the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. mr. franken: mr. president, i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. franken: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that floor privileges be granted to ashley white of my staff for the duration of consideration of the pending bill. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. franken: mr. president, i rise today to talk about a matter that's very important to our country, to minnesota, and

to me, science, technology, engineering and mathematics education or stem education for short. as i've traveled around minnesota, i've heard from many of our high-tech businesses that they fear our students won't be ready to take on the jobs waiting for them when they -- when they graduate, and as a result, these jobs will go unfilled and our economy will founder. this is not just true in minnesota, of course, but across the country. in pennsylvania, the presiding officer's state and everywhere in our nation. that's why i'm addressing our need for a well-trained stem work force through the stem master teacher corps act, which has been cosponsored by my

colleagues, senator lieberman and shaheen. we have been hearing concern about the state of stem education in our country for over a decade now. in 2000, a 25-member commission headed by former senator john glenn published a report called "before it's too late" which addressed the pressing need for high-quality math and science teaching. five years later, another report, "rising above the gathering storm," presented the findings and recommendations of a national academies commission chaired by former lockheed martin c.e.o. norm augustine concerning the deterioration of stem education and basic research. last year, a follow-up report dramatically titled "rapidly approaching category five hurricane," warned us that the -- quote -- "gathering storm is now threatening to wipe out u.s.

leadership in global science and technology if we don't act fast, and it said so with good reason. according to the bureau of labor statistics, nearly every one of the 30 fastest growing professions require stem skills. these include jobs in some of the fields that are most critical to the future of our country, health care, energy, climate change and national security, and yet too few kids are graduating from high school with the interests or the preparation to successly pursue stem degrees in college. well over half of college students in china and japan major in stem fields compared with only one-third of u.s. citizens. international standardized tests show that we rank only average or below average in students'

math and science performance. the 2009 program for international student assessment placed american 15-year-olds 25th in math and 17th in science out of 34 oecd countries, the developed countries. what's worse is that we're spending more on education per student than any other oecd country in the world except for luxembourg. as congress works to reform no child left behind this year -- and the presiding officer is working with me on that, on the "help" committee -- i urge my colleagues to consider strongly the importance of stem education, how to spend our limited resources most effectively. president obama has proposed

recruiting and training 100,000 new stem teachers in the next decade and has requested requested $100 million to advance this worthy goal. however, many stem teachers leave the profession within their first few years of teaching, often drawn by far more lucrative salaries elsewhere in science and technology fields. those talents are valued in the market. so if we're going to invest in recruiting and training new teachers, we also need to invest in retaining and best utilizing those individuals. the stem master teacher corps act is based on a proposal brought forth by president obama's council of advisors on science and technology. it will provide the top k-12 stem teachers in a participating area with additional professional development so that they can become leaders in their

schools and in their communities. master teachers will mentor their younger or less effective peers, giving them guidance and inspiring them to stay in teaching. master teachers will also network with one another, sharing best practices and classroom resources. together, these measures will improve the quality and the ability of all teachers, the ability to impart strong stem skills and an eagerness to learn and pass that on to their students. providing career advancement opportunities to affected stem teachers and support to beginning teachers will help increase retention so our investments in recruitment and training will have an even greater payoff. in recognition of their excellent work and new leadership responsibility, it's

only fair that these master teachers should be compensated, so my legislation also gives them a salary bump. our teachers work just as hard as other stem professionals, and it's time we start recognizing that and paying them accordingly. according to the national association of colleges and employers, the median salary offered to recent college graduates in certain stem-related fields, including physics, computer science, accounting and engineering, is is $24,000 higher than that offered to a new secondary schoolteacher and $30,000 higher than that offered to a new elementary school teachers. this legislation has been endorsed by more than 60 national and regional groups ranging from educational organizations like the national education association, the american federation of teachers, the college board and education minnesota, to business groups like life science alley, the

biobusiness alliance of minnesota and the minnesota high-tech association. the bill's also supported by rural groups like the national rural education association and rural community -- rural schooling community trust and numerous science and math societies. i am particularly pleased to have the endorsement of two leading national businesses that also happen to be headquartered in my home state, medtronic and 3m. both of these companies recognize and support the importance of acting now to ensure a well-trained work force for the future, and they have already shown a proactive interest in supporting and engageing students in stem activities. i was just recently at a first robotics event at the university of minnesota that was astounding. they thi had two huge auditoriuf

these over 130 teams competing in minimum anyone this robotic -- in minnesota in this robotics competition. so i'm very grateful of the support of 3 many and medtronic. madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the full list of endorsers be included in the record and i have a list here to show how impressive it is. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. franken: the master teacher corps program addresses the recommendations presented in the president's council of advisors on science and technologies. 2010 k-12 stem education and tracks the priorities laid out more than ten years ago in the glenn commission report. specifically, it would establish an ongoing system to improve the quality of mathematics and science teaching in caid grades can-12 and it would improve the working environment and make the

teaching profession more attractive for k-12 mathematics and science teachers. with the planned reform and reauthorization of no child left behind this year, we have a ra rare, indeed, ideal opportunity to implement real change in k-12 stem education in this country, so let's act now before it's too late, before the storm has fully gathered and before that rapidly approaching category 5 hurricane destroys the competitive technological edge and prosperity that our country has worked so hard to build and -- and maintain. i urge my colleagues to join senator lieberman, senator shaheen and me in supporting a sustained investment in k-12 stem teacher quality and in raising the status of the teaching profession through the stem master teacher corps act. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the bill's text be included in the record. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. franken: mr. president, i'd also like to take a moment to congratulate the university of minnesota duluth men's hockey team for capturing their firs first-ever ncaa division i championship. the umd intul dogs faced off against -- bulldogs faced off against the michigan wolverines in st. paul this past saturday and, wow, it was an amazing game. over 19,000 fans packed the xcel energy center to watch a nail biter really, is what it was. goaltender shawn hunwick of michigan and umd's kenny ryder kept the game close, neither allowing a goal in the third period and sending the game into overtime. stuck at 2-2, bulldog travis oliesuk gathered the puck behind the michigan goal just three minutes into the extra period with the puck in his back -- on his backhand, oelisuk slid a

pass in front of the net to hard-charging teammate kyl schmidt of hermantown, minnesota. kyl, only ten days removed from hand surgery, buried the puck from just outside the crease and in a moment of pure exuberance, he skated to the half line and dove on to his back, performing what i believe was a snow angel as he slid on the ice. it was something to see. it was one of the most thrilling finishes in college hockey history. after 50 long years, kyl's overtime goal gave the minnesota duluth bulldogs their first-ever men's hockey ncaa championship. in his 10th year at the helm, coach scott sandlin led a tenacious and skilled bulldog team that dominated on the power play and got timely goaltending throughout the tournament. and i would be remiss if i didn't commend the michigan wolverines, who played fiercely

and deserve congratulations for an excellent final game. i know everyone at the university of minnesota duluth must still have smiles on their face after their victory and i congratulate the plairs and the coaches and the -- players and the coaches and the fans on a triumphant season. and i would also be remiss if i didn't say that last year, the women's hockey team, the bulldogs also, won the women's ncaa hockey -- division i hockey tournament. so kudos to the university of minnesota duluth and the bulldogs. and, mr. president, i yield the floor and would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. ficer: the

senator from arkansas. mr. pryor: mr. president, thank you. and i understand we're in a quorum call. the presiding officer: yes. mr. pryor: i would ask that that

be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. pryor: thank you, mr. president. i want to talk just for a few minutes about an incident that's unfolding in arkansas that i'm sure is unfolding in other states as well about, say, less than two weeks ago, a 73-year-old woman and her husband received a letter from fema and fema demanded that this couple pay back $27,000 in fema assistance they had received three years earlier and that they do it within 30 days or face penalties, interest, et cetera. well, this is devastating news for her. these are social security recipients. they lost everything in a flood. and let me back up and tell the full story and tell the rest of the story. three years ago, arkansas had some floods on the white river

and the folks in the mountain view area, some of them experienced very severe flooding. fema came -- actually came to this couple's house, walked around, told them on the spot that they were eligible to receive fema assistance for the flooding. and the maximum you can receive is $30,000. they filled out the paperwork. in fact, fema helped them do some of that. like i said, on the spot, while fema was visiting their home and looking at their property, fema assured her that she would -- that they would qualify for th this. they filled out the paperwork, they go through the process. apparently at some point there's even an appeal or some sort of clarification and went through the proper channels at fema. fema was there, they took pictures, the whole deal. they verified the damage. this couple received $27,000 in

fema assistance. they put every dime back into their home. this is a couple that basically lost almost all their worldly possessions in this flood. i talked to her a week or so ago and she told me that they were able to save a few items of glassware and a few keepsakes from the family, but basically everything was either washed away in the water or so caked with mud it was ruined during the flood. the $27,000 helped repair their home and make it habitable but it didn't restore their home anywhere close to the condition it was before the flood. this was their dream home. their retirement home. they live right there on the white river and it's a beautiful part of the state. so they get this letter a couple weeks ago. bear in mind this flood happened three years ago. three years ago this flood

happened. and they are now required under the rules and regs and the law even that fema works with, they're required to pay all this money back. as i said before, this is a terrible hardship. as it turns out, what happened here is these folks, although they were assured by fema that they were eligible, they were actually never qualified to receive this money. they didn't know that. they had fema in their living room telling them that they were qualified and that they should receive the money, that they meet all the tests and all the standards that these -- this is this program's for is to help people like this. however, there was one glitch or one technicality and that was that the county where they lived had not passed an ordnance to go into the fema flood insurance program. now, here again, fema should have known this.

fema apparently went to some of the county meetings where it was discussed and voted down but, nonetheless, fema assured the people that they would be covered under this program. the irony of all this is, this couple, when they bought their home on the white river, one of the preconditions, one of the requirements that they set for themselves is that they would purchase flood insurance. they had it for a number of years. they paid premiums for a number of years. never had a flood. paid premiums for a number of years. finally, the insurance company that offered the flood insurance got out of the business and so they event went to the extent of going through lloyds of london to get flood insurance. paid a premium, a lot of money for their flood insurance, but they carried that for as long as it was offered and finally it wasn't offered and the only thing left is the fema flood insurance program, the national flood insurance program. and because the county had not done what they were supposed to

do, then lady, therefore -- this couple, therefore, was not eligible to receive the fema flood money. again, no fault of her own. she done everything that anybody could do. they paid for their premiums out of their pockets as long as they could, as long as they could find insurance. as that was canceled over the years, the county hadn't come through but apparently fema was actually there at the county meetings and fema knew or should have known that -- that she wasn't eligible. give her those $27,000. now they want it all back with interest and penalties, et cetera. so, mr. president, what i've done today is i've filed the disaster assistance recoupment fairness act. and we actually have it in two forms. we have it as a stand-alone measure. we also have it as an amendment to the bill that's pending on the floor right now. the important point of this story is that all of the

mistakes that were made were on fema's side of the equation. the couple in arkansas made no mistakes. they followed the rules, went through the process, we want through the hearings. there's -- went through the hearings. there's no allegation of fraud or anything that was in any way misleading. they gave them the documents. they did everything they were supposed to do. it was textbook where they did everything they were supposed to do but fema is now coming back asking for a recoupment. so now what -- what our bill will do is not give a blanket exception but what it will do is give the fema administrator the authority under circumstances he deems fit to waive the debt that's owed to the u.s. in cases where funds were distributed by a fema error, like in this case. and also -- also it gives them the discretion that they don't

have under current federal law. i met with director fugate on this a week or two ago and actually we had a very constructive meeting. i think probably on a personal level, he understands this. he feels bad about this. but he feels like his hands are tied under the statute. i'm not 100% sure they are but he says they are and he tried to be very helpful, very accommodating and i think he really does want to work with all the parties involved to try to clean this up. but he says he doesn't have the authority. that's where this bill comes in. that's where this amendment comes in. we'd like it give fema -- the fema director the authority to have some discretion on some of these hardship-type cases, especially where the person who received the benefit did it purely by a fema error and, again, in their case, they put

every dime of their recovery back into their home, just to have it livable. otherwise, they probably would have had to abandon their home or sell the property, or whatever the case may have been. but -- so, mr. president, that is what we are asking of the senate, that they would consider this at the proper time. i'd ask my colleagues to take a look at it. my guess is, since we have 35 households in our state that are receiving these type of letters from fema, these demand letters where they're giving a notice of debt to folks who have received money, my guess is, if we have 35 in our state, there's hundreds and maybe thousands around the country who are in a similar situation. again, our bill is really just for fema's mistakes. this is probably an example of the cleanup of the previous fema

administration. i think director fugate really had nothing to do with this. it took them three years because there was a lawsuit in the meantime. so what this is doing is creating a hardship for folks who really have been playing by the rules. it just gives fema the flexibility to do some of these cleanup in a way that doesn't harm ordinary citizens here in arkansas -- i mean, here in the u.s. i would like it ask my colleagues to take a look at t i would be proud and available to answer any questions. if anyone has those, they can always contact me or my office. what i would like to do is not call it up at this point or anything like that. but be available and maybe be in the queue for sometime in the near future. and, mr. president with that, i'm going to yield the floor and i would suggest the absence of 0 quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call th

the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask consent the call of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to s. res 142. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 142 congratulating the lady aggies of texas a&m university on winning the 2011 national

collegiate associate division women one basketball championship. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. the presiding officer: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be agreed to. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask consent we proceed to s. res 143. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 143 supporting the goals and ideals of national safe digging month. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. reid: i further ask the resolution pw-bl, the preamble pw-bl, there be no -- the preamble be agreed to, any statements related to this measure appear at the appropriate place as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask consent that the appointments at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. reid:: mr. president, we're working on a way to move forward on the small business jobs bill. mr. reid: the staff has been working on this today. we have quite a number of amendments we're trying to get agreement on. we haven't been successful yet. i hope we can be tomorrow because we really need to wrap that bill up in anticipation of the work that we have to do on passing the continuing resolution until the end of this fiscal year. so, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m., wednesday, april 13. following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved

for their use later in the day and the senate proceed to a period of morning business for debate until 3:00 p.m. with senators permd to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with republicans controlling the time from 11:30 to 12:30 for the purposes of a colloquy and the majority controlling the time from 1:00 p.m. until 2:00 p.m. and the majority leader be recognized at 3:00 p.m. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: as i indicated, mr. president, we're working to complete action on the small business jobs bill. chairman landrieu has been so patient in helping us move this forward. in addition, the text of the long-term c.r. has been filed in the house and is available for everyone's review. it's on the internet and people can read it there also. we expect to receive it from the house on thursday. senators are encouraged to come to the floor to debate it tomorrow. senators will be notified when votes are scheduled. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask the following adjourn under the previous order.

mr. reid: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order, following the remarks of senator harkin, which will not exceed 15 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. test.

mr. harkin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. harkin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that amy groson, rosy a mano be granted for -- floor privileges for the remainder of today's session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. harkin: mr. president, there is one thing that every senator agrees on, democrats and republicans alike, with the economic recovery starting to gain strength, it's time to focus attention on reducing deficits.

the current deficits are unsustainable and present a danger to our nation's economic future prosperity. however there is sharp disagreement as how best to achieve that shared goal. along with other democratic senators, i advocate a balanced approach that has spending cuts while continuing to make crucial investments in education, infrastructure, and research, the things that are absolutely essential if we're going stay competitive in a global economy. we know this approach can work because it's what we did under president clinton's leadership in the 1990's. that budget at that time created large surpluses and put us on the track to completely eliminate the national debt within a decade. it also created a brief era of shared prosperity with 22 million new jobs and 116 consecutive months of economic expansion. by contrast most republicans

senators favored an approach i consider to be unbalanced, unfair and highly unlikely to succeed. we've now had nearly a week to evaluate the house republicans budget proposal for 2012 and beyond. the so-called ryan budget. let's look at what this truly radical budget plan would do. it completely dismantles medicare and medicaid. it concentrates two-thirds of its spending cuts on programs serving the most disadvantaged people in our society including seniors and people with disabilities even as it preserves huge subsidies for special interest. it exempts corporations and wealthy individuals from shared sacrifice in order to bring deficits under control. to the contrary this republican tea party plan locks in the bush tax cuts for the wealthy. tax cuts that were passed 10 years ago when we were looking at budget surpluses as far as the eye could see.

well, under our present circumstances the wealthy don't need these tax breaks and we can't afford them. this budget, mr. ryan's and republicans, slashes the tax rate from 35% to 25%. that's the lowest level since 1931. indeed this so-called deficit reduction plan includes tax cuts that would cost $2.9 trillion over the next 10 years compared to the c.b.o. baseline and that's according to the nonpartisan sacks policy -- tax policy institute. this tea party budget plan repeals the new health reform law stripping some 34 million nonelderly americans of health coverage and eliminating all of the assumer protections in the law including the ban on discrimination based on preexisting conditions. this budget of the republicans repeals the dodd-frank wall

street reform law allowing financial manipulators to return to the same reckless practice that's led to the financial collapse to the great recession and to much of our current huge budget deficits. this budget cuts the maximum pell grant award even as more students are enrolling in higher education to give themselves the skills they need for the modern economy. how bizarre, mr. president, that several pundits have called this republican tea party budget plan courageous -- courageous. mr. president, there's nothing courageous about targeting the most vulnerable people in our society for the overwhelming share of cuts. there's nothing courageous about giving another huge tax cut bonanza to those who have seen their incomes skyrocket in recent years. there's nothing courageous about

destroying the retirement security of tens of millions of american seniors including dismantling medicare and hacking away at social security. there's nothing courageous about gutting medicaid, the program that millions of seniors and people with disabilities depend on to pay for things like nursing home care or home health aids. mr. president, let's be clear, there is nothing courageous in this republican tea party budget. to the contrary, i suggest, it is a cowardly budget. it's a bully's budget. and this -- in this budget the powerful and the privileged attack the weak and the vulnerable. we all understand what's going on here. republicans are seizing on the budget crisis as a pretext for ramming through longstanding ideological wish lists. at the state level in iowa wisconsin, ohio, elsewhere

republicans are using the budget crisis as a pretext for an assault on public workers including teachers and firefighters and others. here on capitol hill they're using it to try, as i said, defund the health care reform, to destroy medicare and medicaid, social security, and, yes, to cut tax rates even more deeply for corporations and the wealthiest in our society. this te this tea party budget is an unprecedented assault on middle class and working americans. it would drive down americans' standard of living, shred the economic safety net, reduce access to health care and higher education and do grave damage to our public schools and their ability to prepare the next generation for the jobs of the future. and make no mistake, it's not about reducing budget deficits. republican governors and

republicans here in congress are demanding budget cuts to programs that the middle class relies on, at the same time they continue to push for tax cuts for large corporations and the wealthy. call this what it is. republicans have openly declared class warfare. republican governors have the gall to attack teachers, firefighters, police officers, other public employees. in the words of indiana governor mitch daniels who called them -- quote -- "the privileged elite ." end quote. the privileged elite. our police, our firefighters, our public employees are the privileged elite? why? well, i suppose because they actually have pensions, they have decent jobs, decent wages, access to health care. for heaven's sake, we shouldn't be dragging people down because

they have a middle-class life. we should be working day and night to give every american a decent standard of living, to shore up the middle class rather than tearing it down. i suppose to governor daniels and others, if the middle class are the privileged elite, then i guess the middle class today is -- are those who are making minimum wage, working at dead-end jobs. is that the new middle class? meanwhile, as republicans at the state and national level go after the health care and retirement security of middle-class americans, again, they're going out to pass new tax breaks for those who have already been showered with tremendous breaks in the past. the tax cuts that congressional republicans secured in december, that's what was passed here in december, will add a whopping whopping $354 billion to the deficit this year. even more next year.

the congressional budget office estimates that the tax cuts in the new house budget would cost the treasury $2.9 trillion over ten years. and yet, now these very same republicans claim to be worried about the deficit. well, they're not really fooling anyone. this is not about deficit reduction. it's about ideology. republicans are taking a meat ax to programs for the middle class, everything from cancer research to education to transportation to health care. and they're gutting the safety net for the elderly, the poor and people with disabilities. it's the same old g.o.p. game plan. give huge, unaffordable tax cuts to corporations and the wealthy, enact budget cuts that assist the middle class and the most vulnerable. mr. president, this new tea party republican budget gives new meaning to the word extreme. let's look at what they have

proposed. this budget dismantles medicare, creating a new private voucher program. so future seniors would have to pay out of pocket for many life-saving health care costs. it does nothing to control health care costs. it simply shifts the costs to the elderly individuals. get this: the congressional budget office estimates that by 2030 under the republican budget plan, seniors would have to pay two-thirds of the cost of their health coverage. future seniors would see their out-of-pocket costs more than double, more than double to to $12,500 a year. at the same time, the benefits would be cut in half. in just 20 years, think about that, people who are now in their 40's, looking ahead when they get on medicare, they'll have their benefits cut in half

but they'll pay twice as much for them under the voucher system. this tea party republican budget reopens the prescription drug doughnut hole which we have set in motion to close under the affordable care act. that would require seniors to pay $3,600 a year more for prescription drugs. the republican tea party block grant -- this plan block grants medicaid. it cuts $1 trillion in health care services, which would end vital services that disabled americans depend on like coverage for home health aides, assisted services so they can get a job or nursing homes if that's the only option. by shifting costs to the states, this would worsen our state budget deficits. the republican budget proposal doesn't stop at dismantling the safety net and programs that seniors rely on for a secure

retirement. this budget plan makes profound and des instructive -- destructive cuts to the entire range of programs that underpin the american middle-class standard of living, everything from education, student grants and loans, law enforcement, clean air, clean water, food safety, biomedical research, highways, bridges and infrastructure. in short, all of the programs and services that middle-class americans rely on for a decent way of life. and the programs that enhance the ability of the private sector to grow and provide more jobs. mr. president, the republican assault on the middle class is breathtaking, both in scope and depth. it could not come at a worse time for working americans who are already under enormous strain. it's no secret that people are working harder and longer than ever before, but they still

can't seem to meet the cost of basic, everyday needs like education and transportation, housing, let alone save enough to support themselves in their old age. even before the great recession, working people weren't sharing in our nation's prosperity. the shared prosperity of the years after world war ii created an expanding middle class, a soaring standard of living, but these wages, real wages peaked in the 1970's, and they have been stagnant ever since. think about that. they peaked about 1979. real wages since 1979 have not gone up. and you wonder why the middle class, why americans are so upset about what's going on. they realize this. they may not be able to put it in exact language, but i can tell you middle-class families know what's happened to them. they know that they've lost

their earning power. our middle-class jobs are also being shipped overseas, a trend actually encouraged by our tax code. income and equality in america is reaching third-world levels. job security, savings, pensions are disappearing, along with the american dream. now with working americans just barely making ends meet, just barely holding onto a decent way of life, the republicans have proposed a budget -- make no mistake -- that will destroy what's left of the middle class in this country. i couldn't disagree more strenuously with this approach. the future of our nation depends on our ability to ensure that everyone benefits from economic growth. it means putting policies in place that build a strong and vibrant middle class with good jobs, fair wages, good benefits. that's the america that i want

to see, one where people who work hard and play by the rules can live a decent life. tragically, the tea party budget plan would take us in exactly the opposite direction. it would gut the whole range of programs that support the middle class in this country, dismantle the safety net for those with disabilities and for the poor, a safety net that has been painstakingly created over the last 80 years. this republican budget plan not only turns the clock back to before the great society programs of pell grants and housing and -- and support for people in the middle class, it would turn it back to even before the new deal. it would gut all federal support basically for education. it would all but eliminate federal support for infrastructure, which means we will fall even further behind

china and the european union who are investing massively in everything from ultramodern ports to high-speed rail to state-of-the-art roads and bridges. china right now is investing somewhere between 8% and 10% of its g.d.p. in infrastructure. we're at 2% and going down. indeed, this tea party budget aims to dismantle the federal government as we know it. it proposes to shrink discretionary spending and other mandatory spending from 12% of the budget last year to 6% of the budget in the year 2022, and to just 3.5% of the budget per year in the long run. think about that. it would shrink discretionary spending and other mandatory spending from 12% of the budget last year to about 3.5% of the budget over the long run.

well, that is about the same level of federal spending during the presidency of calvin coolidge nearly a century ago when defense spending was very small and there was very little, if any, support for education or the infrastructure of our country. mr. president, we don't live in the era of calvin coolidge any longer, but this budget would take us back to that time. and adding insult to injury, this budget plan makes a mockery of the concept of shared fries to reduce deficits. apparently, it wasn't enough to bail out the wall street bankers whose reckless gambling and risk taking created the great recession. now we're being asked to cut programs for working americans so wall street can get yet another giant tax cut. this republican tea party budget is built on bad priorities, bad

policy and just plain bad values. as columnist e.j. dione points out, americans can now see -- quote -- "how radical the new conservatives in washington are and the extent to which some politicians would transfer even more resources from the have-notes and the have-a-littles to the have-a-lots." mr. president, going back to the 1930's, the american people have supported and strengthened an unwritten social contract. that social contract says that we will prepare our young, care for our elderly and build a safety net for those who fall, who become disabled or sick. that unwritten social contract says that if you work hard and play by the rules, you're able to rise to the middle class or

even beyond. that social contract says that if you start at the bottom, you have a ladder of opportunity to the middle class. it says that a cardinal rule of government is to provide a ladder of opportunity so that every american can realisticcally aspire to the american dream. but in one fell swoop, this republican budget rips up that social contract. it replaces it with a winner winner-take-all philosophy that tells struggling, aspiring people in communities across america you're on your own. if you're a low-income high school student who can only afford college with the help of a generous pell grant, this budget says tough luck, you're on your own. if you're a working couple with two kids and can't scrape together enough money to purchase decent health insurance, this budget says

tough luck, you're on your own. if you're a poor rural community that needs assistance to pay for a new sewer system or a flood control project, this budget says tough luck, you're on your own. if you're a poor urban community struggling to find funding to create high-quality k-12 public schools for your children, this budget says tough luck, you're on your own. if you're a retiree with serious health problems and can't afford the big out-of-pocket costs in this republican plan to do away with medicare, or if your health insurance company abruptly cancels your policy, this budget says tough luck, you're on your own. if you're a low-income family that counts on federal nutrition assistance and you're trying to decide whether to spend scarce dollars on food or medicine,

this budget says tough luck, you're on your own. mr. president, this would not be the america that we have come to know and love, it's not the kind of america that my grandparents and your grandparents, our grandparents, our fathers and our mothers built for us and for future generations. it's not the america that built the best middle class history has ever seen. this budget is not the kind of america that my friends and neighbors in iowa would find acceptable. so mark my words, this budget is not a courageous budget. as i said, it's a cowrld budget. a bully budget. and the american people will not stand for a un-wise, unbalanced,

unfair assault on their economic security, their way of life and the america that our grandparents and our parents built for you are and for future generations. so, mr. president, i will oppose with every fiber of my being these grossly misguided proposals in every way that i can and i can assure you, mr. president, the american people will not stand for this tea party republican budget either. mr. president, i understand that there's a joint resolution at the desk and i ask for its reading -- first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h.j. res. 37, disapproving the rules submitted by the federal communications commission with respect to regulating the internet and broadband industry practices. mr. harkin: i now ask for a second reading and in order to place the joint resolution on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i object to my own request.

the presiding officer: the objection is heard. the bill will be read the second time on the next legislative day. the senate stands adjourned the senate stands adjourned

the end of the 2011 fiscal year. now a discussion on the budget to deal worked out on friday and the 2012 budget proposals by president obama and budget committee chairman paul ryan. from today's washington journal, this is 40 minutes. >> blumenauer is a democrat from oregon and holds the distinction of a member of the budget committee as well as a member of the ways and means. welcome. >> guest: thank you. >> host: what are your thoughts looming as far as the vote on the budget on senator representative rot yen for 2012? >> guest: well, it's fascinating. people are peeling away the leaders of the onion, what was once proclaimed as being a once

visionary is revealed is kind oo interesting, that it will - largely be a larger deficit in ten years than if congress just0 went home and didn't do anythiny or bold about little money for poor people. now it is a voucher for health care to the insurance companies instead of to the insured. a voucher none the same. it will raise health-care costs in this country. the most fascinating piece is after a hearing, republicans campaigned against slashes to medicare. they take all of those savings to pay for the tax cuts. they go far beyond anything

here fortuitous 30 americans -- for millions of americans. i hope people will see what is inside of it. host: how do they treat entitlement? guest: the main entitlement that has been changed deals with the entitlement for senior citizens to be guaranteed health care in old age. now they are not entitled to the benefits that they have in medicare, unless they are already within the 55 or older -- the younger people will not have an entitlement. the private insurance market did not want to ensure both people, because they were not employable in most cases. they were older and sicker. now they rely on the private market to care for older americans.

they admit that they will reduce the value of this culture overtime. it shatters that entitlement. the partnership that the federal government has had -- elderly, disabled -- by eliminating that partnership and turning it into a block grant that will be ratcheted down. the states are basically on their own. when they look at what is happening in the states around the country, the elderly, poor, disabled, will soon be on their own. host: what will the president proposed this week on his thoughts of how to handle the budget? guest: he has made clear that his approach would be more balanced like the deficit reduction committee and virtually all independent experts. he agrees that it needs to be a balance of revenue and

reductions and some spending. his administration has proposed some cuts in defense. they have been open to change agricultural programs. bear in mind that the president and the democrats in the last congress already engineered a massive change in reducing entitlement costs with the affordable care act, which is going to have savings in excess of $1 trillion. both parties in congress, if they have the courage to accelerate real reforms embedded in the bill, we can save far more. host: this is what one person has to say.

guest: that is nonsense. the ryan budget is. to reduce revenues dramatically , cutting taxes for the most well off. independent analysts agree any way you of one to slap it, it will shift taxes on to middle class americans. the notion somehow that given what we have done already to deal with the reform of health care and now the republicans are

complaining about, because they are not generous enough for special interests. they cannot have it both ways. we are still in a situation where there are opportunities for us. i come from a low cost high value state. they spend about half on medicare. that is people in miami. there are ways that we can bend the curve and improve the quality of health care. adjusting revenue, continuing these efforts. lots of money can be taken out of the department of defense. not moving away from reforming agriculture. we are shipping $147 million a year to brazil and coffee farmers, because we are not

willing to reform our own coffee farming facilities. that is silly. host: the first call is on the republican line from georgia. caller: you guys were in charge. you had the president, the senate. you were in charge and you did not get rid of all of those things. 1% of americans have a perfect credit score. i know how to handle money. not even following simple eighth grade math. you are only pulling in enough money to feed a gopher. guest: bear in mind that what we

saw in the last congress was a complete collapse of an irresponsible legislation from our republican friends in the senate. they did everything to have a super majority of 60 votes. we had over 300 bills that passed through the house that stopped in the senate. there are more things that could of been done in health care in defense and a whole range of things. people were not willing, whether it was simple judicial confirmations or dealing with moving forward of environmental protection, did not want to do it. this is unprecedented in terms of grinding the senate to a halt. unlike what my republican friends said on april fool's day in the house, it still takes

both chambers. we would have liked to pass one thing from the house to the other. article one section 7 still applies. there is a dynamic beer. there is not anybody who is pretending that we should be making some changes. we will advance the budget out of ever budget committee that will be something that could be enacted into law that will not strip away health care from our elderly and most vulnerable and move in directions that i think the american people want to. it does not have to be that hard. we will probably have it this wednesday. it will be available online.

i think it will be the website of the house democratic budget committee. host: pa., thanks for waiting. caller: this thing about the deficit, any business cannot stay in business unless there is enough revenue. and non-profit cannot remain without having enough revenue. the tax cut from president reagan was going from 70% down to 35% at the time. now president obama wants to take it back up where it was before. to do that would bring in 8 million over 10 years the top two% when reagan did what he

did, to 1000 for couples the top 2% put $14 trillion into their pockets. 14 trillion. all he is asking for is to go up 800 billion. that is not enough. guest: the caller makes an important point. historically, tax breaks have been higher than what today are now. they are just pulling back to what the tax rates were for eight years under bill clinton. that is where we created something like 17 million jobs. with the reduced tax rate under george bush, we had a net loss of private-sector jobs.

there is an opportunity without being punitive to be able to restore some revenue that comes into the federal government. there are other areas that republicans turn their backs on. a federal aviation has passed twice. there were some 80which sounds , with their plans, you are able to look through the roof because the top of the airplane has ripped open. these are things that are acceptable to the industry, would take billions of dollars to do with airline safety and necessary improvements to the system, turning their back on

it. these are things that are not rocket science, are not going to bring the economy to a halt. we have been there before and a lot of people and that we should be there now. host: we have heard reference to the bowls-simpson commission. most of those reckitt -- recommendation were ignored. guest: that is not my approach. they lay out a reasonable path. the numbers add up. my point, at that juncture, was, let's move on the things that we agree on and debate where we are not. instead, we are having a very unrealistic effort. it is not going to pass the senate, and would fundamentally change the partnership that americans have relied upon, and would increase health care costs

for all americans while reducing what the federal government invests. and we know who is going to pick up the tab for that. host: end on the independent line. pennsylvania. -- ed on the independent line. caller: there is a myth that the rich are creating all sorts of jobs in this country. they are creating jobs in china. when bush introduced the tax cuts, where were they building? they were tripping over themselves to start building in china. ronald reagan would be rolled over in his grave today. as far as feeding the beast, we are making the debt so big by giving tax cuts to the rich. defense spending, most of the money goes to the industry.

maybe the workers should get some. bush tax cuts, $2 trillion. two wars where most of the money went to defense and private contractors. prescription drugs. almost $1 trillion went to the prescription drug companies. people do not realize that with the bush tax cuts, they put off -- they cut off billions of dollars to the states. guest: your caller has a very important point. we are seeing record profits and corporate america, a few trillion dollars, at last check, that people are sitting on. and they have been able to achieve those profits actually with employment being down.

they have delayed hiring. and we are seeing, just because of the bizarre set of circumstances we have now, in some cases, corporations farm borrowing money to pay dividends. there is another stealth tax that is being inflicted on middle america, particularly, the elderly americans. record low interest rates. when someone gets $0.10 for every $1,000 in their savings account, people who relied on that, are being decimated. this is a tax that falls disproportionately on the elderly, middle america. i would hope that we have a more comprehensive approach, going forward, and we not put the burden on folks who have really

not done anything wrong. they have played by the rules all their lives, save, and have been dealt, i think, an unfortunate hand. host: what do you make of the continuing resolution? what were you surprised with most? guest: it is depressing that we focus on things like -- i expected it republicans to go after public broadcasting even though it is widely acceptable by most americans. i expected them to go after the epa as well. but cutting money for the pregnant women with infants child program -- that was surprising. going into the agricultural system, which has lots of

opportunities for savings, but instead, cuts the conservation payments that goes to farmers which provide the environmental benefits for everyone. that was extremely shortsighted. these are commitments we have made to local communities to give back a small amount of the oil will tay's -- royalties, but instead, we are seeing people having to shut down state parks. frankly, if the public really knew about these things, they would be unpopular. host: do you expect back -- passage on the vote? guest: the issue is no longer the money. that is clear when the negotiators, more than a week ago, were a couple billion

apart. actually, democrats have been willing to give republicans what they originally wanted. but is this really about ideology? they are imposing their will on the residents of the district of columbia, treating it like a colony, on things that have no impact on the federal deficit at all. the bottom line here is, if the ideologues want to push for more, anything can happen, but it is clearly something we are going to see with the debt ceiling, which is a much more consequential discussion. host: should it be raised? guest: it will be. americans will be paying their debt. right now, despite the loose talk about america becoming

, actually, investors are investing tens of billions of dollars every week in the united states. our interest rates are the lowest they have been since 1971. people messed around with the debt ceiling, even hinting that we may not go good on our obligations, it will strangle the economic recovery and add to the deficit for more than they are talking about extracting through some of these unfortunate budget cuts. host: should a decision on the debt limit the kaptur itself, or tied to spending reforms? guest: i will support a clean increase in the debt ceiling, even though i am in the minority. historically, you try to put the

onus on the people in charge. but this is looking at the delicate balance of our recovery, because there is uncertainty and run the world. there is arm wrestling going on about the future of the budget. i make clear, even though i am in the minority, i will vote for a clear debt ceiling increase because america will pay its debts, and we need to retain that confidence. host: charles from bella vista, arkansas. caller: you are just proving to me that you would say and do anything for a vote. we borrow $0.40 on every dollar that we spend. $16 trillion in debt. out of that, we owe $400 billion in interest alone. you people were upset about

trying to save $37 billion. 1% pace 44% of the taxes. 10% pay 9%. 40% of people pay no taxes. we are almost to the point where the gimme-gimmes exceed the people that do not pay a tax. it is going to be worse than greece. earl, there is no way we get out of this debt, unless we do it immediately and soon. guest: it is interesting, i hope the caller takes a hard look at paul ryan's budget. this is taking away the guarantee for seniors for medicare.

it slashes all sorts of programs, but because it is not a balanced approach, because it slashes taxes further, it does not come into balance until 2040. as i said at the beginning of the show, will actually have more of a deficit that if we did nothing. it is not true that the majority of americans do not share in supporting government programs. as a practical matter, a typical american household actually pays more than hedge fund managers on wall street. it is true that some people do not have a federal tax liability but they are paying

huge amounts in social security and medicare tax. 70% of the people that i represent a more for social security and medicare than they do for income tax. but as a percentage of their income, to say middle americans are not paying their fair share is a mistake. kovach in time and look at the money that was -- go back in time and look at the money that was paid by corporations 30 years ago. the percentage was much higher. now it is down to about 6%. i welcome a conversation about what america's revenues system should look like. i think this is one area where there is bipartisan interest. host: tax code? guest: diving into the tax code.

all sorts of provisions that no longer make sense or are unfair. the "alternative minimum tax" that was a tax on millionaires who did not pay their taxes, has now morphed into a tax on millions of american families because they pay property taxes, income taxes, they do with retirement. no billionaire pays the alternative minimum tax because capital gains, a carried interest, is not covered. your caller raises an interest that i want to explore. the tax code is unfair, counterproductive, it leaks money, and it is expensive to administer. host: it makes money how? guest: what are called tax expenditures whether it is for special interests or the deduction that some of us get

for our homes. credits, deductions, exemptions in the tax code now cost over $1 trillion a year, and they are going up. one of the things that was mentioned in the bowles-simpson reports included tax expenditures. including defense, medicare, tax expenditures. those are the largest areas and they are increasing more rapidly. host: does that mean modification or elimination of tax expenditures? guest: there are a number of items there that are deeply ingraine .. popular. there are probably some that no

longer need to be in the code. there are some that need to be streamlined. why should a corporate ceo, for personal use, use a corporate jet and pay less than someone working in his company to be in a middle seat in coach? our tax code, faa regulations, create this bizarre regulation, which invites people to be skeptical. host: would you keep the tax code at 35%? guest: we could increase that rate, broaden the base, deal with other things. there were proposals that came out of the bush treasury that moved toward a lower . i think this will be a

productive conversation. >> host: gene, independent line, on with representative john. >> caller: i'm calling about the debt ceiling and that i think you've got them over a barrel on the republican side. if you get all the democrats together and just run a clear, a clear bill up to the president, they're not going to let this country default in their billing. they are not going to let the world fall apart. they're not going to do it. it's baa loanny of them to tact this bill and different bills on the debt ceiling. all it is is to scare the democrats into come down to them. you touched on the ryan bill. i'll tell you one thing, if that

thing ever passed, you guys are going to be in trouble for the simple reason we've got that in wisconsin, and i'm a telling you, it's nothing but a big mess, and we're going to end up paying more taxes than it was before. >> host: thank you. >> guest: well, i would hope that no member of congress would reach the point where in exchange for some ideological or personal, political hostage taking that they would take down dealing responsibly with our obligations with our international debt, but i will tell you having talked to some of these people, having listened to them, having watched what they have brought to the floor of the house of representatives and amended in the continuing

resolution, i think it's safe to say that some have a very different view of reality from where i think most americans are. this is -- and we watched this, i don't know quite how to describe this drama that we've gone through for the last couple months where you wouldn't think anybody would put this amount of pain of inefficiency, putting the federal operation on a string and yanking it back and forth. it's not just a few billion dollars that we're at risk for the shutdown. the cost of putting the federal government in this limbo has been billions of lost

productivity. i have contracts in my district where people were going to do work, for example, for the navy, couldn't execute the contract and put people to work. we don't know what these people would do. i hope the majority will not play this game, but it's not clear. >> host: mike friedman asks what is the hurry about the debt? we have people without jobs hurting. that's the emergency. >> guest: this is one of the things that disappointed many of us because we've been in session now three and a half months, and there hasn't been an effort to actually boost employment. there have been ideologically driven things for planned parenthood, big bird and public broadcasting. there's been argumenting over abortion that almost shut down the federal government, but there's opportunities for us to move forward.

>> leaving this to go live to a discussion on change in the middle east. one of the hosts is the government of qa qatar, and a little bit later, secretary of state hillary clinton speaking at the forum. we expect her remarks at 8:30 eastern. live right now on c-span2. >> unfortunately, i can't see any of you because of the lights in my eyes, but it's wonderful to have you all here. those of you who have been with us for the day in our intensive sessions, both the preliminary sessions and dialogue sessions, i hope you have enjoyed them, and i hope you have been stimulated to continue the dialogue tomorrow. as many of you will know, this

is the first time that we've been able to hold the forum in washington, and it's a special opportunity to welcome others from the washington policymaking community, from the diplomatic community, from the american-muslim community, from the congress and senate, and so to all of you, we extend a very warm welcome as well this evening. the way we're going to proceed is as follows: we're going to have two speeches before you get to eat your dinner, and then we will have dinner, and then we'll be joined by the secretary of state while we're having dinner, and she will then current

address you as the after dinner keynote speaker. it's in that context that i want to extend a very warm welcome and introduce you to ahmad abin abullah al-mahmoud who is the minister of state for foreign affairs and the government of qatar. minister al-mahmoud has a distinguished career in the foreign service including as qatar's ambassador to the united states in the 1980s. he then rose to be under secretary in the ministry, and in 1995, he was appointed as minister of state for foreign affairs under the foreign

minister bin jasam. we're very glad to have the opportunity to have -- to hear from administer al-mahmoud tonight. jasim would have very much liked to join us, but unfortunately, he has urgent business in delhar where he is hosting the contact group for libya where qatar is playing a very important leading role in the coalition that is involved in protecting the citizens of libya. he has been a partner of the brookings institution in establishing the u.s.-islamic world forum back in 2003.

he has been a steadfast supporter of our efforts here, and it's only because of his urgent business that he was unable to join us this evening, but we are very grateful to minister al-mahmoud who kindly agreed to join us and driver a special presentation on behalf of the government of qatar. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming minister ahmad abin abullah al-mahmoud. [applause] ♪ ♪ ♪

>> good evening, everybody. i am going to speak in arabic, so i will start. [speaking in arabic] [speaking in arabic] [speaking in arabic] [speaking in arabic]

>> translator: toad we are -- today we are honored with these proceedings and inspired and hopeful and believe in the importance of succeeding and achieving the foreign goals and projects to the best of the interests of the islamic countries and the u.s.. last year, we proposed a number of recommendations around the general policies that governments and nations should implement through practical measures and develop by the forum. we agreed to build partnership and solid darety -- solidarity between the islamic world and the united states.

we might have different views on the reality today, and in deciding how the situation would proceed in some muslim countries, but we hope that reform be the foundation that we build upon after all current crisises and evolutions in the middle east have ended. the muslim world might have witnessed such events in various locations in the past, and overcome outcomes. there may have -- they may have

suffered from the lack of transparency, the absence of public engagement, underminding of public opinion and individual capabilities or civil rights, and the rule of law. islam is a central path. achieving development and fighting extremism and ensuring immediate responsibilities, we must -- and fighting the occupation, we must bear that in mind in the ways we act to build a more humane and powerful society. through this aim of the forum to achieve effective partnerships

in actions and not by words. we should build on all previous achievements and on the major efforts and huge sacrifices made towards reform. to build more civilized and prosperous and stable societies. the relationship between the united states and the islamic world is not new. at this point, difference exists. commonground should be built -- common ground should be built upon. it is important to objectively understand the situation facing the muslim countries in order to

narrow the gap between both sides and to have real understanding on resolving conflicts. mr. president obama in his cairo speech tackled seven key issues in the u.s.-islamic relations including political, social and economic issues. he likened those common interests and mutual respect and the fact that america and the islamic world never contradict each other, but they share common principles.

they meet on those, on the common principles, and they are the principles of justice, progress, tolerance, human dignity which consists of the sound basis of the relationship without the need for rivalry. on this occasion, i would like to confirm that these responsibilities are not limited to resolving political issues where the u.s. rule is apparent, but that includes other responsibilities such as promotion of the democracy, political reform, economic and social development, combating extremism, and enhancing the

role of civil society. here, we must recall the importance of resolving the middle east issue. especially the palestinian problem with a just and comprehensive solution based on international legitimacy of resolutions and principles of land for peace and relevant other references. the current situation in the middle east makes it -- makes us very weary and cautious not to fall behind the wheels of domination of economic interests only, but to build on the developments in social, intellectually, political, and economic conditions in the

region. it was very clear from the onset that the condition could not be sustained as they were, and that reform was coming and the demands of the people would definitely surface, and geopolitical changes are issues that can be bypassed. the wisdom requires us to interact, and justice -- when justice was due, the justice was denied. when development was needed, there was no development. when education was necessary to improve, it did no occur. even freedom did not -- was not respected. democracy and participation was due, it never happened,

therefore, we, indeed, are seeing today a new middle east. finally, i thank you all and all those who contributed to organizing this forum, specifically, the u.s. department of state and the brookings institution. i wish you good luck in all the proceedings, and we will be pleased to see you in qatar next year. my god's peace and blessings be upon you. [applause] >> well, there you have it. we'll be there next year.

is that -- [inaudible] thank you very much minister al-mahmoud. i couldn't help but reflect as you were speaking about how reform, indeed, revolution has come to the middle east, and now it is a new middle east that we face, just how dray dramatic the changes have been in that part of the muslim world over the last three or four months, and we are indeed in a very new situation. one could never imagine that the pace of change could happen so fast or that it could spread throughout the middle east and arab world. one could never have imagined that the arab league, the gcc,

and the oic, the organization of the islamic conference, would call upon the international community led by the united states and nato to intervene in the arab world on behalf of arab citizens against a regime in libya that was killing its citizens, and so we are indeed in a new middle east, and because the middle east is at the heart of the muslim world, we are in a new muslim world as well, and it's in that context that the organization of the islamic conference now has come into its own in a very important

way, and that's why we are very glad that the secretary general has joined us for this conference and is going to say a few words of greeting on behalf of the organization of the islamic conference. secretary general is a distinguished turkish academic writing numerous articles, booings, and -- books and papers on science, the history of science, islamic culture, turkish culture, relations of the western and arab world, and he's been with the oic since 1980. he originally is the founding director general of the research

center for islam imhistory of the arts in istanbul. he's boosted the organization and helped it to play an important leadership role in the muslim world, so, ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming secretary general. [applause] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> ladies and gentlemen, guests, good evening. dinner speeches are often not as political as the dinner itself, and given the indication of today's executive meal, i don't believe that i would be able to compete with it, however, i assure you that i would not keep you too long before the delicious meal before us, and i would not like to spoil your appetite. we have already witnessed the excellent interactions this morning in the course of the fist -- first day of the forum. as we say morning shows the day, and therefore we can easily guess how meaningful would be the remaining two days of the forum. i have already mentioned in the morning that united

states-islamic world forum is indeed a timely initiative given the international affairs. at this point, i would be amiss not to mention the lord of his hieness for the leadership as well as the pay -- patronage. my sincere thanks goes to the brookings institute for their partnership making this forum an annual event of everybody's likings. ladies and gentlemen, we can talk about a lot of options or ways to find solutions to problems and challenges that we face in today's world. this evening, i would like to focus on the single aspect of the possible solutions to our problems with specific reference to core human values.

this is a fact that cannot and should not be ignored. it should rather be strengthened by the west and the east or for that matter, the united states and the islamic world alike. i have also been advocating political concerns at the international level should not be dealt with from security perspective only. we need to identify the root causes of these challenges that we are facing and address them from the angles from which would be effective in mitigating these challenges. you know, i see the work from this perspective and came up with two documents. the continue for action in 2005 and the new charter of our organization in 2008. these two documents identify

areas with the issue of underdevelopment coupled with social injustice and international biased behavior as some of the causes that need to be addressed with priority. thanks to world peace today, our crisis imnating from different conflicts. i believe that not only resolution of conflict, but an education of conflicts to a certain extent is possible. just by addressing the cause of concerns of the present world, we can advance resolutely towards achieving this cherished goal. had we been utilizing all the resources of the efforts that we up vest in -- invest in resolving conflicts or forced measures for education

and libbuation of poverty in our societies, it certainly would have better impact on conflict resolution around the world. by ensuring the basic rights to food, clothing, shelter, and health to our people, we would have done a better job in reducing theceps of frustration among our people which eventually pushes them towards radical ideas and means igniting conflict situations. education and willing development and empowerment, freedom of opinion and expression, respect human dignity come at the next stage. all these factors translate themselves in two words called by the oic which are keys to the effective way of facing the

challenges of current century -- moderation and modernization. this comes through the development of the middle class, the class that has the taste of modernization, for proper education, better understanding, and an open outlook to usher the era of moderation in societies that remain backward and bring them in a complete -- and bring a complete end to radical and extreme thoughts and processes. however, we should not forget that not only social injustice, but international treatment to certain societies, vis-a-vis, others, plays a crucial role in creating crisis that stifles peace and prosperity.

ladies and gentlemen, let me conclude by what we at the oic are doing in these areas. we have created a $10 billion poverty fund for the destitute of our member states. we adopt a special program for the development of africa. we initiated major projects for the development of science, technology, and innovation sector of the muslim world. we established center for women development towards their proper empowerment in the society. we created partnership with the united states and others to develop partners on house, science, and technology, and other sectors. we ensure the respect of core human values as suggested by islam. we finalized the establishment of oic and independent permanent commission on human rights to promote human right issues in

our member states. we respect freedom and succeeded in creating the broad based consensus on combating religious profiling, stereotyping, and intolerance. our cooperation with the united states was specific mention to the personal involvement in the matter encourages us to further our engagement between the united states and the muslim world. we encouraged good diligence in our member states. we believe with sincere efforts invested in them, this step definitely gives better results letting us be on the road of peace, stability, and prosperity. bless enjoy the evening, and bone a petite.

thank you all for your patience, thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much, secretary general. he literally talked through supper three times today. ladies and gentlemen, please enjoy your meal, and we'll be back with the secretary of state when you are finished. thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] ♪ ♪ ♪ >> breaking away here so the

participants can have dinner. secretary of state hillary clinton is scheduled to speak at the forum later tonight. we'll have her remarks live in an hour 15 minutes from now at 8:45 eastern. this is the first time the u.s.-islamic forum is convening in washington. on tomorrow's "washington journal," we discuss budget negotiations with vick why hartzler. it begins live at 7 a.m. eastern on c-span.

>> by the end of this week, congress is expected to vote on a measure to fund the government through the end of the year. here are some comments from bernie sanders about the deal reached on friday. this is 30 minutes. >> mr. president, we are at an extraordinary cross roads both from a moral perspective as well as an economic perspective, and the reality today is i think as most americans understand is that the middle class of our country is collapsing over the last ten years income went down by $2500. millions of americans have lost their jobs, secured new jabs at

-- jobs at substantially lower pay. younger workers are finding it very, very hard to get a job at a livable wage. furthermore, mr. president, what we don't talk about terribly often here on the floor of the senate or certainly in the corporate media is the rather unfortunate reality that in the united states, we have the most unequal distribution of income and of wealth of any major think on earth. today, the top 1% of earners makes 23% of all income. top 1% earns 23% of every dollar, and that is more than the bottom 50%. top 1% makes more money than the bottom 50%. the percentage of income going to the top, 1%, mr. president, nearly tripled since the 1970s.

between 1980 and 2005, 80%, 850 dlsh 80% of all income went to the top 1%. today when we talk about distribution of wealth, not income, the numbers are frankly beyond belief. today in america if you can believe it the wealthiest 400 americans, 400 americans, a very small number out of a nation of over 300 million people, own more wealth than the bottom 150 million americans, 400 and that gap between the very, very rich and everybody else is growing wider. mr. president, i don't have to describe economically what's

going on in this country because almost everybody understands it. real unemployment today is not 8.9%, but closer to 16%. today in america, 50 million people have no health insurance. today in america, our seniors and disabled vets understand that they have not received a social security caller in three years. what we start with, mr. president, when we look at america today is a middle class that is disacking, poverty that is increasing, and the people on top doing phenomenally well. begin that reality, one might think that the congress would be actively involved in trying to protect the middle class and working families, and lower income people, but if one believed that, one would be

sorely mistaken. mr. president, just last december, four months ago, congress passed legislation to provide huge tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires by extending the bush tax cuts to the top 2% and by even more by lowering the estate tax for the top three tenths at 1%. at a time when the people on top are already doing phenomenally well, what congress did against my vote is make the wealthiest people even wealthier, so four months ago after giving huge tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires, growing the deficit, our republican friends and some democrats come back saying well, now we have a real deficit problem. we made the problem worse in

december, so now we have to deal with the deficit, and we'll do it by making huge cuts in areas that americans depend upon. we are looking at the robin hood prince pl in -- principle in reverse. we are taking from millions of families who struggle to survive and give it to million -- millionaires and billionaires. to me, it's immoral and very, very wrong. i'll tell you about cuts coming in this 2011 budget. in times of soaring fuel prices in the state of vermont, and i'm sure in minnesota, people heat with oil. the cost is going up.

the low income home energy assistance program lihe would be cut. in vermont, people who use the lihe program are low income senior citizens, so we give tax breaks to millionaires, and then we have the low income senior citizens say sorry, you may have to go cold. at a time when the cost of college education is getting unaffordable for many, many low and moderate income families in this country, hundreds of thousands of young people have given up their college dream because of the high cost of college, pell grants would be reduced by an estimated $35 billion over ten years including a nearly $500 million cut this year, and pell grants are the major source of federal funding to help low and moderate income college students go to school. mr. president, at a time when 50

million americans have no health insurance, community health centers would be cut by $600 million. it's an issue i worked very, very hard on. community health centers provide access to primary health care, dental care, low cost prescription drugs, and mental health counseling for some 20 million americans right now. our hope was to expand that to 40 million americans, and when you do that, you save money because people do not end up in the emergency room. they do not end up in the hospital sicker than they should have been. $600 million for community health centers were cut. children's health insurance program cut by $3.5 billion, a time when poverty is increasing, women with children, nutrition children for low income pregnant

women is cut by $500 million. at a time when we have such high unemployment rates and we want to put americans back to work rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, including our rail system which is now far behind, europe, japan, and even china, federal funding for high speed rail is eliminated in the budget we're going to be voted on very soon representing the cut of $2.9 billion. public transportation will be cut by nearly a billion, a 20% reduction. mr. president, i know in vermont, and i expect all over this country, local communities are struggling with their budgets, police departments are not getting the budgets and the manpower that they need, and yet in this budget that we'll be voting on, local law enforcement funding would be cut by $296 million. at a time when homelessness is

increasing, when we need more low income housing, public housing would be cut by $605 million. mr. president, that is the 2000 budget agreement that was just reached a few days ago, and what is absolutely incredible about that budget is that deficit reduction falls totally on the backs of low and moderate income families, on people who will not be able to get health care at community health centers, young people who will not be able to go to college, senior citizens who will not be able to heat their homes in the winter time, that's where this budget is balanced, on the backs of the weak, vulnerable, the children, the elderly, and the poor, and yet, at the same time, as the wealthiest people become wealthier, this budget does not

ask for one penny, one penny from millionaires and billionaires. at a time when major corporation after major corporation enjoys huge tax loopholes, so not only do they avoid paying any federal income taxes, in many cases such as general electric, they actually get a rebate from the irs. this budget does not ask compt america to pay one penny more in corporate income taxes, and that's where we are in the 2011 budget, and now we're looking in a short period of time at the 2012 budget, and, mr. president, if you think this 2011 budget is a moral and economic disgrace, wait until you hear what this 2000 budget, the so-called paul ryan tea party budget, which as

i understand it will be voted on in the house likely passing later this week. that budget will slash trillions of dollars from medicare converting medicare into a voucher program meaning that seniors will have to pay substantially more for their health care than they currently do, and, mr. president, the question that has not been answered about is if you are or will be when this ryan budget goes into an effect, a senior citizen living on $14,000-$15,000 a year of which millions of seniors live, how will you come up with thousands and thousands of dollars to pay for your cancer treatment or the other problems that senior citizens have. how will you do it? there's no money available for you to do it.

what ryan's budget does is demand low income seniors pay for money with money they don't have. what happens? i'm not sure i've heard that answer. if you are a low income senior citizen and you are asked to come up with thousands of dollars out of your pocket and you don't have that money, what do you do? the ryan budget savages medicaid, education, the environment, infrastructure, and other programs that tens of millions of americans depend upon, but here is the kicker. we savage medicare, medicaid, education, and many other programs that moderate and middle class families depend upon in order to give even more tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country and to the largest corporations. after savaging health care in america for middle income and low income families, the ryan

budget would reduce the tax rates for the wealthiest people in the country from 35% to 25% corporate income taxes the same level at 35% or 25%. i suspect there's people listening to me now who just don't believe it. they say, come on, you're not serious about it. at a time when the middle class is collapsing and the rich get richer, you're not telling me people in the house are about to vote on a budget giving huge tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires and to large corporations, and then cut back and throw millions more off the health care? you're not really serious. check it out. i am serious. this is exactly what the ryan tea party budget which will likely pass which the house has in mind. mr. president, as i began saying we are at a pivotal moment in

the history of this country, and that is whether or not we move in a sense into an al gar ky form of society where a few people on top have incredible amounts of wealth, incredible amounts of political power, while the middle class disappears and poverty increases. that's where we are right now, and i would hope very much that the american people engage in this debate and to tell members of the senate to tell members of the house that it is morally wrong and very poor economics to cut back on programs desperately needed by working families while giving huge tax breaks to people who absolutely don't need that. mr. president, will that, i would yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.

>> on c-span2, a discussion about federal communications regulation of the internet and net neutrality.

state department spokesman mark toner said today that the u.s. supports the marketing of libyan crude oil by qatar against fighting against gadhafi. he confirmed they marketed 1 million barrels of crude among other topics. this is 50 minutes, and we'll watch this until secretary of state hillary clinton speaks at 8:45 eastern time. [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon, everyone, happy tuesday. welcome to the state department, just a couple things at the top, and then i'll talk your question -- questions, plural -- i imagine you'll have more than one. secretary clinton did meet with

qatar this mornings leading up to other meetings of course leading up to united states officials including president obama later this week. they did discuss a wide range of regional and bilateral issues including the ongoing situation in libya, and the secretary had the opportunity during that meeting to thank him for qatar's hosting of this week's meeting of the libyan contact group as well as qatar's support for u.n. support resolution 1973 and operation unified protecter. as you know, she'll also be meeting this afternoon with -- >> [inaudible] on the meeting, it's just burns, feltman, and gordon who are there? >> correct. >> jean suspect there? >> i'll double check on that. >> [inaudible] >> i didn't, -- sorry, pete

could haved. >> [inaudible] >> i'm aware of the travels, but i don't have any details. >> or whether your officials attending plan to meet with them while there? >> i can find out, but not at this point, no. >> what do you understand his capacity there? >> again, i refer you to the qa that authorities. they are running the meeting, and they can provide more details on it. secretary clinton is meeting with the senior daneian minister to further discuss the situation in libya regarding the meetings in london. they'll discuss other bilateral issues including the recent formation of the new senior -- jordan government and other middle east peace efforts. the united states wants to express its deepist sympathy for the loss of life and injuries caused by the bombing of the

subway on april 11. we condemn this hain yows act that demonstrates complete disregard for human life, and in this moment of sorrow, we offer our sympathy to the families and loved ones of those injured or killed. that's all i have for the top. i'll take your questions. >> on libya, there seems to be some unhappiness in europe among your european nato allies, in particular your first ally ever, france, and its -- and britain seems to be teaming up on you wanting more u.s. military, a big bigger u.s. role in the operation. are there any plans to increase that role to go back to where it was at the beginning? >> matt, i'm aware of the

remarks, and you know, i don't know that they were necessarily ganging up on us. i think they were commenting on nato's tempo of operations, and i believe that nato briefed earlier on this issue today, and addressed some of those concerns. we have ever confidence in nato's ability to carry out the tasks and enforcing the arms embargo as well as the no-fly zone as well as the protection of civilians in libya. as the president said, the u.s. and other key partners had capabilities that they brought to this operation up front, and then our role would diminish as nato stepped up and took command and control of the operation -- god less you -- and that's what's happened, and we have confidence in nato's ability to carry out the mission. >> you talked about nato as an extraterrestrial being from another planet with occasional

meetings. you are the largest country and contributor to nato, the largest budgetary contributing to nato. the question is is the united states willing as a central member of nato willing to increase its contribution to the current operations? >> well, we feel we contributed a great deal to the operation so far. by no means do i refer to nato as an extraterrestrial being. it's the most successful military alliance in history, and it does have the capability and structure to carry out a mission like this, and we believe its doing its job effectively. there's no change in our posture. i just would note that secretary gates and others have said that the u.s., of course, has needed

would help out if requested in other capacities and other capabilities, but really our role has receded in this mission. >> just to follow-up on that, i believe there's been no such request from nato to the united states; is that correct? >> that's my understanding. >> and is it correct that the united states is no longer -- no longer has any of the -- and courteney will, i hope, correct me here -- any of the a-10 warthog aircraft currently being used in the libya operation? >> well, i would refer you to the pentagon for the details on that or to courteney -- [laughter] >> i'm not the official spokesperson. >> just to add on to the previous answer, i mean, we are still, as you correctly noted, we are a part of nato, providing support for nato. we have air bases and assets in the mediterranean, and those are

obviously being brought to bear for this operation, but, you know, there's been no other further request for assistance that i'm aware of, and -- yeah, go ahead. >> did you confirm or deny that the u.s. has not said no to any of the latest nato requests in last three days? >> i'm sorry, can i confirm -- >> or deny that the u.s. has not said no to any of the explicit nato requests? >> again, those are operational details. i'd refer you to nato and to u.s. forces in -- yeah? >> on the broader question. >> yes. >> is there not any consternation in this building or town on the fact that the europeans, the french, and the british in particular, dragged you into this kicking and screaming? they agreed at the beginning that the u.s. would play a big role, and then have a limited role. you did not want leadership after the first couple of days,

and now they've turned around and done exactly what you expected them not to, or exactly what you had been promised, but what they promised you that they wrownt do which is to ask you to resume that leadership role. there's no frustration about that? >> look, again, i'm not going to parse the french foreign minister's comments today. >> it's not just the french foreign ministers. the defense minister as well. >> we believe they are carrying out the mission successfully. obviously, there's challenges on the ground targeting those types of things that they're addressing, and we believe doing better, but -- and i really want to clarify. you said kicking and screaming. look, this was a joint international effort. when we saw a situation affecting the most urgently the