>> chris: i'm chris wallace, and this is "fox news sunday." the oil spill in the gulf, day 62. as experts work to contain the leak and limit the damage, the president calls on congress to act on clean energy. is the time right for a big new initiative? we'll ask the top republican on capitol hill, senator g.o.p. leader mitch mcconnell. only on "fox news sunday." also, a republican congressman calls out the white house for tough financial demands on b.p. >> in this case, a $20 billion shakedown. >> chris: we'll ask our sunday panel if the congressman was right or wrong about how this president treats big business. plus, where do we stand in the campaign to defeat the taliban in afghanistan? we'll get the latest in an

exclusive interview with defense secretary robert gates. and on a day we honor our dads, our power player of the week turns to our founding fathers for inspiration. all right now on "fox news sunday." and hello again from fox news in washington. we'll talk about the oil spill in the gulf and what it might mean for the nation's energy policy in a few minutes. but first amid recent reports of tough-going in afghanistan, the top man of the pentagon, secretary of defense, robert gates. mr. secretary, welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> thank you. >> chris: you said this week that the narrative in this town about the war in afghanistan has become too negative. let's discuss some of the issues that have people worried. the u.s. commander, general stanley mcchrystal says that the first operation in marjah has become a "bleeding ulcer," and the major offensive in kandahar has now been delayed. in both cases, largely

because the afghans have been too slow in providing civilian support. isn't that a concern? >> sure, it's a concern. but i think the narrative is perhaps overly negative in part because it's incomplete. i was just at the nato defense ministers meeting in brussels. general mcchrystal briefed in detail on the marjah operation, as well as on kandahar. and the bottom line was progress is being made. it's somewhat slower than anticipated. the kandahar operation has actually been underway for a number of weeks, so what is taking more time is the shaping of the environment. before we actually engage with troops and so on. so i think it is a tough pull. and we are suffering significant casualties. we expected that. we warned everybody that would be the case last

winter, that as we went into areas that the taliban had controlled for two or three years that our casualties would grow, especially this summer. i think general mcchrystal's message to the defense ministers is he is confident he will be able to demonstrate by december that we not only have the right strategy but we're making progress. >> chris: the key to begin pulling u.s. troops out by next july is to begin to turn operations over to the afghan army. here's what "time" magazine says about the army and put it on the screen. nine out of ten afghan recruits can't read a rifle manual. commanders routinely steal enlisted men's salaries. recruits tend to go awol after their first leave. question: do you really believe that the afghan army will be ready to start taking over next july? >> i think that they will be ready to assume primary responsibility for security

in certain areas of afghanistan. certainly by a year from this coming july. well're still looking at 13 months from now. the reality is the afghan national army is meeting expectations and above that in terms of recruiting toward the larger numbers of a goal of 134,000 by this fall. their attrition and retention rates are both above expectations and above the goals. >> chris: what about the recruits going awol and commanders stealing enlistees' salaries? >> there are some and there are instances of that but there are also significant instances where we are, and a large number of examples where we are partnering with the afghan army and where the operations are working. that's what general mcchrystal was briefing to the defense ministers. the percentage of those partnered relationships, of those partnered operations has gone from somewhere around 40%, six or eight months ago, to about 75-80%

now. >> chris: you keep saying that the july 2011 date to begin pulling troops out is a starting point, and that the pace of withdrawals will be based on conditions on the ground. but let's take a look at what vice president biden said recently. in july of 2011, biden said you are going to see a whole lot of people moving out. bet on it. who is speaking for the administration? you or the vice president? >> well, first of all, that's in a book. i don't recall ever hearing the vice president say that. whether he said it or not, we clearly understand that in july of 2011, we begin to draw down our forces. the pace with which we draw down and how many we draw down is going to be conditions-based. there is general agreement that those conditions will be determined by general mcchrystal, the nato senior civilian representative, ambassador saidwell, and the

afghan government together in terms of making their recommendations. >> chris: so if vice president biden is telling the reporter -- and there has been no statement by the white house he didn't say it -- there are going to be a whole lot of people moving out next july. you're saying that has not been decided? >> that absolutely has not been decided. >> chris: youring is it will all be decided -- >> i also haven't heard vice president say that. so i'm not accepting at face value that he said those words. >> chris: you know, it's interesting, because one of the reasons that you made such a strong statement up on capitol hill and why you're talking to us today: are you worried that the narrative is getting away and that there may be a rush to judgment on afghanistan? >> i think it's more a sense of frustration. i've been here before, three years ago with iraq. and we were just getting to the point where the surge forces had gone into iraq. there was a lot of concern. there was a lot of anecdotal information that things

weren't going well, casualties were very high. american casualties were very high in iraq. and what i'm saying is people are losing context. this policy, this strategy has been in place and working for only about four or five months. we have yet to put a third of the surge forces into afghanistan. the president has said we'll wait until december to evaluate how we're doing. so i think there is a rush to judgment, frankly, that loses sight of the fact we are still in the middle of getting all of the right components into place and giving us a little time to have this, have this work. >> chris: let's turn to the gulf oil spill. is there anything more the pentagon could be doing either to help stop the spill or to prevent those millions of gallons of oil from washing up on the gulf coast? >> not to my knowledge. we have offered whatever capabilities we have.

we don't have the kinds of equipment or particular expertise. i have authorized the mobilization of up to 17,500 national guard troops in the four states that are most effected. we have a standing offer. if there is anything that people think we can do, we absolutely will do it. >> the u.n. security council has passed another round of sanctions against iran and following up on that the united states and the european union have imposed a set of unilateral sanctions. for all that, honestly, do you see any sign that the sanctions, these efforts caused any weakening of the will of the regime in tehran to develop a nuclear weapon? >> actually, what we've seen is the change in the nature of the regime in tehran over the past 18 months or so. you have a much narrower based government in tehran

now. khomeini is leaning on a smaller and smaller group of advisors. in the meantime, you have an illegitimate election that divided the country. so i think adding economic pressure on top of that, particularly targeted economic pressures has real potential. >> chris: you think it could weaken the will of the regime in tehran? >> i think it could add to the pressures on the regime, that if you add the things we're doing to help our allies in the gulf area improve their defenses, improve their military capabilities, you put that together with sanctions, you put that together with diplomatic pressures and a variety of other things that are going on. and i think, i think you have a reasonable chance of getting the iranian regime finally to come to their senses and realize their security is probably more

endangered going forward. >> chris: reasonable chance? >> i think so. >> chris: can we contain a nuclear iran? >> i don'the we're prepared to even talk about containing a nuclear iran. our view still is we do not accept the idea of iran having nuclear weapons. our policies and our efforts are all aimed at preventing that from happening. >> chris: when you say that we would not accept a nuclear iran, does that mean that a military strike either by the u.s. or israel is preferable to a nuclear iran? >> we obviously leave all options on the table. i think we have some time to continue working this problem. >> chris: in the time we have left, let's do a lightning round of quick questions and quick answers. i know you always enjoy this so much. >> always gets you in trouble. >> chris: the house and the senate committee have voted to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" over your objections that the pentagon review should be completed first. is a repeal inevitable? >> well, i think you'd have

to ask the members of congress that. i haven't done any head counts. we are -- the president has made his decision. our review is about how to implement this and what are the obstacles, what are the problems, what are the challenges, what are the issues? how do we mitigate the negative consequences if we identify negative consequences? what are the questions we have to address? those are the things this review is all about. i feel it's very important for the military to have the opportunity to weigh in, to register their views on these issues, and to give us help on how to do this smart should the legislation pass. >> chris: as part of your new drive to try to cut the budget for non-combat operations, has the president agreed to veto any bill that would include continued funding for the c-17 cargo plane, or an alternative engine for the joint strike

fighter, even if the legislation also included repeal of "don't ask, don't tell"? >> as i told the defense appropriations committee, the defense sub committee this week it would be a very serious mistake to believe that the president would not veto a bill that has the c-17 or the alternative engine in it, just because it had other provisions that the president and the administration want. >> chris: have you been an assurance by the president that he will enforce his feelings, your feelings about the budget, even at the expense of social policy? >> i think the white house has put out a strong statement in support. i'd also say i don't go way back on a limb to look back and make sure nobody is back there with a saw. >> chris: you think they veto the bill even with repeal of "don't ask, don't tell"? >> i think so. >> chris: you set a deadline for congress to pass a war supplemental bill by memorial day. i don't have to tell you that marker has come and gone and democrats are still trying to put money for social programs into the supplemental bill. at what point delay in

passing this bill do we begin to hurt the troops? >> first of all, i didn't set a deadline. i wish i could set deadlines for the congress but that's just not the way the constitution is written. as i told the congress this week, this past week, we will have to start doing stupid things after the fourth of july recess in terms of planning for major disruptions if we don't have the supplemental by the fourth of july recess. we actually begin to have to take really serious negative actions that impact our troops, as well as our civilians in mid-to- -- in early to mid-august. >> chris: finally, how long are you committed to staying in this job? >> well, we just said that we'll see. >> chris: well, at one point, the reason i asked is you talked about until the end of the year, until december of 2010. but now you seem to have taken a new fight into the

budget this gets you into 2011. >> well, we'll just see. >> chris: well, would you have started this fight if you weren't going to see it through, sir? >> i didn't want to get bored. >> chris: very little opportunity for that. mr. secretary, thank you for coming in. pleasure to talk to you. please come back, sir. >> thanks a lot. >> chris: up next, the president deals with the gulf oil spill and makes a new push for clean energy. we ask the senate top republican mitch mcconnell if it has any chance to become law. back in a moment.

♪ [ male announcer ] first is the beginning. first kicks open the door, and possibilities follow. ♪ first resets everything. first moves us forward fast. ♪ we all want first. first isn't later. it's now. what will you do first with evo, the first 4g phone? only from sprint, the now network. deaf, hard-of-hearing and people with speech disabilities access www.sprintrelay.com. ♪ ♪ ay, yay, yay, yay ♪ ay, yay, yay, yay ♪ ♪ ♪ baby, baby, baby, baby... uh-oh ♪ ♪

♪ baby, baby, baby, baby... uh-oh ♪ host: could switching to geico 15% or more on car insurance? host: does elmer fudd have trouble with the letter r? elmer: shhhh, be very quiet; i'm hunting wabbits. director (o/c): ok cut!!!! uh...it's i'm hunting "rabbits," elmer. let's try that again. elmer: shhhh, i'm hunting wabbits. director (o/c): cuuuuut! rabbits. elmer: wabbits director (o/c): rabbits. elmer: wabbits. director (o/c): rabbits with an "r." elmer: aw...this diwector's starting to wub me the wong way. vo: geico. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more.

>> chris: here is where we stand on day 62 of the oil spill in the gulf. the coast guard reports a new containment system is almost at capacity. capturing more than 1 million gallons of oil daily, which many experts believe is still less than half of what is spewing in the gulf. drillers are now within 200 feet of finishing a relief well to plug the spill but it could still take weeks. one of b.p.'s partners in the offshore rig anadarko blasted b.p. for the reckless actions that led to explosion. joining us from louisville, kentucky, to talk about the oil spill and more is senator republican mitch mcconnell. democrats have a new campaign attacking the g.o.p. for a cozy relationship for big oil

based on congressman joe barton's apology this week to b.p. let's watch. >> if republicans were in charge, this is the guy who would be overseeing b.p. >> i apologize. >> he apologized to b.p. and called the recovery fund a tragedy. >> chris: senator, how do you counter the democrats' argument that republicans care more about oil companies than they do about the environment? >> of course, that's nonsense. i have couldn't disagree with joe barton more. b.p. doesn't need an apology. they need to apologize to us and they certainly need to cover all the costs of the clean-up and the economic damages as well. and they're going to. it's important to remember the president of the united states is the biggest recipient of b.p. political contributions when he ran. so that's nonsense. we want to get it cleaned up. and i think the administration -- you know, the president, himself, is in charge of developing a

contingency plan to deal with oil spills. what happened to it? we know there are skimmers around the world that could be sent here. where are they? the administration has a role to play in this. they haven't done a very good job so far. >> chris: let me ask about another aspect of this. the fact that white house chief of staff rahm emanuel this weekend is mocking tony hayward, the head of b.p. for attending a yacht race off england's isle of white. this, of course, at the same time that president obama and vice president bush -- rather, vice president biden, rather were playing golf. do you see any difference? >> the guys could use a better p.r. advisor, but the point is we need to get the oil leak stopped and keep as much as the oil off the shore as we can. clearly, not enough is being done. all the local officials on the gulf are frustrated as

they can be. i read a story about governor riley in alabama locating a particular piece of equipment in bahrain, himself, getting it flown over and having a bureaucrat telling him it had to go to louisiana, not alabama. you have shrimpers on shore who want to pitch in and help. governor jindal has been frustrated because of the difficulty in getting permission to do things they want to do. let's concentrate on getting the leak stopped, which is b.p.'s responsibility. we understand that. keeping the oil off the shore, the federal government is the lead horse on that. and you know, the president has been advocating expansion of government across the board in virtually every area. if you are going to advocate expansion of the government, then you look not so good when the government you're already in charge of doesn't function very well. >> chris: after the president's oval office speech this week, you said this -- let's put it up on the screen. "what they're doing here in effect is holding the gulf

hostage to a national energy tax." but in his speech, senator, much to the distress of the left, the fact is the president didn't mention either an energy tax or cap-and-trade. what would you be willing to accept and not accept in an energy bill and do you see any flexibility in cap-and-trade? >> we knew what he was saying about. his chief of staff famously said, "a crisis a terrible thing to waste." they want to seize on the oil spill to pass a national energy tax referred to around washington as cap-and-trade. they never miss an opportunity to seize on a crisis to turn to the far left to-do list. this has been a big item on the far left to-do list. a national energy tax. mark my words, that is precisely what they intend to do. seize on the crisis in the gulf to try to pass this. dianne feinstein, one of our more prominent democratic senators, said cap-and-trade

or national energy tax doesn't have anything to do with an oil spill in the gulf. she was exactly right. >> chris: what would you be willing to support in a new energy bill if not cap-and-trade or energy tax? >> the first thing we need to do is see if we need to pass legislation related to oil spills. that is the current problem. not climate change or a national energy tax. but the oil spill, itself. that is what we ought to be concentrating on. and it could well be that new legislation will be required related to that, you know. better inspection, prevention in the future, better clean-up technology. that's the kind of thing we ought to be doing and could do on a bipartisan basis. >> chris: but are you saying that you oppose any effort to take a look after this oil spill at how we get our energy in general? >> no, but i certainly oppose a national energy tax. by the way, there is a bipartisan majority in the senate in opposition to a

national energy tax. cap-and-trade. and that is exactly what they're going to try to push, chris, after the fourth of july. no question about it. >> chris: let's turn to another subject. the obama administration now confirms what secretary of state clinton told a reporter in equador; namely, the justice department is going to file a lawsuit challenging the new arizona law that cracks down on illegal immigrants. one, what do you think of that decision? and what do you think of the argument that the administration apparently is going to make that state law, this state law infringes on federal authority when it comes to immigration? >> well, here again, you can understand the frustration of state officials. we just talked about state official frustration in the gulf. the national government is responsible for trying to get the oil spill, keep the oil off the shore. now you've got the national government over on the border with mexico. we all know that border security is a federal government responsibility. and so out of frustration,

the government of arizona, the people of arizona passed legislation in response to that. you can understand their frustration. i wish the administration would spend more time on border security. and less time passing lawsuits against state governments who are frustrated because the federal government didn't do what it's supposed to. >> chris: do you think they're wrong if they challenge the arizona law? >> well, let's see what happens in court. to me, they ought to be concentrating on securing the border. you know, this whole immigration issue is a federal government responsibility, and they basically have thrown the ball to arizona by not enforcing the border. >> chris: a week from tomorrow, the senate judiciary committee will begin confirmation hearings on the nomination of elena kagan to the supreme court. back in april, senator, i asked you about a possible filibuster. let's take a look at what you said. >> it's highly unlikely, however, unless the nominee is an extraordinary individual outside the mainstream with really

bizarre views. >> chris: senator, do you see anything in kagan's record that is outside the mainstream with really bizarre views? >> well, we haven't started the hearings yet. the hearings begin june 28. we're all beginning to get material from the clinton library. i think some of her views are quite troubling, at least to me, in the area of political speech and the first amendment. she has basically argued before the supreme court that the government could ban pamphlets. i find that very troubling. but i think it's entirely too early to determine whether or not this nominee would be subjected to a 60-vote threshold. we know that the president has filibustered supreme court nominees and we know the vice president has filibustered supreme court nominees. we know senator reid has and the judiciary committee chairman leahy has. i have never filibustered a supreme court nominee. but it is possible, but

entirely too early to know if it's appropriate. >> chris: you're saying it's possible and you're leaving the option open? >> the option is open to under senate procedures but to predict that might happen at this stage of the game is entirely premature. >> chris: it's been a remarkable week in the u.s. senate where some democrats have joined republicans to block a new spending bill that would extend unemployment benefits for people who are about to lose them. and also provide state aid that would allow workers not to be laid off. are some democrats getting religion when it comes to the deficit? >> it sure seems so. we passed a $13 trillion cumulative national debt threshold a few weeks ago. and the issue here with regard to this bill to which you referred is paying for it. now we did manage to take out a piece of that bill last friday. and pay for it. that was a doctor reimbursement issue. we paid for it for six months. what republicans have been

arguing is that much of this is worthwhile and should be done. but it ought not to add to the deficit. now as you indicate, a growing number of democrats are showing that kind of concern. that's why the big democratic majority in the senate has not been able to pass this bill. they can't seem to find a way to pay for it. they can't resist the temptation to keep adding additional domestic spending programs every opportunity they get. they have the same temptation in the house and running in the same difficulty there. maybe we have born again concern on the democratic side, some born again deficit reduction people on the democratic side. it would be welcomed to see that. >> chris: senator, what about the folks that are going to lose their unemployment benefit? what about the state workers who may be laid off? president obama in his weekend internet address says republicans are making life harder for those people. >> his problem is with his own party. democrats are joining us in saying these are worthwhile things that should be done

but they can be paid for and not added to the deficit. >> chris: let me ask you one last question. we have about a minute left. that is about the 2010 elections. democrats say in kentucky with rand paul, in nevada with sharron angle that the tea party has pushed the g.o.p. to nominate senate candidates who are further to the right and therefore are going to be harder to elect come november. now you have reports in the state of illinois that your senate candidate there mark kirk, the reports are, has inflated his military record and his experience as a teacher. how concerned are you about all three of the candidates? >> the democrats, of course, will be desperately trying to tear down and demonize our candidates, because they're in deep trouble. the gallop poll that just came out this week taken by -- actually an n.p.r. poll came out this week taken by a prominent democrat and republican pollster indicated americ americans preferred republicans over democrats,

party generic questions, by eight points and they're desperate. they'll work to tear down our members. they in deep trouble and the reason is the american people looked at this administration and they have seen them running banks, insurance companies, car companies, nationalizing the student loan business, taking over healthcare, running up debts. america would like to do a mid-course correction. that's why if the election were held today, chris, there would be a lot more republicans in the house and senate than there are at the moment. >> chris: senator mcconnell, we have to leave it there. thank you so much, as always, for joining us today. always a pleasure to talk with you, sir. >> thank you, chris. >> chris: up next, our sunday panel on the latest from the gulf and whether the white house is getting tough with b.p. or too tough. we'll explain after this quick break. they're shrimpers,shermen, they're laborers, they're deckhands, they're people who work in restaurants... these are the people of the gulf coast who need our help. i'm darryl willis. i oversee bp's claims process on the gulf coast. bp has got to make things right

and that's why we're here. part of that responsibility is letting you know what we're doing to make it right. we're replacing the lost income for fishermen, small businessmen and others who aren't able to work until the spill is cleaned up. our claims line is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. people can call or go online and we'll help them figure out what information they need to file a claim. we've got about 900 people handling claims and 25 walk-in offices in 4 states. so far we've paid eighteen thousand claims, at no cost to taxpayers. more than fifty one million dollars. i was born and raised in louisiana. i volunteered for this assignment because this is my home. i'll be here in the gulf as long as it takes to make this right.

i'm ashamed of what happened in the white house yesterday. i think it is a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what i would characterize as a "shakedown." in this case, a $20 billion shakedown. >> chris: texas republican congressman joe barton with the apology to b.p. that touched off a firestorm here in washington. it's time now for our sunday group. bill kristol of "the weekly standard." mara liasson of national public radio. former state department

official liz cheney. and juan williams also from national public radio. so republicans ran away from the barton apology. we heard senator mcconnell do it again this morning, for the pressure. the apology, for the pressure that the white house put on b.p. to create this $20 billion escrow fund. but even the "new york times" suggested that barton may have a point. the white house fired g.m.'s boss, chrysler was forced into a merger, executive pay was curbed at banks that got bail-outs and health insurance companies were pressured to roll back premiums. question, bill kristol, is the president standing up to big business or is he bullying boardrooms? >> his own interior secretary said something about keeping the foot on the throat of b.p., which doesn't sound like standing up to anyone, it stands like bullying. i have no sympathy for b.p. we have an article in "the weekly standard" that they should stand beyond and was the least responsible for the

big oil companies and handled themselves poorly since the disaster, let alone before. it's not healthy for the country, as the economy as a whole and the president to bully companies. >> chris: do you think he bullied b.p.? >> i don't think he did bully b.p. b.p. agreed to the fund. this is in their interest. it will shield them in some way from more litigation. because if you go to fund, you first don't have to sue the company. the conservatives would be happy not to give more money to trial lawyers. full disclosure, i'm married one. this is a fund, just like the 9/11 guy, ed -- 9/11 fund, administered by the same guy. it doesn't mean you can't sue in future, but i think this is a way that b.p. can build up good will and get rid of claims quickly and perhaps more cheaply. >> chris: i understand the politics of it. obviously, you do not want to

be seen on the side or expressing sympathy to b.p. but was the gp wrong to run away quickly from joe barton's remarks and openly, they made it clear to the public they threatened to take away his position with the committee if he didn't apologize? >> i don't think so. he was wrong and he realized he was wrong and he apologized for it. it's important to separate out here the issue dealing directly with b.p. it's good thing to set up the fund. i think feinberg who is running is it the right person to run it. it's a very tough job he's been put in. and i think people are skeptical about having gone through now 62 days of incompetence, whether the administration is now suddenly going to be able to effectively manage this fund. having said that -- >> chris: they're not going to manage the fund. it will be independently run. >> well, feinberg. >> he doesn't work for the administration. >> chris: he doesn't work for the administration. that's right. >> and i think, though, by saying they put their person

in charge, that it's not b.p. in charge, they will own this. i think people will view it as they own it. the important point is the b.p. situation is isolated and unique incident. a national emergency, a national disaster. the administration deserves credit for what they have done there. i think it's different, however, from what we're seeing in other businesses and other parts of the economy, where the expansive view of what the government's role ought to be is in fact dangerous. i think it causes people legitimate concern. >> chris: let me switch suggests on you, or pivot a little bit. the controversy over weekend recreation, democrats including rahm emanuel this morning, the white house chief of staff, are blasting b.p. chief executive tony hayward for -- here, we can see mr. hayward attending a yacht race. we're told a glitzy yacht race off the isle of white while crisis going on in the gulf. but discussed with senator

mcconnell, while he was out at the yacht race, president obama and vice president biden is playing golf. is there a difference? >> of course there is a difference. his company, under his control, led to the spill and in the course of trying to clean it up at the moment. it's their immediate emergency. you would imagine that his team -- >> chris: the president is in charge, he says. >> he's in charge of the president of the. there is a lot going on. it understand that. i don't think it's a case that you say the united states government isn't doing what is necessary. he's been down there several times. >> i disagree with that, actually. >> i disagree. what you see here with b.p. is the same guy who said you know americans, they're going to file a lot of bogus lawsuits and give me my life back. he is just insensitive to the extent of the damage done here. i think when you talk about the pivot in this conversation, the pivot is really not that big. when you think about sort of the gucci-clad feet of

mr. hayward on his 52-foot yacht and the idea that government would say you know what? big guys, you have to be responsible for people, the b.p. chairman said they were small people. but responsible to individuals that you harm while you are reaping tremendous billions in profits. that's a reasonable thing for government to do. that's what government should do in america. this week -- one other thing. this week g.m. actually didn't close its plant this summer. you know, liz, you go on about oh, extensive government. here is government keeping auto jobs going in this country. that is a good thing for america. government should do that. >> you know, juan -- >> the president cannot have it both ways. the president cannot give a speech to the nation, in which he draws analogy to war and says absolutely he will do everything in his power to make sure that we get this mess cleaned up and we help the people of the gulf coast, doesn't say that he is going

to allow foreign carriers to come in. he doesn't then actually move to do anything possible. he won't grant a waiver for the jones act. instead he goes golfing. you can't say -- >> chris: i want to switch -- >> you can't say -- >> chris: i want to switch to another subject. bill, that is the fact that the president used fully a third of the oval office speech not to talk about the gulf and the spill but to talk about the fact he wants to pursue clean energy legislation. what do you think are the chances he will get anything through, and especially what do you think of the chances he will get either a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade? >> i don't think he will get a cap-and-trade or carbon tax through. it's not war. that, of course, the speech shows that. if it's really war -- president bush did not devote his 9/11 speech to talk about other things. there is a limit for what government can do. the problem is not government taking on b.p., they're in cahoots with b.p. they're government and big business together that failed. that's the striking thing about the oil spill. i don't think the mood of the public now is to say let's

give more power to government and big business. who was one of greatest lobbyists for cap-and-trade? who spent money on cap-and-trade? b.p. huge proponents of cap-and-trade. >> chris: mara, 20 seconds left. >> chances of cap-and-trade are very, very slim. the chances for something, that maybe does something for alternative source of energy, there is a chance for that. >> chris: we have to take a break, panel. when we come back, the white house touts the stimulus plan and ask for more. concerns about spending and the deficit continue to mount. because of one word, imagination and reality have merged. because of one word, a new generation-- a fifth generation-- of fighter aircraft has been born. because of one word, america's air dominance for the next forty years is assured. that one word... is how.

since our beginning, we've been there for clients through good times and bad, when our clients' needs changed we changed to meet them. through the years, when some lost their way, we led the way with new ideas for the financial challenges we knew would lie ahead. this rock has never stood still. and there's one thing that will never change. we are, the rock you can rely on. prudential.

the first thing we noticed was our next door neighbor, looking through our picture window, at the tv. i was going to set up a chair for him, because he was watching my tv, on my front lawn! [ male announcer ] call now and get fios tv, internet and phone for just $99.99 a month, plus the fios tv movie package, free for 12 months. the fios technician came in, got everything hooked up and when he left i had the greatest picture i've ever seen.

[ male announcer ] and if you don't love fios, you can cancel with no early termination fee. there's no term contract required. i love going home and working on the computer, because fios is so much faster. [ male announcer ] get fios for just $99.99 a month -- with no term contract -- plus the fios tv movie package free for 12 months. [ dennis ] switching to fios, everything was done so easily so smoothly... it was an incredible experience. [ male announcer ] call 1.866.680.fios. that's 1.866.680.3467. customers with disabilities that's 1.866.680.3467. at 800-974-6006 tty/v. [ dennis ] you couldn't make me give up fios. what concerns economists and the significant part of the g.d.p. and the job growth is attributable to recovery act. >> quit running the country in the ditch here and the

kids will be left with less prosperous nation and lower standard of living and it's just not right. >> chris: vice president biden and judd greg with different views on the effect the stimulus has had so far. we're back with the panel. i discussed this with senator mcconnell. fascinating development where you have senate and leaders pushing for a big new spending bill with money to extend unemployment benefit and aid to states facing layoffs and the senate said no. liz, what is going on here? >> you know, i think that people are hearing from their constituents back home. and if you look at the numbers, we have actually lost 3.6 million jobs since the stimulus business first began at the beginning of the administration. the president is now back again saying we need $50 billion more which basically would have people in states that have been responsibly run bailing out states that haven't been. and i think, you know, people at the end of the day are

growing more concerned, i think, about the debt and spending even than they are about jobs. watching what is going to happen at the end of the year when you get the bush tax increases repealed, the extent of the bush tax cut repealed to result in a tax increase. frank limb, watching tv. watching what is going on in greece and seeing a significant cautionary tale about the european style democracy, where i.m.f. has said to greeks look you have to get the public sector out of the healthcare system and make things more hospitable for the private sector. watching all of this and the obama administration continuing to march us off of a cliff. you are seeing democrat and republicans response to that. >> chris: i was going to say i want to get to the core issue. as the mid-term election approaches, juan, do you believe that the deficit and the spending have become a bigger, hotter political issue than stimulating the economy? >> it's a huge issue if you look at the polls. but the number one issue in

the country is economy and number two is joblessness specifically. those are the preimminent issue in the mind of voters. people are concerned about jobs. >> chris: why do you see democrats in the senate pushing back? not a lot but some. >> there is concern about the deficit and if you look at the concern that americans have, gallop had a poll and number four was american leadership. there is a failure on the leadership to deal with the big problems, immigration, oil spill, everything. one of the things, it's very clear at this moment we have to keep stimulating this economy. we should not risk allowing the recession to fall backwards. that's what we are risking if we refuse to spend money to keep the recovery underway. the c.b.o. said in may that more than 2.8 million jobs had been saved by the much maligned stimulus put in place in 2009, as if oh, it didn't make a difference.

of course it made a difference. people say it saved jobs in state government. that's terrible. we should do jobs in the private sector. ideally we would but you have to give private sector sufficient -- >> chris: but the fact is you really don't have to get into the conversation because he is making the points and knocking them down. >> if bill kristol speaks he just irritates me. >> i'm deeply wounded. >> chris: the fact is that the white house is now touting a six-week campaign that they launched called "recovery summer" in which led by the vice president they are going to talk a lot about the unheralded virtues of the stimulus. there is a c.b.o. report that says the stimulus created or saved roughly 2.5 million jobs so far and the white house says it will preserve 1 million more jobs this summer. is the stimulus a selling point orrer drag on democrats come november? >> recovery summer is a nice p.r. gimmick.

but the point is to have a real economic recovery for years and for decades. that is impossible with the amount of debt we've built up. building up more debt will hurt jobs. the idea that the economy and jobs and debt over here is ridiculous. if you are overly in debt as we are and state governments are, the idea to pass legislation to allow them to take on more debt and keep unsustainable payroll going and pension funds for state employees going any longer, that will be great. that delays day of reckoning. credit the small people, if i can use a phrase that carl-henric svanberg used. >> chris: i advise you not to use that phrase. >> i am the small people. small people understand this, but the big shots in washington are talking let's spend $50 billion and $100 billion. it's include cross. we're over our head in debt and the public understands we have to stop spending more than we can afford. >> and if washington under both parties hadn't spent all the years ignoring the problem and letting it

fester, we would have had more room to fight the recession. the fact we had a huge structural deficit and we have seen other countries get in trouble for similar ones means that there is no political space to do what every economist tellous to do in recession, spend money and stimulate the economy. we can't, because number one we have spent it on other things. >> we have spent a lot of money. >> true. that is overhanging -- $140 billion to extend jobless benefits, won't do must have. but if we don't do something about the bigger deficits -- >> chris: liz, joe biden at the news conference said if we take our foot off the accelerator we run the risk of a double-dip recession. >> at the end of the day it comes down to whether or not you believe the private sector is the engine of growth in the economy. i think juan seems not to believe that. if we are going to get out of the recession, we have to

create incentive for private sector to create the jobs. you are not going to see it because you bail out state governments with bloated bureaucracies. you have to create conditions -- >> chris: but are you saying let the thousands of first responders and teachers be laid off? >> i think it depends on the state. i think you have to force people to restructure. if you are talking about new york where they have runner rooms and they take -- rubber rooms where they take teachers who are never fired and they sit in the rubber rooms and never lose their jobs, yeah, that ought to be changed. people need to be forced to regularize and make efficient cuts so we don't -- we can't sustain this. if we try to continue to sustain this, that is actually what is more likely to lead us into a double dip recession. >> states already laid off 84,000 people this year. if you lay off people it does not help private sector to gain confidence. that's all i'm saying. >> you believe in the rubber rooms in new york? >> i'm hell on wheels when it comes to terrible things that the teacher unions are doing

in the schools in the country. but i'm saying right now you can try to address waste and fraud and the obama administration is doing that. you can say we want a freeze on necessary spending and the obama administration is doing that. at some point you have to say in order to make sure that the economy remains on an upward incline in terms of the progress -- and we have been adding jobs to this economy. >> we lost 3.2 million jobs since the stimulus -- >> we added jobs in the last five months. some of them are census jobs and the like but the idea is we are going in the right direction. why stop now, liz? why risk having us catapult downward, down the hill and back into further recession? >> the problem is the action that the government are taking now are creating huge uncertainty. in addition to concern about the massive energy tax, healthcare, financial reform, offshore moratorium on drilling, the private sector is not going to be able to make investments and take the steps it needs to make to get

economy going. >> chris: we have to leave it there. glad to see we got you in complete agreement on this. check out the latest edition of panel plus where they continue the discussion on the website foxnewssunday.com. we promise we will post the video before noon eastern time. time now for e-mails you posted to the blog wallace watch. last week's comments by former first daughter barbara bush on healthcare in africa and obama healthcare reform got a lot of attention. david isabelli wrote -- >> chris: and jim schwartz from centennial, colorado, handicaps the california senate race this way -- as in barbara boxer. keep the comments coming. find us at foxnewssunday.com. up next, our power player of the week.

♪ ♪ do u gonna be there? ♪ are u sure u gonna call back? ♪ ♪ when am calling up and all that? ♪ ♪ ♪ can't u hear i'm sick? ♪ i'm lovesick ♪ can't u hear it explode? ♪ all down, all down no, it's just for new people. hey ! chocolate, vanilla, or strawberry ? chocolate ! chocolate it is ! yeah but i'm new too. umm... he's new... er... than you. even kids know it's wrong to treat new friends better than old friends. at ally bank we treat all our customers fairly. with no teaser rates...

... and no minimum deposits. it's just the right thing to do. >> chris: she has been fascinated by the founding fathers since she was in third grade. always wondering if they came back what they would think of this country. now she is pushing an effort to stay true to their values. here is our power player of the week. ♪ ♪ >> our competition does work, but if we don't understand what we have, we won't understand when it's slowly being taken away from us. >> chris: you may recognize her from movies an television, but actress janine turner is now working on her most important project. a new website called constituting america through which she hopes to educate people about founding principles. >> to me, if you love it or not love it, at least know it. know it. that's the goal. >> chris: for adults there are articles and video clips

about the constitution and federalist papers. >> this is one of the things we need to change. >> chris: the real focus is on kids and turner gets help from her 12-year-old daughter juliette. >> have you heard about the constitution? i hadn't until easter break and i read it. >> we the people, 9*17. >> chris: the website puts on contests to write essays, write songs and short films about the constitution. the deadline is july 4 and they already have gotten entries. >> i'm innocent and i don't have anything to say anymore. >> constitution. guarantees certain rights. have you read the bill of rights. >> chris: winners will be announced on 9-17, constitution day in philadelphia. dvd will be sent to schools around the country in hopes of being used as part of a curriculum. >> this will start to permeate slowly the youth with this idea. first of all, what is the constitution? secondly, oh, it is relevant.

third, it can be cool! >> chris: janine turner is best known as the alaskan bush pilot maggie o'connel on the '90s tv show of "northern exposure." >> people up, not from the government down. >> chris: but she says her strong political views cost her in hollywood. >> if you stand and speak out you're a conservative, you are blacklisted to a certain extent. >> chris: do you think you would have lost jobs because you're a vocal conservative? >> mm-hmm. >> chris: how ignorant do you think americans are about the constitution? >> "ignorant" is a strong word. the constitution is not in our conversations as americans anymore. >> only a few hours to do this. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> chris: and so like a modern paul revere, turner will keep spreading the word

about our founding principles. and warning about a government she feels is infringing on our freedom. >> i want other americans, other children in america to know they have rights and to know they can speak out. if they don't know their rights they won't know when they're being taken away. >> chris: once again, you can visit janine turner's website at constitutingamerica.org. that's it for today. we have want to wish a happy father's day to all you dads out there, especially mine. have a great week. we'll see you next "fox news have a great week. we'll see you next "fox news sunday." captioned by closed captioning services, inc the first thing we noticed was our next door neighbor, looking through our picture window, at the tv.

i was going to set up a chair for him, because he was watching my tv, on my front lawn! [ male announcer ] call now and get fios tv, internet and phone for just $99.99 a month, plus the fios tv movie package, free for 12 months. the fios technician came in, got everything hooked up and when he left i had the greatest picture i've ever seen. [ male announcer ] and if you don't love fios, you can cancel with no early termination fee. there's no term contract required. i love going home and working on the computer, because fios is so much faster. [ male announcer ] get fios for just $99.99 a month -- with no term contract -- plus the fios tv movie package free for 12 months. [ dennis ] switching to fios, everything was done so easily so smoothly... it was an incredible experience. [ male announcer ] call 1.866.680.fios. that's 1.866.680.3467. customers with disabilities that's 1.866.680.3467. at 800-974-6006 tty/v. [ dennis ] you couldn't make me give up fios.