worst. neil cavuto will bring us context and perspective from fox news with "your world." it starts right now. >> stocks drop. gold rallies. the debt fight rages on. the dow down, 90 points and still no breakthrough as the white house threatens to veto an effort in the house tomorrow. gold hitting a new record, topping $1,600 an ounce with investors running for safety. more on the fast and furious fallout in a moment. but, first, to washington, what's a priority? debt ceil? no. union elections on the fast track. that is what it. i am stuart varney here for neil cavuto. and day one of a hearing by the national labor relations board wrapping up as we speak.

the board wants to speed up union elections from the current 38 day average to ten day average. former verizon wireless chief says it eliminates rights to fight off unions because the current board is "pro union." would you spell it out. if you speed up an election, 38 days down to ten days how does that kill jobs? >>guest: the way the process works is this: unions must get 30 percent of the group to be represented by the union to sign authorization cards. it takes months and months to do that. once the 30 percent of the workforce has signed the cards, they file with the nlrb for an election. the nlrb calls an election and supervises that election. today, it is usually 30 days for 40 days for the election to take place. what they would like to do is change that to ten days.

all the months that it took to build interest and then to give companies only ten days to state their side of the case? it slants the results toward the union. >> i thought the nlrb was supposed to be neutral adjudicating disputes opposed to taking sides. you say the nlrb is not neutral? >>guest: i have never found that to be exactly the case. >> is it less neutral? >>guest: look at the boeing situation we have encountered in south carolina. obviously, this was an end run on the attempt of unions to try to intimidate companies to not go to right-to-work states where worker dozen not have to join the union as a condition of employment. >> is the administration flatout pro union? >>guest: i cannot say that. >> wait, wait, wait, you cannot

say their own nlrb dominated biobomb -- by the obama appointees is not neutral. >>guest: we people want to be elected to office. clearly there is the answer. >> let me quote from a member of the nlrb, a recess appointment by president obama and he is a former labor lawyer, and this is what he had to say, two quotes from 1993, going back, and this is what he said "employers should have no right to raise questions concerning voter eligible or campaign comment." and then "eliminate formal role of employers in union elections." that is not a neutral guy. >>guest: well, how can that be neutral in any way, shape or form? when does the company get to stare their issues? what they would prefer employees to do?

>> if the administration is so pro union and business doesn't want the speedy elections and more union representation, why isn't this pushing back more forcefully by the business? >>guest: i think business will as in the besituation in south carolina, that boeing has stated their case, and even the politicians in south carolina have stated their case, and other companies are supporting boeing, and i think you will see more and more of this. >> you are not making much noise? >>guest: well we need to start making noise. >> thank you, former environmental done wireless c.e.o. a new union manual, manual, manual showing what length the unions go to to build their ranks causing for pressure tactics on employers including rolling strikes, jeopardizing relationships with lenders and politicians, and damaging an employers' public image, and the goal according to the manual is

to bring management "to its knees." my guest calls it intimidation for dummies. my guest is from the competitive enterprise institute and we tried to reach out to the union that put out the manual with no response. vincent, do they go after personal, this manual, does it tell the union people to go after personal information of managers and executives including their children, details like that? >>guest: it instructs them to go after whoever, wherever they can, even the managers' personal residence and do leaflets outside the purchase and get third parties to attack them. they are doing whatever they can to try to intimidate and to push the companies to recognize the union.

mind you--. >> is any of this illegal? we may call it unethical or pressure tactics in the extreme but can you say it is illegal? >>guest: well, i'm just going by what the manual states and the manual specifically says that union members have to sometimes disobey the law and it says they should do that to further their own interests so the manual talks about disobeying the law so you can only imagine to what extent this will be taken. >> isn't there a lawsuit about the manual at the moment? >>guest: there is. the company is suing the scio for racketeering and extortion taking the sciu union tries to ruin the base of the company so the company would capitulate to allow scu todownize. this is not about the workers or allowing the workers to unionize. what they want is to have the company to sign a neutrality

agreement which takes away the right to a secret ballot for the workers and puts a gag order on the company to not tell the workers what, exactly, unionization would do to the workers and to the company. >> i remember a few months ago, maybe six months ago, i remember i think sciu members invading the home space, the home, the home of an executive while his child was in the house, the child was clearly intimidated and they held, i will say, a pretty, not violent, but it was a strident demonstration in front of and on the man's property. i recall that and you are saying this kind of tactic that is in a manual in black and white put out by a union? >>guest: that's right. they advise going after the managers personally. and that poor kid, he had to lock himself in the bathroom and pleaded, when will they leave me

alone? that is what this union is advocating. they are going to someone's personal home, intimidating them and their children. >> is it a new tactic? i cannot remember this kind of thing happening in the 70's 80's or even in the 1990's. >>guest: well, it is old but they are escalating it through a recent congressional oversite hearing on it and they said that historically there are only a handful of these things and now we are seeing more and more unions going to great lengths to get more dues paying members. this is all about getting more members not about the rights of workers. >> thank you for joining us, always a pleasure. >> stocks sliding with debt fears mounting, and now calls from moody's investors to maybe dump the debt ceiling altogether. how does that it is with republican freshmen who say they are ready to risk re-election if it means getting america's

fiscal house in order. republican congressman is a freshman joining me now. you sound like a brand new breed of politician. if you are willing to risk re-election on the point of principle, i cannot remember hearing that before, sir. >>guest: well i appreciate that, and that is what this is about. that is why we came to washington, dc, in november, the freshman class is standing on getting our fiscal house in order because it is a threat to our national security. >> are you in the camp that says "no," do not raise the debt ceiling make do with the money coming in. do you stand on that principle? >>guest: i have looked at the numbers and being a small business owner you cannot cash flow this problem away, so i do recognize the ramification of a default but this is the moment. this is the time we have so seize the moment to change america for generations to come for a positive outcome for all americans and this is our opportunity. >> you realize that we are on the edge of maybe what is

so-called financially a downgrade, in my opinion that would be the loss of our financial status, our financial reputation in the world. you are prepared to risk that? >>guest: i'm prepared to stand because this is the opportunity, the perfect storm for us to get something done that is going to structurally change washington, dc, for generations to come, and this is the opportunity, we will seize it that is why we came to washington, i talked to the rating agencies and we have a debt ceiling crisis and we have a debt crisis and boats will result in a downgrade of our rating if we don't get it taken care of and that is why it is so important to get it right. >> how many other republicans in the house stand with you on this point of principle? >> i cannot give you a number but i can tell you that it is strong in the freshman class we are standing united. we are going to the white house tomorrow because we are sending a letter, 65 fellow freshman republicans, saying give us your plan so we can debate it.

we will get it done and hopefully he will respond to our letter. >> i don't if you know this but the president, i believe today, threatened to veto the balanced budget amendment which you will vote tomorrow. he is saying he will veto it before you vote for it. >>guest: well, it is time to put our proposals in black and white. that is why we put a budget together and passed it in the house with cut, cap and balance. we will be honest with the american people, we are talking on the president to put his proposal in writing to debate it. we are ready to take the case to the american people because we know this is the opportunity to get this done right. >> man of principle, new york republican congressman. thank you for joining us. >> did the president's top money donor in 2008 predict his loss in 2012?

you could save a bundle with geico's multi-policy discount. geico, saving people money on more than just car insurance. ♪

geico, saving people money on more than just car insurance.

it means getting everything you need to invest for yourself, not by yourself. it means choosing from stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and every etf sold. plus 5-star research designed to increase your intelligence, not insult it. so you can wave good riddance to some high-priced joker churning out cookie cutter portfolios. price is one thing. value is another. don't confuse the two. e-trade. investing unleashed.

>> goldman slashed. they cut the forecast for u.s. growth predicting jobless rate of 9 percent at the end of 2012. if that is right, that is not good news for the president's job. the former carter pollster says he is more at risk than ever. the goldman sachs people say by the end of 12 unemployment will be at least 8.7 or 8.8 percent. do you say flatout president obama cannot be re-elected at unemployment rate like that? >>guest: unlikely. we almost beat reagan with the world falling on us because of questions about that into the debate but this president has something we didn't have the unemployment rate is much worse than it looks. and i was amazed i saw something that you wrote about, we have

more people who are permanently, permanent jobs lost, 108,000 permanent jobs lost the last few months and no new net permanent jobs created in two years. zero. >> are jobs the issue? >>guest: yes and a sense of jobs and what is happening with housing, with people's lives and a sense of general decline. worse than anything is a sense of malaise, a sense of country is in decline. 40 percent of the american people are saying that the economy is in permanent decline and they are blue-collar democrats. this president is in danger with those voters. >> i remember the carter years late 1970's and he does not use that word "malaise," but "crisis of confidence," and invited everybody to camp david for six

weeks to figure out what was wrong with the country and gave us a sense of crisis. is there a direct parallel from then to nowst >>guest: the ratings skyrocketed until a couple days later and he fired the cabinet, people forget that speech was a huge success because he was trying to be honest. the problem, with this president, he is saying what they have decided we will raise a lot of money and use it to destroy our opponents and we will tell people, it could be worse. i have run one of those campaigns and the argument it could be worse, is a weak argument, a very weak thing to hold on to. >> and a list of the top donors on the screen from the obama campaign in 2008. top is the university of california followed by goldman sachs and microsoft. it is not the individual but the group. >>guest: and major banks fill out the rest of the top 15.

>> will the group come back and give more? >>guest: some are. hollywood will. >> why is goldman sach offering up this kind of forecast which is gloom and doom for the economy and an administration which they support? >>guest: some would say it is an objection they own. they own the mall. some people say this. look, they have enormous influence. the facts are undeniable. the problem is the administration likes to attack everyone who brings the facts but the facts are there and people know what is happening if their lives. >> you have a personal dislike for the administration? >>guest: i think the democratic party should be standing for ordinary people and i think they are standing for special interests and capitalism. i think it should be the voice of ordinary people. i don't think they know what an ordinary person is. that list of contributeers,

'many ordinary people are on that list? >> good question. thank you, pat. ingnothing to hide? at least the closed door meetings we know about but what about the secret meetings we don't?

>> are taxpayers kept in the dark? another secret meeting on the debt ceiling taking place between republican leaders and the president: white house press corps only finding out today. >> you talked about the boehner meeting and why it was not

announced? >> well there have been conversations ongoing. >> why was the meeting not on the schedule? >> there are meeting and conversations with the president, the vice president and other senior members of their team that are not always on the schedule. >> did the president have republican leaders to discuss--. >> without get into a read out of the specific conversation. >> let me repeat, this is the third secret meeting we now know about between speaker boehner and the president. the only difference is how majority heard cantor joined in the secret talks. that is little comfort to my guest. i thought the guys worked for us, for the taxpayers, it is not a question of why the secrecy, but i will express an opinion that he is just plain wrong. this is our money, this is our financial future that is talked about and i want to know what is going on. >> of course, it is our money. it is our property.

whatever room they met next we owned that room and the car the president road in. we are the shareholders of this corporation known as "america," and the problem is, that the political people in washington know we are in the on their side. and the president has kind of a break them off from the base of the party approach so that they, he will try a wedge between the tea party and ordinary americans and how republicans. >> it seems kind of un-american to do theys behind closed doors when the stakes are so high. and i want did show you what white house spokesman carney said when he explained why the meetings were taking place. this is some time back. he said and i will quote what he said "not going into specific meeting because we believe that is the right approach to increase chances of reaching an agreement." that doesn't seem like there is any increase in the opportunity to make an agreement, at all.

>>guest: no, and what kind of deal is it that minimizing public inputs makes it more likely to pass? it should undergo public scrutiny if it is a good deal, do it in the open. if it is not a good deal, you want do hide it. and that suggests that they are not pushing very good doles. >> but can you, in fact, negotiate something as complex as this and so political as this if it is an open forum? could you get a deal done in that forum? >>guest: i'm in the suggesting she negotiate egg -- everything on c-span but we are talking about unusual level of secrecy. when carney said not every meeting is on the schedule every point meeting is on the schedule unless it is designed not to be this is conspicuously secret, not just to they didn't happen to, you know, the schedule is update add couple times a day and it was not updated, this is a high level meeting and the point of not putting it on the schedule was to avoid input.

i know the president says we need to get politics out of this and he has it backwards. what he is saying, that we don't want public input on this, we want washington to decide and the rest of the country to shut up. >>stuart: do you remember candidate obama wanted this on c-span. >>guest: he is the health care negotiation the building of the health care plan would be on c-span, and, now, after three years, this is becoming an unusually secretive administration and, remember all the attacks on bush because they were meeting with people who were the energy companies, members of the energy companies to discuss what was going on when environmental policies and demands for this stuff from the left to be made public? and they are in the doing that. >>stuart: thank you, jerry. it is no secret how the governor of maine is dealing with his state's budget and economy. he just signed the biggest tax cuts in that state's history. while cutting spending, as well.

the republican governor of maine joins me new. governor, welcome to the program. good to have you with us. >> a pleasure to be here. >>stuart: so, you cut taxes on the rich. you cut welfare, you rollback state worker pensions, and you got democrats to support it. wraps you should go and work in washington, dc, sir. >>guest: well, thank you. we cut taxes on the rich and the poor. 70,000 families if longer pay income tax because they are below the poverty level. so we had a small decrease from the marginal, the highest marginal rate but eliminated the low rate. >>stuart: governor you sound like a western state republican, not like a republican or any other politician from new england. you could not exist in vermont, now, could you? new hampshire you would not do too well and massachusetts is out of the question. what is it about maine that lets

you balance the budget? >>guest: i am a businessman who now is serving as state of the governor. and i am not a lifetime politician and i think that was a matter of timing. the people of maine were tired of being in debt and being overtaxed and looking to someone that brings common sense to the statehouse. >>stuart: your critics are saying you, sir, are harsh and you are balancing the budget on the backs of the poor; that you are going after the most vulnerable. your response? >>guest: well, my response is 70,000 people in the state of maine that paid income tax in 2011 will in the pay income tax in 2012. it is the opposite of what they are saying. i am reducing the taxes on the we most vulnerable people in the state. the other thing we will be doing in january is we will continue the process.

i don't think what we did in 2011 is the beginning of what it is going to look like. >>stuart: what do you have in mine next year? >>guest: one thing we will lock at, i give you a hint, maine is the oldest state in the nation by population age and they are the most vulnerable so it is time to take care of our seniors. >>stuart: what about president obama? and national issues? do you have advice for our president? >>guest: yes, i wrote say go to the states and listen to the states, the whole foundation of our country was based on having the states as laboratorieses. go to the state, see what is working see what is not and implement what is working. do in the try to reinvent the wheel. >>stuart: do you have any idea of what your popularity rating is? >>guest: no and i am in the into it for popularity rating.

i got elected to fix the problem and i will fix the problem and the electorate can decide where i stand. >>stuart: i interviewed you shortly after you were elected and most of new england was in a state of shock that you were now the governor. congratulations, sir, thank you for joining us. >>guest: a pleasure. >>stuart: deal or no deal the money for social security checks will be there. now, new calls by the white house to stop saying it won't. s and broken dreams. oh. wait a second. that is a dodge durango. looks like american performance is doing just fine. ♪ carry on. ♪

carry on. but thieves can steal your identity, turning your life upside down in a matter of seconds. hi. hi, you know, i can save you 15% today if you open up a charge card account with us. you just read my mind. [ male announcer ] just one little piece of information, and they can open bogus accounts, stealing your credit, your money, and ruining your reputation. that's why you need lifelock. lifelock is the leader in identity theft protection. relentlessly protecting your personal information to help stop the crooks in their tracks before your identity is attacked. protecting your social security number, your bank accounts, even the equity in your home. i didn't know how serious identity theft was until i lost my credit and eventually i lost my home. [ male announcer ] credit monitoring alone is not enough to protect your identity and only tells you after the fact, sometimes as much as 60 days later. with lifelock, as soon as we spot a threat to your identity within our network, our advanced lifelock id alert system directly notifies you, protecting your identity before you become a victim.

identity theft was a huge, huge problem for me, and it's gone away because of lifelock. [ male announcer ] while no one can stop all identity theft, if the criminals do manage to steal your information, lifelock is there to help fix it with our $1 million service guarantee. that's right. a $1 million service guarantee. don't wait until you become the next victim. call now to try lifelock free for 60 days. that's right -- 60 days free! use promo code safe60. if you're not completely satisfied, notify lifelock and you'll never pay a cent. order now and also get this document shredder to keep your personal documents out of the wrong hands... a $29 value, free. get the protection you need right now! ♪ ♪ ♪

>>stuart: we have an impressive profit report from ibm in 12 week they made $3.6 billion in profit. more than expected. and ibm said they will keep on making a lot of money into the future. wall street likes that and the stock was up in after showers trading. that is ibm. the treasury secretary and the president's budget director refusing point blank to say if the social security checks will go out if no debt dole is reached. my guest says not saying anything is the only responsible thing to say. welcome to the program. i say, sir, it is not out irresponsible and it is intimidating and threatening and divisive to hold out that let that social security checks will in the go out when you know that the money will be coming in, in

august, to cover at least social security checks and more. >>guest: well, that true for the entire month of august but, remember, checks have to be paid at the date they are due and based on whether there is actual money in the account. the way money flows into august twit not all come in at the start of the month. >>stuart: i understand that, are you saying the treasury secretary cannot move around a couple of billion at the end of july to make sure there is enough money on august 3rd? he could do that. he is not going to do that. and he is holding them. he was pressed very hard and so was mr. lew. will the machine go -- money go out on time? that is a way of threatening seniors for political game. >>guest: come on, listen, if there was a democratic president they will in the want to threaten seniors, they want to encourage seniors. >>stuart: yes, to blame the republicans.

>>guest: well, it will be. but, stewart, when we reach august 2 end we are a cash accounting kind of government. and we will have to pay out obligations from the general fund whether they're social security or any other program and if the funds are not there, it makes it very difficult to figure out how you will cover it. there are all kinds of interesting things the treasury secretary may be able to do in order to cough the payments but it is not clear what the financing environment will be like with the bond market so to promise something right now is reckless and irresponsible. so i am proud they are not doing that. >>stuart: no, it is reckless to tell the american people you cannot organize the finances of the country to pay out social security checks on august 3rd. the money with be there, if the treasury secretary and it is in his power to prioritize what is paid and what does not get paid if he puts social security right at the head, the money would be there and he could rearrange the

finances of this nation, surely he could find the $29 billion, the $49 billion that has to go out on august 3rd, you could rearrange it, prioritize it so it goes out. >>guest: not exactly. again, the treasury secretary is bound by law not to impound money and decide who is the winner or losers and it is a lot more complicated than that. we will reach on august 2nd something unprecedented in this country, we never have gotten to the point where we reached a drop dead deadline for exceeding the debt limit. to know exactly what we will be able to do on august 3rd, no one knows whether it is get neither or jack lew and they are merely responding to the uncertainty by telling the truth. >>stuart: in the month of august $172 billion reportedly will come into the united states treasury. $172 billion.

that is an accurate number, so social security, $49 billion goes out. and interest on the debt, $29 billion goes out and medicare $50 billion. that is stuff money coming in, to cover everything that has to go out. so i take your point about when the money comes in. but i think you would grow with me that there is an element of threat here, there is an element of intimidation when the president says, takes out social security and says very clearly he will not guarantee that goes out. that is negotiating in advance of a crisis using a throat to the most vulnerable people in our society. and using that threat for political gain, political advantage, using it to say you republicans, you are the people who are to blame here. i don't think a president should do that. >>guest: well, maybe so, but he was spending to a direct question and he gave what i believe was an honest answer.

yes, he have been more expressive in the answer and said, you know, during the entire month of august enough money will come in to cover social security checks and the only issue is, whether or not they are in by the date that the first checks are distributed through the month. but the net effect is, absolutely the same. >>stuart: he could have said, americans i will move heaven and earth to make sure that you be the most vulnerable people in our society do not get stiffed by my administration. he could have said that. >>guest: he is not stiffing the social security recipients, it is conditioning. by failing to raise the debt limit. the secretary of the treasury is being forced into the position of figuring out would the winners and losers and who the first priority of government funds are going to be. this is something congress is putting them in the position of

doing by not raising the debt ceiling to cover the bill they have incurred. do not lose sight of that. >>stuart: maybe the democrats in the senate should have come up with one budget in two years and is should the president that was acceptable to congress. but that is another story. christian, thank you for joining us. and now $1,600 an ounce with gold and flying out of this. question, where is the safest place to park your cash right? and president obama courting companies to cash up cash for education, companies, just lick -- a good neighbor, state farm is there. stay tuned. verizon claims i 4g lte is twi as fast as &t.

we're putting them to the test against the speed of a rescue unit. go ! they're downloading a music album. the first network to finish gets rescued. does your phone know that we're racing ? . verizon's done ! i've got seven left ! the fastest networin america. verizon. built so you can rule the air. now powering the lg revolution.

the possibilities are endless. interesting... save up to 50% this tuesday and wednesday only. hotels.com. be smart. book smart. new natureluxe mousse mascara! we took out a heavy synthetic and put in a light touch of beeswax. up with the volume, down with the weight. new natureluxe mousse mascara. easy breezy beautiful covergirl. >>stuart: stocks skidding. gold soaring at an all time record high $1,602 an ounce and the debt crisis sending investors to the edge. if can you not afford gold,

where are other places to stash your cash? and now a personal finance expert. before we get rid of gold for a second, do you think gold is safe at $1,600 an ounce? >>guest: i think it reached that because of fear, but it will adjust down a little bit, down to $1,50 so if you are buying gold wait a little bit and see if it adjusts down and it hits $1,350 it will be a buy. safe investments are the oxymoron of the financial world. the best places to go is to the dow jones industrial average stock market especially the s&p stocks. these are the big boys on the block, the top 500. they issue dividends right now and the balance sheets look good and they are profitable and

undervalued. that is good place to go. >>stuart: i heard going into the big name, big american-based multinational corporations, they are safe. but, if you put your money into a lost them over 10 years, you have gone nowhere and sometimes you have gone down. >>guest: well, of course, there is that element of risk. yet when you look at the companies right now they have already adjusted for the things in the marketplace right now. you are looking at emerging economies that could be slowing down. you are looking at the debt ceiling, the issues that are going on with that and you are looking at sovereign debt. and a lot of the big companies have already adjusted for that and so they are relatively cheap such as boeing and mcdonald's and caterpillar. >>stuart: you buy gold at $1,550 and big multicorporation stocks would you buy a bank cd and earn a miserable 1 percent

and sleep safely? >>guest: if you are that conservative and do not care about making money but if you are looking at retirement there are other options to look at before that. that is like putting it in a mattress so i would in the do that. >>stuart: but it is always there, that is what a lot of people want to know. thank you for joining us. >>guest: great to be with you. >>stuart: shares of our parent company down 4 percent, and the company is on negative watch as we get more developments in the "news of the world," phone hacking investigation. and now, in london with the latest. >>guest: there are reports that a man named shawn hill, a firm show business reporter for "news of the world," and the person first to blow the whistle alleging that andy, a former editor of "news of the world," was aware of the phone hacking and encouraged it, was found

dead at his home today and now, police are not corn -- confirming that is the same man because he has not been positively identified and they have in the identified the next of kin but they call it "sudden," and say they are not treating it at suspicious but there are lots of tweets already out there, tributes to mr. hoare saying while he struggled with alcohol and drug problems that led to his being let go at "news of the world," he was a good reporter and a go man and this is on a day that saw the assistant commissioner of the police step down amid a flurry of allegations of police involvement in some of the problems surrounding phone hacking and bribery, and a resignation of john yates less than 24 hours after his boss sit down, and both say their integrity is intact but they needed to step aside to allow

the force to go about their work. the former head of murdoch's organization was questioned yesterday and arrested and lawyers want answers. >>guest: she is not guilty of any criminal offense. the position of the metropolitan police is less easy to understand. >>reporter: finally, murdoch, his son, james and brooks will all appear before a parliamentary committee tomorrow to answer questions about phone hacking. fox will be providing quite extensive live coverage of that event and on wednesday there is an emergency session of congress called. that is to address the issue of phone hacking in the greater

scandal that has engulfed this nation. >>stuart: thank you, amy, from london. the president calling business leaders to the white house today asking them to pony up for his >>guest: program. my guest on that is next. theser with software that has the ability to save your life. that's magical software. [ male announcer ] the innovation, the engineering of mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.

>>stuart: president obama just wrapping up a meeting with top c.e.o.'s in america and asking them to make investment in the education initiative. my guest was in that meeting, state farm chief executive ed rusk. >>guest: our conversation was continuing the engagement of the

business community around driving the important intersection of education, workforce development, and economic growth. a number of us in the audience participating with the president have our own initiatives underway that are supportive. >>stuart: you are giving $10 million a year as you have for many years giving that $10 million to the president's directives on education; that correct? >>guest: our engagement has been through america's promise, with colin powell and his wife, and the other programs, a continuation of that but it is also more than just money, it is an engagement of our associates across the enterprise and i not the only one. many of my other colleagues there have been doing the same thing in helping people become better consumers of the education system. >>stuart: you are a chief executive officer of a major corporation and you are sitting in a meeting with president

obama. to me, president obama comes across as being some what antibusiness. and i tend to think he may be playing class far wear -- warfare on debt talks. does he come across in the meeting as a man who disregarded business or the private sector except when hent whats money? >>guest: well, i would say that when it comes to education we are essentially on the same page. and i have found that in the 20-some years i have been involved in this effort going back to, really, a nation at risk, goals 2000 we have been in reasonable agreement in what we are doing to give our kids the skills that are creditally necessary for them to be college and career-ready when they finish school. >>stuart: the president says

he wanted to invest more in education. he wants more spending in that area, more public taxpayer spending opposed to the spending cuts which are being proposed by the republicans and he wants to invest more in education and he wants to spend more in education. now, you, i believe, have signed a letter saying, look, you guys in washington, get on with the debt deal, let's get some spending cuts to there, and it seems there is a contradiction between signing that letter, go on with the debt deal and the president saying, well, i want to spend more money on education. >>guest: part of that comes back to rationalizing just where the machine goes. we have found for a good number of years spending more money on education does not immediately or eventually, even, add up to greater student achievement. so, as you come law and look at the current budget issue, what we are trying to do from an

education standpoint is make sure what we are spending the money on is in fact, effective, and to scale those efforts opposed to just dumping more money into the hopper. >>stuart: do you think the president grows with that? that he would direct some money away from unions, pensions, bureaucracy. >>guest: well, this was not the discussion. what we were talking about is, where can you really put monies on proven activity that is saleable. >>stuart: thank you, edward rust, c.e.o. of state form. >>guest: thank you, stuart. >>stuart: eat less cheese and meat to save the planet. stay tuned.

. [ male announcer ] you sprayed them. thought they were dead. [ laughter ] [ grunting ] huh? [ male announcer ] should've used roundup. america's number one weed killer. it kills weeds to the root, so they don't come back.

guaranteed. weeds won't play dead, they'll stay dead. roundup. no root. no weed. no problem.