prove yourself worthy of the valor of our troops. one way, one way that members of the united states senate and house can prove ourselves worthy of that valor is to pass amendments like this amendment. to force as best we can officials in pakistan to do the right thing for our troops, for their families and for our country, but also to do the right thing for their own people. people who live in pakistan threatened every day by i.e.d.'s. so, mr. president, i'll conclude just by saying that we have an opportunity to prove ourselves worthy of the valor of our troops in passing -- and passing this amendment is one such way to do 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.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: mr. president, i would ask consent to set aside the pending amendment. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: mr. president, i would just very simply call up three amendments. the first amendment is amendment number 1215. the second is amendment number 1139 -- 1-1-3-9 -- and also the third one is 1140. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from pennsylvania, mr. casey, proposes amendments numbered 1215, 1139, and 1140.

mr. casey: and i would ask consent to set those three amendments aside. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: i would yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. lef mr. levin: mr. presiden? the presiding officer: the senator from michigan.

mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that on thursday, november 17, senator bennet be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. levin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask for regular order on the levin-mccain amendment. the presiding officer: the amendment is the regular order. it is now pending. mr. levin: i thank the presiding officer. now i ask unanimous consent that the pending amendments -- i withdraw that, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to that the senate proceed to calendar number 232, h.r. 1039. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 232, h.r. 1039, an act to protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the judicial conference, and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate proceeds to the measure. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the committee-reported amendment be agreed to, the bill as amended be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate and any related statements be printed in the record as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent now that the banking committee be discharged and the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r.

2056. the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate proceeds to the measure. the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 2056, an act to instruct the inspector general of the federal deposit insurance corporation to study the impact of insured depository institution failures, and for other purposes. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the levin amendment at the desk be agreed to, the bill as amended be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table and that any statements relating to the bill appear at this point in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent now that the senate proceed to the consideration of calendar number 221, h.r. 3321. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 221, h.r. 3321, an act to facilitate the hosting in the united states of the 34th america's cup by authorizing certain eligible vessels to participate in

activities related to the competition and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate proceeds to the measure. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent that a feinstein substitute amendment which is at the desk be agreed to, the bill as amended be read a third time and passed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate and any statements related to the bill be placed in the record at the appropriate place as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: mr. president, i now ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of calendar number 53, s. 99. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 53, s. 99, a bill to promote the production of melitonin 99, and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate proceeds to the measure. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute be reported, the big a man amendment which is at the desk be agreed to, the committee-reported amendment as amended be agreed to, the

budgetary paygo statement at the desk be read. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the statement. the clerk: the senator from north dakota, mr. conrad. this is the statement of budgetary effects of paygo legislation for s. 99 as amended. total budgetary effects of s. 99 for the five-year statutory paygo scorecard, zero dollars. total budgetary effects of s. 99 for the ten-year statutory paygo scorecard zero dollars. also submitted as part of this record for the table prepared by the congressional budget office which provides additional information. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the bill be passed, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table with no intervening action or debate and any related statements be printed in the record as if read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: mr. president, i now ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. res. 332 which was submitted earlier today by nor hagan. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 332, a resolution supporting the goals and ideals of american education

week. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. levin: mr. president, i ask the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table with no intervening action or debate and that any statements relating to the measure be printed in the record at the appropriate place. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: i now ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. res. 333, which was submitted earlier today by senator feinstein. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 333, welcoming and commending the government of japan for extending an official apology to the united states former prisoners of war for the pacific war and establishing in 2010 a visitation program to japan for surviving veterans, family members and descendants. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate proceeds to the measure. mr. levin: i ask, mr. president, the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table with no intervening

action or debate and that any statements relating to the measure be printed in the measure at the appropriate place. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: mr. president, i now ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, the senate adjourn until 9:00 a.m. tomorrow, friday, november 18, 2011. that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. that following any leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of s. 1867, the defense authorization act. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: we'll continue to debate the defense authorization bill tomorrow. if senators want to offer amendments, they should come to the floor tomorrow. there will be no votes tomorrow. the next vote will be around 5:30 p.m. on monday, november november 28. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until

speeders astoria was told in the administration when obama was given first budget and there were 60,000 earmarks his first

was the details and he was by his lobbyist for capitol hill that there is no way you can do that. you can't touch cut ties with democrats and i think had he vetoed he would have been a tea party. had he signaled his fundamental desire to change the system and to change the way washington works, he could have continued to rally the reform movement that now breaks out literally all over the world because of their frustration with the current way democracy does not function. >> next, president obama addresses australia's parliament as part of its asia-pacific trend. his remarks come after he and australian prime minister julia gillard announced a new military partnership between the two countries.

from canberra australia this is 30 minutes and comes from apac public affairs channel. >> mr. president gives me great pleasure to invite you to address the house. >> prime minister gillard, leader abbott thank you both for your very warm welcome. mr. speaker, mr. president, members of the house and senate, ladies and gentlemen. i thank you for the honor of standing in this great chamber to reaffirm the bonds between the united states and the commonwealth of australia. two of the world's oldest democracies and two of the world's oldest friends. to you, and the people of australia, thank you for your extraordinary hospitality and

here in the city, this ancient meeting place, i want to acknowledge the original inhabitants of this land and one of the world's oldest continuous cultures, the first australians. i first came to australia as a child traveling between my birthplace of hawaii and indonesia where i would live for four years. as an 8-year-old i couldn't always understand your foreign language. [laughter] last night i did try to talk some stride. today i don't want to subject you to any ear bashing. i really do love that and i will be introducing that into the vernacular in washington. [laughter] led to a young american boy, australia and its people, your optimism, you your easy-going w, your air reference sense of

humor all felt so familiar. it felt like home. i have always wanted to return. i tried last year twice but this is a lucky country and today i feel lucky to be here as we mark the 60th anniversary of our unbreakable alliance. the bonds between us run deep into each other story we see so much of ourselves. ancestors who crossed vast oceans, some by choice, some in chains, settlers who pushed west across sweeping plains, dreamers who toiled with the hearts and hands enhanced to label roe rhodes and build cities, generations of immigrants who would each new arrival and a new thread to the brilliant tapestry of our nations. we are citizens who live by a common creed. no matter who you are, no matter

what you look like, everyone deserves a fair chance. everyone deserves a fair goal. of course progress in our society does not always come without tensions or struggles to overcome a painful past. but we are a country with a willingness to face our imperfections and to keep reaching for our ideas. that is the spirit we saw in this chamber three years ago as this nation inspired the world with the historic gesture of reconciliation with indigenous australians. it's the spirit of progress in america which allows me to stand before you today as president of the united states and it is the spirit later today when i become the first u.s. president to visit the northern territories where i will meet the traditional owners of the land. nor has our progress come without great sacrifice. this morning i was humbled and

deeply moved by a visit to your war memorial to pay my respects to australia's fallen sons and daughters. later today at darwin i will join the prime minister in saluting our brave men and women in uniform and it would be a reminder that from the trenches of the first world war to the mountains of afghanistan audis and americans have stood together and we have fought together and we have given lives together in every single major conflict of the past 100 years. every single one. the solidarity has sustained us through a difficult decade. we will never forget the attacks of 9/11 that took the lives not only of americans by people from many nations including australia in the united states we will never forget how australians for the first time ever showing that our two nations stood as one.

and none of us will ever forget those we have lost to al qaeda's terror in the years since including innocent australians. that is why as both the prime minister and the opposition leader indicated, we are determined to succeed in afghanistan. it is why i salute australia outside of nato the largest contributor of troops to this vital mission. that is why we honor all those who have served there for our security, including 32 australian patriots who gave their lives, among them captain bryce duffy, corporal ashley burke and lance corporal luke gavin. we will honor their sacrifice by making sure that afghanistan is never again used as a source for attacks against our people, never again. as to global partners we stand

up for the security of people around the world. we see it when our rescue workers rushed to help others in times of fire and drought and flooding rains. we see it when we partnered to keep the peace from east timor to the balkans and when we pursue our shared vision in a world without nuclear weapons. please see it in the development that lifts up a child in africa, the assistance that saves the family from famine and when we extend our support to the people in the middle east and north africa who deserve the same liberty that allows us to gather at this great hall of democracy. this is the alliance we reaffirm today. rooted in our values, renewed by every generation. this is the partnership we work to deepen over the past three years. today i can stand before you and say with confidence that the alliance between the united states and australia has never

been stronger. it has been to our past, our alliance continues to be indispensable to our future. so here among close friends i would like to address the larger purpose of my visit to this region. our efforts to advance security, prosperity and human dignity across the asian-pacific. for the united states is a broader shift through a decade that we thought two years that cost us dearly in blood and treasure. the united states is turning attention to the vast potential of the asia-pacific region. in just a few weeks after nearly nine years, the last american troops will leave iraq and our war there will be over. in afghanistan we have begun a transition, a responsible transition so afghans can take responsibility for their future

and so coalition forces can begin to draw down. and with partners like australia we have struck major blows against al qaeda and what that terrorist organization on the path to defeat, including delivering justice to osama bin laden. so make no mistake, the time of war is receding and america is looking ahead to the future that we must build. from europe to the americas we have strengthened alliances and partnerships. at home we are investing in the sources of our long-term economic strength and the education of our children and the training of our workers, the infrastructure that fuels commerce, science and the research that leads to new breakthroughs. we have made hard decisions to cut our deficit and put our fiscal house in order and we will continue to do more. because our economic strength at home is the foundation of our leadership in the world, including here in the asia-pacific.

our new focus on this region reflects a fundamental truth. the united states has been and always will be a pacific nation. asian immigrants help america and millions of american families including my own cherished our ties to this region. from the bombing of darwin to the liberation of the pacific islands, from the rice paddies of southeast asia to a cold korean peninsula, generations of americans have served here and died here. so democracies can take root, so economic miracles could lift hundreds of millions to prosperity. americans have bled with you for this progress and we will not allow it -- we will never allow it to be reverse. here we see the future as the world's fastest-growing region and home to more than half the

global economy. the asia-pacific is critical to achieving my highest priority and that's creating jobs and opportunity for the american people. with most of the world's nuclear power and half of humanity, asia will largely defined whether the century ahead will be marked by conflict or cooperation. needless suffering or human progress. as president, i have therefore made a deliberate and strategic decision. as a pacific nation, the united states will play a larger and long-term role in shaping this region and its future by upholding core principles and in close partnership with our allies and friends. let me tell you what this means. first, we seek security which is the foundation of peace and prosperity. we stand for an international

order in which the rights and responsibilities of all nations and all people are upheld. where international law and norms are enforced, where commerce and freedom of navigation are not impeded, where emerging powers contribute to regional security and where disagreements are resolved peacefully. that is the future that we see. i know that some in this region have wondered about america's commitment to upholding these principles, so let me address this directly. the united states puts our fiscal house in order we are reducing our spending and yes after a decade of extraordinary growth in our military budgets and as we definitively end the war in iraq and began to wind down the war in afghanistan, we will make some reductions in defense spending. as we consider the future of our armed forces, we have begun a review that will identify our

most important strategic interests and guide our defense priorities of spending over the coming decades. so here is what this region must know. as we and today's wars, i have directed my national security team to make our presence and mission in the asia-pacific a top priority. as a result, reductions in u.s. defense spending will not, i repeat will not come at the expense of the asia-pacific. my guidance is clear. as we plan and budget for the future we will allocate the resources necessary to maintain our strong military presence in this region. we will preserve our unique ability to project power and deter threats to peace. we will keep our commitments including our treaty obligations to allies like australia. and we will constantly strengthen our capabilities to meet the needs of the 21st century.

our enduring interests in the region demand our enduring presence in the region. a united states is a pacific power and we are here to stay. indeed we are already modernizing america's defense posture across the asia-pacific. it will be more broadly distributed, maintaining our strong presence in japan and the korean peninsula while enhancing our presence in southeast asia. are posture will be more flexible with new capabilities to ensure that our forces can operate freely. and our posture will be more sustainable by helping allies and partners build their capacity with more training and exercises. we see our new posture here in australia, the initiatives that the prime minister and i announced yesterday will bring our military's closer together. we will have new opportunities to train with other allies and partners from the pacific to the

indian ocean and it will allow us to respond faster to the full range of challenges including humanitarian crises in disaster relief. since world war ii, australians have warmly welcomed american servicemembers who have passed through. on behalf of the american people i thank you for welcoming those who will come next as they ensure that our alliance stay strong and ready for the tests of our time. we see americans enhance presence in the alliance that we strengthened in japan where our alliance remains a cornerstone, a regional security, in thailand where we are partnering for disaster relief, in the philippines where we are increasing shift visits and training and in south korea where our commitment to the security of the republic of korea will never waiver. indeed we also reiterate our resolve to act firmly against any proliferation activities by

north korea. the transfer of nuclear materials or material by north korea to states or nonstate entities would be considered a great threat to the united states and our allies and we would hold north korea fully accountable for the consequences of such action. we see a america's enhance southeast asia in our partnerships with indonesia against piracy and violent extremism and in our work with malaysia to prevent proliferation. the ships will deploy to singapore and in our closer cooperation with vietnam and cambodia. and in our walk of india as it looks easton plays a larger role as an asian power. at the same time, we will reengage with their regional organizations, if our work in bali will -- and they'll be proud to be the first american president to attend the east asia summit. together i believe we can

address shared challenges such as proliferation and maritime security, including cooperation in the south china sea. meanwhile the united states will continue our effort to build a cooperative relationship with china. all of our nations, australia, the united states, all of our nations have a profound interest in the rise of a peaceful and prosperous china. that is why the united states welcomes it. we have seen that china can be a partner by reducing tensions on the korean peninsula from -- and we will seek more opportunities for cooperation with beijing including greater communication between our militaries to promote understanding and avoid miscalculation. we will do this even as we continue to speak to beijing about the importance of upholding international norms and respecting the entered -- universal human rights that

chinese people. a secure and peaceful asia is the foundation for the second area in which america is leading and that is advancing our shared prosperity. history teaches us the greatest force the world has ever known for creating wealth and opportunity is free markets, so we seek economies that are open and transparent. we seek trade that is free and fair and we seek an open international economic system where rules are clear it and every nation plays by them. in australia and america, we understand these principles. we are among the most open economies on earth. six years into our landmark trade agreement, is between us has soared. our workers are creating new partnerships and new products like the advanced aircraft technologies we build together in victoria. we are the leading investment in

australia and you invest more in america than you do in any other nation, creating good jobs in both countries. we recognize that economic hardships can't just be about one nation extracting another's resources. we understand that no long-term strategy for growth can be imposed from above. real prosperity, prosperity that fosters innovation and prosperity that endures, comes from unleashing our greatest economic resource, and that's the entrepreneurial spirit, the talents of our people. so even as america competes aggressively an asian markets, we are forging economic partnerships that create opportunity for all. welding on a historic trade agreement with south korea we are working with australia and our other apec partners to create a seamless regional economy. and with australia and other partners we are on track to

achieve our most ambitious trade agreement yet. a potential model for the entire region, the transpacific hardener ship. the united states remains the world's largest and most dynamic economy, but in an interconnected world we all rise and fall together. that is why a push so hard to put the g20 at the front and center of global economic decision-making, to give more nations a leadership role in managing the international economy. including australia. together we have saved the world economy from a depression and now our urgent challenges to create the growth that puts people to work. we need growth that is fair, where every nation plays by the rules, where workers rights are respected and our business can compete on a level playing field. where the intellectual property and new technology that fuels innovation are protected and

where currency's are market driven so no nation has an unfair advantage. we also need growth that is broad. not just for the few, but for the many with reforms to that protect consumers from abusive and a global commitment to end the corruption that stifles growth. we need growth that is balanced, because we will all prosper more when countries with large surpluses take action to boost demand at home. and we need growth that is sustainable. this includes the clean energy that creates green jobs and combats climate change which cannot be denied. we see it and the stronger fires that devastate -- the devastating floods and the pacific islands confronting rising seas. the countries with large carbon footprints the united states

industrial you have a special responsibility to lead. our nation will contribute to the solution in its own way and i know this issue is not without controversy. in both our countries. but what we can do and what we are doing is to work together to make investments in clean energy, to increase energy efficiency and to meet the commitments we made at copenhagen and cancun. we can do this and we will. as we grow our economies we will also remember the link between growth and good governance. the rule of law, transparent institutions, equipment a straight and of justice. because history shows that over the long run democracy and economic growth go hand-in-hand. and prosperity without freedom is just another form of poverty. this brings me to the final area where we are leading, our

support for the fundamental right of every human being. every nation will chart its own course. yet it is also true that certain rights are universal. among them freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion and the freedom of citizens to choose their own leaders. these are not american rights or australian rights or western rights, these are human rights. as we have seen in the democracies that have succeeded here in asia. other models have been tried and they have failed. fascism and communism, ruled by one man and ruled by a committee, and they failed for the same simple reason. they ignore the ultimate source of power and legitimacy, the will of the people. yes democracy can be messy and

rough. i understand you makes it up quite well during question time. but whatever our differences of party or of ideology, we know in our democracies we are blessed with the greatest form of government ever known to man. as two great democracies we speak up for those democracies when they are threatened. we partner with emerging democracies like indonesia to help strengthen the institutions upon which good governance depends. we encourage open government because democracies depend on an informed and active citizenry. we help strengthen civil societies because they empower our citizens to hold their governments accountable. and we advance the rights of all people, women, minorities and indigenous cultures because when

societies potential of all their citizens the societies are more successful, they are more prosperous and they are more just. these principles have guided our approach to burma with a combination of sanctions and engagement and today he is free from house arrest. some political prisoners have been released in the government has begun a dialogue. still violations of human rights persist so we will continue to speak clearly about the steps that must be taken for the government of burma to have a better relationship with the united states. this is the future we seek in the asia-pacific. security, prosperity, in -- and dignity for all. that is what we stand for. that is who we are. that is the future we will pursue in partnership with allies and friends and with every element of american power.

so let there be no doubt, in the asia-pacific and the 21st century the united states of america is all in. still, in times of great change and uncertainty, the future can seem unsettling. across the vast ocean it is impossible to know what lies beyond the horizon but at this vast region and its people teach us anything it's the yearning for liberty and progress will not be denied. it is why women in this country demanded that their voices be heard, making australia the first nation to lead women to vote and run for parliament and one day become prime minister. it is whether people took to the streets from delhi to seoul to jakarta to throw out colonialism and dictatorship and build some of the world's largest democracies. it is why a soldier in a watchtower along the dmz defense

of free people in the south and why a man from the north risked his life to escape across the border. why soldiers in blue helmets keep the peace in a new nation and why women of courage go into brothels to save young girls from modern-day slavery which must come to an end. it is why men of peace in saffron robes face beatings and bullets and why every day some of the world's largest cities the dusty rural towns and small acts of courage the world may never see. a student posts a blog blog, citizens find the charter, and activist remains unbound and imprisoned in his home just to have the same rights that we cherish here today. men and women like these know what the world must never forget.

the currents of history may ebb and flow, but over time, they moved decidedly, decisively in a single direction. history is on the side of the free. free societies, free governments, free economies, free people and the future belongs to those who stand firm for those ideals. in this region and around the world. ..

[applause] [applause] [applause]

>> well, mr. president, on behalf of the house and the parliament, i thank you for your address and the depth of the message that it contained. as the leader of a close ally, you have been received as a most welcome to friend. especially as we commemorate three years of a formal alliance. as an individual you inspire us all as a symbol of what we can achieve and as you remind us of what we ought to achieve. as a former senator, i know that you are pleased that we have present with us senate colleagues. in thanking the president of the senate and the senators, i thank you for sparring in them the appropriate behavior dictated.

[laughter] i wish you a successful and enjoyable remainder of your stay in australia and success in your travels in the region. i hope you have a safe return home to your cheese and kisses, that is the misses, the wife, and to your children. [laughter] [applause]

next, a gop presidential candidate michele bachman meets with the "des moines register" editorial board to talk of a campaign. she discusses the nation's health care system, foreign policy and weighs in on the use of waterboarding during interrogation of suspects. the editor starts off the meeting which is just over an hour. >> could afternoon. i'm editor vice president of "the des moines register" and we are honored to have with us the republican congressional candidate from the sixth district of minnesota, michele bachman. thank you for being with us. this is our editorial board. we are spending time talking

about issues important for not only the state of fallujah but around the country. you've been actively involved in the campaign. thank you for coming and spending time with us. >> i appreciate it. >> we would like to give you the floor for a couple minutes or so to give an opening statement about the things you're seeing and interacting with the voters and start asking you questions. >> with all due respect i want to say i am a republican member of congress but i'm not a congressional candidate. i'm a presidential candidate so and running to be the next president of the united states in 2012 on the republican party ticket and i am proud to be here and thrilled that i know what is the first caucus state. i came in very late in the race. i had gotten involved in the iowa straw poll. what i'm told is that no candidate has come with so little time and won the iowa straw poll and also the first woman to ever win the straw poll so i'm proud to have the distinction as well but we are

not resting. we are working very hard. being involved in the straw poll was a good thing for our campaign because number one, we won but more importantly it forced us to be disciplined early on as a campaign and to do the hard work that needs to be done in iowa. it's about being on the grout meeting the people, actually face-to-face person by person, living room by living room and meeting by meeting and that is what we did in the straw poll and continue to build on since then so we were pleased we worked as hard as we did and we have a strong base in iowa but we are continuing to work on that. we've held two meetings one in-store make it 9:00 and after that we want to webster city iowa and we will be traveling on today's a that is what we are doing, exactly what needs to be done to meet with the voters and hear what they have to say and continue to go on and then progress as we are following the schedule which is on your first and new hampshire and south carolina and on.

>> we would like to schedule and we are working very hard. >> [inaudible] >> i think no one has ever seen an election quite like this one. it is always the unexpected, isn't it? no one felt i had a chance to win the straw poll. every once it was never going to happen but we did and part of it is because i'm a hard worker, our team is a hard-working team and we all work together and my message resonated with the voters in iowa and as we have seen throughout the state everyone thought it would be on any given day they thought this candidate would be the next president, this candidate will be the next president and it is changing. if there's anything we've seen its the fluidity of the reason we've seen candidates go up and down and it certainly isn't locked in cement by any stretch of the imagination so we see our candidacy on the upswing right now. we certainly see that where we are going meeting with voters on a regular basis. the national polls are one

thing, the iowa poll is another what we are drilling down even deeper person by person very excited with what we're seeing and we are seeing with new information about the candidate this is a good process. i will tell you it's difficult, it's one of the difficult things i've ever done in my life, but it's good. i defend this process because it's tough. after all, we are fighting to be the next leader of the free world. the leaders need to know who we are, what we are made of, how we take. i've gotten my body blow. the other candidates are getting theirs. this is a good process. we need to go before the people and be vetted. i'm grateful for it and i defend this. >> [inaudible] >> i think early on when my numbers were also very high - people look, for instance, at me and my background. i'm an apologetic social conservative and so i was being

attacked. i never will dressed for the check i'm pro-life or for the fact that i stand for marriage between a man and a woman and for religious liberty and so attacks came from that but, you know, i was very happy to take on the issue. >> on that point, you have carved out a fairly narrow slice of the republican party. how come if you are the nominee, are you going to reach out and bring in the middle of the republican party? >> that is the duty of what i saw happen of the straw poll spot went to almost every day -- i would do about six stops a day during the straw poll -- and almost every stop someone would come to me afterwards and say michele, a democrat and i voted for barack obama, but i'm voting for you. then people would say michele, voted for barack obama. i am an independent but i'm going to vote for you. we saw that stop after stop.

i think that's exactly what we are going to see. this election more than any other people are not interested in a republican or democrat. they really aren't. it isn't that they have affiliation with party. it's the best person. who is the candidate. and there is very strong bipartisan agreement that we are going to speak to the economy. some people want someone who can be a unified europe. i can be a unifier. i'm elected in minnesota which isn't known for being a conservative state. i'm the first republican woman to get elected out of minnesota to go to the capitol to represent my state. i'm proud of that distinction. but also why did it not by tap dancing. i'm not a politician. i'm a real person. i was 50-years-old when i met to congress. i'm 55 of age now we and i've been very forthright and a bold about my position. one thing people have always appreciated about me is i mean what i say, i say what i mean and i don't dance around. i'm very forthright.

i think that kind of frankness people are looking for coming and they want someone with a real plan to be able to deal with the economy. i former federal tax lawyer. i get taxes. my husband and i started a business from scratch and ran it profitably. we get the travail that a small person believed to a business person goes through. i also sit on the financial service committee and got that kind of background to do with the economy and i think i've got the right solutions. that is the number-one issue in this race. jobs in the economy. but i also have a background and the benefit of serving on the house intelligence committee, which is dealing with the phoenicians classified secrets. now that issue was rising. it wasn't rising before the campaign, but the issue of dealing with national security is rising because of the iaea report that joost came out last week dealing with the threat of a nuclear weapon on the part of iran. i think there will continue to be front and center and it needs to be because i feel we are seeing that the united states is in a more vulnerable position

than we have before. a lot of that has to do with the fact that the super committee, and here again, i was a lone voice in the wilderness of washington, d.c.. last summer i was one of the only voices that say we have enough revenue coming in to pay the interest on the debt. let's do that. let's not see our credit rating go down. but, all 535 of us should be here in d.c. right now and look for how we are going to cut a significant portion of the budget. it would be painful to have to make the cuts. but we need to do that because we can't continue to bar with the level we are borrowing so i threw a line in the sand. and i was a lone voice. but here we are. we saw our credit rating downgraded. and here we are kicking the can down the road. maybe five months later. we are no closer than any sort of deal in fact it looks like there should be >> translator: ascent if we have the train wreck here is what is going to happen. we will see a massive tax increases that are going to hurt

job creation, or we are going to see massive cuts to our military. we have about 400 billion in cuts this summer. now we're looking at absorbing another 600 billion. and we need to look no further than defense secretary leon panetta who said to john mccain if the super committee prevails or doesn't prevail, however it works out that there are 600 billion in automatic cuts, if that happens we could be looking at sending the armed forces back down to troop levels in 1940 and we would be looking at said the number of ships we have back to 1914 levels and our air force would be at its lowest little of aircraft. it's coming at the worst possible time because the economy is flat on its back and then you will get the military at the same time. it doesn't take much imagination to find out what that means for our vulnerability in terms of national security. wouldn't be a good scenario.

>> before we go back to that, we've covered a lot of ground here, but you talk about the debate which led to the super committee created about raising the debt limit. do you still feel it was wrong to raise the debt limit? what do you think the impact would have been if we had not? >> i think it was wrong to raise the debt ceiling by $4 trillion. let me give you the context. the day that i came into the united states congress we were in debt $8.6.7 trillion it took 19 years to accumulate 8.6 trillion in debt. here we are today. we're just about at that 15 trillion bubble level of debt. as we've gone in a little over four years time for 8.67 trillion of debt to 15 trillion. by next year we will be at a minimum of 16.7 trillion in debt. that is almost doubling the national debt in five years. what changed is the velocity of spending. we've never spent at this level

because you can just look at the contrast. in 2007 the debt for the year was $160 billion. last month in october the debt was 203 billion just for one month. it's the philosophy of spending. the philosophy of the debt accumulation. so much so that in october that works out to $650 for every man, woman and child in the united states of for a family of four that is $2,300 of additional debt that they have to pay for. so, what families are saying and what anyone is saying is that congress spends money faster than people can earn it. >> in the effect of saying we are not going to borrow in the third nine starting tomorrow. >> the net effect is to say we will pay the interest on the debt. that is a standard and poor's that's what they look at. can you finance the debt. >> [inaudible] >> part and? >> which is how much per year? the debt?

the interest on that? the interest on the debt is getting worse. it was about 6%. i don't know what it is now but i know what will be doubling in ten years. and it will be a little -- let me correct that. we will be spending more money on interest on the debt in ten years the and we are on the military. >> so that's my question. if you pay the interest on the deck, and the things we have to pay for, social security, etc., and everything else would have gone away the next day? >> what we need to do is not avoid reform. that's what it for the administration does including republicans. it isn't just democrats. it's all the administrations. avoiding a tough issue which is reform and that's what we have to do. we have to reform the programs we have today. consider when i was born here in iowa we didn't even have medicare. it wasn't until he was about 10-years-old that we have medicare. and in that time we had a

program now that's a good 45 years of age. it's time to have reform. we have to reform that program because the way that it's going now, those numbers on spending are not going to stay at a plateau. they are going to escalate. >> what it does medicare reform look like under your policy? >> i like the direction suggested how we are subsidizing health insurance and it isn't just for senior citizens. i want to change health care for all americans. today we ask in essence what will be socialized medicine with obamacare? what i want to do is allow all americans -- i want to and the monopoly that insurance companies have in every state, and i want to let every american and every eye when by any insurance plan a lot, anywhere in the united states with no federal requirement, no minimum requirement. then pay for that policy with their own tax-free money. whether it's a premium or the deductible or the co-payment or

their pharmaceutical or if they go to the chiropractor i want them to be able to pay for that with their own tax-free money and have true medical malpractice liability reform because the deals with the cost issue. the other thing i would like to do is offer a liability shield to any doctor or nurse or drug company or clinic or hospital that wants to offer free care to poor people. when i was a little girl in waterloo my mom would take us to the doctor and say we don't run to the doctor. that's what my parents say. but they would take as a doctor's visit was $5 said they would go and see the doctor, but the doctor also saw people that wouldn't pay but he didn't charge people who truly couldn't afford it and he knew if someone was abusing the system or not and they just didn't charge. but today it's different. you have people that sue you and so doctors are in a very different position. i think if we want to encourage people to offer care free we

should and one thing we could do is offer a liability because the biggest problem in health care is the cost. that is the main problem. president obama said every household was saving $520 a year if we went with obamacare. i haven't met one of you and yet his told me that they've saved $2,500 a year on their health insurance premium. in fact it's going the opposite. so, my plan addresses the issue of cost and that's what i want. >> my bill from 40,000 americans to washington, d.c. to fight against obamacare because obamacare will be more expensive than anyone begins to drain will be. it will be terribly expensive. just at the last time that we needed the new entitlement program we are getting one. when we can lead. number one, we can't afford the cost of it. but number two, we are seeing it

will restrict doctors and i will give you one example. i was doing a town hall, a physician stood up it was a family practice guy, very tall and he stood up and said michele, let me tell you what just happened to me because of obamacare. the irs is enforcing obamacare. they are hiring 16,500 new agents to enforce obamacare and he said i have to call the irs because i had a woman on medicare and i get to get a number for her and he said guess how long i was on the phone with the virus while she waited in my office and i said how long? he said two hours and 15 minutes. he said i am so frustrated. this is what obamacare is going to mean for me. and it wasn't just her that we could. his time was wasted in all of the other patients waiting in the waiting room, they had too. this is the system we have. i want to get rid of obamacare. i wrote the legislation on the first member of congress to introduce the bill to repeal obamacare. i want to repeal that and then

put my plan into effect that addresses the cost issue. >> to help somebody that works for a smaller company, doesn't have the company provided health care plan now and can't afford to buy one. how does that not exist in the tax break in that person's be five keys and worked for him under your plan? >> absolutely helps them because now can buy the cheapest possible plan they can get. i think a lot of people will do is buy catastrophic health insurance plans. and then on -- what we will be seeing under my plan is we will be encouraging new, for example like the clinics to grow up so when somebody has their child at a soccer game and they have an injury in soccer they can run their kidcare and get them seen immediately by a doctor and pay for that because that's the biggest problem in health care right now is the third party

intermediary. no one even knows what is the health care cost any more because either the government is involved and the government by far is the largest of health care in the united states for one particular entity. and so we want to do is be able to reintroduce the free market and into health care so the people own their plan. >> what type of health care coverage of you have? has it always been government? >> it hasn't, no. >> when you work for the irs and conference have you ever -- >> but we have also been without. we purchased on our own. one of the biggest problems is that the individuals cannot deduct their health insurance on their income tax. businesses can but what people and that's wrong. i introduced a bill in congress that is a choice act, and that would allow americans to be able to purchase health insurance policy and deduct on their income tax.

they should be able to do that just like a company can. >> people who the insurance company won't sell the entrance to. do you propose for that the existing conditions who can't purchase health insurance? >> again i think it is the marketplace that knows how to determine the cost. government is determining the cost and all we are seeing is escalated costs. the market needs to make that determination. but it isn't that people necessarily have to go without health care. insurance is wanting to be a health care is another. states have come up with various solutions, high risk pools are something the various states have come up with and then you're always going to be people that have chronic conditions or pre-existing conditions and that doesn't limit the space. the states can come up with high risk plans and they will. they have in the past. i'm not sure the exact number but i think it is 30 some states have the will and what they try to do then is at the state level

to give a subsidy so that people can pay would would be more of a normal price for health insurance and then the state comes in and pays the difference. if that is but a state chooses to do, i think i encourage that. but again, we also want to offer charitable organization for doctors or clinics to offer care to people who are indigent or people who are in a difficult place. the thing is health care will be provided. the question is what is the cheapest way, the most cost-effective way to get the highest quality care. we want the greatest number of people to have the highest quality-of-care at the lowest possible price. that is not what we are getting with the government been a cheap purchasers of care in the united states. and by cheap, i mean the entity that purchases the greatest amount of health care. we are not getting a good value for that dollar and so health care is a big issue.

but the one thing we do know is that obamacare will break the bank. we cannot afford obamacare. that isn't michele bachman saying that, that is kathleen sebelius, the health and human services secretary who recently said we cannot have a long term component of the obamacare bill which is a tax portion because there is not enough money. if they admit there is not enough money. we haven't even gotten this off the ground yet because to make the number work for obamacare overeaten year period, they have to have all of the revenue up front and the expenditure coming later. that's the only way they could make the game or can we try to expose with a flawed this is but obamacare will never be allowed to pay for itself, and we also see a stunning level of power that the government has because with obamacare there's already been over 6,000 pages of rules and regulations that have been written. it isn't just the bill. this is a bill that will never finish being written. that is why they came out with a

study 82 months ago now and they said that the number one reason why employers are not hiring is obamacare. it's because today employ years know that every employee d they hire will have at least a $2,000 price on their head because if they don't offer health insurance, they will have to pay a fine to the government and it will be at least $2,000. that is a teaser rate. with the government will do any time it needs more revenue it will buy a lot of great employers have to pay and will be far more than 2,000 so employers are reluctant to hire new employees because they know the costs are exponential dealing with health care. >> do you think vaccines are dangerous, and did you vaccinate your own children? >> sure we vaccinated our own children. they went through and have the normal course of measles, mumps and rubella and tv and all the bb shots the of to have.

they had them and i had them when i was a beebee that we have seen a difference in the number of the vaccinations children have and more and more are being encouraged all the time. that is a decision that parents need to make on behalf of their children. that's the point i was making in the debate. this is a decision not for a governor to make but to abuse the executive of 40 the governor admitted he did it use that authority. this is a decision that rightly parents and children have to make. but the more important issue and all of this is the issue of the crony capitalism and it was the idea of politicians paying off their political donors with either mandates or government contracts and the area at the federal level. there is a new one that is coming this happens all the time and it's scandalous.

no politician should be paying off their political donors. >> [inaudible] >> well i'm not a doctor. i'm not a scientist. my point in the course of debate is of use of excessive power and also crony capitalism. >> the question on the nuclear weapons report how would you deal with that issue? >> guinn back to the time that president obama came into place, it was my eve at best and foolish at worst for a president to meet with iran with no preconditions. that was unprecedented. this is a nation that has violated one issue after another with the iaea. they have been unwilling to let inspectors in and there's all sorts of problems with iran and the stated repeatedly over and

over again that once they gain a nuclear weapon they would use it to what israel off the face of the earth and so the president backed off and was done with i should say the administration that was done with no pre-existing condition. and what the president gave iran is the luxury of time. the time to continue unabated to develop a nuclear weapon. this is extremely serious. it is a number one threat that faces the nation. not only our nation but other nations across the world because we know what iran will do. they will share the information technology and power of a nuclear weapon not only with themselves but with syria which is a career for them and to their proxy organizations which are hezbollah in lebanon and hamas, and they will share it with sudan. president obama made what i believe was a wrong decision

with of the treaty of russia last december. as we are seeing a fee denuclearization if you will of the nation while for third world basket case nations are getting moved up. this has very serious and profound implications and as a nation as you know we will see the call for nuclear weaponry as well and so week will be seeing the nuclear rise in the middle east, and i don't think that that will lead to peace. ultimately what i want as president of the united states is peace i want to see peace not only for the united states but in the middle east region and around the world, and to be a world at peace i think the united states is the good global leader. we are not perfect. we've made a lot of mistakes, but i think we want to make sure that the united states is going to condition its strength. >> we achieve peace in the middle east with iran as a nuclear power.

>> that's difficult, isn't it. >> the mistakes made in the past you are in the white house now. what are you going to do? >> [inaudible] >> there will be likely three scenarios. either elon will make a strike, israel or the u.s. could make a strike. i would hope that it would not be the u.s. the would be making the strike. hopefully no one would make that strike but right now iran hasn't gotten a signal from anyone that they have something to lose if they continue to go forward. the continued to develop not only the enriched uranium, but also the ability to deliver a nuclear weapon. they've continued to go forward unabated in a manner that has put not only the united states at risk but the rest of the world press. >> what is the signal to be spent? what needs to be done in iran

right now? >> well, again, president obama is taking this off the table which is extremely foolish in my opinion. we need to isolate iran economically. we can. >> [inaudible] >> pardon me? >> more so than we already have. >> i'm not saying there aren't any that are meaningful because the meaningful sanction would be with the central banking community so that they wouldn't have access to funds. we could shut them down in a heartbeat if we were able to stop money from flowing to iran. if they couldn't sell leal and receive money in return the and you have to have a banking system to do that, they would be done. president obama has been unwilling to do that. i think that has been tragic. he has failed to bring the russian and the chinese and those he needs to because i believe that he's taken his life

of the central issue which is dealing with nuclear iran. instead, he was diverted with libya. i cannot immediately and said i was opposed to what the president was doing in libya not because i am such a fan of newmar gaddafi or was a fan, but at that point libya wasn't posing a threat to the united states and that is sent me saying that. at that time we had secretary defense gates who said there was no american national lead to stand there was no mention in libya. why are we going into a country when there is no vital american interest and mission? that was wrong for the united states to be there. what we need to do is focus on iran. we started the effort. we unilaterally began the bombing. president obama did that and made the decision while congress was still in session. i was in washington the week he made the decision. he moved forward, congress was there.

he didn't consult congress. he said he didn't have to. i believe he did. he moved forward and made that effort and unilaterally we were there. only after the guy did states began bombing did we then join up with nato. but again, don't forget who provides the number one source of funding for nato. we do. we provide that money and then secretary defense gates came out just before he resigned. we've been providing the defense for europe. that needs to end. europe needs to stand on their own 2 feet. we need to stop providing their defense for them. we are far too extended beyond what we should be. we can't afford that. and i am not one who says. with me tell you one area. we have a problem when it comes to procurement. there is a military industrial complex in washington, d.c..

the issue of procurement is scandalous where today we have a cost basis and pay based upon how much time it takes to develop a weapon. now if you go order a couch you don't pay more money if it takes longer to build that couch but that is what the federal government does. we pay more money based upon how much time it was. we need to have a fixed price system where we say we will pay you x amount for this weapon and that's it. and then you figure it out and get it developed. instead we are getting played all the time on procurement and this is wrong and has to change. tricare is something else i think can be reformed. it isn't that i want to cut back on benefits for service people, but tricare is also something that needs to be reformed. >> you said that you supported

waterboarding and had no problem with that. is the notion of torture being acceptable consistent with your general fifa and value? >> i don't accept your premise that it is torture. i don't accept that as a premise. >> what do you think it is? >> it is called an enhanced interrogation technique we've used to bring about information. i would go back to the example of harry truman. he was asked about the decision to drop the bomb in japan. there was a terrible decision that harry truman had to make but he made it and he said if i have to kill a thousand japanese to save one american life that i will. he made the decision, so let me finish. in in that vein if i as president of the united states have someone who is a terrorist and waterboarding rustam khalid sheikh mohammed the admitted mastermind of 9/11 and it was said later by the vice president that we did extract useful information from him that helped

prevent other incidents, if i had knowledge that we could use something like above waterboarding to be able to save the american people would use that? use i would because it doesn't kill anyone. is it uncomfortable? is it is uncomfortable but i am more concerned we would prevent aircraft from going into the twin towers taking them down and taking out 3,000 innocent american lives than i am about the comfort level of a terrorist and what that means for them because this is done under an altered conditions where is it uncomfortable? yes i do not deny it is uncomfortable with the person is not going to lose their life nor will they be permanently injured or in pairs by this. and it is done on very unique and strict circumstances. >> here's the of the problem. what is president obama doing

today? >> we no longer have the interrogators. the cia interrogators are no longer able to deal with enemy combatants. all we have a stormy field manual and we publish it on line. any terrorist can see what is guinn to happen to them when they are captured and in effect the bill exactly what is going to do to them and so they do not fear. there is no fear, no respect for the united states because they know it's ackley what is going to happen and something else i brought up is we no longer have a place to put them in jail once we capture them. there are ships but that isn't a long-term solution. we as blogger and airforce base, but it isn't a detention facility if all we are using is the army field manual. when are we going to recognize we are et war? we are at war met with an enemy

that means business. our enemy sees that we are at war. diffracting like we are at war. we are the ones acting like we are not at war. we are with an enemy that wants to see us defeated so much so that it wasn't weeks ago that we saw iran tried in international assassination plot on u.s. soil to carry this out at a restaurant that presumably would be filled with members of congress and senators and hundreds of innocent americans and they had no compunction about killing all of these innocent americans. here in washington, d.c. in the nation's capital. >> going back to the question on waterboarding use it is being down on terrorists but it is as an interrogation technique to determine whether people were too nervous. the have not been tried. >> it is the admitted mastermind of 9/11. >> hismelt the only one, many people -- >> he also wanted to be

executed. there is no reason why -- those determinations need to be made by the president and those who are in in that hierarchy grid of authority. certainly not everyone is waterboarded nor is everyone. it is an extraordinary technique and all i am saying is like a president needs to have that technique on the table. >> if you think it isn't that bad, would you ever submit to it just to see what it's like? >> the would be absurd to have the president of the united states submit to waterboarding. there are those that have submitted themselves to it so they can talk about it and speak about it afterwards. but again, let's look at the context. the united states of america was attacked in an act of war. we lost the twin towers, 3,000 innocent americans. flight 93 went down over pennsylvania and innocent lives were lost. the pentagon had a plane and

flown into it and we lost hundreds of innocent lives. this is a very real issue. i take it seriously. and as president of the united states and in particular commander in chief, i will do what i have to do to keep the american people say. we'll probably have a greater risk now than when president obama kimmage to office because you are looking at the nuclear iran. this changes the equation pitted it could change the course of history. >> how do you respond to a person like john mccain who would also say that he takes very seriously and argues by using torture which is his definition of the word has actually made us less safe as a result? >> number 1i have the deepest admiration and respect for john mccain. he's a true american hero and i respect him. i respect his opinion. but he and i would disagree on this issue. i see that this is an enhanced interrogation technique.

this is something that should be available to the president of the united states. limited use, undoubtedly but something nonetheless in the right circumstance the president needs to employ this should be in that toolbox and that is where we disagree. i do not believe this makes us less safe. i think we are more safe if we are able to get the best intelligence and information. we are also seeking a different type of war. the loveless threats we are looking at today are not as much of geopolitical nation states that are suited up in uniform on battlefields. it's not as much like that. we still have that element. but we are dealing with the threats today through interrogation. our best answer to be done through detention comer rendition, interrogation, and that's why we need to have the interrogation but we also need to have detention. i would continue in guantanamo

bay because we have to have someone to have people that are in detention and the special forces. >> we need to make sure we have the resources because it is a different kind of enemy and a different kind of war and battlefield coming and we need to be able to adapt. >> is there any area you think president obama has done a good job? >> i think that he made a good decision to take out osama bin laden. i too, ron paul in the last debate on that issue and i felt ron paul -- i disagreed with him. he felt it was wrong for the president to have made the decision to to galusha bin laden and to take out al-awlaki who as you know is the chief recruiter. he recruited major house on who is responsible for the fort hood massacre and all of the american people there.

he was responsible for recruiting the underwear bomber that wanted to take out and in later for detroit and for the times where bomber who was not successful but said before a federal judge we are at war and we are going to continue to be and so he was a very active and very involved in the recruitment and it was right that president obama made those decisions. i also commended the president when he chose not to have a new helicopter bill because again as the procurement process broken it was far more expensive than it needed to be. he understood that and i appreciate him for doing that as well. it isn't that every decision president obama makes is wrong. he makes decisions that i can agree with, but i think that the general direction he has taken in the country has been a disaster and i disagree with them. there are some decisions that he's made that is right and i thank him for that, but there

are i think certainly i don't believe that he deserves to have a second term. he doesn't have the formula for turning the economy around and i think he's weakened the united states and made us more vulnerable to the enemy attack. >> so what is your formula for turning the economy around? >> it is found out michelebachmann.com and it begins as a basis and a comprehensive tax code but more than a tax code and number one, i am more committed than in the other candidate with repeal both obamacare and dodd-frank and i wrote to both pieces of legislation and i called the jobs in destruction act and committed to that. let me add this on dodd-frank. dodd-frank mandated the rules to be written about 26% of the rules had been written so far. the estimate is just 26% of the rules written would require

annually 11 million man hours. just by way of comparison. building of the empire state building required 7 million man-hours. so this is the level of the cost we are going to have added on to the economy. it won't add but it's going to subtract from the economies of this is one more reason we have to get rid of it so repeals those pieces of legislation. i've been working on the issue of legalizing american energy production and all of the above plan that is what i will do, legalize american energy production that is 1.4 million of jobs we can create and will increase americans' domestic by 40%. i want to get back down to would gasoline was a gallon the day barack obama took office. it was on average $1.79 a gallon. i would love to see us get back to that if we can increase supply and stabilize the value of the dollar or strengthen it, that will help. that's part of the reason that we are seeing it.

>> talking about -- >> talk to out my tax plan? i also want to kill $1.8 trillion worth of job killing in you will regulations. i want to deal with illegal immigration and by the first candidate to sign a pledge that says i will build a fence on the southern border, and i want to deal with benefits to illegal aliens and also make english the official language of the country. my tax policy i want to abolish the united states tax code. i former tax lawyer and i want to have essentially flat tax system but one that recognizes people who make more need to pay more. they need to not pay any less than people that are at the middle and more income level and that is unfortunately what herman cain and rick perry's plans to. they have people with the middle and lower income levels pay more than people that the higher end. i want to make flat so that people are not just advantage of the middle and the lower level.

i also want to make sure the same rules apply to everyone, and i also want to make sure that everyone pays something and this is a departure for all of the candidates. even if it is only $10 a year that might be all that some people can afford. it is doing away with the eitc, error in the income tax credit because that takes millions of people off the tax and sends them a check every year. something happens to people's mind set. 47% of the american people pay zero federal income-tax and 53% of the american people pay their best of the income tax. the top 1% of income earners in the united states 40% of all federal income tax. that's interesting. >> some pay nothing. >> and that's what's wrong. that is what is wrong because today or i think it was this

last year the corporation paid like 9/11%. ge pays 7% of the tax rate. >> he would eliminate the tax credit to give them money from the treasury. >> what i want to do it again by abolishing the tax code the would be with business as well and the tax is too high. let's face it the combined effective rate of the federal and state tax burden because all states are different is about 40%. that's the only thing you need to know about why we are seeing jobs leave the united states on a lot of countries to the 25% corporate tax rates and falling and we are waiting in a 40%. that is why one manufacturer in west des moines told me i bought a piece of equipment for a million dollars and i can either put it in the west des moines or my canadian plan which is a tax rate of 18%. where would you go? he said i would put it in canada and when i said that piece of

equipment it wasn't just a piece of equipment it was the jobs that went with it. we have to be competitive. number one we have to be competitive in the world and we are stifel and ourselves and we are deluding ourselves and we are embracing a culture that looks like increase and we are being uncompetitive like the old western european nations we used to laugh at. when we are doing that we are disadvantaging ourselves in terms of competitiveness and that is why i feel we need to change the mind-set in the united states that everybody pays nothing because growing and audio with there's a couple added adages my parents told me at one of them as nobody knows you a living. nobody knows you a living. you have to work. not everybody can work. we get that. there are people who are physically or mentally disabled. nobody begrudges anybody for that reason. but nobody knows you a living as a pretty good iowa at age. something else my parents taught

me was an honest day's work for honest pay. in other words you have to work for your employer you can't just expect to get paid. >> does that mean eliminating welfare programs totally? >> it means taking a look at what the jobs have put into place in the mid-60s. but i want to do is go through the great society programs and i think a lot of that need to be ended and i think the states need to make the decision about if they want them or not. we didn't have the food stamps before 1964. but 1964 they came in and they've only escalated from there. the same with public politics and with a lot of programs that came in the mid-60s. we simply can't afford them. with the federal government spends 6.7 trillion in the year but only takes 2.2 trillion of tax revenue and spends and borrows 1.5 trillion that we don't have, we are in trouble and that isn't just one year that this year after year after year and so that has to income

and so part of that is dismantling the modern welfare state that is not a part of the constitutional government, and i want to get back to the constitutional government and those programs in my opinion the states can decide if they want to do them but we simply can't afford them at the federal level anymore. >> a lot to talk about your five years in congress so far. can you cite for us three examples of legislation success we've had since you've been in congress? >> first of all i've been in the minority until this january. and so nancy pelosi was not particularly interested in advancing my pro-growth agenda. she should have because we would have been in a much better place to the head she embraced the agenda. but i have been involved in american energy, legalizing american energy, and i have been a strong advocate for that. i also work very hard, like i said, bringing 40,000 americans to washington, d.c. to fight against obamacare. i work very hard on that. i work very hard against

dodd-frank. i work very hard at putting fannie and freddie into the receivership which is an orderly wind down through bankruptcy. i oppose the automobile taskforce and the bailout. i was the leader behind closed doors opposing the bush administration on the bailout and i worked with democrats, we worked across the aisle and we actually brought down the first vote on the 700 billion-dollar be allowed. we didn't prevail on the second one, but i tried in the best we that i could come and now i'm working together with republicans and democrats and we are hoping to get a bridge built between wisconsin and minnesota, and we think we might get their for the historic first and i am praising president obama for that. it looks like at this point the obama administration is getting behind that. i got off the call with the secretary of transportation and the interior and also senators frank and klobuchar and other representatives and we think we are going to get that done.

it's possible to get something done to work together as republicans and democrats and i'm looking forward to eight to beat to it. >> as one of few that has ever run for president, how do you feel that you have been treated by the press, by the public and by the river candidates? >> the public has been wonderful. people in iowa have been fantastic and all across the country. i haven't felt that anyone has seen me as any less or disqualified and i want to give thanks to my parents for instilling the fat. i had three brothers and no sisters and i was treated just like my brothers and for the public's any girl can have to grow up with three brothers and no sister you learn how to fight and they know not to be on the sister as far as the other candidates did been very gracious and very kind, and certainly we have our

differences. we don't see each other at all really to speak of because when we go to events we are not they're talking to each other. we are talking to people when we go to the beach we line up behind the curtain, go on stage and then we are off talking to people so we don't spend a lot of time talking. people have been nice and gracious and civil. they're certainly are differences. then you ask about the press. i think probably everyone wishes they could be treated better by the press, but i am grateful for the fact that the media has covered are ravens and i'm glad they've covered our agents and as long as the report what happens we are more than happy. there's a job the media has to do and we understand that. and so, you know, it is what it is. i've never really lorain or griped about the press or coverage because i am grateful they are there and reporting to and that's the wonderful thing about the day and age we live in is almost anyone can be a

journalist today. if you have a phone camera you can make history anyone can see what's going on any given minute and i think even the 2012 race is different than the 2008 race. twitter was used in 2008. but much more so people are more familiar with that and the level of expectation the public and the media have everything is an instantaneous response and so we have to be converse almost every issue instantaneously as it happens, and that is a -- this difficult to be conversant on every topic but it is a good process. it is very good for us to go through this. i started our conversation today. one of the most difficult exercises i've ever gone through but i descended to the hill because the job of the president

will be extraordinarily difficult. and will take everything out of a person and then some and so it's important for a person to go through this. the have to learn to be better all the time. i appreciate that. i appreciate how tough this is because we want the best candidate for the united states. we want the best president we can possibly have. obviously i have an opinion on that. >> how do you feel about that comparison? >> if she's a wonderful woman. she's been the governor of alaska and she has made great contributions and i am grateful for everything she's contributed. she blazed the trail herself by being the first female vice presidential candidate on the republican side and she took a lot of abuse during the course of the time she was a candidate,

and i appreciate her for her willingness to stand up and serve her country. >> thank you. that's going to be it. congressman, thank you. >> they didn't even get a chance to ask a question down there. [laughter] >> you should ask them how they feel like they are being treated by the media. [laughter] >> one more? great. >> i'd like to ask about afghanistan. in the the date the a right to criticize the 30,000 saying it should have been 40,000 troops surge. if he were president today, what do you see as the way for word? ..

to filter requests that had been made. at that point the decision had to be made to focus on this house, but we saw success down there nonetheless and the troops did a good job. we've seen a better commission on the ground, particularly around kandahar. but the problem is that they couldn't do with this problem quickly on both fronts, it's actually linked to the amount of time that the united states had to stay in that area. my face is i would like to get men, get the job done, get out, get home. this is just like the mad amount of time. he would be pulling the troops out. that is less than a year from now. when the president sent those

30,000 troops it wasn't just 30,000 troops. he also announced the date we would be leaving. that is most insisting that you are going to lose this effort. and you don't have the president talk about winning. e..you're the president talked about the jury. but is not why we sent troops to win and have victory? the president -- we won the peace in iraq and he is determined to lose in iraq here and we will by pulling out our troops out by the end of this year. we are to know iraq would make friends with iran and the kurds have enjoyed the same thing. iran will come in and out these be rocked. he needs to go back and demand that iraq him a wealthy country, not a poor country should pay us back. we spent over 805 billion in iraq should pay us back for what league expanded. the last 4400 american lives. when it comes to afghanistan, at

this point the president has been a tough situation on most impossible, almost impossible because now that the troops are coming out, what a skinny would be enlisted to help us knowing that they are going to be left with the taliban. so the taliban is going to stay there. they live there. and so, if they enlist to help us, they are a target and they don't see any victory. so what the united states has done is let down our allies and we've invigorated our enemy. and that is the failure of the president's policies. he is choosing to fail in iraq. he is choosing to fail in afghanistan. we cannot have this overweight then see afghanistan stand on their own by next september. and so he is making a deliberate decision. there's a real problem with that county network.

we haven't even started dealing with the east, so we can't possibly hold the south india with the east when the president is going to troop levels out. >> the republican nominee is going to have to go in january 20, 2013 and increase troop levels? >> well, and tend not to be the nominee, but the next president of the united states. and so i would be inheriting a situation whereby 20 saw the president conveniently enough, just before the election, would have made sure that he pulled the troops out. and really, it is more than obvious. the president is taking his orders from general axelrod. he is not listening to general allen in afghanistan. he is not listening to general austin in iraq. he is listening to general axelrod and is essentially that centcom to chicago. he is also listening to general david frost. that is who he is listening to. everything now is about his

reelection. and i think that is the lowest of the low for a commander-in-chief to make military decisions based upon his political reelection calculus nurses make a military decisions based upon what is in the best interest of the united states and our security and our defense because after all, that is what needs to be the number one issue of the commander-in-chief. >> one last question before we get a chance to say goodbye. less than seven weeks look at the calendar year, folks in iowa will be headed to caucus night and we certainly will be sitting here spending time talking about our endorsement. tell me why you should win support and also why you should read our endorsement. >> because i am most reflective of the value suddenly the iowans hold them what they're looking for the next president of the united states. i once went to a to understand the economy and know what to do about turning it around. i have that event had that

background both as a self-made individual who our family went below poverty at one point and i had to work my way through college and establish myself. i know what it means to be middle class and below poverty. i noted is to come out of that. i have that americans value of no one owes you a living and give an honest days work for an honest day's pay in your word is your bond. those are very important iowa values. i lived those, a pakistani family and by sending in generations of my family with the tinnitus since the 1850s. i have the practical knowledge as someone who started a business from scratch in red tape profitable today. i have that background is a tax lawyer, also as someone who has sat on the is in the united states congress. i know what needs to be done. i formulated a coherent good plan that makes sense and i've

put that out on a website. and i know what needs to be done and i can bring people together to make it happen. i cut my teeth on education reform. as the mother -- you're going to ask about foster children. we have five biological children we have raised and they're all grown now and they are all grown now. i got involved in politics because i was another. as a mother was concerned about what i saw my foster children bringing home and at that type. so i decided to get involved. i got involved and ultimately i let an education reform movement in minnesota and 95 years of my life to education reform. my husband i were part of a group in the first k-12 charter school in the united states and our school is focused on that. we both had broken hearts for at-risk kids, my husband and i. so we got involved in education

reform in a very proud to say we became perhaps the only state that repealed the federal education standards, which were politically correct to down standards and instead we put in place, that was my answer is that i lead. we put into place academic standards. just like when i grow up in iowa, i attended public schools. they were fantastic. i had such a good education growing up in iowa public schools and then i went to minnesota and they were very good schools out there as well. but if i was shocked to what my foster children for bringing how many back pack because i'd always been supremely blessed by the school site onto and i was shocked. i'll give you one example. my 11th grade foster daughter and not class brought with color. our 3-year-old scholar, but if anyone needs a leg up in life as a foster child.

i related because in my own family we had gone below poverty. and another said to me when we lost everything, she said missile, there's one thing that can never be taken away and is your education. she was right and i listen. i was 13 years of age and i studied. because i paid attention and did well in school, that helping make it in life. i wanted for foster children to also have the same opportunity and i wanted them as best they could. in 11th grade they are coloring, they will not have the best opportunities that would hurt them first, but he would hurt business people like my husband and i because we as people wanted jobs that are well-trained and it would hurt productivity. so i got involved and i let that education reform movement. what is really remarkable about that is that it was minnesota, a democrat state. what i thought is this movement a partisan issue. i never once said if i was a conservative or not. but when all of my statement

spoke and it talks about education. and because of me going around the state, people put pressure on their own senator, on their own house number to get rid of this education program and make it. and i was surfing in the minority in the minnesota senate and we actually got rid of this program. everyone said it never happened because education is the number one budget item in any state's budget and this is the biggest program minnesota ever adopted, but we got rid of it. that is why i know. if pollyanna to think you can fight city hall, but i believe we can repeal upon the care. it is going to be the toughest thing that will ever happen. i think we can get it if obamacare because people hate it. i size to education reform in minnesota and a democrat state we think it's impossible, but i see we can do it on a national level and it is not that i'm against health care for people,

certainly not for poor people. i want them to have it. i think we can deliver better health care at better prices directly to people because if there's anything medicare has shown us, it is fraud, blatant fraud. and we have to weed out the front. we will see an obamacare of me wants to make sure people get the finest care. the greatest quality health care for the the number of people at the lowest possible price. that's the definition of the free market. >> congresswomen continue not very much. >> thank you. >> and that's what i want to be president of the united states. >> thank you for coming. i know you're so busy. >> thank you for the opportunity. thank you so much for having me and i really appreciate it. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> good to see you. you're welcome. bye-bye. the guy who holds the boom mic gets to shake hands, too.

>> for those who say that france, for those who say that we are rushing this issue of civil rights, i say to them, we are 172 years later.

[applause] to those who say, to those who say that the civil rights program is infringement on states right, i say this: the time has arrived in america for the democratic party is to get out of the shadows of states rights and to walk forthrightly into human rights. [cheers and applause] >> next, a hearing on the future of human space exploration. nasa administrator charles bolton testifies about the international space station,

technology development and potential commercial products. the chairman of the assigned subcommittee is florida senator and former astronaut, bill nelson. this hearing is an hour and 50 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> good morning. well, nasa is cranking now. we've got -- you think back a year ago. in the years since the nasa bill, and the nasa bill is about the only thing that passed other than appropriations bills, continuing resolutions that had to be done. but until the time that we pass the trade those in patent reform bill, major legislation

nashville was the only thing and now, thanks to this lady right over here and another lady named barbara mikulski, we now have nasa funded compared to other agencies very well, given the financial and fiscal environment in which we are in at which they are cuts across the board in all agencies. you compared nasa's budgetary level with the others. nasa has come out very well. and so we now have to pass the appropriations bill that senator mikulski and senator hutchison have crafted as they have worked it out with congressman wolf and congressman fatah in the final conference report on that minibus appropriations bill that

includes minnesota. and what it does is it funds two lines of rockets and parallel. that is a balanced approach. the one line is developing a commercial rockets tt crew and cargo to and from the international space station. and lest you question anything that's going on on the international space station realized that there is a drug that is in its final fda trials. that is a vaccine for salmonella. and there have been other drug and it's starting fda trials. that is a vaccine for bursa and those are developed utilizing properties.

in addition and balanced is the parallel line of rocket and that is the big rocket. and that will have it in our naming, to my understanding, mr. administrator, orion. it will have a crew of seven and it will be the big rocket that will enable us and it will evolve over time and its capability, to get the components in the earth orbit and to go further than out in the cosmos, whether that is first target of 2025 for the asteroid before we go on in march. whether it is that promote go

back to the moon, those are still things to be determined. in the meantime, also in parallel is this plethora of other unmanned space missions and about to be launched as a volkswagen size mars rover that has a scooper that can analyze the martian soil that has a red beam that will pulverized rocks and it has two eyes that stick up, that will beam back real-time images with the transmission delay for the miners back to earth for earthlings to see this rover going around the surface. and of course, of course, we took us several months ago to venus in the meantime we have

done also a mission to the moon. the immense gravitational field as well as an earth observing satellite. so we have got a lot that is going on. and as we get ready for these two new rockets, and areas the modifications to the ground operations and ground equipment. so with that as a background, we have a very robust future and our first witness is the administrator of nasa. and then, on the second panel we have this center directors from the three primary centers charged with executing nasa's human space exploration initiatives. bob cabana is kennedy space

center. and of course, he oversees efforts to transform the center into the next generation launch complex at where the workforce resides that will one day launch the astronaut to mars. and mike coates, johnson space center, the home of mission control, the senator leading the development of the orion crew vehicle and robert lightfoot, marshal flight space center, which has designed every u.s. rocket that has ever launched humans into space and it is currently designing the space launch system. so we look forward to this. i'll return to my colleague, senator poussin. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and certainly delighted to join you on our subcommittee chair this morning on this very hearing. as always, if they privilege to

share the full city of the commerce center with her leadership along with senator nelson. we would not be in a position to hear what i would hope would be a positive message from administrator bolden and other distinguished witnesses concerning the key nasa -- the three key nasa centers. many is that the nation as a crucial crossroads in our human spaceflight program. we are for the first time in over 30 years, without the means of transporting our astronauts into space. fortunately, the passage of the 2010 nasa authorization of last year in an overwhelmingly bipartisan and bicameral show of support, provided direct she needed to remedy the situation as soon as possible. this hearing is intended to

provide the committee with a progress report on how nasa is doing in carrying forward the provisions of the law and moving us along the course outline by the love. we are in a difficult economic times as we all know the fiscal challenges are great and that is no less true of nasa and the rest of our federal household. in the relatively short time is served on the subcommittee along with my more casual observations of nasa's spaceflight programs over the years, i developed essential confidence and trust in the hard-working, dedicated people of nasa and their support contractors. i believe the technical experience, expertise and commitment if they are to meet these awareness challenges others at the somewhat diminished over the past year as we have seen the awkward come in my view, unfortunately ill-timed transition away from the space shuttle program to an all too surely defined set of

replacement programs. we now must live with maximum speed and efficiency within the constraints we face to get back on track. i look forward to the hearing today that we are making real progress in that regard. they also wanted to your 30 obstacles which remain and which my colleagues can address in the months and weeks ahead. the review is space exploration leadership is simply too important to the well-being of the nation, both economically and competitively for us to do anything less than our very best to ensure the success of what is now, i hope, our common shared plan for the u.s. spaceflight. thank you again for convening this hearing, mr. chairman. then at forward to the testimony's exchange and i yield back. >> senator hutchinson. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. i want to say first that i'm going to talk about some of the

preamble to today's hearing. but this subcommittee has been instrumental in setting the direction and the course for nasa. we have provided the leadership. and i obviously, senator nelson, you have been there from the beginning. you have been missed. , the leader, the little dog that the bug that never would give it up. all of those things that were necessary to make us go forward as we were watching the space shuttle program comes to an end. and i can't say enough good about the never give up attitude. i want to say, senator boozman,

you have jumped in and your very first term. you have met with the staff, learned all the issues. always been a supporter of nasa, the cheering effect of leader and taken a step committee, caring about it and being a major force for the things we've been able to do. thank you. and i want to say that senator rockefeller also has been at our backs. i mean, going forward he was a little skeptical frankly about the direction that nasa was going and whether it was worth doing anything. but he became convinced him he has been a champ again along with us, to get our program back on track. so, i just want to say that it has taken all of that, along with great leadership from the house, to get to the point where

we are. and i thought the congressional gold medal ceremony yesterday was inspiring. it was beautiful. and i thought it should inspire all of us that all of the work we have been doing for the last two years to get us on track is not only well worth it, but essential. that we can't be the country that is backing off at a time when other countries are gearing up to go forward. and i think we had some reestablishment to do to preserve our leadership in human spaceflight. and we are here to help make sure that happens. as we were winding down the space shuttle program, we were

not in sync with the administration. and i think congress was exercising his prerogatives and trying to come to terms with the fact that we weren't going in the right direction with the right amount of speed and vigor. what i will say that things have changed, i believe and finally in a meeting that we had about two months ago with the direct during the omb and others and mr. bolden and his deputy, we began, i believe, to forge a consensus that now has resulted in the september 14 announcement that the space launch system designed was in fact the reality. and the agreement then became

our lives, public and contracts they think i'm hoping you're going to tell me find a role here. and i will also say, while talking about the impetus that we have, barbara mikulski has been a champion to change senate committees on appropriations in order to be ranking on the subcommittee that would assure that the authorization bill that we passed would be fully implemented. i could not have done it without a partner with harper mikulski. and i believe her interest in and approach to the science mission of nasa was an enhancement to assure that we would be doing the space program

and a way that complements an odd that the science part. and so, we are 18 on that score. so now, i just want to renew my pledge for the next year and month and a half that we continue to go forward vigorously. we will oversight of vigorously. but i am hoping that we won't need the net jain further questioning because we will all have the team after feeling that we are going forward with the same goals, the same vicar, the same trust that really should be necessary to accomplish what we all want, i think it not as far as to her astronauts to space station and the other armaments

and with their own great employees, with their own experience staff and that is my goal for the next year and month and a half, for this agency and been on the appropriations site as well as the authorization site. we can make this happen. so thank you, mr. chairman. and i will look forward to hopefully hearing progress report from the administrator that is a positive one that we will go forward cindy cohn buyout. thank you. >> thank you, senator hutchison. thank you for your heartfelt remarks. i have a great colleague from florida on things that affect our state, there is very little daylight between the two of us. it's another one of those subject areas. senator rubio? >> thank you. i apologize for being a few

minutes late and after your sentiments and with our colleagues from arkansas and texas as well. let me just say they don't have some questions later on. i want to share with you an idea that makes it so good an opportunity to the inside. during the august recess has a finish in early august, kind of what i think for a vacation as he rented a. as we were driving home i went to 95 and the florida senate at the kennedy space center where we got to look at the things they put on for visitors. my parents took me there for my eighth birthday. suffice to say a lot of things have changed. my kids have never been there. but they left their come especially my beloved hero but they're very inspired by what america has accomplished in the past and the space program. i will never forget the line from president kennedy, the

actual place where he justifies america's space ambitions and uses the example of someone who immersed remicade thousands of years ago and said bye to go to space clinics the same reason why people wonder why from the other side of the mountain. america's space program has been a leader in that regard. as we left there, we watched a film about the first lunar landing. my 11-year-old daughter turning us, why don't we go to the nudity more? it's not a specific question, but in general the question younger americans have is what we do great things any more? we do do great things. it is important to remind them of the things we've accomplished and the things going on in the unmanned program thursday deltoids capability once again. the space program is indicative. we are a nation of dreamers and people that are intellectually and scientifically curious. i don't think i'm that to justify. all of the commercial scientist with military and economic progress that has come as a result of our space program.

but if you want a way to inspire people in america go to science, math and technology in the space program can do that better than any other national endeavor we have. just a few moments ago i had a meeting with the first lady of el salvador. as she was departing she picked up her iphone are black. and showed me pictures of her for her own son. you never believe what her son had on the table. a rocket that said u.s.a. on it. this is the first, a 4-year-old. i asked what you want to be when he grows up? he wants to be an astronaut. but if it does space program has met to our role in world leadership is that there is a 4-year-old boy, the son of the president who wants to be an astronaut in his inspired by america's space program. there is a replacement. there's a lot of great nations emerging, but nothing out there can take her place and nothing is for indicative the map than our space program.

the extraordinary opportunities. i want to thank you and everyone at nasa for the work you do and i hope during my six years in the senate or five years in two months by now that i've run out the clock on 10 months, they'll have an opportunity to watch as america's space program in insulator the 21st century. the thank you. >> general bolden, thank you for being here. >> mr. chairman, thank you for allowing me to be here. too many other members of the subcommittee, what to thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee today and discuss the outlook for human nasa spaceflight program. on the first to thank the congress for approving and yesterday awarding the congressional gold medal to astronaut senator john glenn, near young, michael collins. and senator nelson and senator hutchison, especially thank you both from the bottom of my heart for your inspiring words

yesterday during the ceremony. it meant a lot. contrary to popular belief, this has been an incredible year for nasa. we have completed the u.s. space station. we are taking key steps in moving into the future of exploration beyond low earth orbit and watched a private company or the spacecraft around earth and do your bit and retrieved intact. celebrated 50th anniversary of human spaceflight and witnessed the successful safe conclusion of the historic space shuttle program. orbiting 220 miles above earth right now, the international space station represents an unparalleled capability for human space-based research. the science facilities to support a variety of disciplines, the station holds the promise of good discoveries to nationals exploration fields that have improved life here on

earth. nasa has engaged other corporations in an august of this year we finalized a cooperative agreement with the center for advancement of science and space to manage the portion of the iss battery assisted laboratory to increase usage and maximizes potential. the iss will provide opportunities for at least 2020 and with yesterday's successful docking and the plan december docking of 29 asked, we will restore the crew complement to six for the nominal six-month duration. to support the iss, nasa implemented the effort to develop and demonstrate cargo transportation capabilities in the commercial resupply services or crs contracts to prefer cargo services to and from the station. nasa is pleased with progress being made by both of these

efforts and we anticipate space exploration technologies inc. and orbital sciences corp. will begin transporting cargoes to the international space station under the respect they've crs contracts next year in 2012. nasa's investor development of private sector human spaceflight capabilities to the commercial crew development initiatives. now the agency is taking the next after the commercial crew program of partnership between nasa and the private sector to incentivize companies to build and operate safe, reliable and cost-effective commercial human space transportation systems. on september 19, nasa released a draft request for proposals for phase one and the agency plans to release the final rfp for this effort by the end of this year. nasa's aggressively moving forward with their next-generation human spaceflight system by developing nearby multipurpose crew vehicle and space launch system, which will take astronauts beyond low earth orbit.

nasa's plans include an improved system tests late as the o'bryan and sls and 2017 and a crew fright passed in 2021. in may i approve this orion designed for the end cpv asset may not alter the scope of her at the space requirements. the agency's current contractual partnership with lockheed martin corp. will therefore be used for at least the development phase of the orion. an early fy 2014, nasa plans to conduct exploration tests late one and en croûte tax mission is early production variant of the orion double hull.a the vehicles he shall performance. in september, selected design for the sls, which will take astronauts farther into space and never before appeared to be evolving to capacity 130 metric

tons. sls latest liquid hydrogen system based on the shuttle's main engines and upper stage that uses the jay to x engine. while nasa plans to use by segment solid rocket boosters were at most the first two initial capability fight, there will be a competition to develop the following boosters. the rank and pcp and sls launcher will provide the united states with flexibility to conduct missions to a variety of compelling destinations such as the earth to her son heard the crunch points. and mars itself. as we look to the future of human spaceflight, nasa is working at the national research council to develop roadmaps to gather investment strategy. we are exploring innovative ways to drive the rapid pace of projects, reduced life-size costs and minimize the risk of incorporating new type elegies

and designs. nasa is also actively engaging with the international community through both the iss partnership in the international space exploration coordination group, which recently released the initial version of a global exploration roadmap. the gr examines options for expanding presence into the solar system. with a human mission to explore the surface of mars is its ultimate goal. nasa with their commercial and international partners has embarked on a new phase of human space exploration and development. and well, was the culmination of efforts of many nations to construct the iss and the beginnings of a new way of doing business. the use of commercially provided services rather than government on vehicles to transport crew and cargo to rip them back is one of the nasa to focus on sending astronauts on missions of exploration with the o'bryan and sls. we are committed to developing an affordable, sustainable next-generation human

spaceflight to stand that will human exploration, scientific discovery, brought commercial benefits and inspirational missions that are the best interest of our nation. we need your continued support to provide the funding required for this and all are human spaceflight efforts. mr. chairman, and be happy to respond to any questions you are the members of the subcommittee may have at this time. >> thank you him in general. senator boozman >> thank you, mr. senator. we appreciate your testimony and appreciate you being here. the multipurpose crew vehicle are anticipated to fly unmanned in 2017 and man gained 2021. if as well as as well as those

planning for 1.25 billion budget, can you explain what exemptions are made with respect to what those project good debates and with that kind of budget, -- senator, i will let robert lightfoot who is behind the attack to specifics of your questions, but in general, we are assuming that we are going to get 1.2 as the starting amount for sls and that's an absolute minimum, we will be allowed to escalate for inflation. otherwise it is a decreasing budget. i do need to make that very clear. so that is one budget assumption . it's if you had a $1.8 billion budget, what is the difference in getting stuff done quick >> every time you give me more money, i can get it done much more rapidly and given the

flexibility of using the funds for exploration, the combination of them pcv and the sls, we can execute a development profile, which resembles whichever it recognizes as realism, which is funding expenditures go up and down over time. the area under the curve if you want to stays the same because i will spend the same amount of money over a given period of time, but i will be allowed to vary the amount that is spent each year so we can keep the two programs moving along simultaneously and get to the same endpoint together. instead of running the risk of having one ready and having to wait while we try to bring the other one to catch up to it. >> and regard to the orion mcpv,

no contracts need to be made through the development phase is there a plan to compete the mcpv and its operational phase? one is the development phase expect it to be complete? >> i will take for the record to date that the development phase is expected to be completed because it is an evolving program and i would have to find out for you the definite date that is complete. but in terms of what are our plans for the future, we are talking about a developmental program that you are satisfied and everything else is what you want to operate with for the rest of your time and that could end up a competitive base contract. down the road we may find at that time that you may want to do similarly to what we did this time with orion and he is the

same configuration. but that is yet to be decided. >> very good. in your testimony, we talk about the exploration flight test and that it will validate innovative new approaches to space systems, development, which are expected to reduce the cost of exploration. can you elaborate a much you mean by new approaches and how cost is reduced? what other benefits are there for the slight pass? howled the flight test affect risk in some of those kinds of things quite >> every time we fly, we bite down risks. so one of its prime object is is to reduce the risk and subsequent flights and eventually the operational phase. so that is always first and foremost in my mind as a tester. if you look at the thermal protection system on the mcpv

developed for specific purposes. one of the primary goals we develop at bft one, if we find out if there is extremely high fidelity between north flight test shows in the model show, it reduces the amount of ground tests you have to do. it increases your reliance on models that means you don't have to do as many test downstream. we did a show test sometime back this past year, not directly related to sls, that it demonstrated the overbuilt things. we took a segment of a solid -- i think it was a solid rocket booster and external tank away put pressure on it until it failed. we went to failure. that showed is that we build things a lot stronger than we may need to do. you know, those are little past, but they help in the downstream design that you're going to do.

every pound we can take out of the design, every piece of wire that we don't have to put into it means decrease costs. and it also adds to reliability of the system because you don't have that many component and those are some of the things. again, i am out of my league. that is why practice experts behind me and asked them to question and they'll give you the real answer. >> thank you, mr. chairman. senator hutchison. >> thank you. mr. bolden, the president's budgets have been submitted before we had the meeting with jack lu, the omb for. as you know, the appropriations committee in congress changed the budget request from the president to fund the sls system at a level at which it can be

completed. my question is, the 2013 budget, is that being revisited now by nasa and omb and the white house to come more in line with what congress has now sent out as the appropriate funding level? >> first of all, many thank you very much. you and i have talked about this. i thought that was a banner day for the country because they represented -- it proved or demonstrated our ability to get together on both ends of pennsylvania avenue. both parties come to consensus on priorities for the future of the nation. as you remember, we all agree that the three priorities for us going forward would be sls mcpv for the space station supported by a robust commercial crew and

then the james webb space telescope is a hallmark for science programs. so i cca, establishing priorities was really, really important. we are adjusting our budget request now so as to support those priorities, but also to find ways to bring about the necessary expenditure of funds for things like technology development, without which we cannot realize those three priorities. so while sls mcpv as critical, it represents state-of-the-art. we cannot itemize the state-of-the-art. we have to think out of the box. these three guys behind me have got to have their people do imaginative things. what we find 2021 when we fly sls and mcpv, my guess is it will not resemble in many ways the vehicles flown in internal

mechanisms and sit guns may be different than what we find 2017. that's why say it why say it is an evolving program. >> let me just see if i can see if i'm understanding what you're saying. are you going to revisit the 2013 submission? and will accommodate the numbers that u.s. said we have to have two build the sls system more accurately than the submission before a meeting with mr. lu? >> senator, the numbers being developed for the 2013 budget will adequately support what we have agreed to his priorities for nasa and the nation. so that is the purpose for giving it to use so that if i have told you all -- >> it is being revisited. >> we have revisited our budget

submission and that is at work right now in the executive office of the president. the budget that will come forward for the president in february will reflect the agreements that have been made between the industry shouldn't congress as best we can. >> well, i am very hopeful that that is going to cement our trust relationship because the original proposal from last time that 1.3 billion is not going to do it. we have done adjustments on our and in the 2012 budget. and if we are in fact dollar coin in the same direction, we would expect some accommodation of that new relationship. >> senator, levey make sure that i clarify and that you understand my statement because he has made a statement about a

specific amount. i think you know i am not privy to discuss specific amounts at this time. but what i want to emphasize to you is that we have developed -- >> well, i am only putting what authority been put out. >> yes, ma'am. we have put in place a plan for the a plan for the a plan for the crew vehicle commercial p. and utilization through 2020. does being a the three top priorities for the administration and the congress. our intent is to build a budget that supports that enables us to bring the thin on the schedule that we presented to you. so that is our intent and hopefully we are seeing the same. >> so an intervening and meeting of the minds that appropriations bill on what you submitted

before the use -- >> as you will hear from senator rectors, if whenever it is that the house of zero, if the mini bus passes and is signed by the president, that is great news for the nation. it gives us firm budget numbers to which we can work. it increases the morale because they now know that they are not going to have to wait for four weeks or eight weeks or whatever it is. >> i am in agreement with you on that. but what i am asking is, is nasa going to carry forward and is the omb and the president's proposal going to carry forward what we are passing right now and not command with another

drop that forces us to have to rearrange priorities yet again. that is the question. >> let me see if i can understand the question. are you asking about the balance and allocation of funds within the nasa budget? are we going to stay exactly where we are now? you mean, for example, commercial crew and sls trant three. you know, we have a difficult road ahead in sls mpcv at the level of funding that we are right now, mutually agreed to by the congress and the white house, but these are very difficult fiscal times and we all agree that we had to take very difficult measures. we think we put forth a budget that will enable us to produce a program for exploration. we have a plan in place that we

hope will be able to develop a commercial crew and cargo that will sustain our operation and leadership on the international space station. and those things, right now i think we have put forth a budget that will do that and is in compliance with the agreement that you and i made. >> are you talking about what is going through congress now? >> no, man. i thought you're asking me about the budget being developed by the administration. >> we significantly change direction and. as to the meeting of the minds about funding the priorities. you told us what you had to happen we provided it for the sls. the commercial crew vehicle system has never been shortchanged by nasa for your administration. but sls has. so we have now set those priorities that we've agreed to them with you and mr. lu. all i am trying to find out and

just wanting a straight answer if possible, is now that we have set these priorities and when congress have put together a path forward, you are not going to back track? >> no, man. and i say again, we are going to live up to the agreement that we made to find -- sufficiently fund a system come a space launch system and a multipurpose crew vehicle that will enable us to launch testified in 2017 en croûte and a crew of flight in 2021 and get to mars by 2030. and that is what i think we mutually agreed to. and that's what we're going to do. i go back to senator said tense question of what i would do if i had my money. i don't have our money. so we will do what is necessary in terms of the allocation of

funds so that we do not back off from our commitment to space launch system that can keep us on track for this target dates. i hope that's answering the question. >> i am way over my time and i was hoping for that what i think was a straight answer. i will know for sure in february when we do get the president's budget, but now we have set the scores that we are going to stay on that course that we are on from this day forward, having the nasa budget and the mini bus. >> i do want to make sure. you know, this is a great news story where we are right now. as i said again, the agreement -- >> it is a great news story. just tell me we're going to continue. >> we are going to continue the great news story.

>> general, that is asked by a lady who is a bulldog in the appropriations committee as well as this committee. and just to provide a little more sub text, to that colloquy between the two of you, the administration had originally for this space launch system requested roughly and i am around being 1.7 for the sls in fiscal year 2012. that ended that being funded at 1.86 in the minibus appropriations. the administration had originally requested 916 million for orion and not ended up being funded at 1.2 billion, where you are having