bad politics. Its bad politics to do something that people dont like. And they like medicare. People like medicare and they like Social Security. Right. One of the interesting intellectual things occurring is that the opponents of the Affordable Care act use the eye didnt call argument that was used against medicare and Social Security. Its socialism, its socialized medicine. And yet not one of the o uponants certainly in the congress would ever dare to stand up and say lets repeal Social Security. Lets repeal medicare. So i think one of the fears is that the Affordable Care act might work. And then enter the same hollowed status as both Social Security and medicare have in the american but there is an alternative argument to that, which is even some people who like republicans say, or republicans themselves say this is been the wrong strategy to try to defund it here. If we just simply let it be enacted its got so many flaws its going to be perceived badly. And well have a Huge Campaign issue in 2014. That is a more logical argument for what to do if you ares against it. I dont have to or if you dont, if you think its flawed. Surely if you define it as being imperfect thats true of everything. We have changed Social Security many times. We will change it again many times to adjust to changing circumstances and needs. Weve changed medicare many times. The notion that any legislation as massive and sweeping as this isnt going to be changed is simply incorrect and inconsistent with history and reality. Affordable care will be changed. It was itself a compromise. And so its going to be adjusted change. I think over time providing Health Insurance for the 40 or so million americans who dont have it will be seen as a positive step, as it should be seen. This was said in this mornings conversation, by republicans and even some reporters raised this question. By adding sequestration as a condition, did the president miss a chance to already have a deal . Because the president and everybody i talked to, you know, from the head of the imf or world bank, i havent talked to all of them recently, but they have said in the last 24 hours it would be disastrous. So did the president make a mistake by including sequestration as part of a condition for an agreement on the debt ceiling just to extend it. Im not there, charlie. So i done know what goes on. And so i cant say whether he said that or didnt say that. Whether if he did it was a mistake or not. I do know that when youre in genuine good faith negotiations as ive been many times in this position, on the budget, you go back and forth. What about this, what about that. You make suggestions. You float ideas. One is rejected. You try something else. That occurs if you have good faith. If you dont have that, its youre not dealing in good faith. And so what someone said or didnt say in a private discussion, i dont know. I do know that the one remarkable thing about this whole effort has been the relative clarity and consistency of the president s position. He is prepared to negotiate everything after 9 government is opened and the debt limit is extended. So hes prepared to put obamacare in terms of reform on obamacare, hes prepared to talk about the entitlement reform. Hes prepared to talk about everything. Yes, absolutely. Including revenue enhancement or tax increases or tax cuts, everythings on the table. I think everything is on the table. Anybody can raise what they want. The republican definition of negotiations, at least on the house side has been we want to use the closing of the government and the debt limit extension as leverage in the negotiations to get our position. And if we dont get our position accepted then were going to close the government and not extent the debt limit. Is that the republicans including john boehner and the Republican Leadership or is that simply those 20 to 30 members of the tea party. Well, if it was only 20 or 30 members of the house, they wouldnt be where they are today. Its obviously many more. Rose 20 or 30 could not hold the house hostage. Thats exactly light. Rose even though john boehner might be worried about them because it affects his speakership. Well, he has adopted the rule that says that if a majority of the republicans and the house caucus are not for a position, he wont put it up for a vote. Thats why you have this unfortunate situation now where its pretty clear that there are enough republicans in the house to join with democrats, all of the democrats to pass a clean, continuing resolution and reopen the government immediately. He wont like defunding medicare an all that. Thats right. So he wont let a vote occur because hes yielding to the views of the majority of his caucus but 20 doesnt represent a majority of the caucus so its much more than that. When you were the leader, the republican was bob dole. Dow like him . I like him a lot. Now it doesnt seem thats the way it is between mitchell and reid i mean harry reid and mccobble. Yeah. A few minutes after i was elected Senate Majority leader one of the first calls i made was to bob dole. And i asked him can i come and see you. He said yes, of course. I went to his office, and i said to him youve been here 30 years. Ive only been here a few years am you know a lot more than i do. But i do know these jobs are very difficult if not impossible, and there has to be some level of trust between us. And so i said im here to tell you how i intend to behave toward you, to ask you to behave that way toward me. An i then said the simplest of things. Ill never embarrass you, i wont insult you, ill never surprise you, that is important in the senate. He was delighted. We shook hands and for six years i as majority leader and he as minority leader never once did a harsh word pass between us in public or in private. And to this day we remain good friends. And when i go to washington i visit him when i can. Hes a terrific guy. Rose but do you think that is the relationship between harry reid and mitch mcconnell. I dont know. I dont think it is. But im not on the inside and so i dont know what goes on in private discussions. Although i must say, charlie, just today i heard them both speak on the radio. Rose saying. Saying very nice things about each other. Rose and the like leehood of a deal. Like leehood of a deal. Let me be clear. Dole and i disagreed on many, many issues, probably most issues. We have very vigorous debates. But they were on the merits and we won some, he won some. Others we compromised. I dont think its necessary to have personal hostility and acrimony to represent vigorously and fairly a party position. That i think is a big issue. Rose just because you are part of the kind of conversation taking place, boehner has supposedly said will never let a default happen. We may go right up to the edge. And we will go up to the edge. But if you know that, doesnt that make your negotiating position, if you are a democrat, much easier . Just simply keep saying no. And so we eventually will recognize that hes got to do something. It doesment but if he changed his mind he wouldnt be the First Political leader to change his mind on an important issue. So i wouldnt you condition count on that. I wouldnt take that as cast in iron. You make various statementsment just look at the republican position in the house, over the past two weeks. Its been one thing after another, first it was defund medicare. That didnt fly. Then it was delay medicare. That didnt fly. Then it was that apply means the president will not accept it. Thats right. It didnt get anywhere in the process. Because they knew that if they went to the senate side, because it wouldnt prevail and the press would be anyway. So their position has constantlyivity should. I will say for o billiona he has been remarkably consistant on his position. Now i think its time to bring it to a conclusion. The debt limit ceiling expires in a couple of days. All of the political points that are going to be made have been made. And i think the president is in a strong position to produce the result that reopens the government, that extends the debt limit. Hopefully for a longer rather than shorter period. And enables us to get back the important task which is getting our economy moving again. That will do more to deal with the deficit than all of the wrangling the congress could ever produce. A strong economy, job creation, employment, income rdz growth. Economic exchanges. That is what this country. Did we need in this a negotiator, did we need somebody like George Mitchell in the middle of these, everybody. We have a lot of people involved. There are a lot of so there wasnt a need to have somebody speak to both sides. I dont think. In the congressional process i dont think that works. It doesnt. I dont they take their prerogative pretty and i think they should. When bob dole and i negotiated and we had the house membership tom foley, bob michael, speaker gingrich and others, we didnt invite third parties in. I dont think that would get very far. Rose wouldnt get very far would, it. You and i had this conversation out in aspen last weekend along with bob wooden and others, this president is criticized even by his own party because he doesnt seem to Pay Attention to him. There have been no phone conversation, no dinners, no lets just kickback and talk. First i think there have been some phone callsment and i think there have been some dinners. I think the criticism is not enough of them. Rose but when you say that, you have to talk about how many there have been. When you have Democratic Senators say maybe two calls and you know, four years. Its called schmoozing. Rose yes, it is. Its a good thing to do. And i think the president should do more of it. But i think that the effect of what he has or hasnt done is grossly exaggerated by the crit ims. Its marginally helpful. But in the end, members of Congress Vote on what they think is best for their constituents and what their conscious and judgement tells them. And its kind of an insult to a senator to say that if the president would just put his arm and him he is somehow going to. Rose theyre not really saying that. They are saying if, in fect, you spend time with people, its not that i need the president to put his arm around me t is that if i spend time with people you get to know them and what bob dole had, trust. Thats the point. And that is a valid point but a president cant do what bob dole and i did. Because there was one of him and one of me and you get 535 members of congress. So no president can have the kind of relationship i had. Rose but were not talking about 435 members. Were talking about with the speaker of the house. The argument is ronald regular and and tip oneill had a relationship. I think that has become a myth too. They had a decent relationship. But the notion that they went and had a drink and settled everything, i think that is exaggerated. Rose Chris Matthews just wrote a boll book about it. I think that the whole notion of obama, its good to do. But charlie, i asked you out there, who is generally regarded as the person who is the best schmoozer. Lyndon johnson. He wasnt a schmoozer. He was a pusher. Bill clinton, really. Bill clinton, right, right. When we took up clintons Economic Program in 19923. Yeah. He was a schmoozing day and night with the republicans. Rose yes, he was. Dinners, lunches, meetings back and forth. When we came to a vote, every single republican in the senate and the house voted no, without exception. Scioscia moozing is goodment but it has its limits. Its sort of like i drink orange juice every day and its good for me but it isnt going to cure my cancer or prevent me from getting diabetes. Rose but there is also this, know, i mean my point is simply that there is too much distrust in washington. There is. Rose they dont believe if i do this, will you take advantage of me. You will in the end so im not going to do this because you will blindside me. Right. Rose thats the problem, isnt it . That is a problemment its not the only problem. Rose okay, one. What are the other problems y we come up with this, and all they do is kick the can down the road. Another problem is that because of the gerrymandering that now occurs, you have the vast majority of members of the house of representatives are elected from districts that are safe for one party or the other. That means that you know right now, charlie, you know whos going to win in about 4 375 of the 435 districts. Rose because 70 of the voters in that district are one party or the other. Changing. That means that the Pivotal Moment in american elections for the house of representatives is not the general election. Rose its the primary. Its the primary. And as we all know, we have low participation even when we have a hot president ial race, and miniscule participation in the nominating process. And as a result, the members of the house know that their election depends upon the primary process and that gives the tea party on the republican side and those who are more idea logically left and say rigid on the democratic side disproportionate influence in the workings of the party. I saw a house party, house member who is tied to the Tea Party Stand up on the house and say we cant compromise. Compromise is the problem. Compromise is a source of our problems. And one of the commentators, not a charlie rose but another commentator said how can that be in i a country of 300 million people, very diverse like this. I will bet nine out of ten americans dont agree with him. And the other commentator said yeah, but hes talking to the one. The one who is going to participate in his nomination and therefore his election. And you can see it right now in the republican party, the tea party, are threatening to run candidates in the primary, against anybody who quote caves in on this issue. Cave in is another word for compromising. And they say its about principles, not compromise. Well, everybody says its about principles. Everybody who is position ive ever contested or dealt with says this is a matter of principles. Why do you think people are hostile to obamacare . Well, first off i think. A misunderstanding. No. Or there is something about it that they have a good point. Let me clarify one thing. The polls show that a majority are opposed to it. But if you analyze the polls youll see that within that majority theres about 15 who are opposed to it because it didnt go far enough. They favor a single payor system, a medicare for all. So if you add them to the supporters, you can actually get a majority who are for it. Secondly, look, its subject to misunderstanding. A Television Late night host ran a series of videos on the street just a couple of weeks ago. And he said to people what do you think is better, obamacare or the Affordable Care act. They are the same thing its the same thing. Oh, we like at fordable care act but were not for obama care. Theres a lot of misunderstanding. And rarely in history have you had the extent of organized opposition to prevent it from being implemented that you have today, particularly from the states that are governed by republican governors who wont extend medicaid, which is an effort to defeat the purpose of the act. Reminded me of the vote, in one of those town meetings that one. Candidates having said you tell the government to keep its handsoff my medicare. Thats what they think. My medicare, not the governments. Well, that exists throughout the country and you have to deal with it. I think it will be a rough beginning. It will be confusing and complex but in the end i think it will work. And i think thats the real danger. Rose you think were about ready to get past this,. I really do believe it and i think within the next 48 or 7 it 2 hours it will happen and i obviously hope very much that it does. Rose let me turn to other issues quickly because of your experience with foreign arena. What do you think about the iranians and the negotiation that is taking place with them over whether they will, because of the pressure of sanctions or other reasons say well forego, didnt have it in the first place but will prove to you that we will dismantle our nuclear effort. The sanctions clearly have had an effect. Those who oppose the sanctions on the grounds that they would be meaningless and wouldnt do the job i think have been proven to be mistaken. The real question is have they been successful enough to prompt a realistic change in policy by the government of iran. Now its interesting. President rouhani said what the Ayatollah Khomeini had previously said. We iran do not want Nuclear Weapons. The problem is their actions are inconsist want those statements. Rose right, in terms of the level of centrifuges they have and all of that. And misleading the inspectors. Rose not allowing inspections within thats right. And not declare facilities that they are required to declare. So the real question is they now have the opportunity to policy, is what they say is in fact their policy. That is their actions are consistant with that policiment and i believe that the president is correct when he says we must engage on that issue. We have to be careful. We have to recognize that were dealing with people who have made mistaken and misleading statements about this in the past. And you also have to, charlie, consider this. There are Nine Countries with Nuclear Weapons. In every one of those countries a large majority of the republican believes that their country should have Nuclear Weapons. Its others who shouldnt have them. We should not expect iranians to be different from everybody else in the world. Meaning that. Meaning that the government policy with respect to Nuclear Weapons is not a source of the disconsent within the country. The source of discontent is on economic. Rose and other issues. Right. Rose for some of them it is a nationalism issue. Is a nationalism issue. A c