have had healthcare. runs around $600 a month for teachers, but i think we have to start somewhere with the healthcare reform and i have to say that i don't - in being in healthcare should have researched it thoroughly and read it thoroughly but i think most people just are not - they're just scared of change and not really understanding fully all that's involved. i was diagnosed with cancer two years ago and thank god, that i caught it early and so far my insurance has covered it well, but i have friends that you knju were not so fortunate that were reduced or refused treatment for cancer and we have, m d ander son and we have to drove from

north texas there to get chemotherapy. i just think that - probably going to be a good thing. i think president barack obama has a good heart and has our interest in mind and - um... not everybody is going to agree on everything so - i'm glad that we have to start somewhere. . . .

host: that will be on c-span2. an hour left in the "journal" this morning. coming up, the wounded warriors program. we will be right back. >> c-span, christmas day, a look ahead to 2010 politics, including republican congressman

eric cantor and nbc's david gregory, buzz aldrin and fellow astronauts on the legacy of apollo 11, a discussion on the role of muslims in america and the world, and later, a former cia intelligence officer on u.s. strategy against al qaeda and in afghanistan, and at 8:00 p.m. eastern, remembering the lives of william f. buckley jr. and senator ted kennedy. >> this christmas holiday, we have three days of the book tv on c-span2. friday morning at adm, books on history, politics, and public affairs, including taylor branch on his new book, "the clinton the tapes," sarah palin on her book tour, and a new biography of supreme court justice scalia. you can get a full schedule at booktv.org, and follow us on twitter. merry christmas.

host: joining us now at the c- span cable is brigadier-general gary cheek. walton to the program. -- welcome to the program did tell us about the army would warriors program. guest: we have soldiers from three basic areas, about 40% isolated from theater, 20% are soldiers who have had injuries in mobilization or demobilization, mostly reserve components soldiers, and the other 40% are soldiers, mostly active duty soldiers, who have become wounded or injured, things that just happened in every life or part of the training, etc. for the nine dozen soldiers, we have 29 units across the united -- 9000 soldiers, we have 29

units across the united states. the other part of the program, which looks after the most severely injured soldiers that are part of that, about 1000 of them are on active duty, and about 4700 are retired and have gone back to the community. we have a program that cares for them following active duty and for the most seriously injured looks after the active duty of the army as well. host: why was it necessary to create this wounded warrior program for medical treatment beyond what they receive at places like walter reed or after they separated from the military at a veterans affairs -- veterans facility? guest: one of the key reasons is we tend to keep about 50% of the soldiers on active duty when they go through the program. for the army, it is imperative that we try to rehabilitate them and bring them back to duty. for many of the soldiers,

particularly the non- commissioned officers, there is a wealth of experience that we really should not just simply release them to the department of veterans affairs for the treatment. there's a lot to gain for us there. our army warrior ethos is that we never leave a fallen comrade. we wanted to all we can for the soldiers and their families, and they are professional soldiers who volunteered to serve the country. this is a career that they have chosen. they have made a commitment and we have made a commitment to help them. when the conditions are very, very complex, and are going to take a significant amount of time for them to rehabilitate, we bring them to the specialized units so that they can focus on their care, on the rehabilitation, and returned to duty, hopefully. host: in a recent article about the program, they talked with the program director, and they

said that soldiers with a combined disability rating of 50% will be eligible for the program as long as the injuries are combat-related. what does 50% mean? guest: that is taken from the rating tables of the department of defense and the department of veterans affairs when they are assessing the seriousness of a wound, kill us, or injury. probably -- wound, illness, or injury could probably in better terms, the kinds of injuries you will see -- i will give you some examples. posttraumatic stress disorder is a category where we put a soldier in the most serious army wounded warrior program, burns and education, brain injury. -- burns an amputation, brain injury. that is why we have the army wounded warrior program, to continue to advocate for the soldier, help them navigate through the many benefits and opportunities they have and assist them well into the

future, for as long as it takes. host: is this just for soldiers that have been injured during the iraq and afghanistan conflict, either directly or indirectly? or is it something that they've suffered before these conflicts started up, that they could come in and get treatment? guest: the army would warrior program was for soldiers -- army wounded warrior program was for soldiers of this generation on active duty since 2001, the ones most seriously injured. the wounded warrior program is really an advocacy program and assistance program to connect a soldier with other non clinical services or medical care. for soldiers on active duty, they could also be enrolled in this program, but they will have all whole other series of care providers, case managers, and those who provide non-clinical services. it is a pretty complicated program that brings several pieces together.

host: for the better part of the next hour, we will talk to the brigadier-general about the army's wounded warrior program, and if you want to get involved in the discussion -- we have a special line for veterans, wounded veterans and their family members. our first call comes from oklahoma, randy on the line for republicans. go ahead. caller: i believe that if our government is going to send our citizens to fight wars, then they should be obligated to give the soldiers or the veterans and the warriors the best of care above all. and that includes the so-called

universal health care that the of the coming up here -- that they have got coming up here. the veterans deserve all the attention of the government should be obligated to serve them after they've served our country in the manner that it did. -- that they did. guest: i agree completely with him. obviously, if we are going to have a professional army, all-volunteer army and military, if we cannot guarantee the care and take care of these soldiers, both from the point of injury all the way into the future, and help them with a productive, wholesome, and rewarding future, that young americans are not going to volunteer to serve the country. soldiers on the battlefield, if they're not assured of their medical care, are not going to fight with the same intensity and tenacity that they do today. we have a moral obligation, and frankly, soldiers, for those who

dedicate their lives to it -- it is something we feel we have to do. host: our next call this from teresa, a va nurse. caller: i'm a nurse at the va, taking care a lot of the soldiers coming back to some of them, when they first come back, the haft family and support, but because of their mental health and posttraumatic stress disorder, they start to lose their families and their jobs, and they come to the va, and there is no help for them in terms of housing and support. they have to wait and wait, and they cannot wait. they give up hope. i was wondering if the congress could create an emergency fund so at least warriors could be put on disability quickly until

the funding comes through each year. host: sir? guest: well, that is a tough problem, and one of the key things that she is bringing out is that in our case, our 9000 soldiers, every one of them is an individual, with unique medical issues at a minimum. they bring with them a whole host of other potential challenges, be they family, personal, private, or otherwise. but they also bring in goals and dreams and aspirations of other things that they have always wanted to do. our program, as we have learned in eight years of war, and through that period, we of constantly improved this program. we have got what i would call very dedicated cadre and staff, excellent facilities, but we have learned that is not sufficient. it is not enough just to provide those services and provide nice facilities. what we have worked on and what

we are going to is an inspirational model to convince our soldiers to overcome their disabilities, live with the things that they have to come out of focus on whether their abilities -- focus on what are their abilities, and focus on a viable, productive, and rewarding future. in this particular case, she described a soldier who starts to lose the support structure, and has a difficult time transitioning into civilian life. we have to reach back and assist them. we are strong and great partners with the department of veterans affairs. they have been an enormous help to us. they have an officer that works with us. we have a the representative in every one of our war years transitions unit. we partnered very strongly with them and we want to look after every soldier, whether they are on active duty or as a veteran.

the role of the family, as she mentioned, is just so critical, and the support, love that they provide, we cannot repay. we cannot replace. and certainly, the nation should do all it can to provide more for the families. host: we want to remind our viewers and listeners that we've shifted gears in our discussion this morning. a lot of you have called in about the health care vote, and while that is an important issue, we have shifted gears and are talking about the army's wounded warrior program if you want to get involved in that conversation, please give us a call. of course, our special line for wounded veterans and their family members --

next up is cliffside, north carolina, on our line for democrats. good morning, daniel. caller: yes, it seems like the administration of the last eight years did an excellent job of paying lip service to giving help to returning veterans, and to me, there is nothing more important than that. i'm just curious -- mccain was against some sort of benefits that veterans were getting because he was afraid we were going to lose volunteers. can you tell us what that was that he was so dead set against when the presidential campaign was running last year? host: are you familiar with that? guest: i am not familiar with anything that senator mccain had been opposed to or against. but i guess what i would say is,

for the army, we work very closely, obviously, with the administration, the office of the secretary of defense, and with congress. what i have found is across all of those, both administrations and with the congress, have been enormously generatio -- enormously generous, very open, very, very helpful to us. and i believe also that they worked very cooperatively with the department of veterans affairs. putting the politics of this aside, i think for both congress, the administration, the officials that serve in the office of the secretary of defense, and others, we have enormous cooperation, and army has been very well taken care of. host: for the soldier that has the 50 percent disability rating, does he have to make the direct application to the program, or is the army tracking them from the time he is injured and taken off the field and identified as a person that

would be moved into this wounded warrior program? guest: it varies, mainly because sometimes it is very evident from the injury but the disability rating is very likely -- in the case, say, of an entity or a burn. in other cases, it is not as a parent. as soon as we recognize that the soldier is going to be a candidate for the program, we will enroll them in that. but regardless of whether they are on active duty, they are assigned to the warrior transition, those that are seriously injured, and they will receive great care, case management, at the dedicated leadership to guide them through that. host: paul in miami, welcome. caller: good morning. sir, i honor your service to our country and the service of all of your other fellow warriors, though i oppose war. i'm an anti war veteran. i want to ask you two questions.

what lessons have we learned -- [inaudible] and what are we doing to address the deficits for vietnam veterans that have been mistreated? and when are we going to get a surgeon general, sir? let's get on with it. thank you. guest: paul, i had difficulty understanding the first questions. i just got the lessons and care. host: i think that is the gist of it. guest: he asked one question we learned about warrior care since walter reed. i think we learned there is that, first of all, the army -- if you remember "forrest gump"

when he was playing ping-pong, he was playing a patient in an army relocation center, -- army rehabilitation center. in the 1970's, we had one of those at valley forge, pennsylvania, were general frank reelected after being wounded in vietnam and decided to have this leg amputated and have another year of recovery there, where he ultimately, based on how inspired he was by the other soldiers he was with, decided to return to active duty. by the 1970's, the disability was really gone from the army. we have a program called medical pulled and pulled over, that work adequately for a peacetime army -- medical hold and holdover, that work to adequately for a peacetime army.

but the different things that we had done became in addition to take care of the number of soldiers, both casualty -- became not sufficient to take care of the number of soldiers, but casualties and those in medical care. we created these warrior transition units and we are in our third year of being operational. what we've done is put dedicated and trained leadership, traditional leadership that soldiers are familiar with, and we provide case management to train those that can help schedule points, keep soldiers on track, as well as the physicians or assistance who can help orchestrate multiple conditions and helped negotiate for -- and i will say to collaborate with other physicians. we have said all those things up. this is a great start for the army. what we've learned now is that

it is not enough. we want to get to where we get our soldiers focused on their future, and through a pretty deliver it co -- pretty deliberate goal set, medical care, real politician, personal life, family -- rehabilitation, personal life, family, the ultimate goal is that we want a soldier who was fully prepared to step into civilian life and go back to the army. most importantly, it is confident that they can do that. with any change in your life, there is anxiety that goes with that. we are not necessarily going to eliminate all that, but we want to increase the level of confidence that we have a good handoff that a soldier steps from one part of life to another. the next year is going to be an exciting one as we step into the

comprehensive transition plan, which will automate these practices, and allow us to identify and resolve issues for the soldiers as we get them ready for the next step in their life. we are changing from just providing the services to one where we really want to inspire our soldiers to be excited about their future. so many of them had so much to give. host: this next question was e-mailed to us, along those lines. guest: what a great question. what we have found, obviously, for the soldier was injured -- soldier who was injured, we certainly don't want them being idle and doing nothing with their time, because this can lead to large despondency,

depression, other things. we want soldiers to get engaged in the work program or education program, and sometimes both. that is what is so critical about selecting a track for the soldier, one week to an initial assessment. -- when we do an initial assessment we might have an intere -- might have an infantryman that is not medically qualified to return. the soldier could be a legal clerk could we want a soldier to go through some counseling with a career counselor, select a new specialty, and then we will set up an education plan to help them work on that while they are recovering. we offer opportunities to go to college, vocational training. a whole host of things that soldiers can do but we set them up in some cases with smaller shops, or using va benefits to go to -- to set them up in some cases with scholarships, or using va benefits to go to college.

a friend of mine, while he was recovering, got a master's degree from georgetown, and he is going to remain on active duty, recently selected for promotion to colonel. he is currently on his war college scholarship as well. we really want our soldiers to be actively working to go to school while they're in the program. host: we're talking about the army's wounded warriors program with brigadier-general gary cheek. it is the commander of the warrior transition to man. -- he is the commander of the warrior transition commanded thomas on our line for independencts. caller: good morning, general, and tv announcers. i have an interesting question, regarding what a person leaves the military, first-termer, third-termer, or the retiree --

why can't we use the central part of the united states for a west coast, east coast base program, because the skills we have in the military, any branch could accomplish the maintenance, food service, and hospitalization, and you can have your wounded warrior at that base, which has been closed. i was very saddened when i was up in the north central part of the united states where the air force base was come and they are selling everything off to the civilians. host: thanks for your call, thomas. guest: it is interesting. i guess what i would say is that these 9000 soldiers, each one as an individual8 -- every one of them has their own goals,

dreams, and desires, and the last thing they want is to be forced into doing something, or be pushed into a certain direction what we really want to do is offer them a lot of opportunities. this is probably what america -- where america can do more for our wounded and injured service members as they returned to civilian life. the support of america for our armed forces has never wavered. in fact, it continues to be a remarkable -- it continues to be remarkable what they offer every day for soldiers in terms of gifts, welcoming, etc. it is far warming for all of us. -- heartwarming for all of us. would warriors get invitations to a sporting events and gangs like that. -- and things things like that. those are nice and they make them feel appreciated, but they

are transient things. what we need to do is embrace these service members and offer them a career. bring them back into the community. get them involved in sporting events and athletic activities. for the golfers, who have not played golf until you've played with a double amputee. you have not been a cyclist until you of been told by a soldier with a missing arm that " i will play you forward as we move through a course." or kayaking. get them into the community, offutt them a clear, and you'll be surprised. -- offer them a career, and you'll be surprised. host: mike, you are of veteran? caller: yes, sir. good morning, general, and good morning, sir.

i was in desert storm, and operation iraqi freedom in 2003. lately, when i come back from iraq, i had a lot of injuries. i want to also said that the treatment program i'm involved in an alabama, it is of the program, and they have been very good -- it is a va program and they have been very good. the only problem i have is the long way. other than that, excellent job. thank you, sir, for your time. guest: that is actually good to hear. with our 9000 soldiers that we have on active duty, we do have a lot of issues. frankly, sometimes, you cannot get it right. -- you do not get it right.

when we do not get it right, we want to make the corrections to take care of that soldier. the conditions and issues change. what is right yesterday may not be right the next day. for michael, i think it shows how far we have come in our relationship with the department of veterans affairs. it is a very positive one. is one where when we had a veteran with a problem, we contact va and work with them. or if they have an active duty soldiers, they contact us. we work very collaborative leap we have a number of va officers working with the army, and we of army officers working with the va, and liaisons' in different places. it is critical that we work together. it is good that he is doing well with his treatment and his recovery, but i think, if i could, i could probably offered those on the line, if we have a wounded soldier and family with an issue, we of got a hot line,

1-800-984-8523. they will when you walk with the right person who will care for you. -- live view up with the right person who will care for you. host: later in the evening, c- span will air the senate armed services committee hearing, talking about the wounded warrior program, and was chaired by senator ben nelson, democrat of nebraska, and features several wounded warriors and their spouses. if you want to find out more about the program, you can tune in this evening at 11:00 hour for the reair of the senate armed services committee hearing. back to the phones. rhode island, on the line for republicans. caller: to the general, thank you very much for your service. thank everyone who is in

uniform or past uniforms. really appreciate it. i'm a vietnam veteran of three years. it's just ironic that the news conference that the president just had, someone in the audience yelled out, "what about the troops?" he had to be reminded. as far as i'm concerned, that sucks. thank you. guest: one of the things i would say -- let me express my gratitude to the vietnam veterans. the treatment they receive, which is much different from what we have today, is attributable to them. they stepped up and told us that we will not allow this to happen again to this generation of warriors. we are very, very appreciative of that bond we have with the warriors of that generation. i know they know that they have passed the guide to this

generation, and the army has not filled this generation and will certainly not fill them. --not failed this generation and will certainly not fail them. host: is this unique to the army? guest: no, they all have a version of the program. we collaborate quite often and share ideas. but all of them are somewhat different all the services of a different culture and different circumstances. all of them approached this in a little bit differently. we are really, really good about sharing ideas. host: our next call comes from california, dan on the line for democrats. caller: good morning, in general. i want to commend you on a job well done on bringing these issues to the forefront, to the american people. with the challenges of today,

the military and the medical personnel, b.c. lot more soldiers on the battle being injured -- we see a lot more soldiers on the battlefield being injured and killed. i do not see hearings by the budgetary committee about the military spending, if it is going to balance out more towards these types of programs to help with that. i would like to see what your thoughts are on that. guest: well, as i pointed out earlier, the congress has been very generous to the army. they listen to us very closely in terms of what our requirements are. in particular, when we look at budget requirements for help, it is funded separately through the office of the secretary of defense. if everything like that is programmed in. the number of casualties we have, the number of soldiers

need to take in -- we program and budget for making sure we can take care of those requirements. we are for real taking care of by the congress. -- very well taken care of by the congress. host: the issue of posttraumatic stress disorder has come up several times this month last week in "the new york times," there was this headline, talking about a private first class who has struggled with posttraumatic stress disorder and production after tours in iraq -- posttraumatic stress disorder and drug addiction after course in iraq -- tours in iraq. it talks about the circumstances of his ptsd and whether he violated military laws. he refused to sign a waiver. he talked to a therapist

afterwards. is there any thought of changing that policy to get these soldiers to be more forthcoming about their experiences? guest: well, i think in this particular case, what this policy is oriented on is determining if this soldier poses any immediate threat to those around him or to his family. it is not intended to be a dive into history to find culpability for something the soldier may have done. that is really not what it is about. if anything, is probably providing a little more clarity into what we are trying to accomplish here, as opposed to being part of an investigation into potential war crimes. i think all of us who have served in combat, we have to make decisions, particularly commanders and leaders, but also soldiers, especially in counterinsurgency. all of them have to make decisions, and very quickly, but there can sometimes be

consequences that are unintended. that can trouble the soldiers and leaders for an extended amount of time. i do not think there's anything wrong necessarily with the policy. i think what the provider is doing is telling the soldiers that if there is something that you are doing or my be that might pose a risk to your family or soldiers, they an obligation to make sure that does not happen. host: our next call is from trees in california. you are a veteran? -- teresa in california. you are a veteran? caller: no, my husband is. my daughter just married a wonderful young man in the army. my question is, i wrote a proposal here in my city of riverside to have support housing built for these families that would have everything that they needed on- site, and housing would have a care givers unit, because so

many family members want to care for their wounded vets while they are transitioning. there were also the physical therapy there, social workers, everything that they would need, a clinic. my proposal was accepted, but the time i went to the builder -- by the time i went to the builder, he did not seem to want to build what was needed, because of cost, and the land was bought, he was to build this thing, about the time it got approved by the planning commission, it had turned into housing for seniors, because they felt that would be the easiest way to get to the community to accept what was needed. i know, because my husband and i have been in the system for a long time, that most of the housing that is being built by the bva and the money coming

through the states is going for alzheimer's units for very old veterans. i also know, going through the system, my husband became completely disabled by the age of 29. he was fast track on to social security disability, which is what is happening now, because it is so difficult when you are a board through the va. my husband, completely disabled at 29, did not win 100% with me being his advocate until december of 2006 could what happens with these families is that their credit falls down and they end up living on credit card debt, and they cannot even get, when they don't have a car, they cannot get a ride to the hospital appointments, because they have not met the threshold of being disabled get --.

of being disabled yet. my husband and i would love to live in one of these transitional programs and be there, because we know this life, and we know that the divorce rate is high, and keeping your kids together -- i would have to quit jobs to get my kids' teeth fit or their eyes taking care of, because my children were deprived of benefits they should have had all through their lives. host: you have given us much to work with. thank you very much for your call. guest: first of all, thank you for what you're doing and thank you for your interest in your community. it is wonderful what you have undertaken to help veterans from all our wars, not just this generation's war is. i wish the best for you and your husband and i thank you for your advocacy and support for him, which is really typical of what we see in army families. really wonderful and what they do. i have a couple of lots for you.

-- couple of thoughts for you. the statute that governs disabilities and compensation for veterans is 60 years old, was written under the leadership of omar bradley. we are well overdue for reform of this statute. we have got from agricultural, industrial america, with the draft army and a draft military, and now we are an all-volunteer army, the information age in america, with an army that fights by unit, not by individuals. we have a lot of married soldiers could we have a lot more women, not just single, young men, as in past wars. it is high time for a new look at this ability statutes -- at disability statues for veterans that goes beyond just disabilities and awarding compensation. this generation wants something more along the lines of replication -- rehabilitation

and future productivity, and that is what week owe them. our message to congress and the secretary of defense is that is what we need to do. the statue to change oba's the takes some time, and it is a complex -- obviously takes some time, and it is the complex and difficult issue. as a soldier is going through the disability board process, we do it collaboratively and expanding the program. it will become the standard program. we do a joint physical with the day -- with the va, and at the end of the process, va disability and army disability assessments will be completed, they will be enrolled in the va,

and a lot of the challenges you have will be prevented by the way we are currently doing business. unfortunately, it is too late to help you and your husband. host: our guest is a graduate of the u.s. military academy at west point, and his awards included the bronze star, meritorious service medal, and army achievement medal. how does an officer with field artillery experience become the assistant surgeon general for care and transition? -- for warrior care and transition? guest: most of my experience has been in operational units and strategy policy, that type of thing. when they told me that this was the job i was moving too, my jaw hit the floor, but quickly told them that i would be honored to do that but i think there is some brilliance and a but the army has done.

you cannot simply put the responsibility for the care of our wounded soldiers on the medical corps. it is also an army responsibility. they have a soldier like me from the operational army to help run this program, and i do it in collaboration with great doctors and nurses and medical support service officers in the medical corps. what it has enabled us to do is that when we have a soldier with an issue -- fort hood is an example -- if the soldier has an issue that percolates to an outside channel, i can contact the general at fort hood and allowed him to that issue. the senior commanders like him have taken a personal interest in taking care of the soldier and resolving issues. in essence, what we have done is bring multiple cultures within the army together to solve problems. the progress we've made in the army would not have been

possible without the other general offices, senior commanders, everyone within those installations where we have these units. if not for them, we would not have anywhere near the program we have now. their support, their interests, their influence, and their leadership has been absolutely spectacular for us. host: the general is featured in an article in this morning's "new york times," "at fort hood, reaching out to soldiers at risk." it has making an average not only to soldiers still in the service, believed to be at risk, -- making an out reach not only to soldiers still in the service, believed to be at risk, but to conscientious objectors, whatever, from the service, and he is making and our reach to bring them back into a situation where they can resolve differences with the military. is that part of the wounded warriors program, or is that

above and beyond the call? guest: it is not necessarily part of our program but there could be a soldier at third that had become absent without leave -- a soldier out there that had become absent without leave. what is fascinating -- the general is a terrific leader down there. what he shows is that part of the army that america doesn't see very often is that we learned many years ago that you cannot be thin skin, you cannot be defensive about issues when we have problems. we have to be open and transparent if we want to prove ourselves. that is the underlying message that general cone is sending. he wants his army at fort hood to be the best it can be for soldiers. the fact that he is willing to reach out and listen to others it signifies that. host: 4 collins, colorado, allen

on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. i'm kind of nervous. it is the first time i've ever called but i work with an organization at fort collins that works with disabled kids. we cooperated with the cheyenne va and signed up for the horses for heroes program. i want to commend them, the army and the va, for going outside the box and doing whatever is good for the veterans. really works wonders, watching the mental and physical therapy that these veterans go through, working with horses, riding. it helps to balance them. i want to give them a high-five for doing a good job. guest: you know, alan, i am thrilled to be here for your first call. what he is doing is exactly what we want america to do, getting

our soldiers out into the community, showing them what we ca -- what they can do. we have a lot of programs like this with other organizations. there are a lot of therapy programs like this that we're doing and other units. this one is a great idea. we have excursions' we do, we have a program called "ride to recovery," where we take a soldiers out on 600-mile trips. i did one of them, and the last time, the soldiers put me to shame. the little vignette i gave about the guy missing an arm -- i could not keep up with him. they proved themselves with abilities that maybe they thought were lost. they are rejuvenated a programs like this. the wounded warrior program does

a number of things like this. there are great organizations out there that bring our warriors out of the hospital rooms and get them back into society and prove the things that they can do. that little bit of restoration restored the confidence, the self-esteem, and it starts to encourage them to reach for greater things, more things, and it reminds them that their life can be very, very productive. it is not about disability and compensation. it is about rewarding, productive future. alan, i thank you for your reaching out to them. that is a terrific program. host: the soldiers that come through this program that want to stay in the military, even though they are disabled -- is it something that they are genuinely trying to make the best of it? are they surprised that they can still stay in the military, even with a disability? guest: well, we have had a

program around for a long time. one of the issues that general frank in january of 1970, he applied to continue active duty, was approved, and rose to be a four-star general, with an amputated leg. the decision to stay on active duty is a soldier's decision. they apply for it. it is not a guaranteed thing. we have got to make sure that they can continue to contribute to the service. in most cases, that is very possible. i can point to several great soldiers out there, and i was doing a disservice to the about 600 or so that have continued on active duty since these wars began, but i will give you a few examples. sgt jonathan pryce, a single entity, unbelievable soldier with -- what he is s -- single amputee, unbelievable soldier

with what he has accomplished. and we have one who is now a platoon sergeant at our warrior transition unit. a lieutenant colonel, a soldier who is paralyzed in both of his feet from wounds in iraq. he now, as the warrior transition unit battalion -- now commands the warrior transition unit battalion at fort lewis, washington pi. and another one injured in 2005 by an ied, that he has a master's degree from west point. we have a lot of roles we can fill just within our wounded warriors program for these soldiers. but they are not limited to that. they can do whatever it is they want to do. we want to put them in positions where they can continue to make a contribution. host: let's go back to the phones. of kentucky, dave on the line for independence.

-- independents. caller: i joined the army that i felt so sorry for those guys in world war iii, correa, because -- will war ii -- world war ii, korea, and they made a truck driver out of me, and i was over there a few months. they started building the berlin wall. then they turned around, and my mother almost died, so they sent me home by plane, and return to me by plane. the following summer, the cuba crisis come up, and that was

more. no fooling around, no weekends off. the following summer, my mom was sick again, and my priest and my dad contacted the company, and they said, "you just want to go home." three weeks later, she died. if you think that did not tell me up, you are mistaken. -- did not tear me up, you are mistaken. oh, i hated that captain so bad. they tried to put me on a medical discharge, and i fought my way out of that, thank god, and got my honorable discharge. what i really want to bring up is the fact that after that, there was a general smacking people in the face for being cowards, but at any rate, i did not feel that way about myself. i had great medical care until the late 1990's from the va.

then they started to bring the indian people in, and if you explain to of foreign person how the american way of life is, it is impossible. they cannot understand it to start with. then they outlaw the one medication i had for years, and i got married and had kids and was a success in big industry. and so here i sit, and i've lost my home to to all this mess -- i bought my home on the gi bill in 1970, and i paid the bill in 2002, or to us one, but this housing program -- they got ahold of my house and took that for me and i did not have much to pay on it. i live in a travel trailer in kentucky on top of a mountain. host: dave, we're going to have to leave it there. sorry about that. guest: dave, i just have to say,

thank you for your service, and we wish you the best with your care. i am confident that the the able to the best -- the va will do the best it can to give you the care that you need and can work directly with you on your personal medical issues. host: we have this e-mail from peg conroy. guest: again, that is a great question. this is a tough area here, and one of the things for ourselves, particularly wounded and injured soldiers, the decision they make on where to live. if they choose to live in remote or rural area, that will make the care more complicated and difficult.

i really appreciate the comment about women. there is far more women serving and the military in far more dangerous roles than past wars. the va in particular has stepped up quite a bit with women's clinics and things like that. i cannot speak for what is available in the state of maine, but there are things that are available. they have mobile clinics that the use and there is telemedicine as well. if your daughter, for example, is a reserve component soldier, there are issues that have come up since she has been released from active duty, there is a process where she can apply to come back on active duty for treatment in the case that she wants that. i encourage you to do that. she can apply with her local reserve unit if that is appropriate. there are a number of ways we can get assistance for your daughter that would require her to step forward and work with her local unit to do that.

host: our next call is from fort worth, texas, jordan, a father of the wounded warrior participant. caller: thank you for much for taking the call. general, your program is working great. our son was originally injured at the pentagon b. he was on the scene pulling people out, and some beams fell on them, and then he spent time in afghanistan as a translator, and went back to iraq, and got stuck with injuries there. three back surgeries, mental issues. the wounded warrior program for the last year-and-a-half has been exceptional good without it, it would have been very difficult. he and his wife live outside of fort bragg it has just been great. we a trichet all the help. a lot of people -- we appreciate

all the help. a lot of people needed. thank you very much. host: before you go, can you tell us what the program, besides what it did for your son, what it did for his family and wife? guest: it is a huge umbrella safety net. bacon called the case manager and there is no paperwork -- they can call the case manager and there is no paper work, none of the rigmarole. support groups. it is just a huge umbrella that they know -- it is kind of like travelers insurance, a big red umbrella. it is such a relief with the issues they are dealing with with a two-and-a-half-year-old baby. he is not a deployable -- nondeployable. he has a lot of titanium in his back from his last surgery.

he is a super soldier. the wounded warriors -- the whole family unit -- they received tremendous benefits. the program works, and we are very, very appreciative of what is being done for our boy. host: jordan, thanks. sorry to cut you off, but thank you very much for your call. guest: what a great story. jordan, thank you for all your doing for your son and his family, and our thanks to your son for his service, both in the theater of war and on 9/11. i am very proud of our program. it's a great program, but not a perfect program. as i said, we want to move beyond just providing great facilities and care management and leadership. now we want in its operational model of goal setting and focusing soldiers on their future. we are doing it with an automated program that we're testing right now and we will have that out army-wide in

february, that lays out every goal aspect of the soldier's life and helps to identify issues and allows us to see where we have problems and shortfalls and the services to provide. if i could add one other thing, we do provide a lot of great services for families, but i am not satisfied by that, either. it is too -- we make a lot of things available, but we provide no guide, and no plan. it is not tailored for the family. our next step this spring is to get a comprehensive transition plan automated and up and running. we will have a family program, sit down with the family, find out what the family goals, desires, dreams, the senetc., a. line them up with opportunities for education, assist them with understanding battered the conditions of the soldier, the

problems, if there is a behavioral health issue, serious injury, how that affects the family unit. we are very anxious to do more for the families. we are so grateful for what they do. so many of them do this, of course, out of the absolute love of the soldier, with no thought of compensation or anything. but quite frankly, we cannot be successful without what they do. i'm glad your son is having a good experience at fort bragg, and we wish 1him and his family the very best. host: we will be airing our recent senate armed services committee hearing on the wooded warrior program -- on the wounded warrior program. our last call is from ohio on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. first of all, i would like to wish all our service members

overseas and at home a safe and happy christmas and a safe new year. i'm a disabled vietnam veteran, and i tell you what, i have nothing but praise for teh va. they have been taking good care of me. they gave me a breathing machine from sleep apnea -- for my sleep apnea the other day. also, i wanted to make a comment. i tried to get through the other day. there was some republican -- i forgot what his name was -- congressman are something -- was that nothing -- was badmouthing the va about health care or something. i thank god every day for iteh he va. without them, i don't know where i would be. guest: i agree completely.

but -- the department is not perfect, but not always get it right, but they are great partners of ours. i got a call from the mother of a soldier who is having difficulties, and as it turns out, she told the story of how he had been wounded in afghanistan, a real serious brain injury. he arrived in a coma. ultimately, his next treatment was done at the minneapolis va, and she described his treatment -- she said it was nothing short of a miracle that he went from basically in a coma to walking, talking, fully functional. as he went to the next stage of his care, he started to the problems, and i spoke to him, and he said that it was not aggressive enough for him. we brought him back to walter reed and completed his care there. this young man has reenlisted,

is an intelligence specialist, will stay in the army. i returned to minneapolis to thank the va care providers there for all they have done for him. i'm glad they're taking good care of you. they are a great partner of ours in this. we are very grateful for the service they provide, for veterans and active duty soldiers as well. host: gov. -- no, general cheek, thank you for being on the program. guest: thank you, and i'm grateful for all the care for the wounded soldiers. the love and care from the nation makes quite a difference. host: another programming notes -- notable books from 2009 -- "washington journal," during the

last hour on friday, will be hooking up with otbook tv to highlight notable books of 2009. thank you very much for watching this edition of "washington journal." we will see you again tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] .

>> next, house and senate negotiators will work on reconciling the different versions of the bill in january after the holiday break. if we will show you highlights coming up next starting this morning early, with senators making a final statements on the vote. then reaction from democrats, president obama, and a wrapup on the hill by capitol reporter. remarks that the majority leader made about all of the people that work at the capitol during the difficult an intense time. we thank you very much for your outstanding service. it's early and i'll be brief. the most obvious problem with the bill before us is it doesn't do what it was supposed to do. the one test for any bill was

whether it would lower costs. this bill fails that test. asked the one test for any bill is whether it would lower costs. this bill fails that test. it is also clear that many of the people even on this side are going to support the spill and they do not like it. otherwise, the democratic leaders would not have such -- have had such a tough time running of the votes. otherwise, democratic leaders would not have had to have votes in the middle of the night or at the crack of dawn, or over the weekend, or even during a blizzard. otherwise, there would not be rushing it through congress on christmas eve. the first time this body has had a vote on the day before christmas and more -- in more than a century. this debate was supposed to produce a bill that would reform health care in america.

instead, we are left with party- line votes in the middle of a night, a couple of this regard deals to get it over the finish line -- sweetheart deals to get it over the finish line, and a truly outraged public. the problem they were told would be fixed was not. i guarantee you that people who voted for this bill are going to get an earful when they finally get home for the first time since thanksgiving. they know there is widespread opposition to this monstrosity. and i want to assure you, mr. president, this fight is not over. in fact, this fight is long from over. my colleagues and i will work to stop this bill from becoming law. that is the clear world of the

american people and we're going to continue -- the clear will of the american people we're going to continue to fight on their behalf. >> mr. president? >> majority leader. >> so many endeavors that have benefited so many americans making health insurance more affordable and more cattle is a process. it is one that has required us to -- more accountable is a process. that is one that has required us -- that is why we have reduced the deficit by $132 billion. over the next decade, as much as $1.3 trillion. mr. president, everyone knows we have had boats in the middle of the night and on christmas eve because the republicans would not allow us to have the votes at any other are. it is true that when we go home and we will hear a near four. i will your and your full -- i

will hear an earful about a boy that was born with legs that stopped right above his knees. needed a new prosthetic devices because the rest of his body is growing, but the insurance company said no because he had a disability. i will get an earful of joy and happiness because, you see, mr. president, from this day forward insurance companies will not be able to deny coverage because of a pre-existing disability. people like caleb and others with diabetes, it is over. it will be an earful, yes, but it will be wonderful to happen is that people have waited for for a long time. this is not the end of the process. this is merely the beginning. we will continue to work -- to build on the success to improve our health system even more and

to ease the burden on american families and businesses. but the process cannot begin unless we start today. the american people and the american economy cannot -- afford for as to wait for the next time. because you see, mr. president, there may not be in next time. nearly 65 years ago harry truman condemned the citizens of economic effects. nearly 65 years later, we still suffer from the same. just months before world war ii came to a close, harry truman wrote, to this body, "we should resolve now that the health of this nation is a financial concern, but barriers in obtaining help show be removed, that the help -- the health of all the nations deserves the help of all the nation." decades have passed and the financial barriers have grown taller. but we will never solve the

problem unless we find the resolve, which we have not found until, mr. president, today. this is how long we have waited. think of those that were just one year old in 1945, the day truman issued is called to this body for action. there are far too many who have lived their entire lives without the ability to afford any type of health care. coverage to more and more expensive each year. insurance companies on more excuses to leave them out in the cold. and for those who worked in small businesses or owned one, knew that the peace health care can provide was merely a dream. today on the verge of 2010, those americans are finally just months away from qualifying for medicare. but as a long time for a citizen to wait for health care in the greatest and richest nation the world has ever known.

how much of a can we afford to put this off, or ask the uninsured for their patience? until health care costs consume not just one sixth of our economy, but one-third, or one have? we certainly do not have, mr. president, the luxury of waiting until america because the only developed nation on earth where you can die for lack of health insurance. we already bear the blemish. that is why we are bringing security and stability to millions who have health insurance spending held insurance to millions who have none. mr. president, could we have order? >> the senate will be in order. >> what we will do is ensure that consumers have more tauruses and insurance companies face more competition. we will set up for those greedy companies that drove millions to

bankruptcy, foreclosure, and sometimes even worse. will add years to the life of medicare and at the lyric -- years to the life of seniors. as we do all of this, we will cut our children's deficit in dramatic fashion. we may not completely careless crisis today or tomorrow, but we must start toward that end. we must strive for progress and not surrender for want of purity. our charge is to move forward. this is a tradition as old as this republic. one that has always comprised interests and opinions as diverse as the people who populate it. our founding fathers did not promise to form an infallible nation. they promised instead to promote the general welfare as we move toward a more perfect union. the value progress. our nation's leaders promised not absolute happiness, but only the pursuit of that goal.

they valued opportunity. and like other new programs that improve the lives of many anderson's strength and to improve even more, programs like medicare, medicaid, social security, progress and of urgency of what this historic bill represents. this is just the beginning. with senator ted kennedy's voice booming in our ears, with his passion in our hearts, we say as he said, the work goes on, because endures. opponents of -- the cause endures. opponents have used every trick in the book to delay this day, this moment, and yet, your we are minutes away from doing what many have tried, but none have ever achieved. we are here because facts will always defeat fair and though one might slow the progress, they cannot stop it. and though one might slow the

speed of progress, its force cannot be stopped. mr. president, i'm sorry to say that for the first time in american history and political party has chosen to stand on the sidelines rather than participate in great and grave in needed social change. i'm sorry to see that many on the other side have resorted to myths and misinformation and continue to rely on them long after they were developed. it is regrettable that they view our citizens' health care through political lanclens becae wanting to live a life is not about partisanship or pulling, but about people and life and death in america. it is about a question of morality and right and wrong. it is about human suffering. given the chance to relieve the suffering, we must shape -- take this chance and deliver on the promise that and the american

people have desert for six and a half decades. >> the clerk will read the bill for the third time. >> calendar #175, h.r. 3590, an act to amend the internal revenue code of 1986 to revise the first time homebuyers credit for federal employees and other purposes. >> the question is on gossage of age or 3590, which is the amended. there is a sufficient second. the nays are ordered. the clerk will call the world. -- but the clerk will call the roll. >> abubakar declerck colesville orol]

-- [clerk calls roll]

[applause] >> today's vote on health care, 60-39, concluding there about 7:15 a.m. eastern this morning. it was within five or 10 minutes of the vote that senate

democratic leaders came outside the u.s. senate to speak to reporters. this is just under 10 minutes. >> i spent a very restless night last night trying to figure out how i could show some bipartisanship. and i think i was able to accomplish that for a few minutes today. never before has the senate from the resolve to make health insurance more affordable and health-insurance more accountable and until today. this is a victory for the american people, those fortunate enough to have health insurance will be able to keep theirs. and those who do not will be able to have of insurance. this is a victory because we have affirmed that the ability to live a healthy life in our great country is a right, and

not minnick -- nearly a privilege for the select few. this morning's vote brings us one step closer to bringing ted kennedy's dream a reality. the dream -- americans are also a part of that dream of ted kennedy's and that has also become a reality. every step in this process has become an enormous undertaking. i want to thank chairman baucus, a dog and rk -- dodd and bark ey. the senators murray and parking are off with their families. they're not here with us this morning. afford to our friends in the house -- to working with our friends in the house so we can send a bayville as soon as possible. we're not going to take any questions.

>> it has been nearly two years since we began our work on the health care reform here in the senate and we're all very proud of this moment. we do not stand here alone. but we of the champions of this effort all the way from the roosevelt to our good friend ted kennedy. we have stood with millions of families that have been forced into bankruptcy because of the cost of health care. we stand with the 45,000 americans dead die each year because they cannot afford health insurance. we stand with small-business owners who cannot afford health insurance for their employees. we stand with those that have been discriminated against or deny health insurance coverage because of a pre-existing condition. today, we make history for them

and every american that has fallen victim to our broken up your system. i especially want to thank leader reid for the territory has navigated the waters during this is a day that we're going to look back upon as senators as a very proud of what we have accomplished. but more important, very happy to see more people getting health-care and health care across been much more under control. this is why we came here. this is why we hired our for these jobs, to pass something very important and historic like this. thank you. >> thanlet me also thank senator reid. on this christmas eve, i cannot think of a better gift that the united states can give our float -- fellow citizens then lived in the fear of of their shoulders that they would not be able to provide for their families in a time of need. this was an enormous victory for the american public and i am

proud of the vote cast in favor of this effort. last year proved that progress is not easy, but today, we are able to prove that it is not impossible. and because of the leadership of harry reid, max baucus, tom of finance and some others, we're not on the cusp of providing all americans with the security of having decent health care. there's never been a vote cast that has done as much to relieve the burdens or read more security for working class families in america than this one. this is probably the most important vote that every member of this senate will cast in their tenure here. i am proud to be a part of it and i thank my colleagues for staying with us. and i was ted kennedy were here today to enjoy this. mary christmas, everybody. >> the corridors of the senate are filled with portraits and statutes of political leaders

whose reputations and contributions of many times have faded into obscurity. but i will tell you, the contribution to this nation made by senator from search light, nevada will become one of the shining chapters in the history of the united states senate and our nation. he achieved in what others have failed in trying to achieve and he did it with a tenacity and strength and determination that i have never seen in my time serving in congress. i am honored to have stood behind -- beside him with so many others to see this great day finally arrives. this is a time of long nights and darkness when history tells us that from the beginning of time people would gather and with their families and friends, they would look for signs of hope and even light a candle. this morning, this vote in the united states senate with a candle of hope for 50 million americans who went to bed last night without the protection of health insurance, for millions

to wait this morning who wonder if they will ever win that battle with the health insurance co. for the coverage they need, for the satirical procedure, for the medication. -- the surgical procedure, the medication. this also tackles one thing that every business knows is essential for our nation. we have done this with my fellow senators here, but also with the help and inspiration of the president who made this his highest agenda and told us he would work hard night and day to help us reach this moment. we owe our appreciation to him, and the vice president especially, for presiding over this special session this morning. >> thank you, and a happy holiday, merry christmas, happy new year to everybody. the bill can be described in a single sentence, and at the same

time it cuts costs, the waste, the fraud, the duplication endemic to our system. and of the same time it covers 31 million people. who would have thought we could do both in the same bill? who would have thought we could do it without a single republican vote and getting everyone of the 60 democratic votes? who would have thought that we could finally get a handle on the thing that is driving our budget deficit to great heights, which is health care costs, and at the same time do so much good by covering so many people? this is an amazing accomplishment. it would be an ordinary times. it is even more amazing under extraordinary times. and the three norseman of this bill stand behind me. -- the three horsemen of this bill stand behind me. leader reid did an incredible job. i stood in of how he could lead with such robert. max baucus star early and he

just persisted and persisted, no matter what blog was thrown away. and chris dodd, who kept the flame of ted kennedy and the spirit of doing the right thing and a good thing and reaching into a of -- and reaching to keep the highest by use of this country alive. mitch mcconnell said on the floor that we will go home and here our constituents rail against this bill. i do not believe that. i believe that the negativity that leader mcconnell and others that have continually displayed on the floor has peaked and now the people have actually learned -- will actually burn was in the bill and all the good that is going to be done, it will become more and more popular because it is good for america, good for the american people, and a true symbol of what we can do if we all pull together. [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> senate democratic leaders after the vote this morning, 60-39, the legislation passes the senate. that was at about 7:30 a.m. eastern or so. meanwhile, president obama reacted a little bit later. he delayed his departure for the holiday break in hawaii until the senate passed a health care package. he is joined here by vice president biden, by the way, who was present at the vote in his role as the president of the u.s. senate. >> good morning, everybody. in an historic vote that took place this morning, members of the senate join their colleagues in the house to pass a landmark health insurance reform, legislation that brings us toward the end of a nearly

century-long struggle to reform america's health-care system. ever since teddy roosevelt first call for reform in 1912, seven presidents, democrats and republicans alike, have taken up the cause of reform. time and time again, such efforts have been blocked by special-interest lobbyists who have perpetuated the status quo that works better for the insurance industry than it does for the american people. but with passage of the bills both in the house and senate, we are now finally poised to deliver on the promise of real, meaningful health insurance reform that will bring additional security to the american people. the bill includes the toughest measures ever taken to hold the insurance industry accountable. insurance companies will no longer be able to deny your coverage on the basis of pre- existing condition. they will no longer be able to drop your coverage when you get

sick. you will allow iraq to pay unlimited amounts are of your own pocket for the treatments that you need, and you will be able to appeal unfair decisions by an insurance company to an independent party. when this legislation becomes law, workers will not have to worry about losing coverage if they lose or change jobs. families will save on their premiums. businesses that would see their costs rise if we do not act will save money out and they will save money in the future. this bill will strengthen medicare and extend the life of the program. it will make coverage affordable for for 30 million americans who do not have it. 30 million americans -- and because it is paid for and curbs the waste and inefficiency in our health care system, this bill will help reduce our deficit by as much as one -- by as much as $1.3 trillion in the coming decade, making it the largest deficit reduction plan

in over a decade. as i said before, these are not small reforms. these are big reforms. if passed, this will be the most important piece of social legislation since the social security act passed in the 1930's, and the most important reform our health care system since medicare passed in the 1960's. what makes it so important is not just its cost savings or deficit reductions. it is the and that that reform will have on americans who no longer have to go without a checkup or prescriptions they need because they cannot afford them, families that no longer have to worry that a single illness will send them into financial ruin, and businesses that face insurance rates that hampered competitiveness. i want to commend senator harry reid for the extraordinary work that he did, speaker pelosi for

her extraordinary work and dedication, having passed reform bills in both the house and the senate. we now have to take up the last step and reach an agreement on the final reform bill that i can sign into law. i look forward to working with members of congress in both chambers over the coming weeks to do exactly that. with today's vote, we are incredibly close to making health insurance reform a reality in this country. our challenge is to finish the job. we cannot assume another generation of americans to soaring costs and -- we a cannot doom another generous americans to soaring costs. let's make 2010 the year we finally reform health care in the united states of america. everybody, mary christmas and happy new year. >> do you have a holiday wish for the troops? >> i do, and i will actually --

i am on my way right now to call a few of them and wish them a merry christmas and to thank them for their extraordinary service as they are posted in iraq and afghanistan. >> president obama from about 9:00 a.m. eastern this morning. he and the first family now headed to a white for the holidays. he is reacting to the senate vote this morning, 60-39, passing health care legislation. the next up, house and senate negotiations will begin on the combined a decision. senator baucus saying that will likely begin by phone even as early as the next couple of days. nebraska senator ben nelson was the last democrat to agree to vote for the health care bill after successfully it negotiating a provision to prevent use of federal funds to pay for abortions. he talked about that after the vote today on the senate floor.

ensuring that the long-standing hyde amendment would be incorporated into the bill. i have strongly-held views on the subject and i fought hard to prevent the tax dollars from being used to subsidize abortions. i was pleased that the house abortions -- i was pleased that the house included this in four of the stupek amendment. commodified this in the senate bill to prohibit federal funding of abortion. i was disappointed to see that the amendment was tabled by a vote of 54-45. i knew then that the underlying bill did not act quickly prohibit federal funding of abortion and consequently i

would not be able to support it. i began to look for other language to accomplish the goal that no public funds should cover abortion in the new health care bill. and after long days of negotiations, i believe we came up with a true compromise that stays faithful to my principles. i want to be clear, i stuck to my guns and stood for a pro-life principles. i did not look for weaker language. i looked for clearer language. and my goal stay the same, to maintain the standard that we had in federal law since the 1970's. while i respect the senator from kansas' opinion, i have to respectfully disagree. the son of language fully upholds a a high and principal like the language in the house bill. the wording may be different, but the principle is, in fact, upheld. under the health care bill, if you cannot afford insurance, you'll receive federal

assistance to help pay for a private health care plan. the stupak language prohibits the federal assistance to pay for abortions. if you would like a plan that covers abortion, you must purchase of a writer or an endorsement to your plan with your own funds. you can do that as well by writing just one check to the injured were. before that, you would get a separate piece of paper addressing abortion. the senate language, with my head of compromise, also prohibits federal funds from paint private insurance that covers abortion. -- from paying for private insurance that covers abortion. the only difference is that if you need assistance for of the insurance coverage and that plan has the ability to pay for abortion, you must pay separately from your own personal funds, perhaps a credit

card transaction, a personal check or automatic withdrawal from year-end account. let me say that again. you have to write two checks, one for the basic policy and one for the additional coverage for abortion. the latter has to be entirely from personal funds. so, under both the stupak and the senate language, no federal funds can be used to pay for a plan that covers abortion. if you choose to purchase abortion coverage, if it is available, you must pay out of your own pocket. furthermore, the senate which allows states to ban public and private insurance from supplying abortion coverage. already, 12 states banned abortion coverage on public plans and five state's ban abortion on both private and public plans.

the senate bill ensures once again that no federal funds would be used for abortion. i would like to note the senate bill goes beyond stupak in the two ways. and it expands the adoption tax credit to help parents with the considerable expense of making the credit refundable tax credit. this means that many potential parents who lack the of federal resources to adopt will now be in a better position to do so. i know people have very strong

feelings about the issue of abortion and i respect those who disagree with my position. but i could not support health reform that did not maintain the 30-year standard barring public funding of abortion. i did not compromise my pro-life principles. we just on different wording, different language that both will work. no public funding will go to abortion. in addition, provision and hours of states to pass laws that are banning the sale of insurance that covers abortion. i make it clear that this new bill does not in any way preempt the rights of states to be able to continue to make advancthat d the decisions that they might make legislatively and we want to make sure and that there is no doubt that this bill has no

pre-emption of state rights. but despite the scare tactics, the conscience clause remains. also, despite what those same people and even some of my colleagues have said, the bottom line is that the senate health care bill will not allow public funds to pay for abortions at all. thank you and i yield the floor. >> the u.s. and it came in on this christmas eve at 6:45 a.m. eastern. shortly after 7:00 they began to vote and it passed the vote -- the senate by a vote of 60-39. joining us on capitol hill, kathleen hunter, u.s. and joining us a bunch lately. she writes for "congressional quarterly." the bill passed today. it was the next up in the process? >> now that the bill has passed in the senate, the next step is

for the house and senate to meet in conference and resolve differences between their two versions of the bills. what will be the most contentious issues? >> mykleby the government run option, language on abortion. >> as is typical after passage of major legislation, a number of senators were releasing statements. senator feingold released a statement shortly -- a short time ago saying that he was deeply disappointed that the bill did not keep public costs down. could another version passed the house? >> the house bill passed and the senate bill did not. -- the house bill included

diversion and the senate bill did not. there were a number of centers that pushed hard for a hardopyion -- a public option with the opportunity for states to opt out. it turned out in the senate there was not enough support. the republicans were unified against it and there were a number of moderate democrats that opposed it, most notably, joseph lieberman from independent who said he was very much against that -- against that. the public plan was eventually dropped. it does not appear that the conference of that will change between now and january. it seems pretty unlikely that there will be supporting january for something there is not support for now. >> there are reports that poor -- said art stupak is not happy with what came out of the senate in terms of language. >> the abortion language was the main sticking point with senator

ben nelson, a centrist democrat from nebraska. majority leader reid met with senator nelson for a marathon session for two days at the end of last week to work out compromise language. he was fairly adamant that that language you worked out would not change. i know that congressman stupak has been talking on his side about pressing for the house press language, but it seems as though moving in that direction could lose support of liberals over here who tentatively and bridgton lee signed off on the deal that the senator reid and senator nas and worked out. >> thanks for the update and have a happy holiday. >> thank you, you too. >> the senate has finished a decision for the year, passing by 60-39. all democrats voting in favor, all republicans against, the

only senator not voting was senator jim bombing of kentucky. -- jim bunning of kentucky. >> the discussion on the role of muslims and know america and the world and later, a former cia intelligence officer on the u.s. strategy in al qaeda -- on al qaeda in afghanistan. and remembering the lives of william f. buckley jr. and senator ted kennedy. >> this christmas holiday we have got three days a book tv on c-span2. at the beginning friday morning at 8:00 a.m., books on history and public affairs. you'll see sarah palin on her recent book tour and you will hear about the biography on supreme court justice scalia. tracy kidder from the recent miami book festival is also included.

you can get the full schedule at booktv.org. merry christmas. >> now is an accurate and pilot fatigue and aviation safety. there were questions about recent accidents involving fatigue and the required experience of airline pilots. it runs about one hour, 50 minutes. >> welcome today the hon. randy babbitt, the administrator of the federal aviation administration. we have held a number of hearings recently on the issue, particularly of safety and

fatigue and related matters. this hearing is a hearing to discuss a wide range of issues with the administrator. mr. babbitt is going to be talking about what he has been involved in at the cafe, a number of actions. troy after he was sworn in as the administrator of the faa, he was -- shortly after he was sworn in as the administrator of the faa, there was a call to action that brought in regional carriers, pilots, and its unions to discuss and improved safety and to reduce risk. the call to action has led the faa to seek voluntary commitment from their creditors -- carriers to implement safety programs and various things. we will talk about that today. the faa has made progress in a number of areas and there are a

number of areas where progress has yet to be made. we held a hearing recently and talked about how fateh has been on the list of the ntsb for a number of years. -- fateh has been on the list for ntsb for a number of years. -- fatigue. commercial aviation in this country delivers about 800 million people per year to their destinations. 30,000 flights operate every day in this country safely. we have had some tragic accident, but few. honand we also know how to prevt accidents in the future by addressing things that we understand or potential problems and cause potential risk.

there are fateh related accidents that have occurred in the last 20 years -- fatigue- related accidents have occurred in the last 20 years. it ought to require all of us to be urgent and our request to the faa to make progress on dealing with these issues. there has been equipment concern recently because there have been major delays and chaos in the country about the air traffic system. the one on no. 19 this year and one in 2008. bird strike issues and the hudson river mid-air collision, those are both issues, talking about the mid-air and bird strike collision, and this raises other issues. a and note -- i know for the

ntsb and also for the faa. i will ask questions about that as well. one commercial airlines fail to comply with airworthiness directives, that is a very serious problems. another has had to be remedial action there. and the issue of next generation, or so-called next gen changing the air traffic control system and modernizing the system is very important because that will improve safety, save fuel, do a lot of things. most people nowadays understand you can access a satellite somewhere above the earth and get directions from that in order to move your car or find your friend or location of a cell phone. despite the fact that the technology is mature and ready, it is not available in this country generally speaking for the movement of commercial

airplanes. it is unbelievable to me. we're still doing this ground- based radar navigation in the skies when, in fact, gps navigation would be much safer. that we would know exactly where it is in that -- an airplane is in the sky. the right now, we know about where that jet is because the transponder put a blip on the screen and at that nanosecond that is where the plane is. and for the next seven or eight seconds, that airplane is somewhere else. we do not need to guess about where airplanes are in the sky. next gen and the modernization of the air travel control through gps system is exactly what we need to do on an urgent basis. that is something that of mr. babbitt is a deeply involved in as well. all of these are very important issues. administrator bob has allot in play and we appreciate him to be -- appreciate him being here today. we have a number of other

senators who will join us momentarily. i would be glad to call on senator dole has if you wish to make a comment. >> that is a very conned -- kind offer. i concur with so many things that you said. i wanted to indicate that. but i can only be here about 45 more minutes. maybe it is best that i passed on the opportunity to make an opening statement. if i have anything, i will submit it for the record and we can proceed to the first witness. >> thank you, and thank you for all of your active participation on this issue. mr. babbitt, you have only in recent months taken the reins of a very large agency. we appreciate that everyone to hear your comments and then open it for questions. as i indicated, we have a number of other senators that will be joining us shortly. your entire statement will be

part of the permanent record and you may summarize. >> thank you very much, chairman, and members of the subcommittee. thank you for inviting me here to testify on behalf of the faa to discuss the faa's ongoing safety initiatives. safety is, of course, the most important issue to the agency and the f a professional -- professionals take this role very seriously. i would like to of knowledge a group of family murders that are attending this hearing this morning, representing the family members of passengers who died earlier this year in an accident. any aviation and fidelity is taken very seriously by the faa and of course, by me personally. what can only imagine the grief and the painful process that they're going through to come to terms with their loss, we are very motivated to improve aviation safety so that other families can be steered their tragic experience. . .

before the issue was raised by a members of congress, i asked them to start an advance notice for proposed rulemaking to consider whether endorsement

would be a stop was to the above require more the what is currently required for commercial certificate public focused more on the actual elements required rather than the 1500 hours required. it would focus more on discrete training and the quality of their training to achieve the rating. i am concerned there raising the quantity of hours without addressing the quality and the nature of the time and public experienced during training may not insure the improved proficiency we all want. public to identify areas where an individual pilot receives completes training to obtain professional operational experience in such areas s icing and varmints, high-altitude environments.

projecticing environments. this assumes once the number is achieved, it would result in the comprehensive set of skills that may not be the case. another area of subject is pilot fatigue. you mention this is been an issue for 18 years. i have personally champions the issue of pilot fatigue. i have been deeply involved with this. i have the faa charter a committee to make a recommendation on this issue. they began meeting in july and sent their recommendations to meet in september. consensus was not reached on all of the issues. we were provided a good framework to consider issues that contribute to pilot fatigue. i committed to an extremely aggressive time schedule for the

publishing of new rule making. the may have been too aggressive. i have been briefed numerous times in areas that need further analysis. as frustrating as it is that will not complete the analysis by our aggressive schedule, i am told the team -- i told the team to take the time to make sure we do this right. i want this completed properly. it will be completed. i want to mention the incredible wealth of information we received earlier this year. we're able to implement much better safety improvements more quickly and more effectively when we were together on the problems and solutions. i am a firm believer in building a consensus. we are -- it is my job to make a call on when a consensus cannot

be reached. we will be updating everyone on the information we have received and how we're moving forward. i am confident we have built a good foundation from which to issue guidance and possible further rules. that concludes my remarks. i will be willing to answer any questions. >> mr. babbitt, thank you very much. senator rockefeller, which like to make any opening comments or begin questioning? >> i will put my statement in the record. i want to say to randy babbitt that you call to make a couple of times. i have been lost in the deepest weeds bog in health care. i think you're doing a terrific job. will you accept my apology?

>> absolutely. >> mr. chairman, i will defer to you. >> senator rockefeller, thank you very much. let me begin asking about the issue of fatigue since you commented on that. informants arc and you know how -- you forms and arc and further analysis needs to be done. both the recommendations and further analysis that is under way, will relate in any way to the issue of commuting? or is commuting outside of the range of vision of this rule making tax >? >> they were briefed on the issue.

all of the parties involved did not come up with any conclusions. instead, they said commuting was an issue. they felt it was outside of the boundaries of what they're looking at in terms of the fatigue rule. i do plan to put observations about commuting into the proposed rule would to make it available for comment. i think everybody appreciates some of the issues here. for your understanding, you should, or perhaps spike can explain. my focus here is on fatigue. my focus is on making certain that when a pilot shows up and takes responsibility to carry two passengers or 250 passengers, the have an obligation to show up to undertake the mission, they have.

it is more of a concern to meet the week in sure they show up. not present they became fatigued. i am more concerned they show up not fatigued. people can be fatigued for all lot of reasons. a 2:00 phone call the sixth, a child to the hospital prepare playing extra cost. we're depending and we have for years on professional responsibility and we have tried very hard. i have to use the bully pulpit. i pushed the professionalism issue with some degree of success. not only does the pilot have a professional responsibility, the carrier has escaped responsibility. it is a shared responsibility. i think some of the awareness and the bright light report on this recently has showed us some

benefits. there was an embarrassing incident where a pilot was observed but others to not be fit for flight. the pilot was removed. the system does in fact work. as i said, commuting will be available for comment. >> mr. babbitt, limit comment on what you said. there are a number of people i see in the room who are family members of the victims of the colgan air crash. i am convinced that their activities, rapunzel activities on behalf of members of their loved ones, will end up seav ing lives. to want to make sure that anyone who gets on an airplane in the future with a pilot or co-pilot

and one who was not flown in icing, neither of whom have been in a motel room to rest for the evening falling all-night flights. there are convinced that their relentless push of cost and with you is going to make a difference. and so with that is a precursor, it just seems to me that the notion of saying we expect everyone to be professional is not obviously just the answer. the question is, if you now have a system in which fatigue clearly plays a significant role, how do you fix that system in a way that the end of the day leads you to believe that you have a better trained crews in the cockpit?

that is the key for me. i have a lot of questions. obama's asked one more -- let me ask one more. it seems to me you must looked at the totality of all of the issues facing these pilots and the crews of these commercial airliners. you said that you do not know whether -- you indicated that the question of a certificate is not the number of hours that you have. it is what kind of training you have had. if that is a qualitative judgment, how are you going to describe that in terms of how someone will hire you? we had discussions about how many hours it would take to get on with an airliner 10 years ago and how many hours it takes

the stage to get a job in a commuter. how would you measure this qualitatively? crux " we have proposed and in our advance notice would be an endorsement. we have used this process today. someone with a commercial pilot's license who would like to fly an aircraft capable of operating at high altitudes. we have a number of altitudes that can fly at 35,000 feet pressurize. commercialize license gives you no insight into that environment correct you have to obtain an endorsement and have some very specific training as to how to operate informant, recognizing what the effects of thin air has on the wing, the narrowing of the flight envelope, maximum speed in thin air. all this is trading for high-

altitude training spree as a first step, we take a commercial pilot and say if you wanna work for a 121 operation, you need to demonstrate to us that you have had multi-crew training. you have had exposure to ice training. you have that exposure to jet engine operations. all of these things would be elements to an endorsement. i am not so convinced the atp we have today gives us the elements we need. after we finished phase one, i frankly atp requirements -- i was on the flight that went behind. florida, flight 1482. i was the aircraft that landed. they had very well-trained pilots.

postal appear -- both of them had atp's. the pilot was not trained for the mission. we are saying that we want to ensure that every public has seen every possible scenario that will be presented to them, whether the of 1500 hours, 2500 hours pre a would much rather have somebody with 1000 hours that have been exposed and simulated. we have the capabilities today to expose pilots to every potential informant. >> could a politician be quiet today and deal with a pricing situation? >> yes. >> how is it that nothing has changed? >> pettitte something i have had six months to work on. >> it is just unbelievable to me.

a commercial license might give you the right to fly a cessna 210 and used a flashlight to see how much ice is on your wind at night. that does not give you the capability to get in a cockpit of a commercial airliner. >> i did not have an atp. i was mentored. we depend on a system that takes a significant amount of time. you have rapid expansion. you can take and hire someone and you have someone in the left seat with three years and someone in the right seat with one year. >> senator rockefeller.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. babbitt, your call to action is very important because it seeks, and i am getting senator dorgan's idea of these things should happen as opposed to these things are going to happen. you are asking for voluntary commitments from air carriers to implement flight operations quality assurance, all of these things some of these commitments are also salt from labor unions, to establish professional standards project they are also saught from labor unions. all of these will be mandated, so it is not a question of

discussion at anymore. i am interested how you're doing on this. the airlines are in trouble. big airlines, little airlines, everybody is in trouble. do the best you can. keyword "voluntary" when it comes to passenger safety, you cannot worry about that. if amtrak went broke because we were in forcing upon the safety standards or any airline because we were in forcing mistakes the war in the public's interests, we would happily do that. that is our job. their job is to make it in a better economy. we cannot shy away from our responsibilities. how do you size up your call to action and how are your voluntary commitments being received?

>> call to action was a fairly robust call to action. it called for a number of things. a thing perhaps inadvertently and we found one that made it pretty effective. what i asked the carriers to do was to devise asa of everyone who had any of the safety programs -- to advise us of everyone who read any of the safety programs and i said, you have by the end of september to a device made whether or not you have done this. we published a list. it is remarkable the increase in participation which gap between the end of september and the end of october. a good number responded. but a good number did not. we put them up on our website. we said these carriers chose, not to do what we ask. of the 98 carriers, we have had

positive responses from 80. they either have these programs in force -- one requires some technology which they are adapting and we're monitoring. we should not consider some of those carriers -- there are very small. " we should excuse if you have them. for example, if you only have two airplanes. i have been very happy. the unions responded 100%. >> it is a tricky balance. in the end, it is not. we are in hard economic times. there is a question i have about people traveling on a christmas vacation and. it will do it was traveling this year. we know that. that is because of bad economic

conditions. there are certain things involving public safety where you cannot compromise on safety. we cannot do that. you cannot do it. previous people might not have been as strong as you are. we cannot let them do a. we have to bring the hammer down and make sure consumers come first. that is the new philosophy. is the philosophy. one quick follow-up. on the next gen, the we cannot get it done and we're still behind mongolia with respect to gps and all the rest of it, that is because they are building their first system. it makes the point. it is going to be great for air

traffic controllers and four pilots because they will be able to tell how far away they are from each other, the will have virtual vision. what will be the effect on passengers in terms of safety if we have the bextgen system in place -- if we had the nextgen system in place? >> senator dorgan mention some of the pieces that will be there. i think there is some ancillary benefits to talk about, not only safety in the aircraft but safety in the informant. a lot less carbon emissions and a lot less noise. the fact that the situational awareness of the pilot is a much enhanced is going to be a huge benefits. i realize i have come into a

situation and i know where it is now. i am pleased that we're beginning to see some rapid acceleration deployment. we're using -- the comptroller to see the aircraft just like you can see radar. we will be announcing a much more robust announcement but we're on a trial basis using dsb in the gulf. a means 10,000 people a day, we moved 10,000 people a day on oil rigs without radar. now we can see those aircraft. they can navigate better. these are all benefits. all in all, the benefits are enormous for all involved. >> one final answer.

why don't we have the system in place now? why have we been talking about it for so long? they found out it might cost them some more money. the president gave a great speech in oslo this morning talking about responsibility. we cannot get it done. what is your theory? >> i think part of it is our own fault. i do not know we never really explained permit available to the understanding of the savings that were available. we did not make the business case, if you will. i can make a good business case today. commercial airlines will save 1 billion gallons of fuel a year. it is $2 billion in savings.

this is the only costs $6 billion. anybody would say this is a good deal. i think the other side of it, there is a to pinpoint. until something is developed where people have the equipment, airports do not benefit. i use the analogy of the cable operator and you want me to buy the box. i will by the box if you have enough channels. i think we finally have come to the. whereupon you need to put the channels on and you need to buy the box. >> thank you. the ranking member of the subcommittee did not make a statement. did you have something to say? >> thank you. thank you for your persistence on safety. i would like to submit my opening statement for the record.

again, thank you. the think i am listening for today is, as you have heard, how do we push this over the hump and get this done? no matter what we try to legislate, we're not the experts. some up maybe pilots, but not to the degree we're talking about here. the need for the industry to try to come up with these standards, of working with you so that they fit somehow with the legislation we are writing, i do not want a political solution to a safety item. we do not want to wait decades longer to get safety standards from the industry. i do appreciate all you have done since you have come into office. what we're trying to do is push this to the end.

a big part of it needs to come from the carrier side, from the pilot's side. >> i appreciate that very much. i have the benefit of public being the loudest and most vocal benefit back in the 1990's. i appreciate what some of these tapes. one of the things, i have done, i also appreciate the concern about something being voluntary. i also have learned what it now creates -- what it takes to create a legislation. we ask people to do these things on a voluntary basis. we're working with congress. i appreciate the help we're getting. if it were in our hands, it would be discoverable. people would be reluctant to give it to us. left in the hands of the carriers, it is not.

we're working with both houses to find ways the weekend get this information so that people will willingly give it. >> guys see that as -- i see that as the key. these creative new ideas, will make things safer. you create the critical mass. but it will not do that. it creates liability for public exposure. maybe that is something we can do to make sure these ideas are sent to you and you can continue to give us those ideas and we need to do to make things safer. >> i would just add one. . we're here today looking back at a tragic accident. -- i would just employadd one

point. a want to find ways to get the information to us so we can predict the accident so we do not have hearings like this. information is going to take us through that gate. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. babbitt, plan to refocus on -- let me focus four important things. i want to talk to about public experience, salary, and then equipment'. helmutp me understand commuting. but say the flight i am going to

fly originates in new york city and i commute back and forth between san diego and new york city. that flight from san diego to new york city the make every week to get on my flight, how is that factored into safety regulations, or is it just not counted? >> no, is currently not counted. commuting, walt i do not think the majority of pollock's commute, it is difficult. -- while i do not think the majority of pilots commute, it is difficult. maybe a new piece of equipment was offered and the didn't want to move children out of school. i think if you look get commuting, the vast majority is commuting on their own system. i think if there were as a base

in virginia and new jersey for colgan. there is a variety of ways you can do that. lagered distance commuting is something different. -- longer distance commuting is something different. i commuted for five years. i wanted that. >> i am a question in anybody's professionalism. i understand living away from home. all of us do that here. but i would tell you flying back and forth even halfway across the country every week is hard worker. it is tiring, it is exhausting. you start to weaken and feel like you have not had a break. i'm not flying the airplane. i'm sitting in back catching a

catnappe. it cannot be a good thing. i appreciate what i'm suggesting probably turns the system upside down. if you shop tired, you cannot fix that until you get some rest. -- if you show up tired, you cannot fix that. >> you have a professional responsibility, as does a carrier to make sure you are fit. >> but we do not police that, do we? nobody is standing there saying, did you fly through the night to get here? >> no. >> livni ask you about experience. i always assumed -- let me ask you about experience. all i always assumed pilot and co-pilot were equally capable of taking over the airplane. i thought it was a safety valve.

i am beginning to question whether expect that assumption was correct. i'm wondering " whether " politics is training ground and the co-pilot is there hopefully get to the point where they will be the pilot. is that a more accurate read? >> both pilots are very well qualified. the go through the same basic training. the captain -- the co-pilot does not have to demonstrate some of the maneuvers a captain has to demonstrate. the co-pilot cannot perform some of the functions in terms of whether constrictions. this recognizes that everyone has to start somewhere. utopia would be that every pilot

in every airplane has flown captain for years. when the first officer is new, he cannot fought with a new captain. first he applies with a check public who is trained to watch and for the first 100 years next he can fly with somebody has to have a significant amount of time as a line-operating pilot. months go by wildest quality get some exposure. there are some protections in there. it is impossible that everyone can come unqualified as a captain. everywherone has to start somew. we restrict some of the things they can do as a first officer. >> is the training ground for level of experience in different if i am flying from scotts bluff

to laramie then from new york to san diego? >> no, sir. once qualified on the airplane -- high-altitude airports and countries to have unusual approach procedures might need different training. but you're qualified to operate an aircraft anywhere in the system. >> i will pass by salary, although that worries me. i think somebody making peck, a salary, i do not know how they are supporting their families and maybe it is not our role to get into that. i want to get to equipment. when i was governor, we had a state plane. i will never forget this. the first day the pilot turned back to me and said, i am turning on the de-icing.

a kind of looked on the wing. you could see some ice building up. then you could see a balloon expand. and i thought, wow, that's it? tell me about the buffalo flight. a one-year honest assessment about how good that equipment is in a flight pattern that will do what i sing is used on a regular basis. >> that airplane -- that will deal with icing on regular basis. >> recognizing the time its takes to put one of these rules help. there were over 100 airworthiness directives to specific pieces of equipment following new criteria for how the equipment works and the recognition to pilots of when they begin to place. they are important steps.

the plane was complete compliance. -- but when they were beginning to ice. i do not want to prejudice that. because -- the fundamental in action or improper response to a very basic warning that the crew had been well trained for and simply did not follow the procedures. >>, thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. thank you, administer babbitt, for being here. there are always some parochial issues. i want to do some comments on issues. an update on fatigue and an update on your survival for six

months so far. in alaska, our flight service stations are not contract it out. all the rest are contract it out. we appreciate that. we think they do a great job. my concern is that there are vacancies ocher rinks, training occurring to replace those people. -- there are vacancies that are brokerinoccurring. that concerns me. as someone who passed to flaunt a lot to alaska, most recently on a small, eight-seater, coming out of a small town back to anchorage, a chemical volcanic ash and we were circling multiple times because the fog

was so thick. the stations where doing what they were doing, giving the store right information. we were concerned about fuel. there was an intent to go further than where we were headed. we ended up cutting through the fog visually based on their recommendations on where to land. the person with me from washington had not experienced -- they had the experience of a lifetime. those centers are critical. we greatly appreciate the people who run those. " we have done in alaska has been a very good job. pickens certification does that there knocking filling the vacancies with the rumor mill. we're not interested in a contract a. you do not have to do this now.

but when you can give me an update of 40 vacancy levels are and what the rollover rate is. that is critical for conditions in alaska. this was about a month and a half ago. it reassures me the quality of people would have working there. >> you have a high-quality team in a unique informant. we are looking at this. we recently had a new federal ruling that allows us two to us things. we have people that would be looking at retirement. they can stay if they want. people think that they would rather be working again. the new federal rule allows us to go backward to something which was previously prohibited. i do not have the full details. a look at back to you in your

office to make sure we have the staffing levels that are required up there. i have no intent of making any change in that environment. i think at cannot assuage that fear. >> we had to get waivers, for oxygen to be moved. deputies administrator helps a great deal on that. we were in some cases two dazed from people losing their capacity. we have quavers. one thing that was not granted there are waivers for oxygen tanks for construction. they're using them for welding and so forth. there are transporting these containers on snow machines. if you could look into that. they did the first half which

was fantastic. it made a difference in people's lives overnight. we cannot do by road. it is not possible. livni follow-up on a few things. -- let me follow-up on a few things. when pulte are denied quite their carriers not to fly -- when pilots are denied, but you know how many of those have occurred? some people say, you know what, you look to tire. is there documentation that you could say they are doing? >> those records are being maintained by the carriers. i will tell you that the number of carriers, that addressed this pretty aggressively. they have commuter letters where a republican -- were a pilot --

the commute itself has led to some fatigue. this is an indiana solution. it is different on different carriers. -- this is an indiana solution. -- this is an industrial solution. >> do you know 2 random reviews to seeking -- i do not want to be critical of the airline industry. generally, it is amazing. we have some issues. " they tell you and what you see maybe two different things. do you have authority to say, i want to see how many people pilots cannot fly because of fatigue?

do you have a capacity and have you done that? >> we have not made that recommendation to go in court or request that type of inspection. on sure they would volunteer. you think -- i do not believe we do. i would see no reason, as long as we kept the information proprietary. if we said, how many people called in sick last month and how many said they could not fly because of fatigue, i am very comfortable the carriers would share that with us. >> you are an example of when you posted on the web site, people were not paid their bills. it is amazing the collection rate spiked dramatically. i think it is a good idea. i was glad to hear about it today.

>> thank you, sir. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, administrator babbitt. let me say first of all that we must take knowledge in the overall house save our aviation system is. we extend our highest priority. we will always do that. as it all know, the colgan flight 3407 is waiting on airlines and we learned a lot from the investigation but now we must act -- excuse eighing oit is weighing on our minds. it drags out. let me ask you, and know that we sent you a letter led by

senator dorgan and senator rockefeller. we also signed a along with other members of this committee, senator snowe. really bipartisan. it said, how could we do this faster? that is the question. >> when we put the notice of proposed rulemaking, we're obligated to take comments. people have a comment window, but we have to observe. we then digest those comments pretty good example would-be a slowed down rule that is parallel to this one is the section for training pilots. we had 3000 pages of comments that we are obligated to digest, summarize, and incorporate if we could. i really do not have a direct answer esther how to make this faster. if there are gaps in there, we

will close them as quickly as we can. >> don't you have emergency authority, as well? if you see something that you think can be addressed quickly. we have had the screw on a cap being not correct. is that a possibility in this instance? people are concerned about this, especially the fatigue issue. >> part of our call to action that we review with all carriers, there is a fatigued and risk mitigation procedure. the carriers have been willing to comply. the unions, i was pleased to see several of the unions take progressive action with serious pieces in their publications. there was an editorial.

when i say that, we have to remember that every day, 20,000 pilots are going to go to work today and they are going to do a great job. they are professionals. we are trying to find two or three that arent't. >> if you see something that can be done and more expedited basis while you are in this rulemaking, not to overreact if you do not see fit to act, and w. l. list holds open the possibility that if you see something that can be done more quickly you couldn't do it emergency if you decided it was wanted? >> yes. if the date indicated we have gaping holes summer, i would act. i appreciate the letter you all

have written. it is hard to convey in here but nobody is pushing -- nobody is wishing this anymore internally. this is something near and dear to me, as well. one of the areas we ask people to respond to and 80 of 89 carriers have responded. these are voluntary programs. it is very positive. the ones who did not, they are too small to stops a program with two or three pilots. >> i am very concerned, along with senator rockefeller. we had an amendment in the stimulus bill to try to have some incentives for private investment in nextgen. he asked the question he that i would have asked. i'd say it is probably our

highest priority, the chairman and myself in safety and preparing for the capability to have the robust airline industries that we want as the economy gets better and people are able to travel. that is something both of us consider very important. if we can go forward with a public-private partnership or incentives, i am going to be supportive of that, as well. we will work with you on that. thank you very much. >> nextgen is a major priority. it enhances security. we have a lot of issues. in my judgment, it is not accessible to have all the end dates. we need to move quickly. i share the comments.

nextgen has to be a significant party. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you for holding this hearing. let me say? nextgen is a party for me as well. i would reiterate what secretary hutchinson said. clearly, we cannot rest on our past achievements. this was proven it earlier this year with the tragedy of colgan air flight 3407 which brought to safety of our airlines back into the public eye. he was chilling to learn about these fatigue issues and some of the training issues. the most chilling was the conversations that was recorded between the captain and the first officer when he said, i have never seen, wind

conditions and i've never experienced any of that. looking into these the icinde-ig rules. it has been contending for 12 years. a racist earlier to secretary would a few years ago. i work with the new head to try to move out of omb. we're able to get it out for public comment. but that is 12 years. you said 3000 pages for this newest rule. it would be to wonder 50 pages a year over a 12-year -- in would- be 250 pages a year over a 12- year period. can you assure us this 50 route will be completed by 2010?

>> december 31 of this year? >> of next year. yes, i can. i cannot conceive -- i am the person who wanted it out by the end of this year. i now understand some of the complexities. i have worked with it over time. one thing i want to say with some of these rule making. the role of salt may take awhile. it doesn't mean the underlying issue -- the rule itself may take a while. we acted immediately and issued over 100 airworthiness directives, the protected the very thing. it gathers all those up in one place. we have to issue these directives so safety was not left exposed. we're doing it with air worthiness directive. the underlying safety issue was protected. >> you would agree we would like

these in a row. i thought of these with the laptop issue. they have their rules and cannot be looking and your computer. there was not a rule in place. we're trying to solve that now. the other issue from colgan crash is the inadequacy of flight school. the student can be groomed in a short as six months. cammies flight students be trained -- schools to train students to be commercial pilots in such a short time? >> that is what we're making the suggestion we are making. i want people to appreciate, there has been some misunderstandings that i am somehow opposed to the idea we would have better training. i was looking better training before anyone brought the issue

up. i am concerned we're not giving people the elements they need to do the mission they're doing. if someone will be a crop duster, the half to learn some things about low-altitude flying. if you carry a passenger, take the responsibility of caring hands to hundreds of passengers. we have an obligation to make sure you've been exposed to every potential experience and will be the unknowns that happened. the flight into the hudson was a great example. i flew fourth 25 years and i hit a lot of birds. it happens prepare >> the training is key. there is the idea of the regional airlines eschas kind oa

farm team for the carriers. the answer is commonly yes. i am wondering about how the safety impact when you have this type of system and its regional carriers to understand their pilots, are only working for a short time. what incentives to the regional carriers have to provide them with anything more than the bare minimum of training. people are leaving the regional carriers, and how do we fix that? >> i am not here to defend. regional airline industry. there is some misunderstanding there. i was in the private sector for 42 years. my exposure in the private sector is far more vast. and understand all sides, both large and small. there are any number of senior,

will qualify, a 25-year pilot error regional airlines. they love their jobs. they live in smaller towns. it is a career for them. >> some of these younger pilots that do not stay as long. do you think to regional airlines are investing as long and as much in their training, especially aerospace the start to put the airlines? do they have the same kind of training facilities? >> many of them do. i cannot speak for all of them. one of the things we asked was that we go and our inspectors reviewed the training of the principal operations -- they're reviewed all the training. we did find areas of the accused improvement. you're also seeing a number of

-- most of the larger carriers are holding meetings with their regional partners who unsure of the have the same level of commitment to training and the safety of forums and the discussions, all of these things have gone on. >> thank you very much. >> i think you very much. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i continue -- i appreciate the continued focus on this subject. legislation address these issues. it is under way and a think one of the questions i have raised in the past has to do with the pilots threaten and their availability to a prospective employer and it was turned over and having access to those records. i think it is important.

i know the legislation addresses that issue. i want to focus on a couple of things. you talked about the distinction between quantity and quality. i will not tonight -- i am not playing in the nba prius i do not have the skill level to get there. no matter how many hours i would practice, i couldn't do that. there is something to be said for experience and having insufficient number of hours. this is one of the issues that i think has been focused on as part of our deliberations here, as well. but how do you square that out when you have a dc-9 the month before and from minneapolis to sioux falls but has 30 passengers on it as opposed a plan that has 50 passengers?