called witnesses. but every single one of them said we're on an unsustainable financial course. we're spending more money than we are taking in, an unprecedented amount each year. and we cannot sustain it. and so at some point we have to decide if we're going to stop or not and at some point we're going to have to decide just like families, our cities, our counties, our states, they're having to decide they don't have the money and they either cannot borrow more or they don't want to borrow more and they actually, amazingly, they may even reduce spending for a while. do you think those counties and cities an states are no longer going to exist? will they fall off the face of the planet? senator bunning's been around a long time.

he knows that's not so. businesses every day are having to cut back. families are cutting back. we can't cut back at all, but we continue to expend greater and greater amounts. the basic budget for this year has discretionary spending, nonmandatory spending goes up about 10% on top and -- and on top of that is the $800 billion stimulus package. all of that is debt. $800 billion. we had none of it in our accounts or banks. we had to borrow it. every penny of that we pay interest on. and this will be $10 billion more. well, it's just $10 billion. after $800 billion, that's not very much, is it? oh, yes, it is. $10 billion is more than

alabama's state budget and we're an average-sized state, about four million or five million people. it's larger than our state budget. an senator durbin, who is so eloquent, he said we just need to pass it right now. we don't need to be talking about paying for it. if you say how we'll pay for it, that may take an extra day to get the paper worked out with the house of representatives. somehow - -- somehow it's senatr bunning's fault that he's been asked to give his consent that this body would increase our debt by $10 billion. and let this bill pass. and senator bunning says, i'm not going to do it. you asked my consent, i'm a member of the united states senate. i have a right the to give that consent and if i have a right to

give it, i have a right to withhold it. and i'm going to withhold it unless you pay for this bill. so i don't think that's anything that should subject him to criticism. oh, yeah, it slowed down the plan. the plan was all greased. we were going to zip this right through. pop another $10 billion to the nation's debt and claim we've solved all our problems at least for the moment. but that's not a healthy approach. i think it's a healthy approach to -- for somebody with -- to stand up and question what we're doing, to say, you asked my on kent for something, i don't believe -- consent for something. i don't believe it and i'm not going to give it. i believe it's time to get on more sound financial footing. i want to say to senator

bunning, i respect your view on that. a lot of people do. i think that it's interesting that our colleagues like to quote letters from people in kentucky talk about that they have suffering as a result of unemployment and that is so painful, but i'm sure you've got letters, as i've got letters. in my town hall meetings people are coming up to me and saying, are you people losing your minds? how much money do you think you can continue to spend in time and time again i hear that. go through the airports, "keep fighting." hold the line. don't give in. they're not talking about adding another $10 billion to the debt because we won't even slow down long enough to figure out how to pay for it. that's not what my constituents are telling me and i'm sure they're not telling senator bunning that. so i think this is a big deal.

so when are we going to end this process? when does it stop? i say the time to begin to stop is now. and i'm going to -- going to be supportive of -- of senator bunning and his plan. i just really feel like that this thing is getting out of hand. as i explained the other night, i serve on the budget committee. budget numbers are not in dispute. the budget proposed by president obama, a 10-year budget, analyzed over 10 years by the congressional budget office, would conclude this -- last year we paid in one year interest on our debt of $170 billion. according to the congressional budget office because we're tripling the national debt at the rate we're going in 10 years the amount of interest we'll pay

on the debt is $799 billion. now, i think the american people understand this is unacceptable. they don't need an accountant or an economist or a bureaucrat to tell them this is an unsustainable path. they know it is and they've known it is for some time. some people say, well, this is just a populous revival. they don't understand. we understand better. you've got to baro, borrow -- borrow, borrow, borrow to make our economy go back. well, what an individual told me today out in the hall from alabama was the same thing a constituent told me a few weeks ago back in evergreen, and it is you can't borrow your way out of debt. you cannot borrow your way out of debt. this is a fundamental principle of life and we've seen to --

seem to have lost sight of it. we're on path. it's unsustainable. we've seen what has happened in greece. it has destabilized the entire union or threatens it. we've seen other countries get in the same kind of trouble. our country is not very far behind. moody's already talking about downgrading our debt rating. the amount of money that you have to pay to get insurance against credit -- against default, against the united states government has tripled in the last few years. these are people that do this stuff for a profit. people are worried about it. so i would just say to my friends and colleagues we're not -- it's not that complicated. we simply have got to stop spending so much money. we've got to spending so much

money. we can't do everything we'd like to do. we don't have the money. and most people understand that in their lives and most of our local governments understand that, but we in the senate think we know better. and i would just say that with regard to the small business taxes and some of the things that are probably -- would be somewhat helpful in creating economic growth, i am so disappointed we didn't include more of that in the bill that we passed when this stimulus bill passed. i remember coming to the floor, quoting right before the final vote a major op-ed in "the wall street journal," by a noble prize lawyer, gary becker, who said this bill that you're considering in the senate does not have sufficient stimulative

impact. he thought it would be much less than $1 for $1 in and you should get well above $1 in a good stimulus package. he warned it was not going to be a job creator. and senator mccain had a better bill at half the cost, $400 billion, targeted for jobs, targeted for economic growth, not a welfare bill, a stimulative bill, voted down by the democratic majority. senator thune offered an amendment similar to the one that paul rhein and others in the house of representatives about half the cost of the bill that we passed that would score, according to christine roamer, president obama's chief economic adviser, her model of how you score these things would have created twice as many jobs for half as much money as this monstrosity we passed.

others passed, my wife reminds me. don't say we when you voted against it. so this -- this is what we're now in. we've thrown out $400-so billion. $400 billion not yet spent. and it's not getting the impact we wanted. that's so tragic for everybody that's unemployed today, they need to wonder why this congress insisted on passing legislation that we were warned would not be effective in creating jobs, which is the key to our economic growth and prosperity. so, mr. president, i -- i just would say i -- i know that -- that good people can disagree. in a recession, that wehen just should keep spending no matter how long, no matter how much, and somehow this will make us come out of it. but when you're creating a an $800 billion a year interest payment, you realize that it

doesn't work that way. and if that was a way it worked, why didn't we spen spend $1.6 trillion in a stimulus package instead o of $800 billion? why didn't we spen spend $1,600,000,000,000 in stimulus rather than $800 billion? because obviously that's a philosophy that has its limits. i thank the chair and would yield the floor and i'm proud to support the senator from kentucky. the presiding officer: who yields time? mr. bunning: how much time is left on our side? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky, five minutes and 15 seconds. mr. bunning: i reserve that time until -- until the 10 minutes prior to the time expiring. in other words, the last five minutes that's going to senator

baucus, i reserve the time prior to the baucus time. i ask unanimous consent to do that. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. bunning: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky is recognized. mr. bunning: thank you, mr. president. ret me begin by addressing -- let me begin by addressing some of the arguments made by the other side of the aisle against my amendment. first, the senator from illinois said that this would cause a needless delay in extending these programs.

potentially causing a protracted negotiation with the house. with all due respect, that's nonsense. we all know the house can act very quickly. in fact, they did so when they sent this bill, h.r. 4691, to us. and the house has already passed my black liquor offset. i want everybody to understand that we pay for the extension of unemployment benefits, cobra assistance, health care assistance, so everybody's covered.

in the larger bill that we are dealing with on the floor, the one we took off the floor to address this amendment and this bill, also extends these provisions longer than just a month. the highway bill, the doc fix on medicare, the small business loans that we heard about that we are destroying with our objections, and the satellite -- rural sariewr -- the rural satev viewers. and i really sincerely believe if we can't find $10 billion to pay for something that all 100 senators support, we're in deep trouble. i think the senator from alabama

made that very clear. i'm on the budget committee also. i've heard those numbers over and over, not from just the republican people who come before the budget committee but from the democrats that testify before the budget committee. we are on an unsustainable path as far as the budget. so, mr. president, the question before us and before the senate is not whether or not the senators support unemployment benefits or all the other thin things, important things that are in this bill. the question is whether or not we as a senate and we as a government are going to pay for what we spend.

my time -- how much time do i have left? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky has a minute, 15 seconds. mr. bunning: well, i think everybody understands why i've been down on this floor for so long. i've been here for 12 years and 12 years in the house and i don't think i've spent this much time on the floor in any one-week period in my life. usually on the floor of the house, you only get two minutes to say whatever you have to say. in the senate, you get as much time usually as you need. i have never needed this much time. but something so important, particularly after paygo, particularly after paygo, and even the larger bill that we have before us, $104 billion of the $108 billion expended in that bill is emergency spending.

that's emergency spending that is not paid for. so when we get to the bigger bill, we're going to have some amendments for that. but i thank the chair and i will yield the floor. mr. bunning: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. begich: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. begich: i ask that the quorum call be vacated. s without objection. mr. begich: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the majority leader be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills and legislation during today's session of the senate. the presiding officer: is there objection? without obction,o ordered. mrs. boxer: how much time remains? the presiding officer: the senator from california, there are 55 seconds remaining. mrs. boxer: okay. well, mr. president, i just want to say in behalf of many of us in this side of the aisle how glad we are that senator bunning has changed his mind and taken the -- the option that he was presented with on thursday; that

is, to offer an amendment and then for us to get this done. too much pain is out there with the unemployed. a lot of workers in my state and in states all across this nation who are unemployed suffered a great deal of anxiety over this long weekend. i will also say that 2,000 department of transportation employees inspectors were furloughed, and that led to stoppage of work on bridge and highway construction in 17 states, because senator bunning -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mrs. boxer: -- senator bunning didn't take the deal that he's take now. so i'm glad he's taking it. and i raise a point of order that the pending bunning amendment violates section 307 of the budget act.

the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. bunning: mr. president, i'm sorry, but i wasn't on the floor. could you make your point of order. mrs. boxer: i raise a point of order that the pending bunning amendment violates section 311 of the congressional budget act. mr. bunning: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. bunning: i make a request that the budget act amendments be waived, the applicable point of order be waived and the yeas and nays -- i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be a sufficient second. there is a sufficient second. the question is on the motion to waive. the yeas and nays have been

ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or to change a vote? if not, on this the yeas are 43, the nays are 53. three-fifths of the senator duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.

under the previous order the clerk will read the title of the bill for the third time. the clerk: calendar 278, h.r. 4691, an act to provide a temporary extension of certain programs and for other purposes. the presiding officer: senator from montana. is there a sufficient second? there is a sufficient second. the question is on passage of h.r. 4691. the yeas and nays have been ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or to change your vote? if not, the ayes are 78, the nays are 19. the bill is passed. without objection. the clerk will report the

pending business. the clerk: h.r. 4213, an act to amend the internal revenue code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions and for other purposes purposes. ms. landrieu: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana ms. landrieu: madam president, thank you. i know that we have returned now to bill 4213, and it's my intention to call up amendment

3335 sponsored by myself, senator cochran, senator wicker, and senator vitter. the presiding officer: without objection, the pending amendment is set aside. ms. landrieu: thank you, madam president. the presiding officer: the presiding officer: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: the senator from louisiana, ms. landrieu, proposes amendment number 3335 to amendment number 3336. ms. landrieu: madam president? the presiding officer: senators please take your conversations out. the senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: thank you, madam president. i spoke at length about this amendment today, so it's not necessary for me to go into a great deal of detail. but i offer it on behalf of several senators from the gulf coast in order to help extend the placed in service state for several thousand low-income housing units along the gulf coast. we're not asking for additional authority. we're not asking for new tax credits. just to allow us to use the tax

credits that have already been allocated. without this date extension, we will lose thousands -- literally thousands of affordable housing dwellings and approximately 13,000 jobs. so, since we're really focused on jobs and focused on economic growth and development, we thought this would be an appropriate amendment for this bill. so i'd like to call the bill up now. of course it has been, and then just allow the leadership to decide when the appropriate time to vote on this amendment would be. and i thank you very much and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. schumer: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate now proceed to the consideration of senate resolution 429, ways submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 429, making minority party appointments for certain committees for the 111th congress. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on wednesday, march 3. that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved until later in the day, and the senate resume consideration of h.r. 4213. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, tomorrow we will resume consideration of the tax extenders legislation. currently we have three amendments pending to the bill. the thune amendment, the sessions amendment, the landrieu amendment. earlier we were able to reach agreement on senators and murray and sanders will offer the next two democratic amendments and senator bunning will enter the next two republican amendments. roll call votes are expected to occur throughout the day. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow.

amendment be considered as read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. bunning: mr. president, in a minute i'm going to speak a minute i'm going to speak orie math mr. president, in a minute i'm going to speak about my amendment to pay for this bill. first i want to talk about how we got here. last week i objected to the majority leader's request for unanimous consent to pass 30 day extension of several inspiring programs that was not paid for. i offered to pass the exact same

bill the was paid for her and unfortunately, he objected to my request. now, there was nothing stopping him from using the tools at his disposal to overcome my objections. the leader could have filed cloture on the bill and brought it to the floor last week. instead of the travel bill that is agreed to give away to his state. if he had done that, this bill would have been signed into law already. he also could have filed cloture on the bill and worked through the weekend and it would already be law or the leader could have proceeded to the bipartisan bachus-grassley bill that paid for these programs, and it would have been signed into law by

now. or he could have accepted my request to pay for the bill and we would not be here tonight. instead of the leader decided to press ahead with the bill that adds to the debt and violates the principles of paygo everybody claims to care about. just over a month ago the majority in the senate passed paygo legislation that supposedly said we are going to pay for what we spend on who support the idea but i knew at the time the legislation would be ignored, and unfortunately i was right. barely juan week after president obama signed the paygo law into effect, the majority leader proposed a bill that was not

paid for. the bill passed an added $10 billion to the deficit. that is $10 billion in your children and my children and grandchildren will have to pay for. that is $10 billion on top of a $14 trillion national debt. after passing $10 billion more debt on to the future generations, the majority leader proposed to pass another bill to add another $10 billion to the debt. that's when i said enough is enough. we can't keep adding to the debt and passing the buck to generations of future workers and taxpayers my children and your children and our grandchildren.

as we know the national debt has grown at a record pace in recent years. a large part of that has been a result of a downturn in the economy, a decade ago and then during the last few years but increased government spending has been a major factor, too. over the last few days, several senators on the other side of the aisle have blamed republican spending for the debt and asked why we did not pay for things when we were in charge. well, mr. president, they have a point. i wish we would have spent less and paid for more of it when we were in charge. there are some notes i wish i could have back, and i sure many of my colleagues on this side of the all feel the same way.

but it's not fair to blame republican spending for all of the drastic increases in our national debt. our side has not controlled the congress for more than three years and the current congress is spending more and faster than ever before. for example, last year the majority pushed through a so-called stimulus bill followed quickly by m omnibus spending bill that combined, contributed, excuse me, contributed to the government ending the year $1.4 trillion in the red. the largest one-year deficit in the history of the united states of america. clearly we are not headed in the

right direction. i do not want to turn this into a partisan debate because it isn't a partisan issue. i only make these points to show neither side has clean hands and what matters is we get our spending problems under control. as every struggling family knows we cannot solve a debt problem by spending more. we must get our debt problems of the control and there is no better time than now. that is why i have been down here demanding this bill be paid for. i support the programs in the bill we are discussing and if the extension of those programs were paid for, i would gladly support the bill. the on the employment rate in my state is well over 10% right now.

many families get their television through satellite providers in kentucky. more than half of the state is bordered by rivers and flood insurance is vital to the people that live near those borders and any of the major minor rivers in the state. in fact, i wrote the law that enacted the current version of the flood insurance program. so i care about it deeply. i'm concerned about the other programs in this bill as well as every other member of this body. that is all the more reason to pay for this bill. if we cannot pay for a bill that all 100 senators support, how can we tell the american people with a straight face that we

will ever pay for anything? that is what senators say they want, and that is what the american people want. they want us to get our budgets in order just like they have to get their budgets in order every day. but that is not what the majority is doing. so tonight, tomorrow and on every spending bill in the future, we will see whether they mean business about controlling our debt or if it is just words. we will see if paygo has any teeth or not. tonight i am of offering a substitute amendment that he is for these important programs

with space ideas. tomorrow i will offer amendments to the offset, the longer term extender the bill that was on the floor earlier today. and i will be back on future spending bills demanding that they be paid for so future generations of americans will not be burdened with our overspending. as i said my amendment pays for this bill with space ideas. mr. president, the tenure cost of this extended programs for one month is $10.26 billion. the offset i'm offering will more than pay for this cost and the offset should be familiar to many. it has been proposed by senter

bachus and the substitute amendment to the long-term extension bill. it was also proposed in the obama administration budget. the offset would prevent black liquor which is a bipartisan of the pulp and paper process from being eligible for the cellulose biofuel producer tax credit. this will save the treasury almost $24 billion over ten years according to the joint tax committee. this will more than pay for the cost of the bill and there will be almost $14 billion left over. under the paygo rules the

$14 billion will be available to be used to pay for the next bill congress passes. i think we all expect the next bill will be the long-term extension bill. some might say i am creating a $24 billion hole in the next bill by using that offset now. that's not true. first we are removing over $10 billion in cost from that larger bill by enacting the one month extensions now, and we are also making $14 billion available for that bill and members on this side of the aisle including myself have offered and will offer ways to completely pay for the cost of that more expensive longer-term extension bill.

this is a proposal made by the majority and i hope and expect every one of them to support my amendment. anyone who does not should be prepared to answer why the senate does not have to make the tough decisions to balance the government's budget while every american family does. we must bring an end to the out of control spending, and there is no better time than now. by year urge my colleagues to join me in saying enough and restore some discipline to washington. i urge everyone in this body to support this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time.

>> mr. president. >> majority leader? >> i rise in opposition to the bunning amendment. the senator from kentucky has decided after one week to accept exactly what was offered to him last week. last week we said to the senator from kentucky if you want to come up with a pay for for unemployment benefits and health care benefits, offer an amendment. you will have your chance on the floor and the senator from kentucky said no because i might lose their for i'm not going to offer the amendment. i will only object to moving forward with temporary benefits from unemployment insurance and health care and several other things and i stand by my objection. the senator from kentucky came to the floor and found four different ways to blame the democratic majority leader for his objection. he made the objection. i think he was the only senator out of 102 objected.

i don't question his motives for sincerity but i think in all candor let's understand where we are at this moment in time. during the one week period of time while the senator from kentucky could have offered an amendment he didn't and as a result, on sunday night unemployment benefits were cut off for thousands of people across america, assistance would cut off all across america, thousands of federal employees were furloughed, federal contracts for construction were suspended why? because he didn't want to offer the amendment that he's offering tonight. well i'm glad he's offering it and i will tell you why i'm going to oppose it. he knows and i know that if we don't pass this bill as it passed the house of representatives, if we make a

change we are destined to send over to the house at a minimum to wait several days or even longer for a conference committee to resolve his amendment and what happens to those unemployed people during the period of time? they don't receive checks. 15,000 people in illinois had unemployment insurance cut off sunday night because of senator bunning's objection. in addition to that, thousands in my state lost the helping hand to pay for their health insurance. so the senator from kentucky tonight is suggesting just take this little amendment. it won't hurt a thing. it's something you should like and while we will over his change moving between the house and senate this people will continue to go without an employment insurance and without healthcare assistance. a 2000 more each day are added to those rules of unemployed people who are going to pay the price for this procedural move

by the senator. i know that there's also a pain in his own state and i know that many people are aware of the fact that there is high unemployment across the states. millions of people who have lost their unemployment insurance. i know that it's affected his state. i've seen the numbers. as a result of the senator from kentucky's objection 4,300 unemployment insurance claimants will lose their on the planet insurance by march 13th if we don't complete action. what he has done tonight is delay. what's even worse about this amendment and the reason it should be defeated is not just because it will once again the lake on employment benefits to people across america, it will once again create problems where people will lose their health insurance they may never be allowed to obtain again because pre-existing conditions and

their family. what's worse, these federal workers who can't go to work are going to suspend construction projects that create jobs across america while the senator from kentucky offers this amendment to change. but let's look at the heart of this amendment. where did the senator from kentucky come up with resources to pay for this insurance? he came up with it from the bill pending on the floor where the revenues are already being raised to pay for unemployment insurance. he's not reducing our deficit. in this situation we've already taken this money and put it in the next bill relating to unemployment insurance to defray the cost of unemployment insurance. so he doesn't reduce the deficit he just adds a procedural hurdle that delays the payment of unemployment insurance to people across america. this could have been done last

week. he was offered this chance last week. he wouldn't take it last weekend as a result a lot of people have suffered and let them have gone through hardship. it's his right to do it as the united states senator but i think the reaction on the floor of the senate i might add from both sides of the aisle is a demonstration that sometimes just because we have the power to do things we ought to think twice before we use that power. i have the power to put a hold on every nomination this president or any president seeks. i have the power to object to any unanimous consent request it comes to the floor of the senate but people elect us not just to make political judgment but make good judgment. in this case, the political judgment was made that the unemployed people involved were expendable. they could wait for days if not weeks until we get around to a

political debate about the deficit. i'm troubled by the argument the senator believes he's one of the few stalwarts on the floor of the samet when it comes to deficit reduction. the record suggests he's voted for to war under president bush that were not paid for costing the united states almost a trillion dollars at a directly to the debt. the senator also supported eliminating the estate tax on the richest people in america. certainly that is going to blow a hole in any budget and that to the deficit. the same was true with medicare prescription drug program. the senator voted for that without paying for it adding at least $400 billion to the deficit. those of us who've been here for a while cast many votes and my critics will find plenty of things to criticize about my record but before i come to the floor and stop the unemployment

insurance for people wondering where their next meal is coming from a think twice about saving the the debate so that victims are not the most helpless people in america who've lost their jobs through no fault of their own. i urge my colleagues when this amendment comes for a vote later this evening to think twice if you vote with the senator from kentucky who takes his revenue source from another bill the will vote tomorrow, if you do that you will deily the unemployment checks again. people come up with other excuse to say no. the senator from kentucky made it clear he doesn't believe unemployment compensation is an emergency need in america. i disagree. i think we are in an emergency situation in our economy. i've met with these unemployed people in my state and other states. they are desperate people. some of them have been out of work for two years.

they might lose everything before it's over and i hope they don't. they are training for new jobs, the to exhausted their savings, trying to keep their families together. the family i read about today said they put everything they own in one of the storage lockers because they lost their home. they moved from homeless shelters to live in the back of their car. is that an economic emergency? maybe not to the members of the senate because our lives are comfortable but it's certainly an emergency for those families. the real question on this debate is who we are as a nation. do we care about these people? these breadwinners' now down on their luck? these folks who work for years and are now out of work through no fault of their own doing everything they can legally to find a way to survive or is this just another political debate, another political issue, another

chance to score political points at the expense of some people who are not in a very strong position to defend themselves? i hope tonight we will defeat the amendment. tomorrow we will have a chance to put a substantial down payment of unemployment benefits, cobra benefits and the bill chairman bachus brings to the floor and i hope we understand that is the right way to do this. what an empty victory if we end up voting for the amendment and stop unemployment benefits as a result while we try to work out differences between the house and senate. there's a lot more we can do here to help get this economy moving again. one of the things that holds us back is when we get in broiled in these procedural parliamentary tangles that eat up a day after day and week after week which leave as frustrated on the floor of the senate and people across america

angry we are dealing with the real issues that count, issues like creating jobs and like making sure there's affordable health care for everyone in this country. we should be dealing with that. the senator said the majority leader could have filed cloture, we did 48 hours, another 30 hours and we could have gone through the weekend for what purpose? for what purpose? we've reached the point offered to the senator from kentucky from the start. he's going to get his vote. but a week has passed, we stood, a week we should look our sleeves and doing things these people of america sent us here to do. what about the deficit? it is serious. majority leaders asked me to serve on a commission with senators bachus and conrad. it's a tough assignment. i don't think it is going to be easy to figure out how to deal with 14 trillion-dollar debt in this nation but i will tell you this we will do better with the national debt if we have a

strong national economy and people back to work. we will be better off as a nation if the families can keep their kids in school and folks can get up and go to work. this notion we are somehow going to balance our national budget on the backs of unemployed people, please, aren't we better than that is a nation? i think we are. twice last year the senator from kentucky voted to explain to become export benefits without paying. tonight he insisted we pay. everybody's entitled to change their mind. when abraham lincoln born in kentucky raised and a lawyer was accused with his critics, is president, changing his mind he said yes i did change my mind. but i would rather be right some of the time they and all of the time so we do change our mind on these issues but let's not change our mind at the expense of innocent helpless americans looking for a helping hand.

if a tornado swept across the state of kentucky god forbid in the weeks ahead and the senator came and said we have an emergency on our hands i would stand up to help him. as i believe he would if it happened to my state. we do that because we care for one another in this nation and we may have political differences and there's been plenty of them that they shouldn't be expense of our basic need to deal with the problems we face. the governor of kentucky said center bombing in a letter today and copy to me and said facing on and play rate of 10.7% in kentucky of 9.7% across the nation he said to senator bumming i urge you to allow passage of h.r. 4691 title extension of unemployment benefits to 1.2 million americans including tens of thousands right here in kentucky. he went on to say the governor of kentucky wrote to senator bunning there are 119,230 kentuckians receiving benefits

through the federal extension program without further extension 14,206 claimants would exhaust all the extension benefits within two weeks. it would take two weeks of the amendments adopted to finally get this done if we get it done in that period of time. the governor went on to write by the end of march to total of 22,797 kentuckians will exhaust their benefits by mid april 31,521 will exhaust their benefits and by july 31st the remainder of those receiving benefits will cost them. beyond the number of those receiving extension benefits another 90,000 kentuckians currently on unemployment insurance will not be eligible for the federal extension program at all. table for their children and seniors who are trying to pay the rent. in addition to the extension of unemployment benefits, this bill also includes important

extensions of federal subsidies to pay health premiums for those unemployed people who lost health insurance with when they lost their jobs -- insurance when they lost their jobs, current medicare payments for doctors, flood insurance and small business loans." the governor closed his letter to senator bunning saying, "i urge to you reverse your position on this bill and would welcome any opportunity to provide you with further information on its tremendous necessity. signed sincerely, steven l. bashier," governor of kentucky. that governor could have come from any governor in our nation. from any governor in our nation. that letter could have come from any governor in our nation. that is the employment picture in the economic shirt in my state and so many other states across the nation. please, when we get down to the budget debate, we should be sensitive to the fact that they're helpless to do to some of the procedural moves made on the floor of the united states senate. it is time for us to stick together, both parties i hope,

in an effort to stand up for the unemployed and get this economy back on its feet. i urge my colleagues to defeat the bunning amendment. it will only slow down the unemployment benefits these people have been waiting for and are worried they may not receive. it will mean that more and more people will fall out of coverage and health insurance and it will mean that medicare services will be available to seniors across the nation went out to decide that they're not being reimbursed enough. those are some of the basics in this will. the revenue source that senator bunning uses is included in the jobs bill that is before us as soon as this matter is over. if you believe that helping to pay for unemployment benefits, we should use the source as the finance committee has suggested and i certainly agree with it. you'll have the opportunity to do that immediately after we pass this bill. in the meantime, let's waste no time, waste no effort in making

sure that these needy people across america get the helping hand they need. and i yield the floor. >> mr. president -- the >> senator from kentucky. >> how much time do i have reserved? >> seventeen minutes and 20 seconds. >> thank you. as the good senator from illinois knows him and there is no need for a conference since the house of 30 pass this bill and authority passed the language in this amendment. i am very sure that they would be willing to accept their own bill back pain for. he mentioned the fact that i object to it four times. i objected more than four, but the majority leader objected four times to my request. i was nowhere in a statement. and talking about medicare part

d premiums and the cost of medicare part d, the majority party in the senate has had three years to repeal medicare part d if it was a bad idea at the time we passed it and certainly with 60 full votes in the u.s. senate, it could have revealed what they consider a bad bill. the fact that it was not paid for was not to my liking. the fact that we were going to take care of medicare senior citizen who couldn't afford their prescription drugs to resident. he spoke about the letter from the governor of kentucky. i didn't receive it. i have no knowledge of the

letter until it was brought up by the senator from illinois. it's amazing to me how many misstatements and how the governor, democrat governor of the commonwealth could bring all these facts up to the senator from illinois and not the senator from kentucky. there are so many things that i can say and i guess i have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, 11, 11 constituent either phone calls or letters, usually e-mails. i'm just going to read a couple of them because i want to

reserve some time in case the senator from illinois gets up again. this is term randall in bardstown, kentucky. just my two thank you for your principled stand against the squandering of our country's wealth. yes, we need to help those out of work, but no, we do not want to help print more money to do it. i have two sons on unemployment at this time, yet we realize we cannot continue to spend money that doesn't exist. thank you very much, senator bunning, for having the guts to stand up for your principles and oppose further spending of money we simply do not have. in particular, i'm glad you stood up extending unemployment and if it's what would put us further in debt.

regards, bob from burlington, kentucky. and another. i just want to send you some encouragement to hold your ground in the senate on renewing unemployment extension benefits. as a kentucky taxpayer and the federal taxpayer, i am tired of seeing unfunded and underfunded programs passed by congress and i'm glad you are taking a stand. as an american and a kentucky and, i believe the government has failed the american people almost totally. but at least in this instance, you are not feeling us. please keep your resolve and don't let pressure and influence way a good decision. that's from william n. flemings berg, kentucky. i'm surprised that you don't have more support when you are

100% correct, that is 100 men in agreement can't find a way to pay for a program, they will never pay for anything. our deficit has got to stop and now is always the best time to start. thank you for standing up for us, mark from independence, kentucky. and this'll be the last one because i still have about three more pages of them. thank you for holding firm last night. you are very much appreciated for being willing to say no to extend the benefits that no one knows how to pay for or who will foot the bill. it takes a very special individual to stand firm when everyone around you seems to be caving in. and that's from debbie from somerset, kentucky. these are just a few.

there's more. but there are a lot of really good people in the commonwealth of kentucky, 4.2 million, that want their senators, they're members of the house to stand up for themselves. and i appreciate hearing from each and every one of them. i thank them for their support and i reservehe balance of time. >> mr. president. >> majority leader. >> mr. president, i also received some e-mail and letters from kentucky and. it's a great state in the industrial home of many turbines. one failed from sunfish, kentucky, which is a pretty tiny town i'm told, came up north to illinois and so i think the beautiful state and i've enjoyed visiting there many times.

a lady named joy from florence, kentucky, said i'm 50 years old, i got let go a year and a half ago from my job because i was getting older and they can pay less for younger workers. most places i applied to want higher by experience. they want a college degree. i'm an elderly mother in a handicapped child and i behind in all my bills. and if there's on another extension, i will not be able to pay my bills. i'm hoping you'll put through another extension. hopefully things will improve come spring. this is from jr, she's from kentucky and i won't read some portions of this letter, but i will read this part. i would like to say i'm unemployed and unemployment insurance has allowed me to keep my home. there still are no jobs that will allow me to live on. i've cut back to just the basic

needs. i'm going to have to give up the internet next. then, i'll start selling my belongings to get by. i sit and wonder if everyone on unemployment gets cut off. does the senate congress realize the war here in the united states will want than the one overseas. we'll be so much dealing and that's when windows just for people to try and survive and feed their families. god help us all. that is the letter of desperation. it is an unimaginable scene that we would reach in any community or in any state. but i think it reflects the fact that some people who write and say cut them off and so what are pretty fortunate people. they probably have a job. they probably have a home and there may not be worried about what the next meal is coming from. but for millions of americans, that not the story. and i understand the senator

from kentucky and i just see this differently. but i take the issue of health insurance as an example. if you have ever had the experience as a parent of having a sick child and having no health insurance, it is something you'll never forget as long as you live. it happened to me when i was a law student. my wife and i were duly married and with no health insurance and the baby with a medical problem. and i try to imagine what it would be like, ours was a temporary experience, but what it would be like if that what we had to face day in amadeus, month after month, year after year. and that's what these folks are up against here is the only chance they have to hold onto health insurance is this cobra program. the cobra program, let me just add parenthetically that was created through reconciliation, this process that has been condemned by some, created the cobra program and said we're going to provide health

insurance for the unemployed people of america. the president stimulus package that will help you pay for the premiums. in the objection of the senator from kentucky cut off those payments for thousands of people all across america. i don't know what's going to happen now. i don't know if some of them lost their health insurance and try to get it back, whether they're going to be denied coverage because some of the preexisting conditions. i hope that doesn't have been. but will mean this just wasn't another political debate for them. it will mean that they've lost the coverage which all of us want to have for all of our families. cobra coverage consumed nearly 84% of unemployment check if you don't give a helping hand from the government. the unemployment benefits are just over $1300. the average monthly family told them premium is over $1100 so you can see it's impossible for families with $1300 a month to pay an $1100 premium.

so 65% of the cost of deferred by this program and that program was stopped because of the objection by the senator from kentucky. he said that we should have gone to the cloture vote. in other words, which interfaces filibuster head-on and taken all the time that it's a two resolve our way through it. and each hour of each day that we did that, more and more people would fall out of coverage of health insurance. we don't hear, as a member of congress, members of congress, some pretty generous health insurance plan. we share with other federal employees, 8 million of us and our families. it gives us the very best coverage with the government picking up about two thirds or three fourths of the cost. we don't have to worry about gaps in coverage. as we receive our checks, we're going to be able to protect our families. if our folks are unemployed, that just isn't the case. the senator from kentucky the objection also affected, as they mentioned, transportation across the united states.

federal reimbursement to states for highway and transit projects on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars each day are stopped because of senator bunning's objection, forcing halting construction work and layoffs of construction workers in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the economic depression. today, the secretary of transportation, reload, and called to tell me the need for urgent response to get these people back to work so they can spec projects and folks working for contractors and working across america can get back to work. they stopped old dead in their tracks because the objection by the senator from kentucky. now he wants to let this go on a little further, amend this bill, send it over to the house, see if they've accepted, maybe there'll be a conference, maybe in a few days or weeks we can get it done. well, it's a 30 day extension. and it defeats its purpose if we

accept this amendment and delayed because of those possibilities. he can no more guarantee that it won't happen, then i can guarantee that it will. but why do we want to create that insurgency from people who have been facing this uncertainty? the senator from kentucky's objection also stopped small business administration assistance to small businesses in illinois and kentucky have well. the sba has an outstanding loan wittiness from small businesses totaling $140 million. because of senator bunning's objection, 3000 small businesses this month will be denied access to loans they need to run their businesses, to pay their employees and to create new jobs in the middle of a recession, can we think of the worst thing to do then cut up small businesses? it didn't have to happen. if senator bunning would've taken the offer that he had last week from the majority leader and offered this amendment last week, we could've avoided all of this weird a week later, he's

decided, all right, i'll take the offer. a lot of people paid the price in the meantime. we will not stop until we have provided the assistance the unemployed americans need, families in illinois and in kentucky and america a desolate one is to bring. eventually we will prevail and care for those who are struggling. in the meantime, i urge my colleagues, please do not support the amendment the senator from kentucky. it is unfortunately a way to delayed even further is critically needed assistance. i reserve the balance of my time and yield the floor. >> after a week of object to senator jim bunning and it is filibuster of a short-term extension of several expired government programs. how did they agree to move forward? >> well, the democrats have been offering the same amendment, same proposal to senator bunning weakening it last week and senator bunning continued to go to the floor and object and were

still trying to get details as to why the senator decided to go along with the proposal. but the agreement that they put forth tonight which allowed them to go ahead and hold the vote on senator bunning's proposal to offset the cost of the bill, which has been the thing driving is filibuster from the start, the proposal regarding black wicker funding, which is a word byproduct. so essentially, they put the agreement in place tonight knowing that there's another bill on the floor, sort of a longer-term package of extension that would include some of the programs in the short-term bill. but they finally were able to reach an agreement late this afternoon to go ahead with the vote on his amendment and to finally clear the bill for obama signature. >> what happened with the bunning amendment? did it pass or fail?

>> the amendment did not succeed. a budget point of order was raised against it and senator bunning was not able to rally enough votes to overcome that objection so that the amendment did go down, but there were -- there were no republicans dissenting. they all held ranks, but senators lincoln is up for reelection, ben nelson of nebraska, russ feingold all supported senator bunning as did joe lieberman, the independent from connecticut. >> the bill at the short-term extension of the government program that did pass, what is the bill cover? >> sure, the bill covers a series of extensions of cobra benefit benefit, medicare provisions and there's a satellite television law that extended health care subsidies

for the unemployed, job creating highway funding. essentially, a whole range of very popular programs. senator durbin has been warning for days going into that all of these expire sunday night, that by not moving the bill and assigning it into law, that 15,000 people in his home state of illinois would be out of unemployment checks because of the program. >> and what about nationally? there has been a lot of talk about the employment benefits in this legislation. >> on a national scale, as i said, the unemployment program, those programs had congress not acted, would have been cut off until they could actually get a law signed in. and they figure the unemployment rate is almost a 10%, said the democrats have been making the argument for days that this was essentially hating americans who

have been hardest by the recession. >> what happens next to the legislation? >> the legislation, president of is expected to sign it into law. the house took it up last week and the expectation of the senate would act quickly. i don't think the democrats anticipated the level of intensity of senator bunning's objection and so that's what you had last thursday night with the back-and-forth in the objection to moving the bill late into the night. and i senator bunning continued to dig in his heels, democrats basically were able to just hammer away at the republican for holding up these programs that they argue are very much needed and desperately would help americans nationwide. >> greg vadala of congressional quarterly. appreciate your time. >> thank you.

>> afghanistan and pakistan richard holbrooke briefed reporters today about his recent trip to the region. from the state department, this is 45 minutes. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> sorry for the delay. good afternoon. welcome to the department of state and our daily press briefing. we always like a lecture on to

guest lecture to come and give us the latest on a significant regional issues, none more important than our ongoing efforts in afghanistan, pakistan, and the central asian republics. richard was just on an extensive trip around the world that included stops in many countries, including afghanistan, pakistan come in fishing up in georgia in germany. he thought it was a good time to come down and give you a current sense of the state of play in afghanistan. i think you'll be happy to a ten questions on the situation in marja and also how other governments in the issues unfolding and how are working together very closely with them. and we'll follow up on other subjects. richard, thank you. >> thank you very much for coming. this is the pattern that p.j. and i are trying to evolve, that after every major trip i come down and we just talk. as i want to talk about this

trip, which is my fifth trip this year in my second to the golf, second to south asia. and this is part of an accelerating intensification of our diplomatic outreach efforts. in the last six months, we've had delegations in beijing, in russia, in turkey, in almost every country in the gulf and of course in europe and china and now for the first time we've reached into central asia. i was in four of the five stands in order if i can remember them, we were so fast. is pakistan first, then kyrgyzstan, then tajikistan and

kazakhstan. we'd also plan to go to turkmenistan, but the religious spoken indication failure, we did not get the final clearance to land in -- provide until we were on the runway taking off to estonia, so we were locked in. and so that's a minor story, but that's the only reason we weren't in ashgabat. now, the purpose of this when i alluded to down here was to visit all of the countries in the region, all the neighbors, with the exception of iran, i've now talked face to face with the leadership. in the case of kyrgyzstan, which doesn't have a common border with afghanistan, the very important enough transit center, which will be -- which we will renew the arrangements on in the

next few weeks. and i wanted to launch that process. we are very grateful with the kyrgyz's government for that support and i had a very emotional meeting with the troops at manas. 35,000 americans go through manas training center every month and we just dropped in on the room where they were talking to their families on skype and playing foosball and just chatted with some of them coming in and out and that always valuable to have an encounter with a young first lieutenant who was on his way back to alaska, who had been injured and six and give us a very vivid word description of his efforts down there. i can go back to that later if it interests you. in tashkent, of course, we talked about the northern distribution network and its

importance to us. most of the supplies coming through that entry point into afghanistan, the northern distribution network, come through is pakistan. in cosmic stan we talked about improving and increasing our overflight facilities and improving rail transit which is initial were interested in. and in tajikistan we talked about also northern distribution issues. and in addition, we talked about resources. water is a huge problem as the walnut in pakistan and afghanistan and tajikistan has one of the greatest water potential in the world and president rahmon described that to us in some detail. and we have on a separate basis, we've got a water resources task force now set up in the

department to examine how we can additionally helped the countries in the area and particularly pakistan with the water issue. and finally, after the four central asian republics, we went on to georgia. now, georgia -- and we visited the georgian battalion outside tbilisi, which will be deployed next month to afghanistan. the u.s. vereen's who are advising the training and to do this as a profession, said these are among the best troops that they've ever seen. many of these troops fight in iraq with the coalition. those of you who know georgia, know that is a mountainous country with terrain features that are sometimes similar to afghanistan. they have a tremendous fighting tradition. and they are going into afghanistan with no national

caveats and after they unpack and get acclimatize, they will be integrated into the marine operations in helmand. on a per capita basis, right now they appear to have the highest per capita troop contribution of any country in the world at about 950 troops when this battalion gets there. it's extremely important deployment and we are great for for it. president saakashvili and i have discussed this a year ago and started the process, which has led to the deployment and he accompanied me on this trip to the training mission. i was not there on any other subject. we did not discuss u.s. russian relations. we did not discuss issues involving the future relationships with nato. this was in afghanistan related

trip. but i want to express, with great strength, on behalf of the entire u.s. government, how much the united states government appreciates the georgian contribution. it came by coincidence on the same day that the government and the netherlands fell. this is an important deployment and gotten far too little attention. the germany of course was to continue a high-level coordination with the muslim allies. but the main focus in germany was the germans supported the police training program. german by constitution, the germans cannot put their police under military command. and i'm sure all of you understand why that was put into the constitution. but within that framework, they are doing very important job on

police training, which is being closely coordinated with the military command, but under separate command arrangements consistent with the german constitution. and we hope they will increase the amount of trainers. they do -- although we raise, we pulled together a very impressive number of additional training personnel in the last week. of course generation conferences. we were still short on training personnel so that's important. and the front end of the trip was then doha and saudi arabia. doha was to address the brookings institution conference, the world islamic program to one of the best comes as the world. from ambassador said to talk to the qatari officials and then went to we either to continue our dialogue with them.

so it was obviously had a nervous importance. in the middle of this i went to afghanistan and pakistan until the leadership. i've now seen president karzai three times at three different countries in the last month. we've had extensive and detailed discussion on his implementation of this plan as he outlined them in kabul in november 19, in london on january 28 in munich on february 6 or 7. i don't remember which day. and so the conversations in kabul were a continuation of that. i met with under members of the government as well. did not have a chance to get out of town, but i spent a lot of time at general mcchrystal and ambassador eikenberry. finally, in pakistan, extensive discussions with the president, prime minister gilani, leader of

the opposition but was sharif and general kai ani and his senior colleagues. that's all i will continue. my next trip to the region will be with admiral mullen. together we did this just under a year ago. i think some of you in this room were on that trip and admiral mullen and i try to do about one civ-mil trip a year. and that trip will include indiana. the last point, p.j. and i had hoped today bring the fbi director with me, bob mueller who just came back from an important trip to afghanistan and pakistan. he had a conflict and i apologize if there's interest, maybe we can bring him over at another time. i would recommend p.j., that you consider that. i think mohler strip. p.j. and i heard a detailed discussion by him the other day. it was a furtherance of our

trilateral meetings last year, which were going to resume in a few months here. and in that -- in his trip, he put together a meeting between the new ministers of interior. minister ottmar and minister malik. this is really important. the court nation between the two countries was at the core of the policies he's been developing over the last 13 months and we really think that director mueller's meetings were important in moving things forward. so with that, outline of what i did, i'll be happy to take your questions. thank you. >> sue pleming with rutgers. in your discussions -- let me rephrase that. what's your assessment of how president karzai stood at the moment? these met him several times. this week, he's imposed

restrictions on the media. there are concerns about media freebie and in afghanistan. he's also last week introduced some new regulations with regard to the elections. maybe if you could discuss those two issues and whether you raise this or are concerned about it. do you see the afghan government moving in the wrong direction? >> i don't see a pattern, too, but you have recent issues that will have legitimate concern. on the first one, p.j. i had an extensive discussion on that and it's pretty obvious that we support free press. we don't like restrictions on the press. my whole career has been to voted to supporting that. and p.j. and i and the secretary of state are concerned and will make our support of free access by the press clear to the government. on the second point, on the

elections, were talking about what the election -- >> yes. >> president karzai -- we've talked about this. ambassador eikenberry has talked to president karzai about this. the integrity of the election in the eyes of the afghan people and the international community is very important. and it is a legitimate concern at the international community, that with all the troops that are there, with all the international systems, that there be a process, which is transparent and free and fair. and so, some of the concerns have been raised with things we think are legitimate and need to be discussed further. p.j. addressed this last week in his remarks, and i would only

add to what he said then. i agree with what he said and he talked about -- i think it's engraved in stone, p.j. but it is -- well, i don't have the exact words, but let me tell you they were memorable and historic. >> you could add live if you'd like. >> i wouldn't forget them for moment et cetera just remember them right now. >> t. think there should be restrictions on assistance to afghanistan? secretary clinton was very clear before the london conference that if the afghanistan -- is the afghan government did not act responsibly and was not seen as, you know, whirling as you'd like them to and doing what they need to do, that you might withhold assistance. >> i'm not going to get into hypotheticals. particularly when the assistance has been structured and restructured. now to help the afghan people. you want us to withhold cash for

work in the agricultural sector because of this issue? that makes no sense. i'm not going to advocate things like that. our -- we have a large overriding goal here to help afghanistan's seat in its efforts to defeat the taliban and and its allies and al qaeda. and we're not going to take our eye off that ball. but to get there, we want to encourage policies that give the broadest possible support to the government from the afghan people. and that covers a wide range of issues including this one. >> can you identify yourself? >> desmond butler. >> there's been some concern in germany about the command structure in kunduz following to build up. is that something that came up in your discussion and do they have any reason for concern

quiet >> it did not come up, although i've read about it in the press. and i do believe they have a cause for concern, does. >> jonathan land day with mcclatchy newspapers. what about paying for the elections? the international community dust on the elections under the presidential election. is there a chance you can withhold international funding for the afghan election -- >> i'm not going to speculate on hypotheticals. that kind of issue is always there that you said, international. the bulk of the money you're referring to is not american and it's not controlled by the united states. so let the international community do with that. >> peter green from bloomberg. if i could ask you about marja, how long do you think it's going to take before that tall offensive finally secures that

area and what comes next. you have any insight into the next portion of the campaign, which is supposed be the kandahar region come over that is going to look like. >> p.j. and i and ashley and my colleagues just got off the phone with frank ruggiero. that's why we kept you waiting. we wanted to get up-to-date information from the field. frank ruggiero, i think all of you know, is the senior civilian in the southern command a former assistant secretary of state, and one of our most talented and highly valued members of our team. and so let me just give you a sense. first of all, there are already six civilians on the ground in marja full-time. that may not sound like much, for our american amateur british. may not sound like much, but it's a lot because first of all they are setting up the district support team. secondly, there plenty of other civilians coming in and out.

take himself was there two or three days ago. and the object here is to start channeling the assistance and most importantly get in the afghan government to stand up in support at that level. to your specific question, no, i can't give you -- well, i'll let mcchrystal and his colleagues speak about the military aspects of the battle. that's their business and their underground. but, mcchrystal yesterday in marja and effects of the military phase was coming to an end. but they're always going to be ied's. there's always going to be terrorist attacks. those happen in the middle of kabul and for that matter they have been in the middle of major cities all over the world these days. the -- i have a feeling, however, that tommy know, some of the energy has gone out of this approach to warfare.

now, the critical test of marja, which was well reflected increased chivers's speech. the critical burial is to bring civilian services to the people of the region and to make sure that they are not tainted by corruption. that they have the order in that area. given the history of the area and given the danger of operating and given the complexity of it. but we are committed to it. and what the military likes to call proof of concept, marja is a test of the strategies that are being put into place. so just to make clear, there was going to be a date in which this campaign and if we start saying we succeeded and we start to

pull out. we're going to repeat the past. and that's not the way to do it. remember, it's clear, hold, build and transfer. the clear phase was always going to be relatively easy and the casualty rate was very low. the hold phase is a transitional phase in my view. it's the build and transfer that is the test of our policies, build and transfer. and that's what we're testing. the final part of your question, conduct are, i can't answer that. but that is obviously a tactical issue and to discuss it prematurely serves no purpose at all. [inaudible] my reporting has indicated that blackwater is likely to get the police training and mentoring contract in afghanistan, the other bidder has been

disqualified. are you at all worried about this sort of optics of blackwater plane that role? did the germans also express -- >> my understanding of that is it is somewhat more complicated than that. there is a real process of that going on. i don't know how much is public or its proprietary information that contractual basis and it's being good in an arms length basis so that neither i nor this building, nor the people on the ground in kabul are involved in the award of the contract and received his later by the united states congress and by the u.s. government. and i want to stress this point because it's very important. whether you like this process or not, whether you like the system or not, it is not being handled by the state department or by

people in kabul. if handled in a separate channel and what little i know about it, laura, suggest that it's not exactly what you say it is. but i'll let you continue your prodigious taking and find out more. >> charlie. charlie wilson with cbs. can you go back to your stop in georgia and tell us how much this georgia contribution is costing and who's paying for it? >> the incremental cost in the country are paid for by the united states and other countries. the salaries of the troops are paid for by the georgians, of course. and there are all sorts of additional things that we pay for. but they're related only to the deployment in afghanistan. and if you really want more

details, i'd like you to come down to our office. we'll lay it out, we'll get general field earpiece away today, but will get colonel lamson to help you on that. >> and just to pakistan, arrested this time and i'm a sorry -- the rest of the taliban leaders, there also is a story in the media that they are suggesting they were arrested to derail the reintegration process, that they were already talking to afghan government in the pakistani arrested them to stop this process or that they were trying to once again impress the americans with the pakistanis had connections with them and they're just trying to hide their tracks. so what is the real story why the pakistanis have become suddenly become so active? >> well, first of all, in the store you're talking about i keep reading and hearing about it. i see no evidence to support that theory. but it's out there. conspiracy theories are stock in

trade and not just in this part of the world. but i don't see any evidence for it. and i know somewhat more than i'm able to disclose about the circumstances under which these events took place. and every detail tends to work against that thesis. now the second part of your question was what, sir? >> why the pakistanis have become so i did. >> well, this is a work in progress. this administration took office just over ten months ago. i said before and i'll fill it again today that u.s. relations with the government of pakistan, civilian and military are much better today than they were 13 months ago. we have really worked on this. some of you as a accompanied us on the trips twice this year. the third trip coming up. secretary gates has been there,

general jones has been there twice, once in november, once last month. admiral mullen goes regularly. i just mentioned the fbi director mueller, don't underestimate a trip by a man of that statue gathering together ministers to previous to our efforts started about nine months ago had never even met. so there's a cumulative effect in my view of this effort. into me, the turning point trip with secretary clinton at the end of october, where she just -- she stayed much longer than she normally does. p.j. was with us and he can give you -- remind you the details. she did a very public series of meetings in a very intense private series of meetings. she answered every question, no matter how hostile they were and won over a lot of people. and this came right on the heels

of the misunderstanding over the kerry/lugar bourbon legislation, which was an unfortunate misunderstanding in my view. so, this process has produced a gradual improvement in cooperation. simultaneous with that, the pakistani military has undertaken to major military offensive in s.w.a.t and in south waziristan. i want to swat on the previous trip, not this one. and met with the leaders of s.w.a.t. and finally some very bad people have been automated by tula mehsud for sure, maybe hakimullah mehsud and now mola barada and some other high ranking members of the taliban has been incarcerated. these are very important sequence of events. and we hope it will continue.

i don't want to draw any strategic conclusions from it. i just want to express my appreciation to the pakistani government and its army for what it's doing. were doing these things in the face of enormous overwhelming economic problems. they're doing it in the face of water and energy problems, which are getting more and more of our attention. winter and are trying to increase our support for the pakistanis. i should've mentioned senator kerry, who went back again. i talked to senator kerry at length yesterday. he is paying special attention to pakistan and playing a very important independent, but supporting role. yes? >> i'm at the "boston globe" and i just wanted to ask you about the kerry/lugar funding. is there -- i'm wondering first of all whether you feel that the

misunderstanding is caught in pakistan? do you feel like people were starting to change their conception of it in the second question was whether there's any kind of bottleneck in giving out the aid. i know that your team is personally reviewing other projects and how has that affected the money? >> first of all, the misunderstanding over kerry-lugar-berman is debated, but it certainly hasn't disappeared. and we work on that. secondly, on the bottlenecks, the biggest bottlenecks are not with kerry-lugar-berman. that money has been appropriated and it is beginning to flow. the biggest bottleneck has been in regard to coalition support funds, which is a very different matter. we, under the coalition support

funds, csf, the pakistanis are waiting for close to $2 billion in money that has been appropriated by congress and has been set aside. last week, we released $349 million of that money, urgently needed. we are still working through the rest of the money, not all the money that is asked for constant. about 60%, 65% of it gets reimbursed. and the delays have been caused by a lot of things. the congress and the gal have accounting procedures, which are pretty complicated. and we have offered to have auditors go to pakistan to help with this. and the auditing team was held up in a massive delay over other

be says. and we pulled them out of the visa issue and they are on their way. and it's a complicated process, so -- and there's a long history here. and again, i do want to blame everything on what we inherited, but when we took office, the backlog was amazing and there was no procedure for it. general petraeus and i have spent a lot of time on this and it comes up on every trip. but we are just going to continue to work this issue through. talked to ambassador haqqani about it yesterday and again this morning, and we're working on it very much. but i do want to stress are in at billion dollars of csf went to pakistan last week. >> today in pakistan, active scanning security forces declared an important victory in bajaur tribal area.

this is just on the border of afghanistan and al qaeda. >> i'm having trouble understanding you. >> today in pakistan there was an important development. the pakistani security forces have declared victory against taliban and al qaeda linked militants in bajaur tribal agency, which is on the border of afghanistan. and was used to stage attacks on nato. >> i know. i've been to bajaur. >> what is your reaction to the overall struggle against it? >> i'm delighted they feel they're making progress. when i first met to bajaur, it was a very bad scene. we flew over, we couldn't land. we had to divert and land in the agency. the fact they feel they succeeded is a very positive development. [inaudible] >> to talk about the kind of killings and captures that some of these major taliban leaders, do you have any sense yet about

what can a psychological effect it might be having on either the taliban leadership or some of the mid-level commanders? do you think -- do you sense any that they're making any thoughts about considering alternatives like reconciliation and do you think any kind of pakistani influence from the isi would have any exact either way on ornate. >> it's a very good question. we ask at all the times of ourselves. we don't -- i don't have any empirical quantifiable black-and-white intelligent answer to that. however, the antic total information coming in would suggest that the combination of the offensive in marja, the pakistani army success in south waziristan and now you've mentioned bajaur today. and the apprehension of transfix barada and other senior taliban and are all having an effect of

people who are starting to evaluate. isaf is reporting more and more people contact demand and say we want to talk about a separate peace arrangements. we really -- but it isn't clearly quantifiable. it's logical that it's happening. these are steps forward in both countries. going forward, you know, i'm just generally unable to use phrases like we've turned a corner. you know, there's light at the end of the tunnel. it's just part of where it came from throughout mike weir. but all i can tell -- i'm not going to project anything. all i can tell you is that these are positive event and they should be welcomed by anybody who opposes extremism and terror and his son.

i think in pakistan and afghanistan but particularly in pakistan there's been a movement, a shift in sentiment here. and pakistan right now, my greatest concern is to help pakistanis with her economic and energy problems. i think they're on the right track in this other area. >> samir nader with radio sawa. can you give us any idea what your visit to saudi arabia? this is the second time. last time you met with the queen. what was the agenda? >> i didn't meet with a cane because after a scheduled the trip, the secretary of state came in at the same time his name and she went out of riyadh to meet with some of the place they call the farm. and they had a very extensive meeting. and they came in like five hours later, only in time to stay for the night. and i saw very senior officials at the level i needed to see

them. and she and i worked very closely together on this. the king laughed and came in to see me and saudi arabia, those meetings take place pretty late at night. in the subject was a legit country elicit terrorist financing. again, we're doing everything we can to try to put more pressure on the money trail. this is hard and saudi arabia because while the saudis have internal controls, they also have an obligation as custodian of the holy mosques to let any muslim hajj or umrah in here and this is a major subject. we also talked about the issues that i brought president karzai to saudi arabia only a few years earlier. we consider saudi arabia one of the most important countries in the larger strategic region, which is affected by afghanistan and we will continue to dialogue