quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. a senator: mr. president, is the senate current until a quorum call. the presiding officer: yes. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, may i ask that the pending quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i -- i'm here today to speak about a report that was released by the center for disease control which i think is instructive for the

american health care system. we are currently in a process of change in health care, changing the way that health care is delivered in our country is going to take years of hard work, of experimentation, and of learning. there are stakeholders on both the federal and state level who are out there right now working to implement models of care that increase the coordination and efficiency with which health care is delivered, improve the quality of the care that is delivered, improve the outcomes that patients experience, and control costs, bring costs down. this delivery system reform is the real issue of health care reform in our time, and i

emphasize it is a win-win for our system. improving the quality of care while lowering cost for the system. this report, called vital signs, released this week by the center for disease control, illustrates how just one type of quality reform -- reducing hospita hospital-acquired infections -- has already improved health outcomes and resulted in significant cost savings. hospital acquired infections are a tragic reality of our health care system. nearly one in every 20 hospitalized patients in the united states is affected by a hospital-acquired infection each year. the most deadly of these infections occur when a tube inserted into a patient's vein is either not put in properly or not kept clean.

bloodstream infections resulting from these tubes, what are called central line infections, kill as many as one in four patients who become infected. i suspect if we sat all the members of the senate down, there would be very few of us who could not identify a friend, a loved one, a family member, somebody we knew who had not been exposed to a hospital-acquired infection. the deaths from hospital-acquired infection are not only numerous but tragic and particularly tragic because they are largely preventable. these are what should be considered a zero event. studies have shown that when providers follow a strict checklist of very basic instructions, including things such as washing your hands with soap, cleaning a patient's skin can antiseptic, and placing full

sterile drapes over the patient, those rates of hospital-acquired infection plummet. the c.d.c.'s "vital signs" report is further evidence of just how effective these guide ins are at reducing and in some cases nearly eliminating central line bloodstream infections from intensive care units. the report's findings show that from 2001-2009, state and federal efforts to promote and adopt c.d.c. guidelines and best practices for preventing hospital-acquired infections contributed to a 58% decrease in the number of central line bloodstream infections among i.c.u. patients. 58% decrease in just eight years, from 2001-2009. now, a percentage is a fine thing. it's a statistic, but it doesn't have a lot of meat on its bones.

so what does this 58% really mean? it represents up to 27,000 lives saved. 27,000 families who got their loved one home from the hospital instead of having that terrible conversation with the doctor explaining to them why their loved one passed away. and if that were not enough, it also represents approximately $1.8 billion in cost savings to our health care system. 27,000 lives and $1.8 billion saved from reductions in just one type of hospital-acquired infection in just one type of care setting. the promising news from the c.d.c. report is that the steps health care providers are taking

to prevent this type of infection are working. the bad news is that we're not doing enough to reduce the occurrence of bloodstream infections in other health care settings. the report found that in 2009, approximately 60,000 central line bloodstream infections occurred in nonintensive care unit settings, like hospital wards or kidney dialysis clini clinics. this should not be acceptable to us, especially given the tools that we know we have to prevent these infections from happening. simply put, we can do better. we can save more lives. we can improve the quality of care that people receive and in the process save billions, billions of dollars in our health care system. the c.d.c. is already working to support partnerships between health care providers to more

broadly implement these now proven quality reforms. this is a good start. mr. president, in my home state, i have very proudly watched the rhode island intensive care unit collaborative, a partnership of health care stakeholders led by an organization called the rhode island quality institute take the lead in implementing similar quality reforms to reduce the rate of hospital-acquired infections in our intensive care units. rhode island is the only state in the country to have 100% of its adult intensive care units participating in a collaborative of this kind, and i would commend it to any one of my colleagues. it began years ago in michigan with the keystone project. it spread across the country through the pronovost principles, and in rhode island we've really run with it. it has only been a few years, but the results, much like those reported by the c.d.c., are eye-opening. and i'll quantify this by saying

that we began with very first-rate hospitals in rhode island. we are in that high-tech northeast corridor, we're near the boston medical centers. we are starting from a very high base of care in rhode island hospitals. but even from that good base, the collaborative recorded significant improvements in two types of deadly infections: central line bloodstream infections and pneumonia among patients on ventilators. the collaborative estimates that from 2007 june 2010, just over three years, the effort had saved 73 intensive care unit lives. 73 lives of intensive care unit patients. it eliminated the need for over 3,200 expensive hospital days and it saved hospitals, patients and insurers $11.5 million. this evidence underscores the

potential for similar types of delivery system reforms which, by improving the quality of care, lower the cost. an array of different strategies can lead to these savings. quality reforms like this that avoid errors and adverse consequences. prevention programs that save lives and money by getting in there before the disease takes off. a robust health information infrastructure that allows for safer and better coordinated care between your primary health care provider, your specialists, your imaging place, the laboratory, the hospital where you had to be admitted. payment policies that reward better results, not just more procedures. and, finally, better administrative efficiency so that more health care dollars actually go to health care instead of being burned up on

bureaucracy and battles over who gets paid and all the rest that weighs down our health care system. the president's council of economic advisors noted recently that up to 30% of health care costs, or about 5% of g.d.p., could be saved without compromising health outcomes. 5% of g.d.p. is around $700 billion. $700 billion a year saved through this kind of win-win is a target worth fighting hard to achieve. i agree with the council's observations, but from my experience, i think that we can achieve these savings not just without compromising health outcomes, i think we can achieve these savings while improving health outcomes.

implementing these restorms and achieving these savings won't be easy. it's not just flipping a switch. it's a journey, and that journey will have turns and it will have obstacles. it is a process, as very expert reviewers have said, of learning, of experimentation, of adaptation. but we've been down paths like that before with great success. and the evidence that i've presented today shows how well it can work in health care. so i urge my colleagues -- i urge the administration and state leaders to continue working together in awful these areas to make -- in all of these areas to make reforming our health care delivery system a priority. the future of our health care system and the good health of our constituents and the good health of our country's fisk all depend on it.

i'll conclude by saying something that i've said before, which is that i give great credit to the obama administration for working in this area. i believe that our health care reform bill put every possible pilot, experiment program, model for testing these different types of delivery system reform on the table. very expert reviewers have looked at it and said, i can't think of a thing they didn't try; everything is in there. and on top of that the obama administration has put first-rate people who really get this side of the equation -- people like don berwick and david blumenthal in charge. so a lot of things v. result in a win-win savings. the administration has not yet set a hard goal for itself to

hit. it still talks about bending the health care cost curve. well, fine. bur that's not a measurable go goal. i suspect that if years ago -- we're coming up, i think, on the anniversary of president kennedy's pledge to put a man on the moon. if way back then when we feared losing the space race to the soviet union, if the president of the united states had then said, i'm committed to bending the curve of the rate of america's space exploration, that would have been an unmemorable and an ineffective presidential intervention. instead, president kennedy put a hard obama out there that everybody -- put a hard benchmark out there that everybody in the world would

known we failed. we didn't know how we could do it. we believed we could. we're innovators. this is the country of innovation and the big idea. and by putting that marker out there, president kennedy drove what was then a smaller federal bureaucracy towards that goal. and i think we need an equally specific goal from the administration on this front in order to make sure that our considerably larger federal bureaucracy is fully purpd towards achieving that -- purposed towards achieving that because the goals are going to be so significant. so i congratulate the c.d.c. on their report. i want to remind my colleagues how valuable this kind of health care reform is. it is not what we yell about her, but it is out there right now saving lives and saving money and we need to encourages it and we need to expand it and the more the administration can put a hard goal out there for itself, the quicker we will get to where we need to be, to the

great benefit of ourselves as a country and to our individual fellow american citizens. i thank the presiding officer and i yield the floor. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, i understand we have some parliamentary business for me to attend to in a moment, and while we're waiting for that, i'd like to take an additional moment to speak in support of legislation that i've introduced with

senators jack reed of rhode island, merkley, sanders and tester to enhance foreclosure protections for service members and their families and to help ensure that their rights under the existing service members' civil relief act don't get violated. i think everybody in this chamber has heard horror stories about how the servicers that took over the loans for the big banks that were chopped up into strips and sold to the four winds now treat homeowners in distress. these abusive practices are bad enough. but when these abusive practices harm the men and women who are sent into harm's way to protect our country, it is a particular shame and a particular tragedy that deserves our urgent attention. these practices are not only illegal and morally repugnant but dangerous distractions from our country's military mission.

general petraeus's wife leads the office for service member affairs and she testified on this issue during a recent hearing before the house veterans' affairs committee that it is a terrible situation for the family at home and for the service member abroad who feels helpless. service members over at the point of the spear in afghanistan have enough to worry about without worrying about the bank foreclosing on their feavment according to recent media reports, it is ha it has e to light that financial institution hazard repeatedly failed to comply with the service members civil relief act or the scra. these violations led to thousands of it mortgage overcharges and a number of unlawful foreclosures. under the scra, it is illegal to close hon a protected service member unless an authorization by a judge is obtained. then the judge can only act after a hearing is held in which the military homeowner is

represented. one of the most troubling cases is a story of sergeant james b. hurley who lost his loam while he was serving in iraq. like many reservists, sergeant hurley made less money serving on active duty than he did in his civilian job. so when he was mobilized, it became a real struggle for his family to aforward his mortgage and they fell behind in making those payments. the scra was designed to protect our service members from just that kind of financial challenge, and it should have prevented the bank from foreclosing on sergeant hurley. however, the bank violated the scra it foreclosed ogee sergeant hurley illegally and forced his wife and children out of their home. sergeant hurley returned from combat as a disabled veteran to find that the bank had sold the home he had worked so hard to build. our current economic climate has hit our returning veterans particularly hard, adding to the

financial challenges our deployed service members already must face. according to a recent department of labor report, the unemployment rate for vents rose to 9.the% overall. and 15.2% -- 15.2% unemployment for veterans of the wars in iraq and afghanistan. these heartbreaking is ibreakins underscore how difficult it can be to readjust economically to life at home, how disruptive that interruption in a career can be. for our returning service members that need time to get back on solid financial footing, that need to rebuild what they had to walk away from to defend the rest of us, we should do everything we can to accommodate their needs, especially during these difficult economic times. by protecting service members from mortgage abuse act of 2011 would require compliance with the scra by doubling the maximum

criminal penalties for violations of its foreclosure and eviction protections. it would also double civil penalties in cases where the attorney general has commenced a civil action against the lender. in addition, the bill will give service members the time they need after returning from deployment to regain that solid financial footing. by extend the period of foreclosure protection coverage from nine to 24 months after military service has ended. i hope that senators on both sides of the aisle can come together and join me in supporting this legislation to discourage loan servicers from further violations and help to protect the financial well of-being and -- well-being and emotional well-being of our troossments mr. president, i would now ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendments and on behalf of senator bingaman call up amendment number 142. the presiding officer: is

there objection? without objection, schort. the clerk: mr. whitehouse for mr. bingaman proposes an amendment numbered 142. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to dispense with further reading of the amendment. it is my understanding that this amendment is agreeable to both sides and, therefore, i ask for its adoption. the presiding officer: without objection. the amendment is agreed to. mr. whitehouse: thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

mr. sanders: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: mr. president, as you well know, congress is now engaged in a debate of huge consequence, and that is the budget. and the budget of a nation like the budget of a family expresses who we are as a people and what our priorities are, where you spend your money, where you make your investments tells you everything about what well be in. i am more than aware that this country faces a $1.6 trillion deficit and a $14 trillion national debt, and these are enormously important issues, but they're issues that have to be dealt with in a sense ofable

way, and they're -- in a sensible way, and they're issues that have to be dealt with in a broader context. so i think the very first question that we have to ask, mr. president, is how did we get to where we are today? is the problem in fact that we spend too much money on head start and child care? that we just shower so much on our children? other is the converse the truth in that we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country on earth? how did we get into the deficit? we will, let me tick it off. and when we discuss how we got into the deficit situation, the irony here is that those people who are yelling loudest about the deficit, who are fighting hardest to make savage and draconian cuts on basic programs are precisely the people who led

to us where we are today. mr. president, i voted against the war in iraq for a number of reasons. one of them being that it wasn't paid for. do you happen to recall, as we went into the war in iraq, which will end up costing us about $3 trillion by the time we take care of our last veteran, do you recall much discussion about how that war was going to be paid for? in fact, zha do you remember one word of thew war was going to be paid for? i don't remember that. i was in the middle of that debate. $3 trillion and no one said, oh, we can't afford it. mr. president, when the crooks on wall street, through their illegal behavior, their reckless behavior, drove this country into the recession we are in right now and they came begging

to the congress for their welfare check of some $800 billion, do you recall too many of the people who voted for that saying, gee, we can't afford to do it. it's going to drive up the deficit. how are we going to provide wall street with an $800 billion bailout? i don't recall that discussion. and when i was in the house a number of years ago, congress passed an initiative for president bush for a medicare part-d prescription drug program. i believe that seniors must have prescription drugs, but not that legislation, which was written by the insurance companies and the drug companies, and it was not paid for. when our republican friends fought vigorously for tax breaks for billionaires, which would ruresult in significantly less money coming into the treasury, driving up the deficit, do you recall much discussion about how

we were going to pay for that? i don't recall that discussion. so i find it ironic that when you give tax breaks to billionaires, no worry about the deficit. when you bail out wall street, don't worry about the deficit. but suddenly when you provide child care to low-income children who are in desperate need of help in the midst of a recession, suddenly everybody is concerned about the deficit. frankly, mr. president, i call that absolute hypocrisy. it is hypocrisy to say that we can give tax breaks to billionaires and not worry about the deficit, but we have to cut back on the needs of working families, the middle class, the sick, the poor, the elderly. mr. president, this country at this particular moment has got to make some very basic decisions, and the decisions that we make are whether in the

midst of this horrendous rescission, when the middle class is hurting, when poverty is increasing, do we really go after, as our republican friends in the house want us to do, programs that are virtually life and death for millions and millions of working-class and lower-income people? mr. president, i don't know about west virginia, but i can tell you that in vermont it is very, very hard for working families to get adequate and affordable and good-quality child care, early education for their kids. it is a major, major problem all over this country. and yet, our republican friends say we should balance the budget by cutting head start $1.1 billion, a 20% cut from 2010 and throwing over 200,000 kids off of head start. if you're a working mom who sends your kid to head start, it

feels pretty good, your kaod is -- your kid is getting a good quality education, they feed these kids, watch them for health care problems, we're going to throw over 200,000 kids off of head start. mr. president, i worked very hard to expand the community health center program which i know is so important in west virginia and vermont. it is enormously important all over this country. a few years ago about 20 million people were accessing the community health center program. we are now work sog that in five -- working so that in five years 40 million americans will be able to walk in the door, regardless of their income, get health care, dental care, low-cost prescription drugs, mental health counseling. it is working. president obama has been very, very strong on this issue. the secretary of h.h.s. has been very, very strong on this issue.

it is working. and here's the irony, when we give people good-quality primary health care, they don't have to go to the emergency room. the emergency room costs ten times more than treatment at a community health center. when you open the doors for primary health care, people will not get very sick, they don't end up in the hospital. study after study shows that when you invest in community health centers, you save the taxpayer money. you save medicaid money. you save medicare money because people have access to medical care when they need it. the republican house wants to cut community health centers by $1.3 billion that give 11 million americans the opportunity to receive the health care that they need. mr. president, in my office and i'm sure all over this country people who are applying for disability help, for social

security are upset about how long the process takes. our republican friends want to make major cuts in the social security administration, which means that a half a million people are going to find delays in getting their claims processed. everybody in america knows that one of the great problems that we face is the expense of college. we know hundreds of thousands of bright young people can't even afford to go to college. we know many people are graduating college deeply in debt. and one of the accomplishments that we've managed to bring about in the last few years is to significantly expand the pell grant program so that low- and moderate-income families would find it easier to send their kids to college. our republican friends in the house have decided in their wisdom that what they want to do is reduce by 17% pell grants, which means that 9.4 million

lower-income college students would lose some or all of their pell grants. here we are trying to compete with the rest of the world, we are falling in many cases farther and farther behind in terms of the percentage of our young people graduating college. the cost for a college course are soaring and the republicans are trying to cut the program which makes it easier for working families to send their kids to college. community development block program is the infrastructure by which we get emergency services: food to help pay for emergency services for lower-income people; housing needs, making sure people keep the electricity on. that would be decimated by the republicans. in the midst of a recession what they want to do is to cut $2 billion from the workforce investment act and other job

training programs when we desperately need that job training to make sure that our people can get the jobs that are out there and are available. and often they're not, don't have the skills to do that. my point, mr. president, is a pretty simple one, that as a nation we've got to make some choices and here are the choices: the top 1% today are doing phenomenally well. that's the fact. our friends on wall street when we bailed out are now making more money than they did before they caused this recession. the top 1% now earns about 23% of all income in america, more than the bottom 50%. the top 1%, the richest people in america in terms of their effective tax rate, what they really pay, is now lower than at any time in memory. you've got the wealthy doing phenomenally well, tax rates going down. we have showered huge tax breaks on them. then we say to balance the

budget we have to cut programs for nutrition for our kids, social security administration, pell grants, head start and many, many other programs which millions of people depend upon. so the question that we as americans have got to decide is when the rich get richer, do we give them more tax breaks while the poor get poorer and we cut programs for them? well, i don't think, frankly, that that is what the american people want. mr. president, you may have seen there was a poll just came out, i think it was yesterday or today, it was an nbc news and "wall street journal" poll. and the questions dealt with the deficit and how the american people think we should go forward in dealing with the deficit. and here are some interesting results. when asked what do americans want the federal government to do to reduce the deficit, the

largest, highest percentage came down in saying that it is totally acceptable or mostly acceptable to impose a surtax on millionaires to reduce the deficit. 81% of the american people said that, for obvious reasons. the rich are getting richer. given the choice to have people who receive huge tax breaks, already doing very well, ought to pay a little more taxes. the choice is not terribly hard. 74% of the american people believe it is totally acceptable or mostly acceptable to eliminate tax credits for the oil and gas industry. 68% of the american public believe it is totally acceptable or mostly acceptable to phase out the bush tax cuts for families earning over $250,000 a year, et cetera, et cetera.

so what the american people are saying in this poll -- and i believe all over this country -- is kind of obvious. given the choice of decimating programs that working families depend upon or asking the wealthiest people in this country who have been receiving huge amounts of tax breaks to start paying their fair share, it ain't a tough answer. and the answer the american people are saying is: you cannot move toward a balanced budget just by cutting, cutting and cutting. a budget has two parts. everybody in america understands that. it is the money you spend. it is the money that comes in. and in the case of the united states government, we have got to address our budget deficit in both ways. we have to raise revenue. and you do that, i think, primarily by asking the wealthiest people in this country to pay a little bit more in taxes. and, yes, you do have to cut some programs. i think there's waste out there.

i think there are programs that can and should be cut. that's what you do. you don't just cut, cut, cut and then give tax breaks to the very wealthiest people in this country. now, mr. president, we have as the senate, along with our friends in the house, the responsibility, the constitutional responsibility of coming up with a budget. and i certainly hope that the president intends to play an active role in this, and i hope that the president is prepared to do the right thing and to understand that revenue, asking the wealthiest people in this country to start paying their fair share of taxes, is one important component of how we move forward toward a balanced budget. but if the president chooses not to participate or if the president chooses not to take that avenue, that does not mean to say that we in the senate should not go forward. so i would hope, mr. president, and i intend to work as hard as i can to come up with a

deficit-reduction program which is fair but which is responsive. and being responsible means it includes revenue and not just cuts. there are a whole lot of ways that we can bring in revenue in a fair and progressive way. it's not only asking the wealthiest people in this country to pay their fair share of taxes, it's ending abusive and illegal offshore practices. do you know that according to a number of studies we will lose $100 billion this year because corporations and wealthy individuals are stark their money in -- are stashing their money in the cayman islands and bermuda. before you cut nutrition programs for pregnant women, maybe we do away with those tax havens. mr. president, we have got to begin the process of ending tax breaks for big oil and gas companies.

exxonmobil, the most profitable corporation in the history of the world, not only paid nothing in federal income taxes in 2009, but they received $156 million tax refund from the i.r.s. according to their own shareholder report. well, maybe before you start cutting the social security administration or pell grants for college students, maybe, maybe, maybe you might want to ask the most profitable corporation in america to start paying some federal income tax. and on and on it goes. so my point, mr. president, is now is the moment when we have got to do the right thing for working families in america, and that is to understand that there's a lot of pain out there. a lot of people are hurting. this recession has taken a very heavy toll. and in the middle of these tough times you don't stick a knife into people and make it even worse. we have got to move towards a deficit reduction. i believe that. but i believe you don't do it on

the backs of the sick, the elderly, the poor and the most vulnerable people in this country. i think we need a little bit of shared sacrifice here, and some of the wealthiest people in this country are going to have to play their part in deficit reduction as well. with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor -- i guess i won't yield the floor. mr. president, on behalf of the majority leader there will be no further roll call votes today. the next roll call vote is expected on monday at 5:30 p.m. with that, i would yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call: iesh

quorum call:

the presiding officer: is the senate a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. reid: i would ask that the consent be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i have a cloture motion at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, hereby move to bring to a close the debate on s. 23, the american invents act, signed by 18 senators as follo follows -- reid of nevada -- mr. reid: mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent the names not be read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous

consent the vote on the motion to invoke cloture occur immediately upon disposition of the judicial nominations in executive session on monday, march 7. further, the mandatory quorum under rule 22 be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i would ask unanimous consent that we proceed to a period of morning business with senators allowed to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask consent that we proceed to s. res. 89. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 89, relating to the death of frank w. buckholtz, the longest surviving united states veteran of the first world war. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. reid: i ask unanimous i asks consent the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, there be no intervening action or debate and any statements relating to this matter be placed in the record as if read.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, i haded good fortune a short time ago when he was -- we had a ceremony here in the rotunda of the capitol to meet him, to talk to him. it was just a short time ago. it was amazing that he had the vitality that he did at such an old age. so i'm happy this matter has been completed today. i ask consent that we now proceed to s. res. 90. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 90, supporting the goals of international women's day and recognizing this year's centennial anniversary of international woman's day. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the pream bomb be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table there, be no intervening action or debate and any statements relating to this matter be placed in the record at the appropriate place as if given. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. reid: mr. president, i ask consent that we now proceed to s. res. 91. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 91, supporting the goals and ideals of multiple sclerosis awareness week. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. reid: thanks, mr. president. i ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table there, be no interveec action or he -- intervening action or debate and any statements relating to this matter be placed in the record at the appropriate place as if given. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i now ask consent that we move to s. res. 92. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 92, to authorize the payment of legal expenses of senate employees out of the contingent fund of the senate. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure?

without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, there be no intervening action or debate and any statements relating to this resolution be placed in the record as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to executive session to consider nominations calendar number 35, 36, 37, 38, and 39. i'm sorry, mr. president. that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc, there be no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to any of these nominations and any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered.

mr. reid: i ask, mr. president, that on monday, march 7, 2011, at 4:30, the senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations, calendars number 4, 32, and 33. that there be an hour of debate equally divided and in the usual form, upon the use or yielding back of that time, calendar number 32 be confirmed and the senate proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on calendar number 33 and calendar number 34 in that order, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table, there be no intervening action or debate and there be no further motions in order to any of these no, ma'am faces -- nominations and any statements related to these nominations appear in the record, that president obama be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered.

mr. reid: i'm told there's a bill at the desk due for its first reading. the presiding officer: the senator is correct. the clerk: h.r. 4, an act to repeal the expansion of information, reporting requirements for payments of $600 or more to corporations and for other purposes. mr. reid: i ask for a second reading on this matter in order to place the bill on the calendar, but under the provisions of rule 14, i object to my own request. the presiding officer: the objection being heard, the bill will receive its second reading on the next legislative day.

mr. reid: mr. president, i now ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it junior until 10:00 a.m. -- it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. on friday, march 4. the following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be expired, the time for the leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, following any leader remarks be there be a period of morning business with senators allowed to speak for up to ten minutes each during that time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, as a result of cloture being filed on s. 23, the american invents act, the filing deadline for first-degree amendments is 1:00 p.m. tomorrow. senators should expect a series of three roll call votes to begin at 56789. 30 p.m. on monday. -- at 5:30 p.m. on monday. the first votes will be on those judicial nominations we've already spoken of this evening and the third vote will be on cloture on the american invents act. so if there's no further business to come before the senate this evening, i ask that it adjourn under the provisions of s. res. 89, as a further mark of respect to the memory of frank buckholtz, the longest

serving united states veteran of world war i. the presiding officer: under the previous order and pursuant to the provisions of senate resolution 89, the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on friday, march 4, 2011, and does so as a further mark of respect so as a further mark of respect

radio. every weekday we will take you to capitol hill, the white house and anywhere that news is happening. we will also talk with experts, politicians and the journalists as we put the events into perspective. the stories that matter to you the most every weekday five to seven eastern time on c-span radio. you can listen in the washington baltimore area at 90.1 fm and nationwide on xm satellite radio channel 132 or go online at

c-span.org. it's also available as an iphone app and you can download the program every evening as a c-span podcast.

earlier today senate minority leader mitch mcconnell king to the floor to criticize democrats on the federal budget. after that, democratic representative durbin responded comments. comments. this is 15 minutes. >> democrats are taking fiscalrs recklessness to new heights. they've spent trillions ofne dollars with they don't have on the things we don't need and ink can't afford.plan to red ink democrats find a rack up this year alone would exceed alb of the debt run up by theom inceptione through 1984. is the the recklessness is the reason we've seen in national uprising. against the policies. americans have demanded that wet reverse this recklessness and lance. restore balance. e democrats have resisted at evert turn. their to conceal the extent of theirvn spending plans, they didn't even pass a budget last year. the nationwide repudiation of m the policies and november they proposed a massive sbillpe lndi loaded with new spending thatfa

amounted to a slapce in the face to the voters. t following the of rage that provoked, they tried to get a spending freeze past the publict they said how about we just walk in place to control spending levels we set last year.e debate to them this entire debate isn't e ame about how to respond to thet thc seeing what they can get away dt with. while republicans have taken arc different approach, responding to our constituents we'veuo insisted the status quo simply won't cut it anymore. we've insisted on actually shrinking the size ofelivered by government. delivered byualut government spending and recentt mamory. s while it was just a small firsts step yesterday we showed that n.'s actually possible to chango the status quo in washington. h? what about the white house?by this by announcing they want to have a meeting.

we are happy to go to the meeng meeting. the but putting a meeting on thehe i schedule doesn't change the fact single democrat in congress has proposed a plan that would allow the government to remain open and would respond to the voters by reining in spending all weade get is talk. the president made an audacious assertion yesterday after thed,e two week cr was passed. he said he wants his advisers to come up with a plan that makesn" sure we are living within our means. live within our means? let me remind you, us mr. president, the president'sag budget has a n uatsio anamassind national debt of more than $20 trillion within the next naa five years. ove amassing the national debt of over $20 trillion would into the next five years. we are projected to spend more than $1.6 trillion this year alone more than we are taking in. that is a $1.6 trillion deficit

es this year. e does this mean we can expect the president's budget director to present us with a piece of paper that outlines $1.6 trillion in? cuts for the current fiscal year? if so, that's great news. ccess, h if the president's measure success as he said is a plan that makes sure we live within our means, the way most people do telhami showing up early for this meeting.nce unfortunately, the president is once again just saying somethin. he thinks people want to hear.fr if democrats had a plan of their own that would cut 1 dollar inld spending i think we would have seen it by now.respsibili democrats a dedicated all ckless responsibility for their owns. recklessness over the last two years. they've left us to do something about it. they made a step in the a redirection after months of resistance on their part. for now we look forward to their dec plan. it's time for present a serious plan of their

own that addresses this crisis. it's time for democrats to take the concern to the americanobjeo people seriously.to the floor, >> the republican floor to the cooking to the floor and made s some pretty strong and sweepingf statements about the state of ad the deficit and responsibility and i would like to have a chance to respond. was senator mcconnell said washington democrats have taken fiscal recklessness to new heights. the amount of democrats plan tok wrap up this year alone would an to exceed all the debt run up by the federal government since its inception through 1984. mr. president, i'd like to set the record straight. derstand i and a stand with the national debt of america was when president william jefferson offc clinton left office. we were running surpluses. we haven't done that for in thel decades.trry. surpluses in the federal this treasury. what did we do with all thishe a money?e we put the social security trust

fund and bought more longevity r and solvency for social securite and if you remember the economy was never stronger. william jefferson clinton leftt office and at that moment in time the national debt, the aria accumulated debt of america frot george washington until he left office $5 trillion. remember that number.st-forwa $5 trillion. fast forward eight years afterf the end of president george w. bush, eight years later or weres weak? the national debt was now rklesn $12 trillion. mscal recklessness by democratt under president bush the national debt more than doubledg and instead of leading a surplus for president obama, he said welcome to an economy that is hemorrhaging hundreds of hemorrh eousands of jobs every single month and when you anticipate next year's deficit, he told president obama, to beth

$1.2 trillion. that is what president bush handed to president obama. selec i don't mind selective view ofut history. i guess we are all guilty ofo ie that to some extent. but to ignore the fiscal mess nl created the more than doubled the national debt in eight years, to ignore that we wage tt wars, to ignore we cut taxes inr the midst of a war which is unid something no president in the history of the united states has ever come ever done is to ignore reality. and the reality is we are here today in the midst of thishethee titanic struggle about whether p we are going to continue to keet the federal governmentwe are functioning. b we are really being askedks whether or not two weeks from .ow we want to have security at controllersor. whether or not we want to have

social security checks sent out, people actually sending the checks come answering questionsi the internal revenue service with a real the securities and exchange commission working with wall street. w weee cannot wage two weeks at ad time for word without doing agrt great disservice to theuntry taxpayers of this country as well as the men and women who work hard for our government now what is the answer in thewet house of representatives? the house of representatives0 says we need to cut $100 billion this year. they started a 60 billion thenct the decided that wasn't enough for bragging rights. to let's get up to $100 billion saf il is that?t like at they didn't look at the budget o of 3.7 trillion. they looked at the 13% slice ofy the pie.'s it. domestic discretionary spending. nothing to be taken out of the

department of defense, nothing to be taken away in terms of tax breaks or the wealthiest orporationns, the most successful corporations. gas was taken all out of domestic w discretionary. so what did they take away? i will tell you what they took l away, i lookedas at my stick lad week.ck, i went to woodstock illinois and counselors who are bringing on,m employed people sitting them down in front of computers withd fax machines and copy machines r and phones and counselors preparing the resolution to get t ckack to to work. these are not with lazy people,. they want to work and need a tte helping hand. what happened in that office rep under the house republicanit budget wou resolution? it would close its doors. more unemployed people, moretheo unemployment checks.a's economy et america's economy back on its to is that we're going to get 15 million americans back to work or how about the house

republicans' proposal to e i eliminate $850 a year in pell grants?ll senator leahy, you know what that is all about. these are kids from the poorest families in america for themilyh first time in their family theye have a chance to graduate have u college but they can't make it. a he don't have enough money. we give them a helping hand andt the republicans to get away. what what do? llege and rock island illinois they told me what it i meslant.t it it meant the 5% one out of every 20 students would go home and not finished the school year. every 20 that's what the house republicam cut means. tining, to to cut job training, to cut education. we have 15 million people out ot work or are they thinking? not bad enough. i went to medical school and mys home town ofit springfield, it d southern illinois, we are so proud of it and that with theedl researchers. they get a few million dollars each year to do medical research to read and fields of cancer therapy, dealing with kurdish use of the complaints of the

veterans returning, but to the housely c republicans do, they closed down medical research.t e is that right?? is that what we want in americay have you ever had a sick persony when you went to the doctor ands said is their anything? is is the richer or somethingha eve experimental,r clinical, trial, if you ever asked that questions then you know the cut by the house republicans is mindless to cut medical research at this moment in history and then i went t the hour by national laboratory on a monday. o what do they do?couldn't a lot of people couldn't answer that question. i learned. specifically are you aware the chevy felch, the new breakthroug automobile, all them that battery come from and this automobile? latest the national laboratory.hs

how about the latestvirt pharmaceuticalually breakthroug? virtually every one of them use is the advanced full-time source that the argon national laboratory. i met a a man who was there experimenting with a new drug ai that can save lives at this laboratory. compute and computers, where is the ih fastest computer in the world i today? i wish it were in the united states. next in china. china. we are nowfast working on the n. fastest computers a we don't lose that edge. where? of the argon nationaloo that laboratory. so what the house republican budget to do to that laboratory laboratory?ry other it would eliminate one-third of the scientists and support stafr working and cut their research by 50% for the rest of the yeare so what. if we don't of the et sto pharmaceuticals forward to liv market sooner toes save lives, f we don't compete with the we

ton't deal with a battery los ta technology so that we don't losr that edge in the world, what what mean? weren't lost jobs. clearly the house republicans were nothc thinking clearly. they were performing brainul surgery witht a hacksaw and as e result they cut things that are essential to the future of, america.ation, resea education, research and now to e have the republican leader tello us we have to accept that that's the future of america, no it's not.own time and again when we sit down ch to deal with the budgetion, whii challenges whether it is in the deficit commission which i was honored to serve on or whatotian their past negotiations, we open this table to all federal spending not just a 14%, that tiny slice of the high.an senator mcconnell ca tn remember and i can, too. bush under president george herberthe walker bush and under president clinton, we put t on the tablef these tax breaks for some of these oil companies andorth corporations and said is it

really worth america's future to for us to u give them a tax brek or use the money to reduce the deficit. that's an honest question to th. mandatory spending. all of these things need to be g brought to the table forbrbut th conversation. n that's not the positions of thee republicans would rather see us shut down the government than te open this conversation to the s entire federal budget. fig they would rather see us shot on the government than fight toainh make sure education training, research and innovation and infrastructure to build a strong american economy to the future.r i woule.d say to my friend,mccon senator mcconnell from kentuckyl we don't need any speeches from national debt that more thanbleu doubled under the lastican pred. republican president. wor we've got to work together in a bipartisan way acknowledging tha devotee of history.ch poi but we all have had nta wheandd reaching the point we are today both positive and negative point where we are today, and we allpe need to take a responsible position to move us forward. mr. president, i yield the

floor. to give comment on the labor issues going on in wisconsin, indiana and his home state of ohio. this with th is ten minutes.e n. >> we all watched the news. madison wisconsin, a columbus ohio, trenton new jersey, other places around the country whereo workers, public employees who w when you analyze itit are paying t muc with including benefits not much more or less depending on its w, place, the incomparable privatea sector workers whether they arer high school graduates are college graduatespa or whatever, the pay is pretty similar and benefits similar.weeen we've seen around the countryas that these public employees area in most cases willing to share i the sacrifice about the budgets and share in the sacrifice of our fighting back against this bad economy. in fact, we know that workers, teachers, police officers,eau, l nurses, people working in the

unemployment bureau and the tha department of interior, that they have taken a pretty big tef hits already in terms of lostn s jobs, in terms of no raises and paying more for their health thg benefits. so we know even though these are not the people that cause the recession any more than the workers that large, ohio or assembling cars or buildinging engines were northwest ohio media and bumpers for the chevy cruce, we know they were not responsible for the failure infe they just seem to be as we've il seen from these ideologicalseemo conservative governors, they'rer seems to be an assault all overs the country on workers leaving workers whether they are publicf or private, blaming workers fory the problems in this economy. they continue to want to get tax cuts to the richest people in wall street as they take their b bonuses and make big dollars and see their incomes go like this.o

but as workers the have pretty much had no real increase theges last ten years. wages in the country have been stagnant. how can you blame the workers in this?t weave that's why what we've seen over the country has been some interesting. 8500 people two days ago when columbus ohio demonstrating not not against budget cuts because thee know those are coming butdemoing ndmonstrating against this a direct assaults by theve government, by the governor andg the legislator, legislative leaders on the right to organize collectively, a right that his been part of our americana thate been part of our values for 75me years. why do they think we have a middle class? we have a middle class becausend workers could band together and say to a company that's veryehod profitable, some of that profity for making we should get some oe it because we are the workers and we've made the company morea management isrk important, crucial.ucial, a worker workers are important andgements crucial and workers' wages gon up, but we've seen the workers'n wages just stagnant now in part

because of the lack of unionization or declined.madi we are also seeking in medicine and columbus and trenton and, lansing in this capital city's country, p mr. president, we hag they're trying to turn t private-sector worker this against public sector workers. c the state budgets in trying to get the auto workers, the private sector workers and the union workers up against each other and fighting each other. that kind of -- that is the -- that is the most base karl rove-type politics that turn working class people one against another. it's -- it's wrong, it's morally wrong, it's politically wrong, and it's very wrong for our country. now, what's also been interesting about these protests, they are not all steelworkers and electricians steelworkers and electricians and american federation ofvern

government employees and afscme. there are a lot of people that have been involved in this. i did a roundtable and a fiscal church right off statehouse square and the leaders of the church and some of the volunteers from the church where theyl ch are and they know thatt of mythe belief and i don't preh or where up my sleep byot christianity but they understand the bible talks a lot about poverty and a lot about fairness and equality and egalitarianism if you will, and for them to go workers on behalf of the richest people in our countryth and that is really what they are doing in the covers and the office and medicine and treatment other t places runs t counter least to my faith. i'm not going to judge their faith. they worship and they read what scripture they read, but when you looky at what my faith means and whether as i say i'm a lutheran, not a catholic you look at leo the 13th and what he said about what catholicism means for workers in fairness,

you know it is point match, points that match. that clearly spoke definitively about this. t mr. president i said this on the floor today. it is a depiction of the canary and the birdcage. the canary died from lack of oxygenears or toxic gas. he only had himself to depend on. he didn't have a government that cared much in thoseende days to write safety laws particularly child laborhi laws. he didn't have a union that was strong enough in those days toi' fight back. to many people that are ultraconservatives, and there were many in both ofoth these bodies of the senate in the house, want to go back to the states. they want to eliminate worker safety laws.coll they are clearly going afterlear collective bargaining andmany clearly going after so many thet things we hold dear., again mr. president it wasn'teri the uaw workers. it wasn't the service employee worker at the state capitol

because the financial crisis.f they have been the victims otheh just like a whole bunch offi nonunion workers have put this financial crisis was caused by greed, by people overreaching by the richest in our society grabbing and grabbing and grabbing for more wealth and they are going to turn -- let's- change the subject turned thosea against the workers. that has happened far too manyre times in our country. yesterday, i'm in a member of the senate appropriations committee and lucky enough to serve on senator leahy's, subcommittee and we brought the secretary of state and, secretary clinton to talk to us about the state departmeno budget. one of the things she said, andl i mentioned madison in columbusi after she said it is one of the thing she said is you know it egypt.n unions in it has been workers in egypt into nation and to nation and around the world. it has been a workers who so ofm often sometimes through their unions if they are allowed to have unions sometimes through ao more informal sort of an col

informal collection of people and whatwh might look like a unn but not formalized to have taken on, who have fought for freedom, who have fought for quality. a lot of these problems in tunisia and egypt is because people are hungry. they also want fairness and a chance to make a living but one of the think secretary clinton talked about is yes this administration is enforcing a i labor law in guatemala. this administration will enforce labor laws in our tradents, agreements.or the labor component of our trade agreements around the world because we as a country, we stand for a more egalitarian workforce.or we stand for worker rights. we believe worker should organize and bargain collectively. we believe in the minimum wage and we believe in workerser compensation.el we believe in worker safety. we believe in human rights and all of that is about the labor movement. you can support labor rights in ramallah but you better be sure you are supporting labor rights in wilmington and columbus and cleveland and detroit in dover delaware and everywhere else and

those were some of the words that secretary clinton said ands i'm obviously expanding on them. but as a nation, i look back atb history and some of the worst governments we have ever had, do you know one of wst the worst ts they didhe? u they won after the trade union. mubarak did and one independent unions. these autocrats in history don't want independent unions so when i see in egypt or fic the old soviet russia or icy history s tells me aboutiet germany, i amt comparing what is happening to the workers in madison or inhat' columbus to hitler and stalins but i am saying that history teaches us that unions are a very positive force in society that creates the middle class and it protects our freedom. so don't tell me you areedom against, don't tell me support unions internationallyun but yo' don't support unions here. don't tell me support collective are getting inup poland but you oppose collective bargaining and

zanesville or dayton ohio because frankly that is inconsistent andte ultimately ie is not taking the side of people whom we are supposed tod, represent. we know mr. president, we knowte that i am proud of my state, about three blocks, two blocks from the capital in 1876 the capital of columbus the american federation of labor was formed.t it was the actual what we know now is the afl-cio began in columbus ohio in 1876 when some workers got together thinking there is some strength and safety inking numbers and we are going to have a better spirit -o standard of living and more a freedom for all if we begin to coalesce in a group of people. t not to cause or bust a hole in m the state budget, not to hurtan companies but to make sure theiy workers are represented and get a fair shake in society. mr. president it is all prettyse simple. w we have a stronger class in this have theecause we rightss to organize and bargain collectively. we have a strong request because

we areryecause democracy becauss can share in some of the wealth that they create for their employers and so i hop hope 10 s from now mr. president and i i know in delaware this is something you haveouou fought fa her codas manufacturing and middle class and all, that wety will see as productivity goes ua and profits go up and workersit wages will go up to match. it is the american way of what we stand for. nothing in our society frankly is more part been a prosperous middle class and what it brings to us in terms of freedom and equality. mr. president i yield the floor.

>> i find more and more at the behavior of professional sports owners to be on seemingly in the sense that they want millions of dollars from their communities and yet they don't really participate in the problems of those communities. >> this sunday on q&a, best-selling author and "washington post" sports columnist sally jenkins on the

intersection of sports and public policy on c-span's q&a. state department spokesman p.j. crowley spoke with reporters today about the obama administration's humanitarian efforts in libya. president obama announced in a white house news conference today that u.s. military aircraft would fly in egyptian leaving libya back home to egypt from makeshift camps in tunisia. it's about 50 minutes. >> good afternoon and welcome to the department of state. sorry to be late but we thought it was important to wait until the president finished baking before we came out. a few things to mention. this morning the secretary met with warren minister sikorski of poland to review a wide range of issues with our nato allies including our security relationships, develop vents in in the middle east afghanistan eastern partnership to manage -- initiative in our newly

established democracy dialogue. the secretary informed the minister how poland can sheriffs democratic experience and play a helpful role. the country is now experiencing their own dramatic changes to democracy. they also discussed cooperation on energy issues including our new agreement to expand cooperation on clean energy initiatives. the secretary then joined the president and others in the bilateral discussion with president calderon of mexico. you just heard the press do their own press availability on that but i will be happy to go through other issues related to that if you wish. turning to africa, the united states condemns this week's violent clashes and the obey a region and urges all parties to refrain from taking action or spreading rumors that could further heighten tensions there. the united states calls on local and national authorities to assure that the u.n. mission in sudan has the access required to increase patrols where fighting is taking place and engage with local leaders to restore calm.

we welcome the news that officials plan to meet tomorrow in abyei in an effort to finalize arrangements for a peaceful migration in line with agreements already reached. at the same time we urge the cpa parties to renew their efforts to reach agreements on the final status of obey a consistent with the obey a protocol and ruling of the permanent court of arbitration. staying in africa we continue to watch the ongoing situation in code to bore with growing concern. today security forces loyal to laurent used a tank to fire upon a group of women who are peacefully marching in support of president with tar or killing at least six. at least 315 people are confirmed dead and 56 disappeared since december with those numbers increasing daily along with reports of mass grave sites. we condemn the use of violence against the civilian sand we demand he step aside in the name

of peace. ambassador marc grossman attended the international contact group meeting hosted by the organization of the islamic conference or oic. the meeting brought together representatives from 49 countries and international obligations -- i am sorry international organizations. there was white spread consensus and reinforcing tracks, military offensive against al qaeda and taliban insurgents, the civilian campaign to build afghan capacity in support of their transition and an intensified diplomatic engagement in support of afghan-led reintegration and reconciliation efforts. hand the meeting's agenda focused on the political process towards a durable resolution of the conflict in afghanistan, including the afghan-led reconciliation and reintegration effort and robust diplomatic support for the region and the civilian aspects of the transition to lead security

responsibility to the afghan national security forces. assistant secretary secretary for international organization affairs, esther bremer, is in india today leading a delegation to the ninth meeting of the india u.s. joint working group on u.n. peacekeeping. this meeting builds on the u.s. india strategic dialogue and was one avenue of increased consultation agreed to during the visit of president obama to india last november. following this working group meeting, secretary rimmer will hold further consultations with the indian ministry of external affairs on it range of multilateral issues and opportunities for cooperation across the u.n. system including on peace and security, human rights, development and u.n. management. finally, regarding the situation in libya, as you heard the president indicate a short time ago, he has authorized the

deployment of military and civilian aircraft to assist in the movement of third country nationals out of libya and back to their host nations. we estimate that there are third country nationals from roughly 23 nations along the tunisian libyan border. many of the citizens come from egypt. it is a very very fluid situation. at the start of the day today we estimated there were upwards of 95,000 people at the border. during the course of today, that number was significantly reduced vote through some operations that are already ongoing and the natural flow of people across the border. but we do have usaid, our teams that are now deployed, one along the border between tunisia and libya, a combined team of usaid,

ofda foreign disaster assistance and pr him here at the state department and they are assessing the situation what might be needed in the coming days. there's also another team in malta that is there in case they need to support any reception efforts in that country. we are working to provide -- we have her fight divided already $2 million to the international organization for migration to support these emergency evacuations. we are in the process of working to put in place an additional $15 million across the international organizations and ngo's that are currently working on this challenge. >> what specifically is the state department component of what the president announced? is there one? >> we would be chartering the civilian aircraft. like i say, there are some operations that are going on,

very limited infrastructure along the border. but we have aircraft, both military and civilian, standing by to be sent to their on an as-needed basis. >> and where would they be going? would they be going all to their home's -- home countries? >> well, the majority, the majority people at the tunisian libyan border we believe our egyptians and they need to be transported back over into egypt and the airlift and sea lift can be helpful there. there have been may be 75, 77,000 people that we estimate have flowed across the libyan egyptian border, but they don't have the same situation on that side. >> if you happen to be from new zealand and you are stranded there, i mean a country that's not particularly close. are you prepared to fly them all the way home? >> i think what we are trying to

do because of the conditions they they're -- it's cold at night -- is first to do everything we can to scale down the number of people who are exposed to the elements along the border and then to the extent that we can get a significant complement of people back to egypt, as one example, that allows you been to address the specific needs of others in terms of finding ways to get them back to their host countries. we also have some people moving through -- a small number of people moving through nigeria so there is a wide range of people, multiple destinations. the team is there to do what we can to move them on and get the the -- get them on. >> and then the last one, this is not something that they have to pay for, correct? it's not like the evacuation of american citizens where they're expected to repay the cost? >> i don't know but clearly we want to get these people out of harm's way and we will do that

irrespective of their ability to pay. >> how much is a set for corrugated with what the europeans do? because i know there are many british and french and other. >> right. their operations going underway, already underway and clearly we are according with egypt for example. we are coordinating with other countries to see how we can contribute that we do have aircraft standing by and they will be employed on an as-needed basis. >> you said earlier today you had estimated that there were something like upwards of 95,000 people at the libyan tunisian border and that has been reduced substantially or significantly. what your current estimate? >> it probably is at least half of that. down in the 30,000 range. >> and then the second thing, in a range of 30,000 or in the 30,000? >> in the range -- that complement has been cut at least in half.

>> and the second thing if i may, just what is your reaction to the venezuelan call for some kind of an international commission, apparently to be headed by former brazilian president lula to try to work out a solution in libya? >> as the president emphasized again in his press availability a short time ago, you don't need an international commission to tell colonel qaddafi what he needs to do. for the good of his country and the good of his people, he should step aside and for the good of his people he should stop attacking them. >> yeah that -- ian but he is not doing that. you think he should and he is not so there's not room for some in the middle to maybe talk to him and persuade them to do that? >> we support any effort. >> so that would include the venezuelan --. >> let me finish what i'm going to say. >> okay. >> any and the effort that is able to resolve this peacefully

deserves consideration. but if i flip that around, if he's not responding to the many calls across the international community to step down, it is uncertain to me what an international commission is going to accomplish. colonel qaddafi needs to step down and as the president has said, history is moving against him. he needs to recognize that and step aside for the good of his people and the good of his country. >> can you just confirm -- you've been talking about the things you are doing on the border with tunisia and the border of egypt. just to be clear you are not taking any activities, humanitarian or otherwise, inside libya right now? is that correct? >> i'm not aware of any u.s. personnel inside libya. there are a variety of ngo's including some ngo's that we

support that may well still be operating within libya. >> but are you finding any specific operations, humanitarian or otherwise, on behalf of the opposition right now in libya? >> well that separate the two out. through organizations such as unhcr, iom, and others, we have already provided and will continue to provide funds to help with the humanitarian situation in libya. it is possible that some of those groups, save the children and others, may well still be operating inside of libya. but we don't have any activity in libya at the present time that is geared towards a political position. we are focused focused on the humanitarian situation. >> p.j. those chartered civilian airplanes and military airplanes

strictly use tunisian territory and tunisian airspace? >> yes. >> okay. equip -- quick follow-up on the libya situation. safe al islam, the son of qaddafi says he is miffed at the position of the united states because he is in the same fight with the united states against terrorism and he's rather disappointed. can you tell us that there was ever in a kind of counterterrorism coordination between the nye and libya? >> has there have been dialogue with libya regarding counterterrorism? >> has there have been operate a coordination between the united states in libya? >> you have got to define operational coordination for me. in other words, has heart of our dialogues and we resumed diplomatic relations with libya involve terrorism and counterterrorism? >> answer is yes. >> not just the dialogue. has there have been cooperation? >> i will take the question and

we can describe to you the nature of whatever dialogue or activity that we have had. i would presume that our dialogue would include sharing information but i don't know of any other. >> but no operation or coordination such as in yemen for instance where there is actually an ongoing fight against al qaeda i? >> speak candidly speak on libyan venezuela? there is some information coming from venezuela actually that some members of the government of qaddafi or relatives are already in venezuela. what will be the u.s. position of qaddafi seeks exile in venezuela? >> well our position is that colonel qaddafi should step aside. where he goes is up to him. >> but if it's something that you will welcome it because to venezuela?

>> we have called for him to step aside and we have called for him to stop attacking his people. what that means he leaves the country i think that is a good thing for the people of libya. i'm not sure it is a good thing for the people of venezuela. i don't know. >> are you willing to say that about other potential havens? >> it's not for us to determine where he goes. it is for us to hopefully see him step aside for the good of this country. >> but wouldn't you prefer to see him go into exile say in a cell in the hague? i mean you voted for that resolution. >> one destination does not include another. >> does this one have an impact in the relations or in the situation between the u.s. and venezuela if colonel qaddafi goes to venezuela? >> again, our view is that colonel qaddafi should step aside today. if that involves his -- his

movement to a third country that would be a major step towards resolving the current situation. >> but are you aware of the venezuelan initiatives in that regard? >> as to whether he would be welcome in venezuela obviously that is a matter for venezuela to determine. >> can you talk a little bit more about your outreach to the libyan opposition that you've been talking about ambassador credits and others? how is that going? what type of contacts are taking place and meetings in that type of thing. >> ambassador credits and his team have been busy over the last several days. they have had meetings here primarily with libyan americans who have an interest and may have themselves contact and libya. we have worked the phones hard

with a variety of business people and others to try and figure out the nature of the emerging opposition, what their composition is, what their structure is, what they might be thinking and this is an effort that is ongoing. >> libyan business people or american businesspeople? >> all of the above. in other words we are trying to determine as best we can what is actually happening on the ground inside of libya, what the nature of the opposition is. clearly if you look back over 42 years, colonel qaddafi is not allowed a lot of pot attacks to occur in the country. he has never allowed them ultimate center of power to emerge. he hasn't been subject to checks and balances as we would understand them. so as we have seen it perhaps in other countries it is going to take a while for us to

understand how the opposition is organizing itself, who they are. you have got a number of former government officials who have turned against the regime. you have a number of military officials who have done the same. you have got tribal leaders who are part of the fabric and the culture of libya. all of these entities are standing up in opposition to colonel qaddafi and his regime. but we are reaching out and expanding and network trying to fully understand what this dynamic is, what is happening and as we go forward how we might be helpful. >> will then include the muslim brotherhood in libya? >> again i am not cataloging who we have reached out to so far, but we are monitoring this opposition. it's a disparate group. it is not one entity. it is a number of entities but we are trying to fully

understand what is happening. >> the remaining loyal this to qaddafi have you had any success with that? have you had ministers, senior government officials continuing in the last three to four days to defect from the regime? >> i think you have had a steady stream of diplomats and others who have rightly calculated that there is no future aligned with colonel qaddafi and his regime. and as the president said again today, we are monitoring this very closely and there will be accountability. and so that is something that anyone who has been a part of the libyan government has to take into account. >> how credible are former governor -- met government ministers who in many cases will have edited it from the qaddafi regime for years or perhaps decades and who are jumping the ship only as it appears that qaddafi's world may be threatened?

>> ultimately that is not our judgment to make. >> but that's exactly the judgment i thought you were trying to make here. >> no, there is a difference between assessment and judgment. you have a variety of people who are standing up and identifying with the opposition. but as to what individual or what group emerges going forward, ultimately that is not our judgment to make. we would like to see a transition so that the libyan people have the same choice to select leaders in the future that exist in other countries. as to who they choose, who stands to be a part of a future of libyan government is ultimately not our determination. >> so far, you have not taken -- have you taken any steps not so much to recognize but to deal significantly with the self-proclaimed caretaker government said to have been

formed by former justice minister? does that group hold any particular special status in your point of view? >> we are reaching out to a wide range of figures. i don't want to, from here, say we have talked to this person but not that person. i don't want to put any kind of a impression that we are giving and imprimatur to one versus another. we are talking to a variety of figures and trying to understand who and what this opposition means. >> when you say that those who's perpetrated violence against the libyan people will be held accountable, are you talking about the violence that stemmed from this recent response to the protests? because as you know colonel qaddafi has been ruling for 40 years with an iron fist and there has been violence against the people for all of that time. some of the people that are in

opposition as our shad said were not only benefiting financially but were also involved in some violence against the people so who is going to be held accountable for what? >> under the terms of the u.n. security council resolution that was passed, believe it stipulates the accountability will be from, i want to say february 15 onward. so that focus is on possible atrocities are crimes that are committed in this current situation. >> pjs several times over the last two days the secretary has talked about her interest or the administration's interest in possibly prosecuting qaddafi himself for the lockerbie bombing. she said that she has talked to attorney general holder and the director of the fbi about this. do you know what the status of that is? has a gone anywhere or is it still a very exploratory phase? >> well i believe and i will defer to justice, but i believe there has been an ongoing open

investigation regarding pan am 103. it may qualify as kind of the cold case but to the extent that there is information that is forthcoming on that, we certainly will take data and evaluated but that would need a justice action to take. >> right, but at this building are you aware of any action that this building has taken, other than referring to letter that was sent to the fbi? >> i am not aware of any particular action that we take in other than if there's any information that we came across obviously were further to the justice department. >> when did she speak -- to holder and the fbi? >> i think she spoke -- there and some statements in recent days that have suggested that mr. qaddafi himself was implicated in pan am 103 and she

is spoken to the attorney general. >> she said i will speak to them. >> i can't say 100%. i will take the question as to whether she has conferred with the attorney general sometime this week. >> and mueller, please? >> yes. find. >> did you get an answer on the legal status of the former libyan ambassador? >> for the time being here means the head of mission. we did receive a facts as i indicated earlier this week. we have not been able to verify the authenticity of this document at this point. normally if you get that kind of a notification there is a formal diplomatic note that follows, a facts or a phonecall. we have not received a diplomatic note since the fax was received. we have attempted to call the foreign minister to try to verify the authenticity of this document and we have not been able to reach him.

>> is the diplomatic visa still valid? >> pardon me? is the diplomatic visa still valid? >> he is still ahead of the mission at the present time. >> has he talked to you at all since the evacuation? >> i think the last time we talk to talked to him was last friday. >> he has said he'll call you back or he said no i don't want to talk to you? >> we have not been able to reach them. he is not picked up the phone. >> okay but had he been told that he will not speak to you or you just haven't been able to connect? >> normally with that kind of follow-up question we would check with the ambassador but his communications with the government is limited too. the short answer is we have attempted to reach the foreign minister to discuss this and other things and so far we have not been able to reach them. >> when you say that normally a facts is followed up by

democratic know, how exactly is the libyan government supposed to present this note to you? you have moved all your diplomats from tripoli, the whole country. a fair point. >> the u.n. mission as has ambassador here -- exactly how you are trying to verify this because i suspect how you are trying to verify the opposition of a fax. i suspect you are not trying that hard. >> i am here to say that we did in fact try to reach out to the foreign minister. >> and he said yes it is real? if he said yes it's real then would you have accepted that as authentic? >> when we reach him and were able to talk about this, then we will judge what he says in terms of the authenticity. but we just have not been able to verify.

>> i understand that but -- it won't be enough for you to consider it authentic. speier making a presumption there. >> what's the status of the diplomat who was designated in charge for a fax that he received and whom he said i think on monday that you were regarding is duly selected representative the libyan government? >> my comments were based on the presumption that the fax would be followed by a diplomatic note the fact is we haven't received it. we have responsibilities under the vienna convention and we are willing to exercise those are sponsored bill of these and. matt: 's point is a good one. our communication with the living government is limited by the fact that we have removed our diplomats and you have got some turmoil at the libyan mission here and in new york as well. we are continuing to assess this

document and trying to verify it. >> but more specifically -- specifically, less on the document and more specifically on the communication with the libyan government. you have not made a deliberate decision not to talk to the government, set correct? you will continue to try to reach the foreign minister to talk about this and other issues related to the current is -- crisis? >> we still have diplomatic relations with libya. >> but that's not what i asked. you said you haven't been able to get them on the phone. are you going to keep trying to talk to the foreign minister and other libyan officials or are you just kind of not talking to them right now? >> let me answer it this way. we do have diplomatic responsibilities under the vienna convention. we take them seriously. we are honestly trying to assess this document. we are honestly trying to reach out to the libyan government to verify this document. that process is ongoing. >> i am sorry -- i'm not just

talking about this particular document. i'm talking about whether you see -- whether you see a benefit or a reason to continue communications with the libyan government, not just particularly on this issue but in general related to the current crisis. >> when we have had any to talk to the libyan government, we have reached out to the libyan government and up until the last few days we have had success in reaching out to them. we have tried since friday, which is the last conversation i'm aware of that we had with foreign minister moussa cusack and over the intervening time, we have not been as successful as we have previously been. that may also reflect some developments inside the libyan government. >> back to the specific document. but a fax to diplomatic note to you confirm the authenticity or would you then have of the

original node or would you then have to verify that diplomatic note fax was in fact authentic? >> matt, we continue to assist the document and we continue to try to verify it. >> has anyone called the number at the top of the thing to find out if it's a working fax machine? >> i can't make myself clear. >> on a related note can you say whether you have been able to identify protecting power in aaa? >> we have not been enough i get a protecting power. there are conversations and an agreement yet has not been completed. >> are you concerned that you don't have one yet? is this a problem? >> i wouldn't say this is a problem. we are in touch with diplomats were still in libya. we are in touch with american citizens directly who are still in libya. so, so far i can't say that the lack of a protecting power has hampered our efforts. >> how many citizens are left?

>> for a combination of reasons that is a hard answer -- question to answer. we have in recent days assisted a small number of americans, perhaps at last i heard about 30 do we were in contact with and steered them towards either ships or aircraft of other countries where they had offers us a -- offered as seats and as always we are grateful for this report from the international community. at this point i don't know that we have any pending cases where there are american still there who have indicated to us that they want to leave but we have maintained contact with american citizens throughout the past few days and if any american citizen continues to reach out to us, we will help them evacuate. >> but last week it was suggested that a number of americans and those with dual citizenship with something like 4000, 5000 people. >> and that remains the case.

there are still obviously american citizens with dual citizenship and perhaps american citizens with just one citizenship and they remain in libya. >> can we move a little knit two the reaction of the resignation of the egyptian prime minister? >> again, this is an ongoing process that the selection of interim leaders is a matter for the egyptian government. we will continue to engage the government and supported as a partner as it moves in this transition. [inaudible] >> i don't know. it was primarily about the situation in libya and efforts to try to help move egyptian citizens back home. >> you don't have any concerns about continuity or stability or anything like that in egypt right now? whoever they choose is fine with you?

>> again this is an ongoing process in egypt just as it is in other countries as these governments need to continue to demonstrate that they are responding to the aspirations of their people. but the decision as to whether a certain individual occupies a certain position, these are decisions being made in each of. >> can we go further east to yemen? except in libya and ivory coast where you are telling the leaders they have to go? >> in those cases they have turned weapons against their people and we think that's a special case. >> in yemen do you have any concerns at the turn of these protests recently with a particular cleric for example who has been on the u.s. terror list? do you have any concern about the direction these protests are going? >> who are you talking about in particular? >> off the top of my head i can't remember his name. >> are you talking about abdul

majid alston donnie? he is designated terrorist on its ear. do you have concerned about his apparent involvement in reading these protests in recent days? >> it is not for us to select individuals but obviously we believe that anyone involved in these efforts should be committed to a peaceful and democratic ross s. and someone who has associated himself with known terrorists probably doesn't fit those qualifications. >> israel and the palestinians? >> sure. >> p.j. last december mr. matthew lee asked you several questions in mid mid-to-late december about the status of mr. abdullah abu ramae activist and time and time again you said that you would come back with answers on this. and they believe that mr. lee

and all of us are still waiting for that answer. >> i satisfied that question. if you want to ask again if there's anything new in that case i will be happy to take the question. i didn't that respond to the question. >> as the original asker of those questions, let's say you did respond. i'm not sure you satisfy the question. [laughter] >> i will be happy to take that question again. >> okay. related, today the defense minister mr. barack -- rap came out on channel 10 and said that the current government cannot advance peace. do you concur with mr. barak and the current government is incapable of advancing the peace process? >> we continue our efforts working with israel and the palestinian authority. to press ahead to resolve the core issues. we have a meeting with the quartet and palestinian

officials today in brussels. our efforts are ongoing. ultimately we believe that this government and the existing palestinian authority should come back to good faith direct negotiations and that continues to be our focus. >> but you don't feel mr. barak government is unsuited to advance the peace process? >> does this government have the ability to reach a framework agreement? yes it does. it is within the power of the existing government to do this. as to whether the politics in israel was enabled that to happen is not my judgment to make. >> what level was the quartet meeting? >> with the envoys level, leading our delegation was david hale. >> continuing on over to the right, if we could. >> there's a trend here. >> is at at that california?

[laughter] >> not that far yet. pakistan. >> as opposed to wisconsin. go ahead. >> well is turkey part of europe or the middle east? i don't know. on turkey, another week yet another set of series of arrests. do you have any concern of what it means having concern? >> we will monitor ongoing developments in this case. we urge that any investigations or prosecutions proceed in a transparent manner and we will continue to engage turkey and encourage an independent pluralistic media. it's critical to a healthy democracy and we will continue our assessments of global press freedoms in our annual human rights report. >> i have a follow-up on that. is president obama where the intimidation of reporters in turkey and did he bring this

issue when he was talking? >> again those are questions that are specific and i'll defer to my colleagues at the white house. certainly we the united states government remain focused on these issues. >> but don't you think the intimidation and the arrests of the journalists in turkey are systematic now? basically every 10 days there a group of journalists being arrested. >> that is our judgment to make. we have concerns about trends in turkey as we have indicated publicly. we continue to engage turkish officials on these developments and we will follow these cases very closely. >> this goes on and it has been a year, several years for some of the people who have been in jail and trials have been going on. is there any red lines -- is

going to go on? >> this is an issue that we follow very closely. we are huge advocates of press freedoms around the world, and we monitor these developments as part of our ongoing human rights assessment in turkey and every other country in the world. >> bond coat d. i bore have you reacted to the latest violence today? fuel is running low we have seen but also mr. bad. so the economic steps that we have taken the bank closures are denying him the ability to pay the security forces that are shooting at women and other protesters. >> fuel is running low. we have seen also money is running low. so the economic steps we have taken, the bank closures inn

devore are denying him the ability to pay the security forces that are shooting at women and other protesters, so we do believe it is having an effect. unfortunately for coat deal for it will take time to resolve this but we remain committed to see the results of the election and mr. -- take his role as president. >> are you waiting for him to actually go bankrupt? >> we do have a u.n. contingent there that is doing everything it can to protect institutions and it's a difficult situation. you have these roving gangs that are attacking civilians. we continue to work with -- there's a meeting of the security council regarding the

violence today. there will be a heads of state meeting at the african union tomorrow that will meet. we are doing everything in our power to try to resolve this but there are still options available to the international community. >> can we go to pakistan? you have any comment on the latest hearing for mr. davis? >> there were hearings today and pakistani courts on charges against mr. davis. the proceedings on a weapons charge were adjourned until march 16. the proceedings on the murder charges were adjourned until march 8. we are concerned that they proceedings are ongoing. they can't really comment on the litigation itself. we continue to stress to the pakistani government and to the pakistani courts that he has full immunity from criminal prosecution. >> what about the lower court?

>> these were the lower court in lahore today. >> so what about the fact that they upheld the decision? >> actually i'm not an expert in pakistan but my understanding is today the court indicated in the absence of a certification by the government to pakistan that he in fact had diplomatic immunity that court would the court would presume that he did not. that is not a definitive judgment. there was actually a call, later this month, a higher court hearing on the question of diplomatic immunity. >> you said that you continue to stress to the pakistani government and the pakistani courts that in your view he has had diplomatic immunity. in terms of the courts have you filed an amicus brief? have usa made a filing with them or are you just saying out loud and hoping that they sort of hear it? i mean it is not clear to me if there's an american lawyer there. >> that is a good question. i will take the question as to whether we have yet or me will file a brief with the court between now and the middle of

march. and with a higher court. i will take that question. >> pjs venezuela under investigation? >> hold on. >> is there any more clarity yet on how it is that the u.s. and pakistan still can come together over whether he has diplomatic. >> not to cut you off but there's not a question about diplomatic immunity. we have yet to get the government of pakistan to recognize that. we don't think there is a question here. >> in my understanding the lower court said today there is no certificate from the pakistani government indicating he is diplomatic --. >> so there is clearly a discrepancy there if the u.s. is saying he does, the pakistani say they have no evidence of that. >> just on that point, we did provide a diplomatic note in january 2010 that informed the

government of pakistan of its arrival in the country, his assignment to the administrative and technical staff of the u.s. embassy and that was notification that he in fact has diplomatic immunity. >> yonah but that no didn't stipulate diplomatic immunity at that time. >> i think we had a background briefing that with a diplomatic note that constitute informing in pakistan that he occupied a position to qualify for diplomatic immunity leaving pakistan and pakistan objected to that judgment so the only recourse would be to declare him unacceptable. >> but as a matter of course to you designate who is a diplomat in who is not? >> there are specific definitions under the vienna convention. as to what kind of activities, there are different categories of people assigned to an embassy and those categories paula pfeifer diplomatic immunity, and

mr. davis was in one of those categories. >> is there any more information about the car that hit the civilian on the way and who was driving it and whether there's going to be any charges leveled? >> these are a matter still under investigation. >> how is that under investigation though? what exactly is under investigation in that? whether he was driving it? what part of that incident is under investigation? >> the incident itself is still under investigation. >> by whom? >> pakistan. i mean is we have indicated, as a normal course, if one of our officers is involved in these kinds of incidents, we will also do an investigation. >> so the u.s. is conducting an investigation? >> i'm not aware we concluded our senior. >> have the pakistanis questioned anyone in that case? >> that is the better question

to ask the embassy in islamabad. >> going to the americans on trial, in foreign countries mr. gross' trial begins tomorrow. do you have any thing to say about that? >> the trial does begin tomorrow and we hope it will be resolved so that mr. gross can return home to the united states. he's been imprisoned for too long. >> will there be a consular officer at the trial? >> i mean under normal course we would have monitors there. >> i know but can you take the question? obviously cuba is not a normal course. >> we would desire to have a consular officer there to monitor the proceedings. >> the i understand what you would desire but could you let us know if there's going to be one? >> i would expect the answer is yes but we will let you know. >> could i'd just have this one, this last one? can you speak to your concerns

about the trial proceedings itself in cuba? >> let's have the trial proceed animal comment on our views of that. >> in general do you have questions -- concerns in general about the judicial system in cuba? >> again the trial will happen tomorrow. we hope it will be resolved quick way and hope mr. gross will return home. >> there has been some indication that the u.s. may have given the french the okay to set manuel noriega back to come off. >> i know nothing about that. >> already won more in that same region. argentina, still unresolved? >> the situation is still unresolved. >> one more on the region. at the end of this press conference today president obama said that there had been an extradition request for the individuals arrested for the i.c.e. agents killing. i was curious if you had any

information about when those were filed and any expectations that would be honored? >> that would normally go through doj. >> but i was curious again a comment about what contacts through the embassy there had been to to follow up on those requests. >> again i'll defer to the process to doj. [inaudible] >> all i would say is that, let me rephrase the question slightly. we have had discussions with venezuela regarding the iran sanctions cisada and that is all i'll say about that. >> what does that mean? sorry, just to follow-up. what does that mean? >> it means that we reviewed with venezuela the specific terms of the law and how they apply to certain entities.

>> so there is any provision to get -- were to be in relation with iran? is that what you mean? >> again, we thought this was important legislation. we have had brought conversations internationally with countries who might have companies or entities that do business with iran. and we have lots of conversations to ensure that countries and companies are in full compliance with both. >> who are you talking to in venezuela? >> international sanctions and also national sanctions. >> who are you talking to in venezuela? >> we have had conversations here at the embassy in washington. >> are you warning them about violations? >> i am not going to go into the particulars but we have had discussions with venezuela. >> just a follow-up madam secretary in the last hearing

the democracies in latin america are doing well with an exception of venezuelan and nicaragua. what did that mean? >> and cuba. >> and cuba, sorry. what does that mean? that the u.s. doesn't consider venezuela is a democracy? >> well i would say that we have expressed concerns about trends in venezuela that would perhaps in future elections lead to results that are less than free and fair. >> mr. robert einhorn said in seoul that the united states will seek the u.n. security council presidential statement to condemn north korea's uranium enrichment program. so do you think -- to expect china will join you? >> well, we have initiated consultations on a potential security council reaction to north korea's uranium enrichment program and we wo h