the leak of misinformation about the cost issue. you talk to every health care economist of. they will tell you whatever ideas or -- would ever ideas exist in terms of spending the cost curve and reduce cost for families, business and government, those elements are in this bill. and in terms of deficits, because we keep on hearing these ads about how this is going to add to the deficit, the cbo has said that this as a deficit reduction. not a deficit increase. so, all the scare tactics out there, all the ads out there are simply inaccurate. some of the same people who cited the cbo when it was saying it didn't reduce the deficit, the same cbo's, the most credible, possible arbiter of whether or not this ads to our deficit, now suddenly or ignoring what the cbo says.

tctc they will save money. they will save the family's money, they will save businesses money and they will save the

government money. and they are going to save lives. that is why this reform a supported by groups like the aarp that represents most of american seniors. that is why this reform has to pass on our watch. thunell let's be clear. the final bill would include everything that everybody wants. no bill can do that. but what i told my former colleagues today is that we simply cannot allow differences over individual elements of this plan to prevent us from meeting our responsibility to solve a longstanding and urgent problem for the american people. they are waiting for us to act. they are counting on us to show leadership. and i don't intend to let them down and neither do the people standing next to me. there is too much at stake for families who can't pay their medical bills or see a doctor when they need to or get the treatment they need.

the stakes are enormous for them the stakes are enormous for businesses, who are already seeing their premiums go up 15, 20, 30%. a lot of the critics of this entire process fail to note what happens if nothing gets done and the american people have to be very clear about this. if we don't get this done your premiums are guaranteed to go up. this does not get done, more employers are going to drop coverage because they can't afford it. if this does not get done it is guaranteed that medicare and medicaid will blow a hole through our budget. those things are guaranteed. that is the status quo. that is the trajectory that we are currently on. i don't intend to have that happen. and i believe that the senate

doesn't intend to have that happen. and i think any fair reading of this bill will indicate that all the criteria that i laid out when i met before a joint session have now been met. it is deficit-neutral, it bends the cost curve, it covers 30 million americans who don't have health insurance, and it has extraordinary insurance reforms in there that makes sure that we are preventing abuse. by the way, it also does things that tom harkin has been a champion of for years, prevention and wellness, to make sure that people are getting the care they need and the check-ups they need and the screenings they need before they get sick, which will save all of us money and reduce pressures on emergency rooms all across the country. so, of there are still disagreements that have to be ironed out.

there is still work to be done in the next few days. i think it is important for every single member of the senate to take a careful look at what is in the bill. we welcome this scrutiny from the press. recently there was an article in the new yorker that talked about all the cost savings and how important they are going to be in terms of bending the cost curve over the long term. i am absolutely confident that if the american people know what is in this bill and the senate knows what is in this bill, that this is going to pass. because it is right for america, and i am feeling cautiously optimistic that we can get this done and start rolling up our sleeves and getting to work in improving the lives of the american people.

thank you everybody. [inaudible conversations] >> senators joe lieberman and susan collins spoke with reporters about health care legislation. this is ten minutes. >> pardon? >> for the health care bill have you been moved by anything-- >> this seems like a ronald reagan moment when i should say what? >> have you been moved towards voting for it? >> well, in other words as i said last night we were having what i consider to be

constructive destruction-- and it is not finished yet and i think one of the things we have learned in the hectic last couple of weeks is that we all ought to be looking at paper. this is a legislative process and we ought to be looking at specific legislative language before we say i agree or i object but to be as explicit as i can be now, if as appears to be happening, the so-called public option government-run insurance program is out, and the medicare buy-in, which i thought would jeopardize medicare, cost taxpayers billions of dollars over the long-haul and increase our deficit is out. and there are no other attempts to bring things like that and, then i am going to be in a position where i can say i am getting toward the position where i can say what i wanted to say all along and i'm ready to

vote for health care reform. my whole point has been here that the president laid out a couple of big goals for this process, then the the cost curve down for individuals, families, businesses, our government, economy and health care and secondly bring a lot of people and who can afford health insurance now. the basic core bill does that. i think some of the other things were going to add to our debt, increase taxes and we are just not necessary to achieve those two goals. >> the insurance companies in your state, how much pressure if any have you been getting? >> i thought you said you were going to be-- i have not received any pressure. periodically i talked to my staff about one thing or another but i have never hesitated to take on the insurance companies. hold on. and, so the reason i was against the public option is the same

reason that a lot of people are worried about this overall health care reform proposal, which is that they think it is getting too big and they are worried that it is going to increase their taxes and increase the national debt that their kids and grandkids are going to have to pay so that is why. >> what about the medicare by yent? >> i didn't change my mind on the medicare by an. it is not terrible to change one's mind if in fact you do, but i don't want to spend too much time on this. in the 2000 campaign when i was privileged to be the al gore's running mate, the party platform was to suggest one way to reform health care was to allow 55 to 65 the world's bullion to medicare. that is a stressed age group and you don't have insurance but a lot of things have changed in nine years. first, in 2000 the federal

government was in surplus and paying off the debt, not having increased the debt enormously. secondly medicare was not on the verge of an imminent bankruptcy, which it is now in third there was in the bill on the floor such as the one on the floor now that would extend the airy generous subsidies to those 55 and 65 earl to enable them to buy insurance and reduce the impact age in the pricing of insurance policies, so things changed a lot. ayn connecticut poston divya? well, i finally got to see that on tv last night and it looked like i was referring back to things i supported in the past to make the point that though i was against the public option, i was not against health care reform and of course i did that before the finance committee bill came out with this very large and again i would say generous but i support it,

system of subsidies that brings basically lower, middle income people into the health insurance system. >> what is beytin to the health care reform architecture? >> not to that extent but here is the point. the medicare by yent that is proposed is not make sense. you can all focus on the but it ended up when advocates of the public option, they tried to get it down another pass and it made no sense. hospitals. and suddenly i'm not the only person in the democratic caucus to-- esau 11 other democratic senators wrote to senator reid telling him they were against it because of the impact they thought it would have on hospitals and doctors in their state and by cost shifting on 180 million people in america who get their insurance today through by the companies.

their premiums would go up, so that is where we are now. this was unnecessary. the fact is that the more they tried to change it to get it through, a separate insurance pools, separate from medicare, self sustaining, the premiums would have to pay for. s.a. said to one of the advocates, nobody is going to be able to afford this plan and he said to me that is not the point. we are trying to work out a deal here, so i said it doesn't make any sense to me because in the long term, the federal government will be pressured to take this over, make up deficits and a separate pool and again it is not necessary. we have got a great health insurance reform bill here and the danger was that some of my colleagues i think we are just trying to load it up with too much and what happens then is that you run the risk of losing everything, so i think what is beginning to emerge and i know

some people are not happy about it, is really a historic achievement. health care reforms such as we have not seen in this country for decades. >> have you involved at all in your process and supporting this bill? >> first, let me say that i am grateful for the work that senator lieberman has done. i believe that his principal stance has improved the bill. i very much would like to see a health care bill that is based on lowering costs, expanding access, helping small businesses pass, but i don't see voting for the current bill that is on the floor even with the improvements that have been made.

i am very leery of the impact of nearly $500 billion in medicare cuts particularly the cuts in the home health care, which are completely counter-productive of the goal of lowering costs. senator lieberman and i, senator wyden and i have amendments to try to give for affordable choices and to lower the cost of health care remains to be seen whether those are going to be adopted. i am concerned about the penalties that would be imposed on smaller employers so this bill is getting better but it is still too deeply flawed for me to support it. >> you had a conversation with the leadership about senator lieberman in senator wyden's proposal. >> i have had some conversations, but they have not given me an answer at this

point. i should make clear that while i care deeply about those amendments, and believe that they make significant improvements in the bill, that it would not be sufficient to persuade me to vote for the bill. i am still very concerned about the enormous cuts in the medicare programs and what that would mean to access to health care for our seniors. >> why offer them? >> because i think something is going to pass, and i would like to make that bill as good as possible, even if ultimately it is not a bill that i can support. i believe that i have an obligation to try to improve the bill, not to just say no and that is why i have been working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle and several amendments that i believe will improve the bill. and i'm going to continue to try to improve the bill. >> have you had any persuasion

from pennsylvania avenue in recent days? >> i have had extensive conversations with the president, his chief of staff, with the omb director, with the white house policy adviser. those that been helpful and i appreciate the dialogue we are having what they certainly have not moved me toward, to be able to support the bill at this point. thank you. >> thank you senator. >> alex wayne of "congressional quarterly" thank you for joining us. we want to talk about what happened today on health care and what is expected tomorrow. first we will hear little bit from senator lieberman but he spoke to reporters about the bill. >> again. it is not necessary. we have got a health insurance reform bill here and the danger was that some of my colleagues i think we are just trying to load it up with too much. and, of what happens then is

that you run the risk of losing everything, so i think what is beginning to emerge and i know some people are not happy about it, it is really a historic achievement. health care reform such as we have not seen in this country for decades. >> alex, how secure is senator lieberman's vote now? >> he apparently told the democratic caucus in a meeting at the white house today that these changes to the bill are dropping the public option and also dropping this medicare bahin proposal have moved in close to supporting it. i think he is probably a pretty secure but now. >> how significant has his role been in crafting the bill we expect the senate to vote on? >> he has been significant at getting things remove from the bill. i don't know how much he has written to the bill. he has certainly been getting stuff cut out of it. >> you mentioned a meeting at the white house between president obama and senate

democrats. the president made some brief remarks afterwards. >> a lot of the critics of this entire process failed to note what happens if nothing gets done and the american people left to be very clear about this. if we don't get this done your premiums are guaranteed to go up. if this does not get done, more employers are going to drop coverage because they can't afford it. if this does not get done, it is guaranteed that medicare and medicaid will blow a hole through our budget. those things are guaranteed. that is the status quo. that is the trajectory that we are currently on. i don't intend to have that happen. and i believed the senate doesn't intend to have that happen. i think any fair reading of this bill will indicate what all the

criteria i laid out when i met before a joint session have now been met. it is deficit-neutral, it bends the cost curve, it covers 30 million americans who don't have health insurance, and it has extraordinary insurance reforms in there that make sure we are preventing abuse. >> what were senator saying about the meeting when they came back to capitol hill? >> a lot of enthusiasm about a. senator jay rockefeller from west virginia told us is god is telling him they have the 60 votes needed to pass the bill. >> are there any democrats whose votes are still up in air? >> senator ben nelson from nebraska. they have not resolve the issue of abortion and whether insurance plans receiving subsidies from the government would be able to offer abortion coverage. until that is resolved senator nelson remains an unknown in this debate. >> and number of groups opposed to the bill held a rally on capitol hill.

including oklahoma senator tom coburn. >> in the mic. let me first of all say thank you for taking a timeout to be here. what our country lacks is our active involvement to return the freedom that is rightly ours back to us again. what our country lacks is the active involvement of the citizens of this country to return the freedom that is rightly ours back to us again. the health care bill isn't about health care. the health care bill is about government control. the health care bill is about eliminating the liberty and freedom to choose what is best for you and your family. you know i practiced medicine for over 25 years. i am a two-time cancer survivor in the best health care system in the world. [cheers and applause]

and that does not mean that there are not problems with their health care system. but i would tell you the government now run 60% of the health care in this country and they don't do a good job at any one of those levels. and this bill will move another 20% of health care under the control of the government. if in fact you are here today because you want a future for your children and grandchildren, you want to restore the liberty that is really yours, that in fact if you want to make choices for you and your family, that right of yours will be preserved. please do more. please have your friends to more. this build must be stopped, not just for health care. we can fix health care words wrong. this bill must be stopped because we have a government that is way too big, way outside the bounds of its intention and we have a government that we

cannot afford and this will make it worse by $2.5 trillion over the next ten years. thank you all for being here and medigogue plessy. >> alex, did this rally seemed to have any effect inside of the capital? >> no, i think it went almost unnoticed by democrats at least, but outside of the capital the polls suggest that there are a sizable percentage of the population who agree with that crowd out there and would consider it. >> what are the implications of the vote on senator dorgan's amendment on importing prescription drugs? >> senator dorgan's amendment failed so that avoids a ranch in the works for democrats. if his amendment had been adopted, it would have meant that a deal between the white house and pharmaceutical industry has and has since been blown up and we probably would have seen the industry turn against this bill. >> looking ahead, what can we

expect tomorrow? is there an end in sight yet? >> we are getting there. we expect tomorrow there will be cost estimates of some new provisions that senator reed wants to add to the bill. once that happens he will be able to start filing what is called the amendment which is a package if final changes, then he will file what they call cloture petitions in the bill which is a procedural move to end filibusters and then we start sort of a ticking clock toward passage. it will take roughly about a week between the time he starts filing the cloture petitions and the time they can finally vote on the bill. >> alex when it "congressional quarterly," thank you for talking with us. >> the senate chamber rejected a measure by senator dorgan that would have allowed consumers to purchase free and portf prescription drugs from other countries. a similar amendment by senator lautenberg also failed. here is part of the debate.

>> mr. president, i wanted to make a point and i know my colleague from arizona wishes to engage in a brief colloquy at this point. the amendment that we are offering, a bipartisan amendment dealing with the price of prescription drugs is a very important amendment. we are going to get our vote on that but then there is also going to be a vote on an amendment that nullifies that. the poison-pill amendment, nullifies that. the 2nd amendment and means nothing happened in the prescription drug prices keep going through the roof. i just want to say quickly that there have been very few bipartisan amendments on the floor of the senate during this health care debate. that is regrettable. this and that this bipartisan. i wide range of 30 senators including republicans, john mccain, chuck grassley, a lobbyist no support this effort. [speaking chinese] but the great sun prescription drug prices by giving the american people freedom and the ability to find competition among drug prices for their sold and other portions of the world

where it is a fraction of what we are selling to american consumers. >> mr. president? i ask unanimous consent to engage in a colloquy with the senator from south dakota. i think that it is important for us to recognize what the door and the amendment is all about. it is about an estimated according to the congressional budget office, we love to report the congressional budget office of around here, $100 billion or more in consumer savings. that is what the dorgan amendment does and it cuts the cost of the bill, the legislation before us as much as $19.4 billion over ten years, so here we are always talking millben in the cost curve. saving money for particularly our seniors who use more prescription drugs than younger americans and get there is opposition. so i would like to ask my

colleague from north dakota one, how long has it been fighting this issue and two, why in the world do we think anybody would be opposed to an amendment that would save $100 billion to the consumers of america? >> mr. president i would say my colleague from arizona, we have been working on this for ten years, myself, the senator from arizona and others. we held hearings on this and the committee. the fact is, we have gotten votes on it before and in each case the pharmaceutical industry that has a lot of muscle around here has prevailed on those boats with an amendment that is a poison-pill amendment saying somebody has to certify with respect to no additional safety risk and so on. the safety issues are completely bogus, absolutely bogus. they have done in europe for 20 years what we are proposing to do in this country, perrilloux trading between countries with no issues at all in what we are trying to do is save the

american people $100 billion in the next ten years because we are charging the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs and there's no justification for. one to show the senator from arizona one chart and this is representative. nexium. if you happen to take nexium, for the same quantity you pay $424 in the united states. if you were in spain would pay $36, france $67, great britain $41, germany $37. why is that the american consumer has the privilege of paying ten times the cost for the exact same drug, the same drug put in the same bottle made by the same company. justify that. >> could i also ask my friend, has he seen this chart? this chart shows that the pharmaceutical companies in america and have increased wholesale drug costs which does

reflect the retail drug caused by some 8.7% increase, just this year while the consumer price index, this little line here, inflation has been-1.3%. how when the world do you justify doing that? these are lists of the monthly increases over a year and cost of some of the most popular or much-needed prescription drugs. so, why would pharmaceutical companies raise costs by some 9% unless they were anticipating some kind of deal that they went into. and i don't want to embarrass the senator from north dakota but is it true when the president of the united states was a member of this body he co-sponsored this amendment? >> mr. president that is the case, the president was a co-sponsor of this legislation. i do want to say as well when i talked about nexium, the

american consumer goods to pay ten times the cost. nexium is for acid reflux. probably a condition that will exist with some after this vote because my understanding is after seven days on the floor of the senate there's now an arrangement by which the pharmaceutical industry will have sufficient votes to be dust. which means the american people lose. but i also want to make this point. anyone who stands up and site safety and reads the stuff that can come right out of the copying machine for ten years, understand this. dr. peter roach former vice president of marketing for pfizer and formerly worked in europe on the parallel trading systems says this. the biggest argument against reimportation of prescription drugs is safety. what everyone has completely forgotten to tell you that in your pre-importation of drugs has been in place for 20 years. atkisson insel in my judgment to the american people to say you can make this work in europe for the benefit of the consumer to

get lower prices but the americans don't have the capability to make this happen. that is absurd. and i think the safety issue is unbelievably bogus. >> and, i might ask my friend from north dakota again, haven't we seen this movie before? the milby i am talking about is that we have an amendment or legislation before the body or in committee that will allow for drug reimportation. as you just pointed out from the previous chart and a totally safe manner and then there is always, thanks to the pharmaceutical lobbyists, of which there are believe 635 pharmaceutical industry lobbyist, a lobbyist and a half for every member of congress, that there is a-- the amendment passes that basically prohibits the reimportation drugs.

haven't we seen this movie before and apparently now another deal was made so that they are now going to have sufficient votes to again cost the consumers of america $100 billion more for cost for the pharmaceutical drugs and their representatives are here on the floor ready to tout the virtues of an amendment which as we all know, is a killer amendment. let's have no doubt about that. >> mr. president the senator from arizona is right that this is groundhog's day ouelett 6:00 in the morning the clock strikes 6:00 and the farmers industry wins. we just repeat the day over and over again. my hope is that we won't have to repeat it today. my hope is that after a lot of work on a bipartisan piece of legislation the american people will have sufficient support here on the floor of the senate to say it is not fair for us to be paying double or triple and

ten times the cost of prescription drugs that others in the world are paying. mr. president i wonder if we might be able to yield some time to the senator from arizona five minutes. it the senator from arizona wishes to conclude. >> my only conclusion is what we are seeing here is really what i would ask my friend from north dakota what contributes to the enormous cynicism in the american, on the part of the american people about the way we do business here. this is a pretty clear-cut issue. as the senator from north dakota pointed out, it has been around for ten years. ten years we have been trying to ensure that consumers of america would be able to get at a lower cost many times lifesaving prescription drugs and the power of this special-interest, the power of the lobbyist, the power of campaign contributions are

now being manifested in the passage of a killer amendment. which will then prohibits-- there's no objective observer who will attest to any other fact then the passage of the follow on amendment, the side-by-side amendment will prohibit the reimportation of prescription drugs into this country, which we all know can be done in a save fashion and could save the americans who are hurting so badly $100 billion a year or more and cut the cost of the legislation before us by $19.4 billion. and to scare people, to say that these drugs that are being reported are not done and they saved manner that is ensuring the american people health is not endangered is of course an old and an old movie that we

have seen before. it is regrettable. it is really regrettable that the special-interest again prevail and the power of the pharmaceutical lobby, but i also want to say finally, there are many traits that the senator from north dakota has the i admire. one of them is his tenacity and i want to assure him that he and i, that i will be by his side as we go back again and again on this issue until justice and fairness is done and we defeat this special-interest and the pharmaceutical industry which have taken over the white house and will take over this vote. it will go what 6:00. does not one of the most admirable chapters in the history of the united states senate or the united states government. >> mr. president i was going to yield five minutes next to the senator from iowa but if there is someone who wishes to go prior to the senator from iowa i would ask-- is it center

lautenberg seeking recognition and of so following the presentation. >> mr. president. >> the senator from iowa. >> we have to keep those this afternoon on drug reimportation. these boats mean that today is the day that we can show the american people whether we can repass drug reimportation or whether the senate will give it lip service and nothing else. now, we have heard here on the floor of the concerns that some have about drug importation and whether or not it can be safe. everyone who knows me knows that i care deeply about drug safety.

the fact of the matter is that the hon save situation is what we have today. today consumers are ordering drugs over the internet from who knows where and the fda does not know, does not have the resources in fact to do much about-- anything about it. the fact is that legislation to legalize importation would not only helped to lower the cost of prescription drugs for all americans, but also should shut down the underregulated importation of drugs from foreign pharmacies that we have come with a situation that we have today. the dorgan amendment in fact would improve drug safety, not threaten it and it would open up trade to lower-cost drugs. in 2004, at my staff was briefed by the investigation that the

permanent subcommittee on investigations of the senate governmental affairs committee conducted. that subcommittee conducted this investigation into what we would call going on right now, the current drug importation. they found about 40,000 parcels containing prescription drugs comes through jfk mail facility every single day of the year. 40,000 packages each day. now, the jfk airport houses the largest and dimensional male branch in the united states but even then, that is the tip of the iceberg according to the subcommittee each day. 30,000 packages of drugs enter the u.s. from miami, 20,000 your through chicago so that is another 50,000 more packages each and every day and what is worse, about 28% of the drugs coming in are controlled

substances. so, we have a situation where we need the basic approach in this amendment to ensure that imported drugs are safe and that is with the dorgan amendment is all about, to give fda the ability to verify the drug pedigree back to the manufacturer, to require fda to inspect frequently and to require these to give the fda the resources to do that. so, the bottom line is the dorgan amendment gives the fda the authority and the resources it needs to implement drug safety from importation of drugs. and certainly, the president knows that a great way to hold drug companies accountable is to allow safe, legal drug importation because i would like

to quote this president, not when he was a candidate for president but a candidate for the senate. this is what president obama's said then. quote i urge my opponent to stop siding with the drug manufacturers and put aside his opposition to the reimportation of lower priced prescription drugs. and now we are hearing about the secret deal with big pharma. and that was revised. just this week, to solidify support with pharma's allies for killing this very important dorgan amendment, the drug companies will do nothing. they will do nothing to keep the united states, or they will stop at nothing to keep the united states closed to other markets in order to charge higher prices, so with the dorgan amendment, we are working to get the job done. what we need is to make sure the

americans have even greater, more affordable access to wonder drugs by further opening the doors to competition in the global pharmaceutical industry. mr. president, americans are waiting. two waffen this thing has been stymied, like it looks like there's another chance to stymie it only i am surprised. most of the time in the past that i have been for the importation of drugs that was my colleagues over here there were trying to stymie but now looks like it is the other side what to have the vast majority for this amendment and i would be surprised if we didn't and it would be a crime if we didn't. >> mr. president before i get to the core of my remarks i want to tell my colleague, i was tempted to rise under rule 19 that says that no senator and they shall directly or indirectly by any formal words impute to other senators and the conduct or

motive on becoming senator. you know i could impute if i wanted to i guess that maybe there are some who really don't care about this amendment as much as they care about killing health care reform but i wouldn't do that. i wouldn't do that so i hope in the context of the debate i'm not forced to rise on rule 19. mr. president, i rise in favor of the amendment of senator lautenberg because it does two things that the entire debate about health care reform protect the american people by putting the safety of families first and there is a lot of brushing aside a safety here. safety is paramount. safety is paramount, and it lowers costs and at the core that is what this health care debate is all about. i appreciate the intentions of the amendment that has been offered today on the floor but in my view is regressive. it harkens back to a time when the lack of sufficient drug

regulation allow people to sell snake oil and magic elixirs that promised everything in did nothing, to allow the importation of on tested unregulated drugs made from untested then underregulated ingredients from 32 countries into the medicine cabinets of american families without serious safety precautions flies in the face of protecting the american people and it is contrary to the context of health care reform. the amendment by senator lautenberg brings us the route to the real purpose by why we have been here on the floor. which is to create the type of reform that ultimately gives greater health insurance and greater safety to the american people. they care about honest, real reform that makes health care affordable and protect american families. protect them from the potential of counterfeit drugs, the promise to care would do absolutely nothing. just as we are here to protect them from insurance policies that promise to provide health

care for a premium and deny coverage to provide no health care at all. mr. president, basically what senator lott reposit amendment is going to do is it modifies the dorgan amendment to allow reimportation but to do it when basic safety concerns to keep our prescription medication safe are complied with. it includes the dorgan importation a amendment bet ads one fundamental elements to the broader health care reform a look protect the american people from those who would gain the system from profits at the expense of health and safety of american families. that is what this reform is all about. specifically when it comes to the importation of prescription medication, this amendment will help us be sure that what we think we are buying in the bottle is in fact what is and that bottle. you know, i want to take this letter. we talk a lot about safety and

pooh-poohing, there are no safety concerns. there's one entity in this country that is responsible for safety when it comes to food and drugs and it is called the food and drug administration. in a letter from the fda commissioner, she mentions for potential risks to patients that in her opinion must be addressed. first she is concerned that some imported drugs cannot be safe and effective because they were not subject to rigorous regulatory review prior approval. second at the drugs may not the as consistently made, high-quality products because they were not manufactured in a facility that complied with good manufacturing products. third, the drugs may not be substituted bulb with the fda approved products because of differences in composition or manufacturing and forth the drugs simply may not be what they purport to be. because inadequate safeguards and the supply chain may have

allowed contamination or worse, counterfeiting. and it addresses fda commissioner hamburg's statesman about the amendment of my colleague from northcutt and i quote, there are significant safety concerns relating to allowing the importation of non-bioequal products and safety issues, safety issues. related to confusion and distribution and labeling of foreign products in the domestic product remain to be fully addressed in the amendment. senator lott burke's amendment addresses this concern. it allows impartation but it protects the american people by requiring that before any drug is imported to the united states it must be certified to be safe and to reduce costs so it does what the fda commissioners talking about here, the agency responsible for protecting the american people. people may just want to not

believe it. they want to ignore it but the fact is this is the entity responsible in this country to protect the food supply and the drug supply. we want to be as certain as they possibly can, that they are set to use an rabino with the ingredients originated before they are imported. we want to be absolutely certain that patients beginning medications that are the same in substance, quality and quantity that their doctor has prescribed. and will reduce cost before they are allowed into americans addison cabinets. i have heard a lot about the european union here. let's look at but the european union is now saying. there constantly being offered on the floor for the reason why we should follow the european

union. well, let's see what happens if we allow unregulated importation. last week the european union commissioner in charge of this issue said and i quote, the number of counterfeit madisons are arriving in europe is constantly growing. the european commission is extremely worried. in just two months, the your opinion union seized 34 million, milligan, hear me, milian fate tablets at custom points. this exceeded our worst fears. now i don't want american families to see those fears come to light here. and i believe that if we do not pass the lautenberg amendment, that we would open the floodgates. the european union's experience only proves my concerns. not saleeby it's them like the other side would suggest.

here is the problem. and 75-dollar counterfeit cancer drug that contains half of the dosage that the doctor told you you needed to combat your deceased doesn't save the americans money and certainly isn't worth the price in terms of dollars or a risk to life. let us not now open our national borders to insufficient regulated drugs from around the world. it seems to me that real health reform, particularly for our seniors and those who are qualified under the medicare program, that received a prescription coverage under that, by filling the donut hole in its entirety, which we have declared he will do in the conference as we are committed to, that provides for the coverage for prescription drugs that aarp talks about on behalf of its members, and that is what we want to see, not by

underregulated reimportation. mr. president we should have no illusions, keeping our drug supply safe in the global economy in which we cannot affect the willingness of the gutters to gain the system will be a monumental but essential task. it would require a global reach, extraordinary vigilance to import the high standards and parts of the world that have minimum standards now so we don't have to ask which drug is real and which is counterfeit. let me just show some of those. people say oh no, the safety issue isn't really the case. tamiflu, we sigh rush when the h1n1 virus came. which is the real one in which is the counterfeit one? there actually is one that is true and one that is a counterfeit but the average person wouldn't know the difference. orthotist aricept, a truck to slow the progression of alzheimer's disease. which is the real one in which

one is the counterfeit one? if i didn't tell you from the labels, you probably wouldn't know but there is an approved one and there is a counterfeit one and let me tell you as someone who lost his mother to alzheimer's, i can tell you that having the wrong drug in the wrong dosage would not have helped slow the progression of hurt al most. it makes a difference. let's look at others. lipitor. very important. you walk around with the real problem with call and ultimately you find yourself, you think you are taking the appropriate dosage and the appropriate drug. which one is the real one in which one is the counterfeit one? there is the counterfeit one and there is the approved one but if you are taking the counterfeit one and you think you are meeting the challenges, then you might have a heart attack as a result of not having the real one. by the time you figure it out it

could be too late to reverse the damage. that is the global economy opening up possibilities at the end of the day. with a gentleman yield an additional minute? finally, this is a gamble we cannot afford to take. to open up the potential for these drugs are ingredients used in these drugs to find their way from nation to nation from southeast asia where the problem is the epidemic to one of 32 nations listed in this amendment into the homes of american families. that is a gamble we cannot take. that is not about protecting our citizens. that is not about providing prescription drugs that ultimately meet the challenge of a person's illness. filling the donut hole totally which is what we are going to do is the way to achieve it. so, i do hope that is what we will do. i do hope that we will adopt

senator lautenberg's amendment and defeat the dorgan amendment for i fear for the safety of our citizens and i fear as to whether not we can ultimately achieve filling that donut hole that this amendment ultimately gets adopted and i fear what that means for health care reform at the end of the day and with that i yield back the balance of my time in thank the senator from new jersey. >> mr. president? >> the senator from new jersey. >> i called the amendment number 3156. it is that the desk and ask for its immediate-- >> preparers amendment-- >> i asked for further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. >> without objection. >> mr. president, i rise today because one thing we have to do as we have process, progress to this health care reform bill is to make sure prescription

medicine in our country is safe and affordable. and, i thank my colleague from new jersey for his excellent review of the conditions that cause us to add this amendment. tewes senator dorgan's amendment, that would allow potentially unsafe prescription drugs to cross our borders and directly into the medicine cabinets of homes throughout america. now, i want to be clear. the effect of this plan, as senator dorgan has introduced, could be catastrophic, and that is why president obama's administration has written to congress expressing his serious concerns with the dorgan.

now, i appreciate the effort to try and lower prescription drug prices. after all that is what we are doing with the whole health review is to try to get cost reduced so that everyone can have safe and affordable health care. we want to make sure that people don't harm their health with any shortcuts. we all want americans to stay healthy and still have some money left in their pockets. but as much as we want to cut costs for consumers, we cannot afford to cut corners and risk exposing americans to drugs that are ineffective or unsafe. the fact is that this is a matter of life or death. the european commission just discovered that counterfeit drugs in europe are worse than they feared. in just two months, and i know

senator menendez made reference to this as well, the e.u. seized 34 milligan fate tablets including antibiotics, cancer treatments and anti-call medicines. and as the industry commissioner of the edu said, every fake drug is a potential massacre. even when the medicine only contains an ineffective substance, this can lead to people dying because they think they are fighting their illnesses with the real drug. americans buy medicines to lower their cholesterol, fight cancer and prevent heart disease. a madam what would happen to a mother or a child if they start relying on madison imported from another country only to find out-years later that the drug was a fake. imagine the heartbreak that might ensue if the medicine the americans were taking was found to be harmful.

the fact is drugs from other countries have dangerously high counterfeit grades and impartation could expose americans to those drugs. and under the dorgan amendment drugs could be in ft. hood from saw writ union countries and estimates over 20% of the drugs are counterfeit. under the dorgan amendment, drugs that originated in china could find their way into our homes and we know that china has been the source of many dangers projects-- products from toys laced with lead to toothpaste made with antifreeze. if we are going to trust drugs from other countries we need to be absolutely certain that we are not putting americans lives at risk and that is why the food and drug administration went on record to express its concerns with the dorgan amendment. it says there are significant safety concerns related to

allowing the importation of non-bioequal products and safety issues related to confusion, the distribution and labeling of foreign products and domestic products that remains, remain to be fully addressed in the amendment. that is from the fda commissioner, margaret hamburg. now, there are problems associated with the possibility of drugs coming into this country that are way different than that which is expected to be used in the treatment of sickness. when president obama's fda commissioner wrote, she also said that importing drugs presents risks to patients because the drug may not be safe and effective, it may not have been made in a facility with good manufacturing practices and may not be the drug claims to be

and i ask unanimous consent that the letter from the fda be included in the record. >> without objection. >> in light of the serious concerns raised by the obama administration, i require that the department health and human services certified that the drugs are safe and will reduce costs before they are imported. my amendment is common-sense bipartisan alternative to the dorgan amendment. in fact, it is the exact same language as the dorgan impartation amendment, but with certification requirement that is so important to ensure safety. mr. president if we are going to allow the importation of drugs from other countries we have got to be certain that they are safe and affordable, and i, with this amendment, would be, would be a

supporter of the dorgan amendment. only certification by health experts would provide that assurance, and i urge my colleagues to support the amendment, my amendment and oppose the dorgan amendment. mr. president, we have no way of knowing what the working conditions might be like an a plant or a facility or the sanitary conditions in other countries, or whether in the process of packing and shipping that temperatures might not be appropriate for the product without its deterioration, and so thusly, again i stress, bring in what you want just to make sure it is safe for the people. there is no moment in the discussion that we have had about the health care reform

bill that says that look, you can save money by taking a chance on the shortcut here or a short cut there. absolutely not. we would not think of imposing anything like that and we ought not to be proposing it here now. i asked mr. president that we yield five minutes to my colleague from north carolina. >> without objection. per day on a fixed income, i believe we need to find a way to ensure they have access to affordable drugs. if we could reduce the cost of drugs with re-importation and guarantee the safety of those drugs, i would be very supportive. however, i have serious doubts that we can adequately ensure the safety of our drug supply with drug re-importation amendment proposed by my colleague from north dakota. even without re-importation, the u.s. has had trouble with

counterfeit drugs. at the height of the h1n1 epidemic this fall, the f.d.a. was warning consumers to be wary of counterfeit h1n1 treatments. these counterfeits came from foreign online pharmacies. in one instance the f.d.a. seized so-called kpupb kpupb treatment tablet from india and found them to contain talc and as seat met fin. as seat met fin. and just last month the washington the post reported on a coordinated rate from the u.s. to europe to singapore. the u.s. discovered about 800 alleged packages of suspicious prescription drugs including viagra, fi gooding and declared it in and shut down 68 alleged pharmacies. counterfeit pharmaceutical drugs are appearing on the market at

alarming rates. in 2007 drugs comprised 6% of the total counterfeit product seized. in one year, they've now jumped to 10% of all counterfeit product seizures. this growing problem is all about unscrupulous criminals prey on the sick and elderly who are in desperate need of cheap drugs. but the consequences are harmful and some cases directly. officials estimate some of these counterfeit drugs contained either a dangerous amount of active ingredients or were placebos. some counterfeits include toxic chemicals such as dry wall material, and to freeze and even yellow hi we paint. according to a recent "washington post" article, tracing the origins of drugs such as clsa and viagra took investigators across the globe and back again. supposedly these drugs came from a warehouse in new delhi through the online companies selling the

drugs headquartered in canada with a license to sell medicine in minnesota. however when federal officials investigated the drugs origins further they actually found that the on-line web site was registered in china. it's server was hosted in russia and its headquarters had previously been listed in louisianan. and on a local level here near the capitol, the "baltimore sun" yesterday reported on the death of the university of maryland pharmacologist kerry john triet ms. john suffer allergic reaction of a counterfeit version of illegal drugs in the u.s. purchased illegally from the philippines. apparently the counterfeit drug so closely resembled the legal version that to pharmacologists conducting the analysis after her death could not tell the difference. local police have yet to identify the content of the counterfeit drug. a few of my colleagues have already mentioned the letter sent last week the fda

commissioner margaret hamburg outlining the safety concerns the fda has about three importation. specifically, the fda stated importing mullen fda approved prescription drugs posed for potential risk to patients. let me go over those four risks. the first, the drug may not be safe and effective because it did not undergo the rigorous fda regulatory review process. number two, the drug may not be consistently made a high-quality product because the facility in which it was manufactured was not reviewed by the fda. third, the drug may not be a substitute double with the fda approved product because of differences and composition or manufacturing and forth the drug could be contaminated or counterfeit as a result of inadequate safeguards in the supply chain. if the agency that oversees drug safety is saying it would have

difficulty guaranteeing the safety of the nation's drug supply with free importation i have grave concerns particularly since the fda is already underfunded and understaffed. but let's take a moment to examine how europe, which does allow free importation, has shared in terms of safety. british authorities say counterfeit drugs often exchanged hands between middlemen and are repackaged multiple times before reaching legitimate hospital or pharmacist to read this creates opportunities for counterfeit products often produced in china and shipped through the middle east to penetrate the european market. in 2008 british authorities identified 40,000 doses of counterfeit case -- >> the senator has used the five minutes. >> mr. president, i would like to ask for about three more minutes. >> without objection. >> thank you. in 2008, the british authorities

identified 40,000 doses of counterfeit hormone treatment for men with advanced prostate cancer and a blood thinner. more recently, the european union seized 34 million fake tablets at custom planes and all member countries. and in other countries around the world, the world health organization estimates of to 30% of the medicine on sale may be counterfeit. as a result, numerous people have died. earlier this year 80 infants and nigeria died from teaching medicine that contain a toxic colin. in july 24 people in bangladesh died from consumption of a poisonous acetaminophen's europe. the dvorkin amendment does not require imported drugs to the fda approved or meet the eckert fda standards. furthermore it does not prevent criminals and other countries from repackaging imported drugs. although our safety system is not perfect, we have a faeroe fda review system for drug

safety that actively involved physicians, pharmacists and patience. as a result, americans can be generally confident that our medications are safe and contain the ingredients on the bottle. mr. president, supporters of a reinterpretation argue that the sick and elderly need an alternative way to obtain affordable drugs. however, a study by the london school of economics found that in the european union middlemen reaped most products with relatively little savings passed on to the consumer. nothing in the dorgan amendment requires the savings to be passed on to the consumer, leaving the door wide open for on the scrupulous profit seeking a third party is to get into the freakin' portion game. in the u.s. we are already trying to reduce the cost of prescription drugs through the use of generics. this is one of the most effective ways for customers to reap savings and generic dispensing free to the retail pharmacy as close to 65%.

the fda is already working with stakeholders to develop drug free importation policy. with the fda looking into this and significant outstanding safety concerns i cannot in good conscience support the amendment offered by my colleague from north dakota. instead i will support the amendment by my colleague from new jersey. the lautenberg amendment will allow importation of drugs on the of the secretary of health and human services certifies doing so would save money for americans and would not adversely affect the safety of the drug supply. it is critical to all americans especially nation's seniors have access to affordable drugs. it's imperative that we not compromise the safety of u.s. drugs on the market. after all, what are good, cheap drugs if they are toxic or ineffective? thank you, mr. president. i yield back my time.

>> the senator from the new jersey. >> mr. president, i believe my colleague from north dakota intends to make further remarks. how much time do we have on our side, please? >> the senator from new jersey controls 13 minutes. >> 13 minutes. mr. president, if senator dorgan is here and we are trying to accommodate a colleague who wants to speak on this -- but how much time is left on the dorgan site? >> 20 minutes. >> 28 minutes. mr. president, we heard about what is happening in the e.u.

having to do with a question of whether or not drugs are counterfeited and the serious consequence of having people take a medication that is not what it is supposed to be and the consequences of something like that especially interface, as it interfaces with other products. now, there was a news report last week that was printed in the yahoo! news system, and today, quote -- de quote the commissioner, european -- the program that in here about controls or at least attempt

some to see that the european union has issues of concern about the situation that the ec and the commissioner said he expected the e.u. to take action to fight the menace of flake pharmaceuticals. and he said that he thought of that the e.u. would agree in 2010 that drugs turning from manufacturing to sales should be scrutinized carefully and that there will be special markings on the package. there is a lot of concern about this, mr. president, and we ought not to negative through year without understanding what the consequences of fake medication might be. i want to see our people pay as little as they can to get the

medicine the need, and part of that has to include a safety factor. and as i said earlier, we would not suggest anything in the health reform bill that would say take the short cut and disregard safety. i have a letter that was sent from the department of health and human services, which i quoted a little bit ago. but we say that the letter is being sent on an amendment filed by senator dorgan and the administration supports a program which i agree to buy safe and effective drugs from other countries and included $5 million in our 2010 budget. now, they go on to say, and this

is from is hamburg, the commission of food and drugs, that importing non-fda approved prescription drugs present for potential risk to patients that must be addressed. the drug may not be safe and effective because it was not subject to rigorous regulatory review or the drug may not be consistently made high-quality product because it was not manufactured in a facility that comprised the appropriate good manufacturing practices or third, that the drug may not be substituted will with the fda approved product because of differences in composition for manufacturing and that the drug may not be what the reports to be because it's been contaminated or is counterfeit due to inadequate safeguards and the supply chain, and i ask unanimous consent that the letter sent to senator tom

carper from the department of health and human services. >> now a rally with a self-described conservative groups against the health care legislation. speakers today include republican senators tom coburn of oklahoma, jim demint of south carolina and richard burr of north carolina. we will also hear from a radio talk-show host or a embrum. this is just over an hour. ♪ [inaudible conversations] save america first, evangelize the world. [inaudible conversations] >> ladies and gentlemen the program is about to begin. please welcome tim phillips, president of americans for prosperity.

[cheers and applause] >> thank you for coming out. along with the thousands of you that are here there are tens of thousands of fellow citizens across this country meeting had u.s. senate office is from arkansas, california, oregon and michigan. let's give them a hand and thank them right now for what they are doing. [cheers and applause] we gather today with a very simple message for this president and majority leader harry reid. keep your hands off of our health care, right? [cheers and applause] since this past summer we have held americans for prosperity almost 500 of our health care her rallies. from places like maryland, and nemer lenders here? [cheers and applause] out to little rock arkansas and from wilmington, north carolina

-- in the north carolinian is here? [cheers and applause] from philadelphia pennsylvania, any pennsylvanians here? [cheers and applause] you that. and we've even been down to my home state of leesburg virginia and across the commonwealth. where are the virginians here? [cheers and applause] jeffersonville indiana, right there. you bet. we've been to evansville myself. across this country, the crowds were big and the passion is intense and we've learned something that we already knew, folks. when americans face a challenge, we stand up and fight for our freedom. and that is exactly what you're doing. [cheers and applause] that's exactly what you're doing today and every day across this country. out on the road at the defense i hear one question more than any other question and it's this: can one person really make a difference? you've heard that, right? [cheers and applause]

all the grassroots activism and tea parties and town hall meetings, does that really make a difference? [cheers and applause] you better believe it does. today you were walking this capital, and our friends across the country are rocking the united states of america, and next year or have a feeling we are going to rock this whole country. what do you think about that? [cheers and applause] if you think grass-roots activism and you, individually, can't make a difference, let's take a very quick stroll down memory lane. remember last spring all the political pundits said this health care takeover was a done deal. remember that? speaker pelosi and majority leader reed said don't worry, we may not even need the whole summer to get this health care takeover wrapped up. the president said by august and on this bill on my desk. remember that? the media was talking about history in the works come by that they mean bigger government by the way, the history in the works but they forgot one thing.

do you know what they forgot? they forgot the american people. you better believe it. they forgot you and they forgot me and they forgot our friends across this country. and beginning this summer, we have our say, didn't we? [cheers and applause] so all guests looked to labor day, labor day slip to october, october slipped to thanksgiving, and now we stand here just over a week from christmas and we've got a message for the president of the united states, he's not coming to have this bill by christmas eve there. [cheers and applause] that's right. [chanting "kill the bill"] this rally today, rush limbaugh

called this a code red rally and we want to thank him. as usual, he's right. any of you wearing a red, i forgot my i've got to be honest i feel in that regard -- tedisco deride because we don't want the u.s. in danger during our health care freedoms and budget. we know what is at stake and our liberty as well. that is exactly right. but it's also code red for someone else coming and you know who that code red is? its majority leader harry reid and his friends in the united states senate; isn't that right? you see support for this scheme is falling apart. have you noticed that? as the american people see what is in this bill our centers may not read it by your reading it and i'm reading it, and we know what is in that bill, right? more government, more spending, more debt, more inclusive government especially. and i will tell you something -- the american people are saying

no. the people of america our hearts are with you and with me. they are with us. i just want to mention to paulson and adamle mengin polls in a speech like this but it's helpful to be encouraged and know for these guys across the street to hear ross, the cnn poll out the last few days when they asked do you support the health care reform coming out of washington, 61% of our fellow americans say no. 61%. [cheers and applause] we all heard the president say, and i know you've heard president obama c. this: if i can just communicate with the american people, if they can just hear, we will pass this legislation. have you guys heard that? he has gone on every prime time show possible including david letterman, i'm not sure if that's helpful but he did it. and it is a problem for the

president. the american people are hearing him loud and clear. they don't believe what he's singing about health care. they know better. three things the president says about health care that we know are not true. number one, when the president says don't worry, i know the budget deficit is bad but my government health care takeover won't raise the deficit a penny do we believe that? [booing] i don't even think most of the guys in the senate believe that. i think only a few professors at harvard believe that maybe. the second thing -- the second thing he says, number two -- [chanting "liar!"] -- the president says if you like your current health care

coverage, what? you can keep it. we know that's not true. we know what happened to our health care coverage. it's just not true. number three, the third thing he tells us, government will never get between you and your doctor. we know that's not true. [chanting "liar!"] and so today when the american people hear this, they know it's not true. they know that when government gets bigger, freedom and free seeds. they know that when you spend more money our deficit goes up and that is on my children, my four children, your children and grandchildren, the american people are smart. they know what is at stake and they are with us and we are winning if we keep fighting. are you going to do that? are you going to keep fighting this fight because we can win this thing if we keep it up.

we can do this. i understand there are a few folks from new jersey. any new jersey folks? [cheers and applause] i want to hear from somebody that is a dear friend of mine. he is the state director of americans for prosperity. he's one of the great leaders in this country and certainly new jersey. please welcome your friend and mine, steve. [cheers and applause] >> thank you, everybody. ladies and gentlemen, fellow americans we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, amongst them our life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. [cheers and applause] and the health care bill -- to health care bill we are fighting today gives the government control over our lives, underlines how our liberty, and it certainly doesn't make anybody happy. [cheers and applause] barack obama, harry reid, and nancy pelosi are out of touch with the american people.

[cheers and applause] but they don't understand or choose not to understand that we are in doubt by our creator with these rights and they are not coming to take them away. [cheers and applause] because we are going to kill the bill. [chanting "kill the bill"] my fellow americans, we cannot allow the pen to be mightier than the sword. we've heard that over and over again. but this is a nation built on a sacrifice, and the blood of our ancestors and those who've given for liberty and freedom to defend what was given to us by our creator. we cannot allow that to be wiped away with a simple signature of barack obama on this bill.

[cheers and applause] this is a moment in history that we are going to look back on and tell our children and grandchildren that we stood and fought to defend those rights. kill the bill, my fellow americans. [chanting "kill the bill"] and one last thing -- one last -- one last thing. one last thing. if these senators think that they are in safe states that they can do this, all i ask them to look to the hopelessly liberal state of new jersey -- [cheering] -- and the state of virginia, the great state of virginia -- [cheering] -- that only a month ago elected conservative republican governors. [cheering] we are not getting up.

thank you. god bless you. god bless america. [cheers and applause] >> i tell you what, he's going to turn new jersey around with your help from new jersey, right? we are going to turn to new jersey about. [cheers and applause] back in the spring and winter when this health care battle first kicked off, there was one group, conservatives for patients right, that was the first group in the breach with television ads, with research focusing on what this health care bill would do, and the head of the group is here today and i want you to give a warm welcome. this was one of the first guys in the breach, rick scott, come on up. [cheers and applause] >> this is a great day to kill the bill, right? [cheers and applause] everyday is a good day. who is from florida? anybody? [cheering] all right. so we started conservatives for patients' rights last winter, and the first -- the first interviews we did every reporter

said this is a fool's errand. what you're doing, this bill will pass and even earlier than ten they told us it would pass by the end of may. no way. [cheers and applause] they said the american people are ready for health care reform. obama-care reform. no way. what we want is better health care, lower-cost, not more government and more taxes. [cheers and applause] >> [inaudible] >> that's a good point, no killing babies. one of the first things we did as a documentary on the u.k. and canadian health care system. these are the stories. a 19-year-old girl goes to get a caps mere test, the government doctors is no you can't get it until your 20. she goes back at 20, they say you can't get it until you're 25. at 23 she gets cervical cancer, two years to live. is that what we want in this

country? >> no! >> they seem know it is too expensive, you can't get it. is that what we want in this country? >> no! >> that's why we are here! >> to years of waiting to get her hip surgery. is that what we want? >> no! three >> we don't want government health care. we've seen it. what do we have in massachusetts today? government health care, long waits, hospitals having to sue to get paid. it's a disaster. we don't want government health care. we want to work costs. that is what we want, less government. [cheers and applause] everybody knows if we stay active we will win. [cheers and applause] the goal of the other side is to wear us down. we will win. we just have to kill the bill and stay active. show up each and every day and

we can do it. [cheers and applause] [chanting "we will win!"] we put out -- we put out numbers on the go 72% of americans will vote against you if you vote for this bill this year. [cheers and applause] we need to let everybody know we will vote against the next year if they vote for this bill. so, i have the distinction opportunity to introduce the next speaker so he is known as the idea machine, think tank -- individual think tank, 18 years in congress, head of the freedom works. he's done a great job. let me introduce dick armey. [cheers and applause]

>> i'm looking at all you folks out here. how many of you worked hard all of your life, pays your taxes, served in the military -- [cheers and applause] i've got to ask you what is unpatriotic about that? [laughter] i've never seen so many attractive domestic terrorists and all my life. [laughter] [cheers and applause] i know that when you get done here you're going to go home to your imaginary jobs, that is what astroturf does. [laughter] let me say it's so great to see you here today. this is such an important expression of our concern that so important to members of the senate seat especially on this weekend. this is the time when they can cast the vote that will change america forever. [booing]

fundamentally devonish your freedom commodore of liberty, your right to be your own person as the lord god intended you to read this nation is devoted to protecting and so it is the time to make this statement and when i leave today in just a few short minutes, i'm leaving here to go speak to a group in arkansas in front of that senator's office because the need to hear and see us out at home too. [cheers and applause] so on behalf of myself and the 750,000 enthusiastic activists of the freedom work it's great to be here together. we showed up last april 15th. they said they are just a one chip program, they will never be back. we came back and they said they are just passing through town, they don't matter. we went to the town hall meetings the congressmen and senators and light as in august. they said you're really not welcome here. we've really don't want to hear from you and you've got no

business talking back at me. [booing] but i know that you are not willing to go away. then september 12th how many of you were here september 12? [cheers and applause] at your own expense, by your own initiative, for your own purpose to make your own statement; is that correct? [cheers and applause] how on american is that? [laughter] you mean you actually came on your own terms? to say what he wanted to say? and to be heard? [cheering] you sound pretty much like terrorists to me. [laughter] i'm so glad to or not real, you would be frightening. [laughter] look, this is such a critical time. they don't have the votes or they would have this dirty deed done by now. [cheers and applause] they don't have the votes because they have seen you show

up in april, and july, in september, and august, and now they are afraid you will show up in november. [cheers and applause] let them know we will be back. [cheering] now it is my pleasure to introduce the next speaker -- [chanting "we'll be back!"] did you hear that? all right, lamar was going to introduce but he's not here. i can't pass up my moment because the last moment that doc coburn -- to practice medicine all his life -- the last time we were together i had the amazing opportunity to watch him

received a lecture on health care from a woman named um, um -- madoxx, a television personality -- [booing] -- who i am told has a ph.d. in something that doesn't matter -- [laughter] -- who knew she was good to lecture the physician because she had actually gone to a doctor once. [laughter] so, when doc coburn has the strength to stand up to this world renowned expert on health care. but in the meantime, we have a treat, and i have to tell you, michele bachman from the great state of minnesota -- [cheering]

>> hi, everybody! [cheers and applause] hi it's the charge of the life brigade. [cheering] you came before and you came again. i guess they must be deaf, they can't hear you. [cheers and applause] but our message hasn't changed, has it? >> no! >> our messages as we are citizens of the united states. we are the owners of freedom. we expect you to maintain or freedom. [cheers and applause] and we are not leaving until you understand that no means note. what part of no don't you people understand? [cheers and applause] you are an absolutely beautiful sight with every day that passes we learn more and more on this bill. number one, there is a marriage

penalty in this bill. [booing] and medicare advisory panel took a look at this bill and they said not only will lead not save money, it's going to cost money. it's going to tax you. we all know it will prove to be the largest middle class tax increase in american history [booing] we also learned this bill will create something very odd. it will create an iron ceiling on wages. so if you make $59,000 a year or more, and that's joint, husband and wife in come, then you will lose the health care subsidy, most likely your employer will pay an 8% fine but guess what, once the employer pays that find their obligation is don, no more health insurance for you. rather than getting a tax-free

benefit of health care you have to go out and purchase your own health care with after-tax income. so if you are making 58,000 get government subsidized health care what incentive could you possibly have to make 59,000, where you have to go out with your own money and purchase an additional policy? this is redistribution of wealth. this is. [booing] i think joe the plummer figured that out a long time ago. [cheers and applause] let me ask you a question, was joe wilson white? >> yes! >> let's tell them once and for all, kill the bill! [chanting "kill the bill!"]

yes! [chanting "kill the bill!"] one thing government hasn't necessarily figure out is how to do the right thing, and the right thing always is in conformity with the constitution of the united states and the declaration of independence. [cheers and applause] let's ask our president, let's ask. , let's ask the speaker of the house where in the constitution is the authority to force an american citizen to buy a product or service against their will? we're in the constitution? [cheers and applause] [booing] we're in the constitution can we have our businesses pay a fine of 8%? where in the constitution do they have that authority? [cheers and applause]

maybe they need a course in remedial reading to find out what is in our constitution. let's tell them the number one -- the number one area in our constitution is to preserve and protect your sovereignty. you are sovereign. [cheers and applause] the beauty of the declaration of independence is that a creator god gave each individual person power. that's the beauty of the declaration. from there, the individual gives power in a limited amount of power back to government, not on the limited power, of limited power back to the government. i think these people have redefined the word limited. i think they put the prefix "un"

in front of a limited. "un" has a lot of meaning here, doesn't it? we don't want to give any more sovereignty, our personal liberty, or personal sovereignty over to this federal government. i think they've got enough. [cheering] we don't want to get any more liberty. we don't want to get any more sovereignty. see any more sovereignty to the u.n.. [cheering] we want to get back to what the other founders gave us in the first place. that is a gift. it is a gift that as we saw some years ago and mother from cuba to occur little five-year-old son, get on a little boat, get on and enter to, rated 90 miles of shore infested water for the privilege of coming to this great free country. we know what we have is

precious, don't we? its precious. 233 years ago it was purchased for us so that we could stand here today and hold up don't tread on me flags. that's our gift. [cheers and applause] that's our gift, freedom is our gift. but it's a gift that is sent free. and as we are coming to this wonderful time of the holiday season, whether you are celebrating the gift of flights with, cut or whether you're celebrating merry christmas, as our family will be celebrating in our home -- [cheers and applause] and by the way, this is a federal official wishing you a merry christmas! [cheers and applause] it's about coming to a time of

peace come a time of reconciliation, and a time yes, that gives us the greatest freedom and peace of mind that anyone could possibly have. and so that's what we wish. that is our wish for our fellow citizens here in the united states, for freedom, not for government enslavement. [cheers and applause] that is our wish. [applause] and so let's send a christmas card to harry reid. [cheers and applause] let's send a christmas card of peace on earth, good will to men. and so to do that, let's say to them do no harm. do no more harm to the constitution. do know more harm to our individual liberties, and do no more harm to america's health care system.

we can do better than that. [cheers and applause] and so now -- and so now we have one of our shining stars who is about to come on to this stage. he truly has been at work labor leader in the senate who has fought time and time again to get to the truth of the matter. this is a person who understands the health care system from the inside out as a physician, someone who has continued to practice medicine while he has served here in the united states senate. we owe this gentleman a great debt of gratitude. please help me welcome the champion of champions from the great state of oklahoma, dr. tom coburn. [cheers and applause]

>> thank you all. let me first of all say -- in the mic. let me say thank you for taking the time out to be here. what our country lacks is our active involvement to return the freedom that is rightfully ours back to a loss again. what our country lacks is the active involvement of the citizens of this country to return the freedom that is rightfully ours back to us again. the healthcare bill isn't about health care. the health care bill is about government control. the health care bill is about eliminating the liberty and freedom to choose what is best for you and your family. you know i've practiced medicine for over 25 years. i am a two-time cancer survivor and the best health care system in the world. [cheers and applause]

and that does not mean that there are not problems with our health care system. but i will tell you the government runs 60% of healthcare in this country and they don't do a good job at any one of those levels. and this bill will move another 20% of health care under control of the government. if in fact you are here today because you want a future for your children and grandchildren, you want to restore the liberty that is rightfully yours that in fact if you want to make choices for you and your family that right of yours will be preserved please do more. please write more, have your friends to more. this bill must be stopped, not just for health care. we can fix health care where it's wrong. this bill must be stopped because we have a government that is sweet to big way outside the bounds of its intention and a government we cannot afford

and this will make it worth $2.5 trillion over the next ten years. thank you for being here. may god bless you. [cheers and applause] [chanting "kill the bill!"] >> -- the bill, you bet, you bet. [chanting "kill the bill!"] well, we wanted you to hear from another senator who doesn't mind just like tom coburn, doesn't mind delivering bad news to his fellow senators sometimes. don't we need senators like that? buys that will stand up and say no matter what the party thinks, no matter what the leadership wants, no matter what anyone wants we are going to do what's right. and that's what this next guy does, the great senator from this state of south carolina, jim demint.

[cheers and applause] >> wow! thank you. [cheers and applause] blight we need some reinforcement. thanks for being here today. [cheers and applause] it's great to gather not as republicans or democrats, but as americans who love our country, who cherish our freedoms and are willing to fight for it. thank you, folks, thanks for being willing to fight. you know, over a year ago, americans voted for a president who promised to cut taxes, cut spending, cut debt to stop -- [booing] -- stop earmarks. [booing] did he keep his promises? [booing] and did he promise to stimulus

that would keep unemployment below 8%? now he is promising a health care bill that is going to cut costs and get more people into in short even though it isn't true. [booing] we have got to do everything we can to stop this health care bill because if we stop this health care bill we can stop his takeover of the american economy, and we cannot fall for any more of these promises that he has not kept. [cheers and applause] thank you for making sure every senator has heard from you. unfortunately today all of the democrats are going to the white house not to hear from their constituents, not to read the constitution, not to keep a

promise they've made back home, but to listen to a president who's telling them they can make history rather than save freedom [booing] we need to make sure when they walk out of that white house, that they hear from you. [cheers and applause] folks, as senator coburn said, this health care bill is important, but it's not just about health care. it's not a government that's lost track of the constitution. it has no idea outbound balancing the budget. they are no longer fighting for the principles of liberty because they've forgotten what it is they are here for. my hope is that they will hear from you not only today, but this next november that all across the country americans will make their voices heard. [cheers and applause] that whether they are democrat or republican, if they are not

standing up for our constitution for a balanced budget and principles of liberty that you don't send them here, that you send us people that believe as you do that this country is about freedom and and now is our time to fight for it. thank you for being here today. [cheers and applause] >> do we have any north carolinian is here? [cheers and applause] the state directors is the next speaker is the best center in the country, richard byrne. [cheers and applause] >> welcome to washington, 60 miles surrounded by reality. [laughter] listen, i want to paraphrase -- >> put the mic down. spinnaker when to paraphrase franklin delano roosevelt --

[booing] [laughter] [inaudible] >> you only have one thing to fear, nancy pelosi and harry reid. [cheers and applause] what an unbelievable process over the last few weeks, a display of true evidence, blatant disregard for what the american people want. ladies and gentlemen, we see you as the calvary. [cheers and applause] we see this movement around the country of the american people saying enough is enough. [cheers and applause] the reality is this isn't about health care and truly. it's really not about budgets. it's about power. and nancy pelosi and harry reid

want all the power consolidated in this building. in this town, in their hands and not in your hands. [booing] this issue, healthcare, happens to be the opportunity for the american people to take power back in their hands. to make sure every parent, that every parent in america has the opportunity for their children to inherit from them an opportunity to succeed. ladies and gentlemen if we continue to spend money, if we continue to borrow money, if we continue to run debt up in this country where our interest obligation outstrips capacity to pay for it we will export our children's opportunity to succeed. it is absolutely crucial that we stop it now. i truly believe the american

people have spoken. they don't want bigger government. they don't want more spending and they don't want higher health care cost. but for christmas i also don't believe they want this bill. [booing] i truly believe -- i believe the american people would take a lump of coal before they take this health care bill. thank you. god bless. [cheers and applause] >> we have one more senator we want you to hear from. she's from a place i used to call home, georgia. he's in his first term and has been one of the most conservative members of the united states senate. that's johnny isaacson from florida. [cheers and applause] >> thank you. before i came over here i walked out on the balcony over there

and you want to know what? i could hear you loud and clear. [cheers and applause] >> [chanting "kill the bill!"] you know, today up there the founding fathers are looking down. this is what the bill of rights is all about, the right to freely assembled, the right to speak freely without fear of intimidation. we will not be intimidated into a national health care program that will not work. we will not be intimidated into higher taxes that break and mortgage our children's future.

>> no! >> we will not leave our grandchildren a country that is unsustainable, and affordable and in that. >> no! >> this, too, can pass, but only, only if we stick together. only if we speak out, only if our voices are heard. only if we use the bill of rights, which are left to us so that we can be heard from one corner of america to the other. today you are demonstrating that you read your wheezes are being heard on the and we will come together, see this through to conclusion, which is to send health care back to the basement of the united states capitol. thank you very much. [cheers and applause] >> [chanting "kill the bill!"] >> all right. [chanting "kill the bill!"] you bet. [chanting "kill the bill!"]

i want to ask you a question. how many of you are thankful for the tea party movements this year? [cheers and applause] i thought so. well, we have to of the national coordinators of the tea party patriots and their search close friends and allies of us and you. we want them up here. is that all right? let's do that. mark, judy def martin, come on up, guys. [cheers and applause] >> i am continually amazed at you, the people, we the people. on september 12i was up there and i asked repeatedly throughout the day, congress can you hear us now! and the answer is yes, they can hear us. the thing is, they hear us they don't want to listen. [booing] so today, listen to me!

listen to me! [chanting "kill the bill!"] [chanting "listen to me!"] >> i don't know about you -- absolutely -- i don't know about you, but what we are hearing nationally in the tea party patriots, there are senators and staff who are playing games with you guys with the patriots around this country. they've taken their phones off the hook, the faxes, they can't even get through at 3:00 or 4 o'clock in the morning. we have one couple who went into their local centers office and talked to the staff. they asked why aren't the phone's ringing? i felt the phones were ringing

and mighty party group was going to be calling today. we are not busy, that's the answer they got. so they go back to their car and you know what they found? they picked up the phone and dialed the local office, it was busy. there were no phone calls coming in but it was busy. that's the kind of games they are playing. they don't want to listen. they want to ignore us and they think we are going to go away. >> no! >> we are not going away. they are counting on loss, they count on us to go away. they think it is ten days until christmas, next week is christmas, they won't pay attention, they will be too wrapped up in their families. i don't know about you but this health care bill, the increase the taxes, expansion of government, that is about my family, my children! [cheers and applause] so, guys, today what we are

going to ask you to do, you are going to go back in there. you were here at the beginning in november and talk to your representatives. today, you are going to your senator's office, and this is the thing, go to your senators office, you have two of them come and stay there until the senator talks to you. stay there. be a peaceful, be respectful, but let them know you traveled all of this weight on your own home -- own dime, and the need to listen before the vote on something this important. they need to listen to their constituents. that is what we are asking you to do today, thank you so much for being here. mark, do want to tell your story? [cheers and applause] >> thank you for being here. for months all of you have been making the phone calls and sending faxes and sending letters and visiting your local

law officers and your representatives have in turn been telling you that you are nazis. they've been telling you that you are terrorists and you are the problem with america. are you the problem with america? >> no! >> in america, government is not the solution, government is the problem. [cheers and applause] ..

and we had some good experiences are doing into the office is sat, talked to some staffers. of course senators wouldn't see us because we're just citizens. we're not important enough. now there are senators that were excellent and i would does obviously there are folks on our side and we appreciate them. another really important thing. we don't want people to believe that we dislike or distrust every politician. there are politicians who came on the stage today and we thank them for their service to this country. [cheers and applause] but we just had an incident over there that all of you need to know about. three of us, two of the national board of the tea party patriots and one of our constituents from california went to visit senator lieberman and we went and respectfully, just like we did every office over the senate office buildings. and we sat down and said we'd like to see the senator.

they told us he was unavailable and we said that's okay, we'll wait. and we waited just like we did in some of the other senators offices about after three minutes staffer came out and said you're going to have to leave now. and we said this is a public office. do we really have to leave? they said you're going to have to leave or we are going to have you arrested. [booing] what do you guys think american citizen threatened with arrest for visiting senator lieberman's office? [booing] your representatives threatening to arrest american citizens while bringing terrorists onto american soil. who are the terrorists, what senators are terrorizing the citizens and i encourage you -- we've got the sun filled beard were going to put it out on the internet. we want you telling your friends. [cheers and applause] we want you to know their time to stop her voice. god bless america and god bless this movement, go team america!

[cheers and applause] >> i tell you what. we are going to bring her back up one more time. [cheers and applause] she's going to make a very special introduction born of our guest of honor here today. michele bachmann! >> are we ready for the great lady that we've all come to see? [cheers and applause] we are rolling up her sleeves to hear from the freedom side! not only is she the most listened to female in talk radio, she's also "the new york times" bestseller author of what all of you are, their power to the people! [cheers and applause] phobos welcome.

and not to mention she is drop dead gorgeous, and smart. laura ingram in mac [cheers and applause] >> hey everybody. how are you? o. stop. [cheers and applause] >> were at! >> i'm here to talk to you about some of my favorite christmas stories. and i'll let you in on media back, every single one of you, all those cute little cameramen back there. i want you to listen up, get your hot chocolate coming or flask ready because i've a story to tell you. it's called how the democrats stole health care. [cheers and applause]

we are all like little cindy lou who and the grinch who stole christmas. asking senator reid, why are you senator reid taking our health care choices and stepping them up the chimney? well, little girl, i'm going to fix health care. it will be better than ever before and then i'm going to bring it back to you. okay, democrats. well well guess what? the grinch may have been able to fool cindy lou who, by senator reid and nancy pelosi can't fool us. [cheers and applause] and then i have some other stories to share with you. you've heard it and sure. it's called the abominable snow dog. harry reid is watching the

video. this new system is going to improve health care, expand choices, lower cost. it's going to do none of this. that is the snow job and then my personal favorite, a year without a. kathleen sibelius will be appearing in this christmas special as the house miser. but i am an optimist. i am a glass half-full person and i believe in the miracle on main street. [cheers and applause] because when we set our mind to something, we can do it. we can do anything and everything. we have been through much worse. after all, we survived jimmy carter. [cheers and applause] it doesn't matter how many slick press conference as the left has and their cronies in the

democratic arty. it doesn't matter how much they vilify us. when it comes to standing up for our freedom and our basic rights, we will not be denied. we will not be silenced. [cheers and applause] and let me just tell you. i don't know about all of you over there but i think about christmas and hanukkah and i think of the season as the christmas and hanukkah season of giving, right? all these people know how to do is take, take, and take. and let me tell you something, does anyone should get a lump of coal in their stocking this year, if senators reid, boxer, schumer, and now joe lieberman. [cheers and applause] and barney frank, that's just a given. let me just tell you something.

they are noddy and we are nice. and we are voters who are making our list and checking it twice. we are gathered today to declare anew our independence. and for the nice part the dinosaur media. they think you're a bunch of djs luke duke's who don't really know what time it is that you should be over in copenhagen with the real people. [laughter] that what we are declaring today, and now numbers and in our passion of so many of you are busy with christmas and all the things that come along with it, we are declaring our independence from a government with a terminator like determination to enlist every american as a lord of the stage. a government that only clear ideal is greater dependency and

a sense of greater dependency on it. it's a government so practiced in protecting itself from democratic principles that this is the closest mankind has ever, to creating sound travels faster than light. [laughter] today under this mask of health care reform, washington threatens its greatest infestation of our lives yet. indeed, when we think about what the many who signed the america's declaration of independence wrote it all becomes even clearer and more important now. we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal. they are endowed with their creator that among these life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness this is the kicker that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. [cheers and applause]

i'm turning around and talking to congress. ladies and gentlemen of the congress, you no longer have our consent! [cheers and applause] [chanting "kill the bill!"] and let me just say, without accountability, senator reid, senator boxer, and house speaker pelosi accountability to we the people, our government lacks legitimacy. [cheers and applause] since when does the right to abort babies trump the right to save a life lacks [cheers and applause]

we are here today declaring independence from a government seeking to create a health secretary that according to the latest love, legislative examination is given almost 1700 new powers. [booing] the senate bill contains the word secretary more than 2500 times and america's newly crowned helpdesk that will control one insurance can and cannot cover, how much plants can't and cannot cost, who can purchase well-planned and what services government plans to offer. [booing] i thought, i thought that we had loosened ourselves from the shackles of tyranny in our great revolution. unfortunately, the shackles have returned. [applause] at this point i would like all of us here to recognize and observe a moment of silence. for all of those children who

will not be born, if in fact this travesty and its current form or some form approaching it is passed in the house of representatives. and for those elderly, many in this crowd today who will be denied life-saving treatment because of a rationing board that exists in this current bill. i would like all of us to stop for just a few moments in a moment of silent prayer for all of those souls. >> have mercy upon us by god. >> silence. >> we are silent, we need to pray to the almighty god and ask him to remember us. >> today, we are declaring new independence and that's independence from a political

class that blames rising health care costs for personal bankruptcies in the next is a plan that would force middle american families to spend upward, get this, a $15,000 annually on the mismanaged health care plan. [booing] that is not taxation. that is plundering. that is larceny. that is stealing. did any of you consent to this? >> no! >> let's face it, if we allow washington to continue along this terrain ago march to the point where we need to check with the federal bureaucrats every time we want to take our sick kid to a doctor, we will lose the rights that our framers, our soldiers, our marines, our airmen, our coast guard, everyone in the u.s. navy spot so hard to preserve all these years. i don't wear a uniform, i don't wear a uniform, that with every

last breath in this body of mine and with all of you and all the people across the country today who could not be here, we continue to stand vigilant. we must continue this work from the moment this rally ends to the office is over there to the people who say they care about they care about the children in one breath and have no trouble spending taxpayers money to abort their babies and the next. that is the message we must send. and to all of these senior citizens here today, i say this. you work hard your entire life and you were promised that you would be cared for in this medicare system. those people who said they said with you are lying all along. they had to be if they vote for this. i am proud to stand with you today and i am saying and great respect closing with this, first they came for the rich and i did

not speak out because i was not rich. and then they confiscated the property owners and i did not speak out because i did not own property. then, they took away our right to bear arms than i did not speak out because i was not armed. and then they came for me and denied me my medical care. and there was no one left to speak out for me. and i couldn't because my medicare or better would treat my tonsillitis. i ask you what our founders would do at this moment. we know what they did. we know what they did. the media will continue to portray you as they always opportunity you. violins, uneducated, and intolerant and you don't care about people. i would imagine and just as we all got together in this crowd

and added a, it money we give to charity without do that whole crowd over there. [cheers and applause] thanks everybody! [cheers and applause] >> well, i don't know about you guys but let's make sure that harry reid and president obama are not the grinch who stole our health care this holiday season. what do you think? [cheers and applause] all right, we're finished with the speeches. now as grassroots activist lets make sure that we take our message across to her senate office is in a civil way and a way that says keep your hands off our health care. i urge you to do that and the senate officers are right this way. there is rebuilding thoreau. if you came here on americans for prosperity best and you want to take a petition we have about 300,000 petitions signed, hands off our health care for your

state. you can feel free to come right behind the stage, but otherwise let's go make sure they hear from us. does that sound good? >> yeah! >> thank you offer coming and let's say this health care system we we have here. news news [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

news [inaudible conversations] >> i am absolutely confident that if the american people know what's in this bill and that the senate knows what's in this bill that this is going to pass. work on the senate health care bill continues. however men of the debate from the senate floor with late nights and possibly another weekend session live on c-span 2, the only network to cover the network gavel to gavel with no commercials or commentary. get updates from the reporters and editors of the congressional quarterly rollcall group and

for iphone users come here the debate with the new c-span radio iphone application. for more including archived video and to read the bill go to c-span's health care hub.

>> now u.n. ambassador susan rice on preventing genocide from the u.s. holocaust memorial museum in washington. this is an hour. >> most of all i would very much like to thank ambassador rice for being with us tonight to

share her thoughts on this important subject. and i think it's very odd that you're here tonight after today's u.n. human rights day. it is also we mark the adoption of the 1948 genocide convention and for us here at the museum it is also the one-year anniversary of the report of the task force which the u.s. holocaust memorial museum convened with the u.s. institute of peace and the american academy diplomacy. and to top it all off, president obama has delivered a very thoughtful, nobel prize acceptance speech which touches on some of the issues that we're going to talk about tonight. so we have much to reflect upon. but i'd like to start i given you a little bit of a chance to talk about the united nations and what you've been up to over the past year. you've made clear that one of your major goals at the u.n. has been reinvigorated u.s. leadership at the body. and i was hoping you could tell us a little bit about what you think happened over the last period of time and what you're trying to do about it and rather

things are improving from your perspective? >> thank you on the mic. i like to begin by thanking you for the invitation to be here. thank you sarah for having me and for that very kind introduction. it's a real privilege to be able to be here at the holocaust memorial museum. i have great admiration for the work that you all do here, both in very witness to atrocities and to history, but also motivating people in the present day to action. and i was really pleased to have a chance, even briefly, to go through the exhibit before we began. i look forward to having more time to go through it in greater depth. but i also want to commend the authors and sponsors of the prevention genocide task force report was a powerful and thoughtful and comprehensive treatment of a very important

issue, which i think i found valuable before i came into government as a scholar and i certainly find valuable as a policymaker turning to these issues again. so i want to thank you again for that. speaking about the united nations, it is, i have to say in all honesty it's a great time to be the u.s. ambassador to the united nations because the world was responded to the change in approach and the change in leadership of intel and substance that president obama has presented. and i have the privilege of working in that context to the u.s. interests and protect and advance u.s. values. and the united nations is a complex and flawed organization, but from our point of view is a vital one that we by the way,

helped their instrumentally to create. and it's one where we are engaged very actively at this sort of pointy end of this year to convey to the rest of the world to change that the president is bringing them to ensure that this institution can be much more effect to in the ways that we needed to be. sober look into the institution to help us advance whether it is dealing with the situations in afghanistan or iraq were the u.n. has on the ground important field present says that are promoting elections, providing humanitarian assistance, try to deal with some of the most political difficult issues such as iraq and the disputed internal boundaries. we are looking to the u.n. security council to stand up as the president said today in his speech in oslo against those who violate international law and failed to meet their obligations from north korea where in june we passed the toughest sanctions

regime on the books against any country in the world today, to potentially iran, should iran continue to fail to meet its international obligations. so we see this body as one place and an important instrument through which to advance court u.s. values. we are engaging in a different way. we're dealing with all countries, large and small. we are rolling up our sleeves and working to try to make the institution better, rather than criticizing it from the sidelines. that included the decision to run for the seat and to join the evidently flawed human rights council in geneva. but we took the judgment that because we are deeply committed to the protection and her motion of human rights, because we abort its relentless focus on one country, israel and its failure to address the grossest human rights abusers around the world, rather than stay on the outside we were going to get in

there and try to work to make a difference. and we've had some success is, some frustrations. that's inevitably the nature of the beast. but as you're the president reiterate today, you don't get anywhere without real elbow grease and action. so, that's another change in our approach. we are meeting our obligations and that means paying our bills and our dues in full and on time. and congress has been instrumental in enabling us to do that on a bipartisan basis. and we are pushing actively everyday for real reforms of the institution can perform better, can be more accountable, more transparent, and worthy of the trust and the investments that not only the american taxpayers make in it, but taxpayers around the world. so in a variety of ways, we're approaching things differently. and i have to say, well not uniform across every metric,

that we sense palpable change. we sense, in many respects, a greater willingness to cooperate, to listen. we are working towards the end of this session of the general assembly and we're finding compromise and common ground on areas where we have stood alone in the past and where we have found ourselves fighting petty battles were being opposed reflexively, without opposition and need not be inherent or necessary. and so, we've doesn't mention earlier been able to forge consensus on difficult issues like north korea. we are now facing challenges and the council related to congo, eritrea. and the potential sanctions on as it goes to fail to meet his obligations with respect to djibouti and it active in

promoting violence and supporting terrorism in somalia. so in a range of ways, we are finding a greater willingness and a greater openness among a broader section of member states to try to become together and meet our responsibilities. >> you touched briefly in your comments about the flaws in the u.n. and i think it's fair to say that many of our countrymen have become very cynical over the years about the united nations, in part because of the issue that we face tonight, the failure to prevent the atrocities in rwanda, but also because of the perceived anti-americanism, the large bureaucracy. you know, you're well aware of the litany of complaints have been made over the years by the united nations, about the united nations. now that you're in the hot seat, so to speak, and really see it close up, you know, what can you say to assure those americans who are really concerned about

the united nations for the reasons that i outlined? >> well, let me say a few things in response to that. first of all, you are right. there're many americans who share the views that -- you are taking a lead it. but i think it's lost in understanding and appreciating that is the fact that survey after survey, including relative recent ones, indicate his support for the united nations and among the american public is typically in the range of 65% to 70%, higher than most people would intuitively anticipate. and yet, you cannot support for the institution and still feel disappointment about its failure to achieve its full potential. and there's no question that that in fact the case. but we need to look at this in various ways. first of all, when the united nations fails to act for example you pointed to rwanda or darfur for many years.

that failure is not of an institution or that big 38 for building on first avenue. that's the failure of its member states to take decisions or fail to take decisions. that's a failure of the chubais that have a vote in the voice on the security council are where applicable in the general assembly. so we have to be honest about that. and we can't just blame some amorphous concrete structure for those failures. secondly, when it comes to transparency and accountability, these are areas where much of the criticism that has been wielded against the u.n. has been manifestly justified by the facts, like the oil for food scandal. and cases of individual or even collect the malfeasance. what is heartening, but by no means satisfactory, is that real

efforts have been made in the wake of the most egregious scandals to try to strengthen controls, have real and credible oversight and investigative mechanisms. and to hold people accountable, to publish and make transparent the facts, and to insist that where people violate the rules, that there are consequences made it out. there's been real progress in that respect. but there is certainly much rater scope for continued improvement and, from our parts, as an extremely influential members eight and the largest contributor, we are working every day to demand more and raise the standards. >> i'd like to, there's a lot of issues that you talked about anything we can unpack some of them as we proceed through the questioning. they like to talk generally about the subject of genocide and mass atrocities. and i have long been struck that

quote that i read that you made in the "atlantic monthly" that referred to distribute that to rwanda host an aside in which he said you swore to yourself that if you ever faced such a crisis again, you would come down the side of dramatic action, going down in flames if that was required. i wonder if you could tell us what's going down in flames were coming down on the side of dramatic action meant to you. >> one of my former colleagues and dear friends, richard clarke, who has now become well known for his writings and his service in government, used to use a phrase that resonates for me and that i think i had in the back of my mind when i said that. he refers to the phenomenon of having to run through the west wing of the white house to raise attention and to get action on something that one believes to

be urgent. i was a that's figurative. [laughter] >> you haven't run naked to the west wing? >> i hope that's figurative. it does mean that there are times when in my opinion one needs to speak the truth. and that is what i wrote on my card that i deposited at the exhibit when asked, what will you do, what do you commit to do? i commit to speaking the truth, whether as a private citizen or as a public servant. and doing so badly and emphatically, that doesn't mean i win. that doesn't mean necessarily that -- that every wish you i wish i think is necessary that there are two run naked will result in the desired outcome. >> have you had to grant naked

yet? >> not yet. last night not yet. in the older i get the more reluctant i am to adhere to that commitment. >> well, you reflected on the experience in rwanda has experienced firsthand as a policymaker. what do you think went wrong there and what what did you conclude was necessary to fix in both the u.s. but also the international capacity to respond to this problem? >> well, let me say that i think many senior american officials, including president clinton, have spoken very openly and honestly about the reflections and their recollections. i was a direct your on the nsc staff at the time, the most junior position. my responsibility was for the united nations and for peacekeeping. that was before i took on responsibilities for africa. and i've often reflected that

our greatest failure in the u.s. government and i think frankly more broadly was not that we ever talk a decision not to act. it was that we never confronted the question. we never actually had, intel was too late, a policy discussion at the deputies level or the principals level about whether or not the u.s. or the international committee should intervene in as the genocide unfolded. and if i think if you go back and look at the records i have, one of the remarkable things is that there weren't editorial pages screaming for american intervention. they were not people in large numbers standing on the floor of

the house of representatives insisting on american intervention. and i think the reason for that was very unique to the moment in time in which this to ways, april 6th, april 7th, 1994. that was a week after congress had ordered the last american servicemen out of somalia in a congressionally mandated withdraw six months after black hawk down. and it was, as i remember it, a kind of harrowing accent and it was one where he think many people felt weren't and were leaving a part of the world were a lot of americans were questioning what we were even doing there in the first place. that was the context. and then, as soon as the genocide began in the killing

intensified, the u.s. government did what we often do in those circumstances, which is everything we can to extricate safely the americans on the ground. we shut our embassy amount we pulled out, and also in a very dangerous and overland evacuation, all american diplomatic personnel, and the american private citizen that wanted to leave that we've are able to assist to lead. and then, we effectively last hour on the ground eyes and ears, except for what later became a significant price presence and what later became a significant but a vocal ngo presidents. back came some days if not weeks down the road. and i think the greatest failing, this is a very personal view, was the failure to ever really ask at the highest

levels, should we, should others in this context do something by way of direct intervention? i will also say that i'm not convinced that had we asked that question and answered it in the affirmative that we would've been able to get there and act in a sufficiently swift and overwhelming to deal with what was literally a hand to hand, house to house genocide. but i think that in -- it's hard to argue that debate should not have occurred. and subsequently, you know, there are many good things that happened with respect to the u.n. force, the belgian contingent which was the backbone decided to withdraw after ten of its peacekeepers were killed. it was followed by the bangladeshi contingents. and they was last a round and we face the policy dilemma of what

to ask about rob that remained. and there were some that criticize the united states for suggesting that 250 person for should do less than a 2000 person force. i personally don't think that criticize them as well founded. and in terms of what i've learned personally for the future, it really goes back to what i said earlier about speak the truth. now that i am at that principals table, as opposed to a junior staffer, i think it's my responsibility and that of my colleagues and those in leadership responsibilities and in the congress and the public and the media to demand answers to those questions and not allow them to be unasked and unanswered. >> let's fast-forward to the president a little bit. we could talk about rwanda for a long time. we have limited time. i do want to ask you, president

obama has repeatedly talked about rwanda and talked about his determination to prevent and end atrocities like those that took lace and wanda, those taking place in darfur. that's what he said when he came to the museum for days of remembrance in the capital of rotunda in april. what concrete steps you think the administration is taking now to realize that commitment? >> with respect to a particular country or? >> know, with respect to the prevention of genocide, you know, taken us less insane we are going to operational sides never again and actually try to fill it. i like to talk about specific countries later, but i'm just talking about in general terms. >> well, first of all, prevention is not only about worming and anticipating the potential for genocide and mass atrocities and our analysts are intended to be very much engaged in trying to provide that insight in that analysis.

but it's also about aggressive, early, and real diplomacy. and this administration has stepped up its efforts diplomatic lee to address ongoing and potential conflicts so the president as he now has appointed a senior special envoy for sudan, general scott gration, whose role is not only to deal with darfur, but to work with the implement the peace agreement in sudan and prevent a situation respect to the north and the south from spinning out of control which i think potentially we have to be mindful of that, that risk. he's a pain in former congressman howard wolpe as a special envoy for the great lakes region including congo and burundi and that's all region

which has been a hot that as you know of atrocities and genocide over the last two decades to be actively involved in diplomacy in that region to prevent and resolve conflict. even in places like guinea where i think it's -- where we had some recent horrific atrocities. we have been very much involved with not only in new york in the council, but in the region, through our embassy and in various behind-the-scenes to pull diplomatic efforts, including some that i myself have been involved in in the past week to try to deal with that very volatile situation to spend even further out of control. see maxell use it in terms of individual conflict as opposed to an overarching institutional changes? >> well, you've asked what we've done. so i'm trying to address that.

>> got you. >> i'm not speaking to the merits or demerits of overall institutional changes. we've also been very active as was the previous administration in going back to the clinton administration in trying to build the capacity of states and regional institutions to engage and deploy for peacekeeping purposes. the global peace operations initiative, the african contingency training efforts, which is the successor to an initiative that i was very much involved in in the clinton administration have together trained over 70,000 peacekeepers around the world, many of whom are deployed now places like darfur and liberia and chad and elsewhere. so capacity building remains an important piece of this and i know i could go on but these are

very concrete and practical measures to prevent and respond and provide the opportunity for warning of genocide and mass atrocities. >> all right. let's talk a little bit about the u.n. in this regard because that's the closest experience as he reflected upon this issue of preventing genocide. what can we do to kind of strengthen the institutions of the united nations, whether it's its peacekeeping operations, whether it's human rights commission, whether it's a special visors office on genocide. you know, our report recommended a bunch of things. there are other reports. i'm curious if you know just as reflected upon that if there are specific reforms that you think would be valuable. >> well for solid and there's growing recognition that the united nations that what we're dealing with is a continuum of conflict that begins for prevention and at peace building and peace consolidation.

and there's a need to build and strengthen the additional capacity across the entirety of that spectrum. on the prevention side, the u.n. has set up mediation teams. it has better warning than it used to have very but frankly, this is an area which is the u.n. is still weak and its reliance on, on member states that are reluctant to provide full and real-time information. it has gotten very active in diplomacy and prevention. the department of political affairs is doing much of the difficult legwork in places that doesn't, that don't get a lot of visibility, places like madagascar are and guinea and nepal where the risk of conflict and violence are real. that is obviously the world's 800-pound gorilla when it comes to peacekeeping and the

deployment of forces. over 100,000 u.n. peacekeepers now deployed in some 15 operations around the world, more than ever before. and it is the u.n. has substantially improved the quality and its capacity to deploy peacekeeping, but it is now so overstretched, and the complexity of what the missions it is taken on is far greater now almost the big, big missions, to 20,000 people, with civilian protection mandates in places like the democratic republic of congo, which is the size of western europe or the united states east of the mississippi or darfur, the size of texas. it is now so stretched that it is arguably falling short. he doesn't have the helicopters the need for mobility in places like darfur or congo. it doesn't, hasn't reached its full mandated strength in each of these cases because there are almost no were peacekeepers to be tapped in to join.

so there are steps that have been taken but there's much more that needs to be done. we have made, i have made as ambassadors strengthening the u.n.'s one of my priorities. and then on the peace building side which has evolved the new mechanisms and structures like the peace building commission, which will, for its five-year review in 2010, there are new mechanisms to try to consolidate peace through diplomacy, through security sector reform in, promoting and enhancing the rule of law, having accountability for atrocities. and these things are in a sense that they are very important and they are manifest from randy to places like guinea-bissau. he talked about the human rights council where the function of

the special rapporteur's is particularly important to provide information and indeed in warning. but the capacities to be built along the entire spectrum of conflict. and i think what we can certainly point to real progress there are enormous gaps that obviously remain. >> let's turn from the general to the specific. and i like to talk a little bit about sudan because i know that's an issue that you've been working on actually to write your career in government and especially the last few months. >> and before. >> him before. >> while i was a private citizen. >> i was very struck with the president's language in his nobel acceptance speech. when there's genocide in darfur, systematic in congo or repression in burma there must be consequences. and the closer we can together the less likely we will be faced with a choice between armed intervention and complicity in depression. do you think there been any

consequences for the perpetrators in darfur? >> not enough. i mean there's an icc arrest warrant for the president of sudan, bashir, whom we and others have been complicit in crimes against humanity, we say genocide and yet he continues to govern. he travels relatively freely. and the only indicted war criminal to submit to justice in the context of darfur has been one of the rebel leaders to voluntary showed up in the hague. so i think there's no question that there has not been accountability for that. now will there be consequences? the united states has imposed in the past sanctions on sudan, not only for what has transpired in darfur, for its support for

terrorism, for its atrocities and human rights abuses in the context the long-standing context of the north-south conflict. and the president's new policy for sudan highlights first of all the important he attaches to affect of action. it balances three very important and simultaneous priorities. one, in the mass atrocities, killings, violence, genocide and darfur. two, effectively implementing the north-south peace agreement, the comprehensive peace agreement so that the final stage of the just and fair referendum can occur in people of southern sudan can determine their own future and preventing sudan from again serving as a safe haven for international mail terrorist like al qaeda. those are three important core

goals that are essential to our interest to regional peace and security. and we have clearly defined in each of those three areas specific benchmarks against which the behavior of the parties will be measured. we will review progress in achieving those benchmarks at a high-level, interagency, on a quarterly basis. and we will assess as the president said -- >> so there are benchmarks? >> absolutely, very specific. >> that have been agreed to by the senior officials? by the highest officials including the president of the united states. and those benchmarks relate very specifically in each of those three areas. >> have you communicated those benchmarks to the sudanese government? >> we've included our expectations to all the parties including the government of sudan.

but if i might just continue for a second. then, we have also heard specifically outlines both the incentives we are prepared to deploy for positive behavior and positive progress, measurable, tangible, not rhetorical the practical progress for steps along those benchmarks as well as the pressures, sanctions, punitive measures that we would be prepared to take for her. and this is important, for the status quo persisted because the status quo is inherently unacceptable and or for backsliding by the parties with respect to those benchmarks. and will have this quarterly review, and we will take decisions in light of the facts on the ground as to how to proceed. and in fact if you look at the president's speech in oslo today, he spoke about this not

only in the context that you highlighted, of the human rights abuses or cases in darfur, burma, zimbabwe, but he explains that this approach of engagement and pressure for which there is no magic formula, no cookie-cutter model is in fact the basis of our approach in many complex situations from your rant to zimbabwe or burma. >> i'd like to just tell the audience, remind you guys that if you have questions for ambassador reiss, please write them down now. i'm going to come to the conclusion of my questioning pretty soon and then give you an opportunity to ask questions. i want to have one more question on sudan if i could that in the gears before president obama took office, many of the people who now are in the administration, including ourselves were quite in favor of the greater pressure on

khartoum, sanctions, possibly even military actions which you've raised on a couple of different settings. i think there was an expectation among some of our activist friends here in the audience that the administration made that even more aggressive on sudan then i think has transpired. i think there's a senate disappointment in some quarters. but as i could just understand how you might square the new policy with those expectations. >> well, first of all, i think we have to acknowledge that the circumstances of today with respect to the north-south agreement and the cpa, the circumstances on the ground in the south, the circumstances on the ground in darfur. they have evolved in some cases far worse in some cases for better than when at least i knew the statements that i did.

i spoke about my own personal view is a scholar at the brookings institution in september of 2006 that if the government of sudan continued to refuse to allow the deployment of the united nations force or the u.n., au force, unamid that it ought to face immediate consequences including the threat of the use of force. i believed it at the time and i think that was a bold but were the possession. there is on the ground a u.n. african union force. our aim is to build it to full strength and enable it to do what it is mandated to do which is to adequately protect civilians. that is the aim as we work with others diplomatically to resolve the underlying conflict. so now in my view the approximate challenge and darfur

a civilian protection and we have a potential means albeit far from adequate, to begin to do that without external forcible intervention. we have a huge diplomatic challenge of working with dollars to unite the rebels to broker a more stable situation between chad and sudan, which is fewer of the conflict and indeed to have the basis for a negotiated resolution to the underlying conflict. that might be remains that the way to accomplish this as well as a way to accomplish effective and full implementation of the comprehensive peace agreement is to be very poignant. if the parties take positive steps, i have no problem with reinforcing that through positive action, if they fail to act or they fail, they backtrack, my strong view of the

president's policy is very clear. there must be consequences. and that is what he said. having been part of intimately part of craftiness policy i think it's the right approach, the right balance and i will be a matter of speaking the truth as i understand it as we work to assess very objectively where there's been progress and where there's been backsliding and how that implicates the assessment of our benchmarks. >> another area of concern for us is the horrific situation in the eastern part of drc. we're according to the international rescue committee more than 5 million people have died. over the last ten years. really one of the greatest areas of mass violence in the world and -- >> i think the greatest. >> the greatest. okay, rape has become a great

tool of war. impunity is rife. you mentioned peacekeepers briefly and then wondered if you tell us a little bit about to questions, two issues on that. one is, what is really do you think the answer to the problem and congo? and number two, and three minutes, well, let's just leave it there. i mean, describe a situation which has been under the radar screen in the world. the international community has been able to deal with adequately. what are your thoughts about what the international community ought to do about it? >> well, first of all, let's unpack the problem. you're not going to get me to answer this in three minutes. i'm sorry. i'll do my best. >> you cannot ten minutes. >> i'll try. there are multiple things going on in congo, particularly eastern congo.

there is the remnants of what was an interstate war. there are the remnants and indeed the ongoing manifestations of what is in fact a civil war among congolese parties in the east. there is the fact that the perpetrators of your wand in genocide remained in the form of the fdlr, operating with impunity in eastern congo and killing very large numbers of people. lords resistance army has also been active in eastern congo. and these are actors that i've committed massive atrocities in the case of the fdlr genocide. they continue to foment insecurity. then you have a congolese army