Tobacco FDA Issue and Budget Plan Versions on Power Lunch

See video
... >> gets to have dinner with sarkozy's wife. >> presumably the only man. >> if i were the women, i would ban him. who wants one guy spoiling the entire dinner. >> oh, stop. that's not the spirit of the g-20. >> we are pleased to welcome now on a number of issues, steny hoyer, who has joined us from d.c. i know you've got a busy schedule, leader hoyer. we appreciate your time. >> thank you. we're in the midst of votes, so i'll have to go quick. >> let me start on the tobacco, fda issue. you made a rather provacative statement. you are convinced that come next week the fda will have the authority to regulate tobacco, yes? >> i don't remember making that statement particularly. i do remember saying that i thought we would pass the bill this week. whether the senate will pass it, in a time frame, we're going to be offer for two-week easter work period. i doubt the senate will take it up until later in this month. >> do you sense they will pass it, though? >> i do. i believe this bill is going to pass. it passed last year in the house. very handily, and i expect it to pass very handily in the house this year. i would hope and expect the senate to pass it as well. >> why do this at all? what do we hope from gaining a product that kills 2,000 americ -- 200,000 americans a year or whatever the number is? >> what we hope to accomplish is having the food and drug administration, which is charged with making sure the public knows the risks and avoids the risks to the extent they can, look at this from a federal perspective and make it clear to the public the consequences. so we think this will up the level of oversight, which we think is appropriate. >> let me ask you about the budget. you're considering both versions, the president's and this republican alternative that paul ryan wrote about in ""the wall street journal"" this morning. how far about -- this sounds like a naive question, but how far apart are those two versions? how rancorous do you believe the budget process will be this year? >> the committee markup was long, but not particularly ran corous. both sides articulated their position. we think that the policies that are pursued in the republican budget are the same policies they pursued of deep tax cuts in the past. and very frankly, the spending levels that they are projecting are really not realistic in terms of their own members' votes, much less the congresses' votes. so we don't think their budget is realistic, and further more, we think their policies are the policies they pursued for eight years which created deep debt, high deficits, high unemployment, hemorrhaging employment status for jobs towards the end of the administration. >> i believe the original obama budget had $250 billion for extra t.a.r.p. money for the banks, then some democrats pulled that out of there. should that $250 billion line go back in? >> no. i think we were right to take it out. after all, what we're trying to do is both invest in our future, invest in the president's priorities, which we think the american public overwhelmingly support in terms of investment and health care for all americans and energy independence for our national security and for our global health. and also in the education of our kids, so they'll be competitive in world markets. but we also, while investing, want to bring the deficit down. clearly the fiscal irresponsibility that we pursued for eight years has put us in a deep hole in our economy, and very much struggling. so we want to get back to fiscal discipline. this is a good step in that direction. >> what do you do if the banks need more money to stop from collapse something. >> we'll need to consider that, clearly. but very frankly, the situation won't be much different than if we include it in the budget. but we don't think as a plan that we ought to be planning for more money. after all, there's still additional t.a.r.p. money available to the administration. we see that bank lending is going up. we see that the stock market has rebounded somewhat, so that we're hopeful and that the policies that we've adopted over the last 50 days are not only having a stabilizing effect, but hopefully are going to have a growth effect as well. >> leader hoyer, again, thank you for your time, sir. >> you bet. >> get back to those votes going on there. >> thanks a lot. >>> we've got matt nesto and i imagine gm's sales are out now, huh? >> they are. the fact that general motors outsold toyota, that's probably more interesting than the marketplace than the actually percentage of decline, which on an adjusted basis was 42%. again, that was less worse than expected. but 156,000 vehicles versus toyota's 132,000, and ford's 131,000, gives you the idea that maybe gm is starting to sell some cars here. at the end of march they saw ...