with cbo so we can talk with folks about these numbers.atd@ % ittle after, maybe. there's a banking committee. >> mr. chairman, i would just add that on our title on workforce that we are working with the other side as well on a number of amendments that we hope when you get through senator harkin, we'll be ready to accept a number of amendments as well. we're working with them.

>> the intention is to go after prevention go to workforce and then the areas of fraud and abuse section. those other ones before we get back to the coverage issue which is the issue is the more serious division as to where we are as po opposed to language. >> there's one thing i need to say. congratulations on your 10th anniversary. [ applause ] >> that's not my anniversary in the senate, that's my wedding anniversary. and i asked jackie whether or not she would like to spend the evening talking cbo numbers. i think we'll go to dinner instead. she's here and my two daughters are here as well. came this afternoon. wonderful friends from iowa. >> let's have a shout out for

the dodd girls. [ applause ] >> all right. senator coburn, you had an amendment? no. who we looking at? no. >> senator coburn had an amendment. >> tom, do you have an amendment. >> waiting on the resolution. >> waiting on that resolution. >> mr. chairman, i have some other amendments but if we resolve this then i probably won't have any more amendments on it. i have a lot of worries but no amendments. >> mr. chairman, i think what senator robert, coburn and inzio are saying is if the roberts language is adopted or could be included or whatever, it would essentially crack the davinci code on a variety of these amendments because as i look at many of these amendments, there are variations of the same ones

of coburn 9 and roberts 1. and so if we could have our legal people to take a look at it, and properly vet it, then i think we could proceed. >> well, i don't think we're probably going to do that in the next five or ten minutes. >> no, we cannot. >> maybe, tom, you would like to offer a proposal? >> i actually think and it may be okay with this section if, in fact, we get that solved. so, i'm kind of at a standstill until i hear where we're going to go. what i would suggest -- first of all i don't think we can work through another amendment in ten minutes an your family ought to have your availability and all of us since we're spending a lot of time here have a whole lot of things we could be doing. since we're meeting tomorrow we ought to close it up and come back. >> that's a good enough suggestion. let me conclude by asking -- i'll conclude and ask mike if he

has any closing comments. mike mentioned something to me a minute ago just in private here that i want to respond to and because i, because -- i'm going to repeat what i said over and over again. i'm interested in a bipartisan bill if we can achieve that. i'm inned in a good bill. and i believe that we have a good bill and it can be a bipartisan bill and even strengthens it. the interest is in getting a good bill. bipartisanship is a very important means by which you achieve those results, at least i believe it can be. so, but if i had to make a choice between having a good bill or a bipartisan bill, not that that necessarily has to be the choice, i think all of us would agree we want a good bill and that's not the minimize the importance of bipartisanship but getting the right product done is critical to all of us because obviously the initial committee moving in this area on these critical areas of quality and prevention and workforce and

these other matters, driving that cost down, increasing that availability, accessibility of health care as well as improving dramatically the quality of health care is something we all share those principles. we debate the methods by which we achieve those goals. not a bad place. i had a lot of mark ups in my 28, 29 years. i began mark ups in many cases. the fab that we do agree on those principles and that we agree what we need to work on to drive these costs down as well as increase accessibility and quality of health care for all americans is a very important point. and i'm determined to keep working as i know mike is on this committee and some have an obligation to serve on both committees of jurisdiction. so, you have a dual

responsibility both here and there and we're conscious of that, melding these two bills together, present them to our colleagues in the senate and then the house an finally to the president of the united states. we have a lot of steps to go through before we get there. if we can maintain the level of cooperation that i've witnessed in the last two days in this process i'm confident we can achieve that goal. doesn't mean we'll agree on everything but we can' chief the goal of producing an important piece of legislation. i'm grateful to everybody for the last two addition. to complete this process is not something that will happen overnight, it will take time. i appreciate the effort. >> i was worried this morning but i think this afternoon we got into a little bit of a rhythm that's achieving something and moving us through the amendments and i think improving the bill, and we all want to have a good bill. and, of course, i think that,

unless it is a bipartisan bill, that america won't have confidence in it. if it's very partisan, i think that the party that does that is stuck with it for the rest of the time and i don't think it will be a good result. these changes we're making is driving down costs and clarifying things and i know we're in an unusual position in this particular situation of having to have a mark that was put down and the mark that was put down was without, without bipartisan participation, so we've come a long way from there. that's very helpful and it's improving the bill and we real appreciate your cooperation and senator mikulski's understanding. she always listen well. we all talk well but she listens well. that makes a huge difference in what we're able to achieve. >> i can listen about one more

day. >> the only thing i want to say, because, obviously, i'm a late comer to this because senator kennedy, obviously, is the person who is the chair of this committee. but as i understand it and i realize the bill we introduce when we had to put down a bill and unless i'm wrong, i think i'm right on this, there's a tremendous amount of work over many, many weeks and months actually going back so that i want to make sure that that product that was put down was not just one drawn up exclusively by the majority. in fact, a lot of what was include represented the ideas and thoughts of the minority as well, witnessed by the work that had gone on before. i just want to make sure we're not forgetting all that effort that's been made over many months. >> there may have been some effort that way. a comment from several of the staff on my side after the first dave walk through where we reached some agreement and then made some changes in the bill

was that we had made more progress in four hours than they were able to make in four months. so the rhythm is definitely picking up. and we're getting that bipartisan, we're listening to each other and making changes and that helps. >> that's a good note to end on. so i thank all of our colleagues. senator mikulski we thank you. we're getting to ten of your title to this bill. you've done a tremendous job. i want to thank you and your staff for tremendous effort to write such a very thoughtful and thorough title on the quality provisions. we're all very grateful to you. >> yes. >> this shall not beñ/ñ/ñ7ññññ;