Live Q&As

You're right.  Social Security shouldn't be used to reduce the deficit, but by 2036 benefits will have to be cut by 20 percent.  So we do have an opportunity though in the context of strengthing our fiscal foundation to also strengthen Social Security.  It's also important to remember that the treasury owes Social Security trillions of dollars.  If we default on our debt or we don't generate the right mix of revenue policies, that revenue will be hard to find.  In the end though, you're right Social Security hasn't created this problem.  I always thought a lockbox for Social Security was the right way to go.  I'll be working in the coming weeks to ensure we strengthen Social Security -- to put the lock on the box so it can't be raided.

It won't.  That's why you need the right balance between cuts and revenues.  We want to win the global economic race so we need to be smart about this and reduce our deficits without eating our seed corn.

In fact, I'm working on a balanced budget amendment that I hope can receive bipartisan support.  My proposal would have the right mix of living within our means while reserving the flexibility to address national emergencies.

Purple Cows rock!!!

Read the Simpson Bowles plan.  That's a thoughtful, bipartisan long-term plan to address all of the issues you're talking about, including foreign aid.

We're the world's leading power, for less than one percent of the budget, we're able to make strong, strategic investments in our national security abroad.  But I agree every dollar needs to be looked at, and I encourage you to use the budget tool I mentioned at the intro to see the impact of cutting foreign aid.

I wish everyone would talk about Simpson-Bowles.  They are patriots, I'm sure talking about it every chance I get.  Help me by spreading the word.

I'm frustrated too, and I hold out hope that cooler heads will prevail.  This is not only a threat, it's an enormous opportunity.  I think we need more statesmen and patriots and political courage.  There's an economic reward for us if we show the world we can make tough decisions and lead.

If everything is on the table, there's broad support from Democrats because it will strengthen Social Security for the long term if done right.  I want my kids and grandkids to be able retire securely.  That's why we're frustrated.  We're for an all of the above approach whereas Republicans want to protect their sacred cows.  You can't cut your way to winning the global economic race.

Go to my website and look at my proposal for encouraging innovation and to help government run more effectively.  I'm asking Coloradans to weigh in with their suggestions here.

Ten years ago the federal budget was balanced.  We had surpluses as far as the eye could see.  I wanted to invest those surpluses to pay down the national debt.  Instead we had two unpaid for tax cuts, two unpaid for wars, and an unpaid for drug benefit and lax financial regulation.  Those are the precise ingredients for economic and fiscal collapse.  We know the treatment: an all of the above strategy like Simpson-Bowles.

Thanks so much.  You don't get to pick your parents. I got lucky.  My dad, above all, believed in citizen involvement.  He was a good Democrat, but he worked with Republicans who were inclined to be bipartisan like Dole and Goldwater and even President Reagan.  By the way, he gave a speech in his first month in the House, urging us to craft a system by which we pay for what we spend.   Thanks for the memories.