with a, with a, multiple point proposal. which basically said -- >> we'll leave this discussion here as the u.s. senate is about to gavel in. senators will pick up where they left off yesterday after recessing unexpect he hadly due to the washington navy yard shooting. senators will begin the day with general speeches. we'll look for reaction to the shooting from lawmakers. senators will also vote today on judicial nominations and continue work on an energy efficiency bill. now live to the senate floor the chaplain: let us pray. eternal savior, who promised to never forsake us, be a shield for this land we love. as flags fly at half-staff in remembrance of the victims of yesterday's

washington navy yard shooting, teach us to use wisely all the time you give us. show your mighty power, even during this season of distress, transforming negatives into positive and dark yesterdays into bright tomorrows. today, guide our lawmakers, inspiring them in their going out and coming in, as you give them the wisdom to labor not simply for time but for eternity. lord, bless us all with strength of will, steadiness of

purpose, and power to persevere we pray in your holy name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., september 17, 2013. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable edward markey, a senator from the commonwealth of massachusetts, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore.

mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i wish we could do more, but i do ask that we now now -- i ask unanimous consent that the senate now observe a moment of silence in honor of the victims of the tragic navy yard, those killed and those suffering from the wounds inflicted in that terrible day that occurred not far from the capitol. the presiding officer: without objection. [moment of silence]

the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: following my remarks the senate will be in a period of morning business, the majority will control the first 30 minutes, the republicans the second 30 minutes. i ask consent at 11:30 senate proceed to executive session to consider the campbell-smith and kaplan nominations, both nominees to the federal claims court. following the disposition of those nominees, the senate will recess until 2:15 this afternoon to allow us to have our weekly caucus meetings. finally, at 2:15 the senate will resume consideration of s. 1392, the energy savings and industrial competitiveness act. mr. president, we're trying to come up with a finite list of amendments to move forward on that that legislation.

it's my understanding that senator vitter have an amendment he wants to offer, he's been around here a few times during the time we've been in session and we would have an amendment, second-degree or side-by-side to his amendment. but in order to do that we have to have a finite list of amendments. we can't go on with nonrelated amendments forever on this bill. so there will be one roll call vote at noon, we hope to vote on energy efficiency amendments whenever there is agreement that can be made. mr. president, there are no words that can possibly ease the pain of the rampage and certainly the deaths involving a dozen human beings who were killed yesterday at the naval yard. i hope it's some small comfort

that this city, this institution, the the united states senate and the whole nation mourn alongside them. to my knowledge there is no explanation for the violence that occurred yesterday. my thoughts are with those who are suffering as a result of the loss of their loved ones, and also those people who are recovering from their wounds and some of them are very serious. i wish them a speedy recovery. mr. president, we have about 16,000 military and civilian employees who work in the naval yard can complex. as well as their friends, family members, who were affected by this tragedy. it was only a few days ago and the officer presiding was here on that occasion also, when we as members of congress marked the anniversary of

september 11, 2001 during a ceremony on the steps of the capitol, but we had a moment of silence here in the senate. yesterday's shootings are the worst loss of life in the capitol region since those september 11 attacks. centered on the pentagon as far as in this area. last week's significant anniversary and yesterday's terrible violence are a reminder that life is fragile and freshous -- precious. a reminder of the debt we owe to those who and our safety, whether they serve in the military or as first responders. geant at arms who is responsible for our safety, was certainly on the job yesterday. he is a dedicated police officer. that's his goal. i still refer to him as chief

gaynor. he has been chief of police for the capitol police force before he took responsibility as sergeant of arms of the senate. he could have done other things. he has a law degree, he's a well educated man but his responsibility is to take care of the senate and he does that very well. i appreciate very, very much, i speak with -- for the entire senate of those dedicated police, fire, rescue, who put their lives on the line to prevent a lot more loss of life on monday. in particular, mr. president, the city owes a debt of gratitude to a canine officer, a 24-year veteran of the metropolitan police officers, a man named scott williams who was hurt very, very badly in the shootings. i wish him a full recovery. and thank him for his selflessness.

mr. president, we have to return to the business at hand. since the moment president obama signed the affordable care act, making it the law of the land and ensuring every american has access to quality health insurance, at a price they can afford, republicans have been on an absurd quest to undo this progress. republican members of congress are horrified every day, they werer horrified when you know what, the united states supreme court said the law we call obamacare, the affordable care act, is constitutional. that's what the supreme court said. in spite of this being the law of the land and it is the law of the land, house republicans alone have voted more than 40 times to repeal obamacare. and are now threatening to shut

down the entire government unless this congress denies funding to implement this very, very constitutional law. under obamacare, members of congress and their staffs will be covered by exactly the same plans that will extend health insurance to millions of americans next year. 535 members of congress and 16,000 staff are treated like other employees across america under the law. they're treated that way under obamacare. and rightfully so. and like 150 million other americans who get their health insurance through their jobs -- that is, their employer -- the federal government will share part of the cost of that health care for us, for the 16,000 who work here in the capitol complex. as it has for all federal employees for many decades. these are the people,

mr. president, in carson city, nevada, reno, nevada, and las vegas, nevada, who answer the phones and help people with problems being with social security, with veterans' benefits, whether they can be buried at the beautiful cemetery we have in fernley for veterans or the one in boulder city, we bury lots and lots of people there, veterans, mr. president. these are the inquiries we get into our offices around the state of nevada and those people work long, hard hours to respond to those requests. they're dedicated, dedicated public servants and that's who the junior senator from louisiana said no thanks, they're not entitled to anything as far as being treated like everybody else. so even more directly to the point, mr. president, members

of congress and our staff will live by the same rules and get their health care from the same exchanges as other americans. but the junior senator from louisiana, i repeat and a number of other misguided republicans want to force members of congress and their staffs to live by a different set of rules. although senator vitter has happily allowed the federal government to pay for a portion of his health insurance for many, many years, as a member of the house of representatives and as a member of the senate, now he wants to force these 16,000 congressional workers to cover the full cost of their health insurance. with this background one must ask, if senator vitter opposes the employer contribution to congressional staffers, does he oppose it also for the 150 million other americans whose employers help pay their health insurance premiums? does he want to discourage private employers from doing the right thing and providing their

employees with affordable health insurance? is that what he wants? just to do away with health insurance that 150 million americans have in america? millions, i repeat, millions and millions of employers rely on this important benefit to attract the best and brightest and hardestworking people they can find. ending the employer contribution would effectively slap 150 million americans with a pay cut and a big pay cut. is that senator vitter's intention? if republican senators believe they should bear the full cost of their own health insurance, they can without any change in the law can decline the federal government's employer contribution and pay their own way. they can even encourage their own staffs to do so. why they would want to do that i don't understand but they can do that. but for senator vitter and uz republican allies to end the contribution for 16,000

hardworking federal employees, even after years of accepting the subsidy themselves is hypocritical and mean-spirited. in truth, this is only the latest republican attempt to derail the successful implementation of obamacare. last november, there was a big poll taken, it's called an election. where americans overwhelmingly voted to reelect president obama. and to keep obamacare as the law of the land. that was the issue of the campaign. who won that? the american people won. and president obama won. and obamacare, the constitutional law of the land, the american people said let's go ahead and do it. so americans have spoken very loudly and very clearly. it's time to move on to something else. it's the law. and it has been.

and on october 1, about 25 million americans who have no health insurance will have for the first time in their entire lifetime the ability to get insurance and what we found in new york alone, the insurance is going to save 50% of what i it did before. it's 50% cheaper. nevada, -- nevada is cheaper. that's the way it is all over the country. according to the voters and the supreme court of the america, obamacare is the law of the land. it's time for republicans to mature. i guess you could say it in a davedifferent way -- "to grow u" and recognize that this is the law in america and has been for years. it is time for republicans to stop denying reality. the senate should be passing

other stuff, mr. president. we should be passing an energy efficiency bill. it'll save taxpayers money, create good-paying jobs -- we need that. bridges -- i've said here before, 70,000 bridges are in a state of disrepair. yesterday a report came out that 8,000 of them are near collapse -- 8,000. we're not spending money to traik care otakecare of that pr. our highways, our roads, our dams need money. this, mr. president, isn't money that just goes to the federal government so you can have a truck that says "federal government building a road or fixing a davment" the money goes to the private sector. that's what we should be doing. for every $1 billion spend and doing something about the highways, bridges, roads, dams,

water systems, sewer systems, we create 47,500 high-paying jobs and thousands of other jobs spin off from them. that's what we should be doing. we should be facing the reality of climate change. look what happened in colorado. i talked to senator bennet yesterday. he said the floods were biblic biblical. in one part of colorado, it rained 12 inches in two hours. i can't imagine that. fires all over the west ... climate change is here. i met with the foreign minister of bangladesh. they don't know what they're going to do with the rise of the

sea, which is taking place. that country has no place -- there's no high ground. it's that way all over the wor world. martial islands -- 1,000 islands manx the martial islands. -1,000 islands make up the martial islands. these people are being washed away. they're spending all of our time, the american taxpayers' time, trying to repeal a law that's been in effect for four years. we should be doing is something about immigration reform. they talk about wanting to do something for the economy. try passing immigration reform. it creates to the positive $1 trillion. it would reduce our debt by $1

trillion. let's do that. let's fix our broken tax system. we should be doing those things, not relitigating a four-year-old policy battle. instead of working with democrats to effectively implement obamacare or pass a new law that benefits middle-class families, republicans are obsessed with fighting a real old battle, and they're doing it at taxpayer expense. and instead of stating what million of americans are already benefiting from obamacare, republicans are standing with insurance companies that would return us to a time when profits came before people. that's the way it was. since president obama signed the affordable care act into law, insurance companies can no longer discriminate against children with preexisting conditions. that's a good deal.

you have a child with diabetes, that boy or girl can't be denied insurance. epilepsy -- can't be denied insurance. and in just a short few months, mr. president, all americans will no longer be able to be denied insurance coverage because of a preexisting illness. they can no longer raise your rates for no reason. they can no longer drop your coverage if you get sick. that's the law today. today children can no longer be denied insurance. as i've indicated, because they're born with a disease or disability. and that i repeat, will soon be extended to all americans, no matter their age. now listen to this one -- and very soon a woman will no longer be considered a preexisting condition, as it was before

obamacare passed. in my relatively sparsely populated state of nevada, tens of thousands of seniors have saved tens of millions of dollars on medicines because the affordable care act has helped close the gap on prescription drug coverage. more than 3 million young people, including 33,000 young nevadans, have been able to stay on their parents' health policies until they're 26 years old. 3 million. and hundreds of thousands of businesses that already offer their employees health insurance are getting tax credits for doing the right thing. in just a few months, almost 130 million americans are preexisting conditions -- and what are some of these preexisting conditions? i talked about it generally a minute ago. high blood pressure, all kinds of things that happen as you get older -- will have access to

reasonably priced coverage, no matter their high blood pressure or their heart condition or whatever the situation might be. and 25 million americans can't afford insurance today will be offered health insurance on the exchanges. republicans have been trying for years to force millions of american families once again to rely on the most expensive care in america today is where? emergency rooms. hospitals hate it because it runs -- their bad debt goes up and all it does is drive up the cost of insurance much the care is not as good as it would be if they could go when they first get sick. they go there out of desperation. that's what i assume the republicans want everyone to do. everyone can go to an emergency room, but it's so expensive. so pus punishing the hardworking

federal staff won't roll back the benefits of obamacare. punishing congressional staffers won'stafferswill hurt thousandsd women including senator vitter's colleagues and his own stavment instead of denying obamacare is a care or purposely trying too derail its implement takers it is time for senator vitter to help us to aprof the law of the land and make ensure ever american has access to the kind of care that members of congress enjoy already, as do 150 other americans who get health care through their employers. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: this morning all of us are thinking about yesterday's tragic events at the navy yard, and we're also

thinking, in particular, of the brave men and women of our military and the sacrifices they make day in and day out on our behalf. once again i'd like to extend condolences to the families and friends of those who lost their lives or were injured in this terrible, terrible shooting. know that your country is with you in these most difficult moments. i had wili'd also like to expree gratitude too all the first responders and medical personnel and law enforcement officers from so many different agencies who worked together to keep all of us nr informed and, most of , safe throughout the day. i have a statement oner in subject, which i would -- on another subject, which i would ask unanimous consent be inserted in the record at this point. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved.

under the previous order, there will now be a period of morning business until 11:30 a.m. with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each, with the majority controlling the first 30 minutes and the republicans controlling the next 30 minutes. mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: mr. president, fraflags across america are beig flown at half-mast this morning because of the terrible tragedy which occurred out that door one and a half miles yesterday. men and women who worked for our department of defense to keep america safe reported to work as usual on a monday morning, and then tragedy struck. a gunman appeared with a a a ast wife, several otherrence with. at the end of it, 12 innocent people died, another dozen or so

seriously injured. this capitol was in shock. it was locked down at some point to ward off the obligate there were other shooters -- to ward off the possibility there were other shooters and more danger outside. we watched as the people who worked at the navy yard and those who worked in adjoining buildings waited patiently for the floi flois police to do thet and courageous work. at the end of the day they showed television footage of that's employees being bussed away from the navy yard to a safe metro location to return home. all but 12 of them, who sadly lost their lives to this senseless gun tragedy. we read the papers this morning trying to understand what could possibly motivate a person to do this, and as we read the background of the shooter, it was clear there were moments in his life when he had use add

firearm -- he had used a firearm to shoot fires of a car that he thought shouldn't be parked in his driveway, shot a gun in the ceiling of his applicant. those things might have been warning signals. how could a man with that kind of background wind up getting the necessary security clearance for a military contractor to go into this navy yard, to be permitted to go i into this navy yard? how did he get this assault rifle and other firearms, questions that still remain to be answered? god forbid we go on with business as usual and not understand what happened yesterday. what happened yesterday brings into question some important values in america. if we value our right for ourselves and our families and our children to be safe, if we value this constitution, if we value the right of every american to enjoy their

liberties with reasonable limitations, then we need to return to issues that are of importance. there was an issue before the senate several months ago, a bipartisan amendment offered by senators manchin and toomey that would have taken an extra step to keep guns out of the hands of those who have a history of felonies and all who are mentally unstable. the vast majority of americans think this is just common sense. we can protect the right of law-abiding americans to use guns in a responsible way for hurhunting and self-defense bute have to keep guns out of the hands of those who would misuse them, felons, the mentally unstable who can't be trusted to have a firearm. but today we pause and reflect on the lives lost. i hope the lesson is learned.

i had a hearing scheduled this morning before the senate judiciary committee on a controversial issue involving firearmfirearmsfirearms. in light of what happened yesterday, in light of the uncertainty of our schedule today, i'm rescheduling that hearing. it's an important one, and i want to say to those who are following it that it will be rescheduled. but at this point in time we have decided to postpone it for today to another day in the near future. mr. president, let's talk for a minute about the vitter amendment that's on the floor. one half of all americans have a common experience, and the experience is this: they get health insurance where they work. one half of all americans. and for virtually all of them, their employer pays for part of their health insurance premium. and the employer gets a tax break. if you own a company and offer health insurance to your imleerks we have whaemployees, l

the employer's exclusion for health care benefits. what you pay for your employees' health care benefits is excluded from your income for tax purposes. it is one of the most expensive exclusions but it a valuable one because it encourages businesses to offer health insurance to their employees. which is impor÷ importantor those families, important for our nation. and when it comes to the federal government the same rule applies. the employer, the federal government, offers health insurance to its employees under what is known as the federal employees health benefit program. eight million americans representing federal employees and their families, get their health insurance through the federal employees health benefit program. it includes members of congress. we don't have a special health insurance plan, we have the same plan that millions of federal employees have. and our staff, our staff enjoy those same privileges. well, now we're in a period of

transition because of the new affordable care act. this affordable care act says from this point forward that members of congress as well as their staff members will no longer be insured by the federal employees health benefit program but instead will become part of the insurance exchanges that were created. these exchanges, which are going to be in virtually every state either because of state sponsorship, federal sponsorship or shared responsibility will offer loorches plans across america so those who don't currently have health insurance today will be able to apply for a plan under the insurance exchange. if they are extremely low-income individuals they will get help, subsidies and tax treatment that help them pay for their premiums. the notion is no matter where you live, you will have access to health insurance. and the health insurance offered

by these exchanges and by every other company in america will change because of this law. change for the better. senator reid spoke about it earlier. preexisting conditions, how many of us don't have a preexisting condition, there's somebody in our family with a preexisting condition. perhaps someone in your family was treated for cancer or diabetes or even mental illness. in the past, health insurance companies could discriminate against you and say sorry, we don't offer health care plans to cancer survivors. well, that's no longer the case. this new law, the affordable care act, so-called obamacare, says that health insurance policies from this point forward have to cover preexisting conditions. not just in children when it's implemented but adults as well. the republicans are saying we want to repeal that. we don't want to put that new provision in the law.

we don't want to cover those, require health insurance companies to cover those with preexisting conditions. there's another change in the law. some health insurance policies will have limits on how much they'll pay. be dareful. if your health insurance plan says we will cover your bills up to, say, $100,000, be careful. you could go in tomorrow or someone in your family and be diagnosed with a cancer condition, requiring extensive medical care that far exceeds $100,000 of cost. under obamacare, there are no limits on health insurance protection. if you have a terrible illness or someone in your family does, the insurance policy will cover you. the republicans want to repeal this provision so that they can set limits on health insurance policies, limits which could literally bankrupt a family with a terrible mental -- terrible

medical condition which they are working on and trying to deal with. that's one of the provisions that's in obamacare that the republicans want to repeal. the issue on the floor today is the vitter amendment. senator vitter is from louisiana and he came to the floor last week and he said since members of congress and their staff are now going into these insurance exchanges, it is time for us to eliminate the employer contribution for members of congress and their staff. they have to pay it all, 100% of the premium. unlike 150 million americans who get insurance through their employment and their employer pays a portion of it, when it comes to congressional staff and members of congress, no employer contribution, pay it all. well, it turns out that that's exactly the opposite of the way senator vitter voted on the floor of the united states senate. on amendment offered by senator grassley, 3564 on the

affordable care act, senator vitter voted during the debate on this issue to protect the right of congressional employees and others for employer contributions. now he's reversed himself. now says no employer contribution. this is unfair. it is unfair to do this to the employees of the senate as well as the members. all that we are asking is that this group of individuals be treated the same as every other american with health insurance through their employment. my fear is that this isn't the end of senator vitter's crusade against health insurance by employers. i think this is the first step. the next step could be to eliminate the employers' contribution for health insurance across the board. that would be devastating. absolutely devastating and fundamentally unfair. to see workers across america, not just congressional employees, federal workers,

workers in the private sector, paying the entire premium with no employer contribution. that's a good way to eliminate coverage, not to expand it and we should be expanding health insurance coverage. i listened to the senator from louisiana describe the employers' contribution to health insurance as a federal subsidy. a federal subsidy. i guess technically he's right. because the tax code says to employers we'll give you special positive tax treatment if you offer health insurance. so the tax code does, in fact, subsidize all employers who offer to pay a part of their employees' health insurance premiums. okay, i'll accept that definition. but that is a worthy subsidy. even though it's the most expensive provision in the tax code, it is a worthy subsidy because it encourages more health insurance, it makes it more affordable for working

families in louisiana, illinois, massachusetts, michigan, and across the united states. if senator vitter is going out to attack an employer's contribution to health insurance as a federal subsidy we can no longer afford, say it on on tour of the senate. i urge my colleagues to stand up for working families in america, in the private sector, in the public sector, our congressional employers, even members of congress to be treated the same, no special preference for members of congress, but employer contribution protected under the law regardless of whether you buy the plan in the private sector or in the public sector. i think this is an important vote. and i think some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle so determined to end obamacare, so determined to put an end to this effort to reduce the increased cost of health

insurance premiums and to make health insurance more available to people across america and basically a sound investment for your health insurance future, i think those republicans who are determined to eliminate that have some questions to answer. they want to eliminate the provision in obamacare which says that parents can keep their kids under their health insurance policy until that young man or woman reaches the age of 26. is it important? well, do have you a son or daughter graduating college soon who can't find a full-time job? are you worried about whether they'll have health insurance? they can stay on your policy, mom and dad, until they reach the age of 26. the republicans want to repeal it. also, we have a prescription drug program for seniors. it's very popular. part d says we're going to help seniors pay for medicine so they can stay well and healthy and independent and strong and not end up in a hospital or

convalesce entd center or a nursing home. we in the obamacare bill extend the protection of this prescription program for medicare recipients. the republicans want to repeal that. how in the world can that be in our best interest? for seniors, many on fixes incomes with limited savings to pay more for the prescription drugs? is that the republican answer? it's not a good one if that's what they're proposing. so when it comes to quality health insurance that won't discriminate against people for preexisting conditions, when it comes to quality health insurance that has to offer maternity benefits, hard to believe, isn't it, health insurance plans before obamacare could seclude -- exclude maternity benefits. up to 60% of the policies don't cover the birth of a child. they have to now under obamacare but the republicans would repeal

that requirement leaving more women in a situation where they have to pay out of pocket for prenatal care and the delivery of a child. how can that be in the best interests of a healthy america? we want moms as soon as they know they're pregnant to see a doctor, have that healthy, happy baby that makes such a difference in your life. is it important? i think it is. it's in obamacare and the republicans want to repeal it. why? if they want to change some provisions, if they want to debate and amend them, let's do it. when it grets down to it there's not a perfect law that's ever been passed. we can always change them for the better p. if we do it in good faith in the democratic way, small d, and that's the way it should happen. but instead the house of representatives which the presiding officer served in before joining us here in the senate has voted 41 times to repeal obamacare. 41 times.

one time a republican leader over there tried to change one provision, perhaps even improve it and his own republican caucus turned on him and said no, no, no, we don't want-term prove it. the last thing i want to say is this: those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it. i think that's etched on the side of one of our buildings downtown here. the year was 1935. franklin delano roosevelt looked around america and saw that the poorest group of americans turned out to be elderly people, people who could no longer work and had nowhere to turn and sadly, many of them had no choice. they want to live among poor people in a poor house or if they were lucky enough, their kids took them in. if you hear the story of your own family and can remember back then, grandma and grandpa pagano moved in that spare bedroom because he couldn't work anymore and they had nowhere to turn. so franklin roosevelt in 1935

said let's create an insurance program. you pay premiums on this insurance plan while you're working and when you reach the age of 65, we'll pay you at least some money each month to get by. they called this insurance plan social security. it was part of the new deal under franklin roosevelt. pretty sensible but controversial, too. you know what the republican reaction was to social security in 1935? here on the fly of the united states senate there was a republican filibuster to stop roosevelt from implementing social security. they wouldn't let him open the social security offices he needed nor give him the staff, a republican filibuster stopped it. then in 1936, the republican candidate for president was alf landon, a progressive republican governor from kansas. alf landon said if i am elected president of the united states in 1936 my first act of office will be to repeal social

security. and then when they started implementing it, the chamber of commerce in washington here sent out notices to employees across america to put a notice in the pay ng envelope and it said the 1% you're paying in the social security mr. worker is never going to help you. you're never going to see a penny of it and the only way to stop it is to vote against this fellow named roosevelt. does any of this sound familiar? does this playbook sound like something you've seen recently? it's capital what -- exactly what the republicans are doing to the affordable care act to the effort by this congress and this president to make health insurance more affordable, to make the policies for valuable, to help working families and try to make sure that those who were uninsured have a chance to buy insurance because uninsured people get sick, too, and they go to the hospital and they get treated and when they can't pay, we pay for it. we pay for it. everybody with a health insurance plan pays more because

those people in the hospital can't afford to. if we bring more and more people into insurance coverage under obamacare, it's going to mean they accept the certainly responsibility to buy health insurance and their bills don't become our bills. republicans want to repeal that. they are replaying the same script and same scenario that we saw when they tried to abolish social security. let's not let it happen. let's move forward in a positive way. health insurance is more than just some privilege. from my point of view it's one of the most basic rights of this country. if you have ever, ever been in a situation with a serious illness in your family and when you have no health insurance, you'll never forget it. it happened to me and my wife. we'll never forget it as long as we live. i don't want to see another family in that situation. repealing obamacare could create it. i hope that we have the good sense to vote down the vitter

amendment, stand for good, affordable health insurance for working families whether they work in the private sector, the public sector, for congress, make sure they have a employer's contribution. the vitter amendment is a step back in time. it is a step back in time that will eliminate the protection of health insurance for literally thousands if not millions of americans. that is not the way to go. it may make sense to the senator from louisiana. it makes no sense to the woshin- to the working families of america. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. levin: mr. president, i want to say a brief word about yesterday's tragic and sense lings -- and senseless violence at the washington navy yard. the men and women who protect our nation make enormous sacrifices for us. face ago workplace -- facing a

workplace gunman should not have been one of them. those of us who have died or been wounded and their families are in our thoughts and hearts today. i come to the floor to discuss another act of senseless violence and our nation's response. in the early morning hours of august 21 is the syrian military began firing artillery rockets into the suburbs east of damascus, hitting neighborhoods held by opposition forces. they have -- that had been fighting to end the brutal dictatorship of bashar a al-ass. we know that many of these rockets were armed with warheads carrying sarin, a deadly nerve gas. we know that these rockets were launched from areas under the control of assad's regime using munitions meamunitions known tof

assad's arsenal. we know from the report of the u.n. weapons inspectors released yesterday that the weapons used, both the rockets and the chemical itself, were a professional manufacture including weapons known to be in syria's government's arsenal. floss other source -- there is no other source of this deadly gas except the syrian government. nothing else makes any sense whatsoever now, mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent at this time that the next two and a half pages approximately of my statement be inserted in the record at this point as though read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. levin: mr. president, some have expressed doubt that assad and russia will follow through on the agreement which was reached in geneva. to address these doubts, we must inspector, verify, and continue to hold open the option of a strike against assad's chemical capability if he fails to fully abide by the yen general agreement. -- by the geneva agreement.

what i do not understand is why some of the same voices who called for the united states to get russia to end its obstructionism now criticize the president for getting the russian's involved. mr. president, i was disappointed to hear my michigan colleague, congressman mike rogers, make the irresponsible claim that this agreement amounts to -- quote -- "being led by the nose" -- close quote -- by russia. that contradicts his previous statements that we need to put pressure on russia to get involved in a solution to the syrian threat. chairman rogers has also said that "what keeps me up at night, we know of at least a dozen or so sites in syria that have serious chemical weapons caches" and he stressed that "all the right steps are taken that we

don't lose that's caches and nothing serious happens." thanks to a threat to the take military action, the russians are finally getting involved in getting syria to respond and we have taken a major step towards securing these chemical weapons, as chairman rogers himself so strongly urged. we need not rely on good intentions from those who have not shown good intentions in the past. it was the credible threat of the use of military force that brought russia and syria to the bargaining table. it is a continued credible threat of military force that will keep them on track to uphold the provisions of that agreement. the president has made it clear and rightfully so that if diplomacy fails, the united states remains prepared to act.

secretary kerry, standing right beside his russian counterpart in geneva, emphasized that this agreement in no way limits president obama's option to use force, if it becomes necessary. now, many of our colleagues have stressed repeatedly in recent weeks that the credible force, the credible threat of military force is essential to reining in assad, and i strongly agree. for the life of me, i cannot understand why those who have taken that position would now argue, as some of those same colleagues are arguing, that the geneva agreement is somehow of little or no use because, they say, it somehow removes the option to use force. the geneva agreement says nothing of that sort. but their argument isn't just inaccurate; it is damaging to our efforts.

why would those who believe that the threat of force is essential to keeping pressure on syria and russia want to argue that it is no longer available? why would those who have accurately said that the yours does not need -- that hav arguee geneva position leaves us in the position of needing to get international approval to use force in this case when the geneva agreement does nothing of the sort. some have criticized the geneva agreement for not doing more to aid the syrian opposition. russia and syria tried to get an agreement from us to not support the opposition, but they failed to get that agreement from us in the general jeep agreemen geneve

else. the administration is seek being ways to facilitate the additional support for the opposition that so many of us believe is essential. i believe we should facilitate the provision of additional military aid to the opposition, particularly the vetted elements of syria's opposition forces, including antitank weapons. such aid will help the syrian people defend themselves from the brutal assad regime, furthering our goal of bringing a negotiated end to this -- to his rule. and i find it troubling, mr. president, that so much of the commentary on this topic has not dealt with substance and policy. washington has been and always will be a political town, but have we now reached the point where politics seems to be the only lens through which so many people around here view the most and serious matters of the day

a, including national security? speculation as to motives or about potential winners or losers or who's up or down miss the point cht this is not an ice skating content with points awarded for style. what is important is our national security and whether this agreement advances it. removing weapons of mass destruction from the hands of a brutal dictator, a preliminary outcome, yes, but real and tangible, is the direct ands --s the direct result of american leadership. a month or a year or five years ago an agreement to eliminate assad's chemical weapons would have been seen as a significant gain for our security and for the world's security and not just for the president who achieved it. but far more importantly, again, for the safety of our people, of our troops, and the entire

world. i hope, as we begin with the hard work of implementing this agreement and as we seek an end to bashar el-assad's rule that we can keep an eye on those rules and skip the score keeping and inaccurate potshots that distract us from achieving those goals. mr. president, i note the absence of a erm quo. -- i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. thune: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. thune: i ask that the quorum call be dispensed with.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president -- as we raise today, i want to talk about the economy and the need to create an economic climate that encourages job growth and strengthens the middle class. but before i do that i do want to acknowledge, as many of my colleagues have, the tragedy that occurred here yesterday at the washington navy yard. we're going to debate a lot of issues, the business of the country goes on, the business of the senate goes on, but for the families of the victims of that tragedy yesterday, things stand still. and it's important for all of us, i think, to take a moment and to mourn with them the loss that they've experienced and to extend our thoughts and prayers to their fails and their loved ones much -- to their families and their loved ones. it is a terrible, terrible tragedy. as we continue the back and forth on the issues today, i hope we'll remember an keep in our thoughts and prayers those

memberfamilies. yesterday the president gave a speech yesterday where he was pivoting back to the economy, a topic that millions of unemployed americans haven't had the luxury of pivoting away from. for most americans they're living this economy every single day in their lives. so when the president talks about pivoting back to the economy, this has been a repivot and a repivot many, many times -- he talks about something else and then talks about coming back to the economy. well, for the american people, the economy is, was, and will continue to be the issue for them and their families. as the president steps up his rhetoric to convince a skeptical public that his policies have somehow helped our economy, i think it is important to point out that the president's policies, according to the facts, simply aren't working. the reality is the participation of the labor force continues to decline. the august jobs numbers reported

labor participation rate of 63.2%, the lowest participation rate since august of 1978, 35 years ago, when president carter was president. what this means, mr. president, is that thousands of americans hadn't given up looking for work. the unemployment rate would be over 10%. we talk about the reported unemployment rate, which is 7.3-7.4 -- but the real unemployment should include those who have quit looking for work. when you add those n.r.c in, the goes up to 10%. those individuals accounted for p 37.9% of the unemployed. so we're not seeing any improvement in the area of people who have been without jobs for a long period of time. worse yet, 60% of the jobs created this year were part-time jobs. we continue to seekers

mr. president, evidence -- we continue to see, mr. president, evidence that president obama's policies are leading to not the creation of full-time jobs but the creation of part-time jobs. americans are having to work more than one job to make ends meet and therefore reducing the take-home pay for them and their families. takehome pay has gone down during this president's time in office. the americans understand that the economic's president's economic policies have fallen short. that's why as you look at these various polls, most americans disapprove of the president's handing of the economy. this administration's policies are hurting jobs and our economy. mr. president, the president's signature health care law is probably as much to blame for that as anything else. as i talk to employers in my state and across the country, the recurring theme is that the mandate, the requirements, all the new red tape associated -- and the higher taxes with the

president's health care law is meaning higher taxes and fewer hours for american workers. according to americans for tax reform, there are 20 new or higher taxes in obamacare that will hit american families and small businesses. as a result of these taxes and other policies in obamacare, the president's signature health care law significantly impacting what matters most to people. that is their jobs and their ability to provide for their families. it's no secret that a good job is a critical part of the american dream. but this president's policies are putting that drea dream farr and farther out of reach. nancy pelosi declared at the time, "this bill is not only about the health security of the america, it is about jobs. in its life it will create 4 million jobs, 400,000 jobs almost immediately." the former speaker's claims run completely contrary and counter to what we are seeing.

people are working fewer hours and as the numbers i presented before demonstrate, fewer people are actually participating in the labor force. americans are discouraged by lack of economic growth and by obamacare's impact on employers and their ability to offer quality jobs. it is taking its toll on our economy. just last week investor business daily reported at least 258 employers cut work hours or jobs so far. according to the united states chamber of commerce 71% of small businesses say the law makes it harder to hire workers. and according to the july fed beige book, the health care law has been cited as a job market concern and they go on to quote from that report, several retailers reported that the affordable care act would lead to more part-time and temporary versus full-time hiring, end quote. the president's health care law is smothering employers in bureaucratic red tape,

uncertainty and taxes. already 20,000 pages have regulations have come from the 2700-page law. the time and cost of complying with these regulations places a serious burden on the ability to spend time and energy creating new jobs, time and money spent opening a new store, increasing hours, upgrading equipment that would create more jobs is instead being spent on lawyers and consultants that have to help small businesses interpret all of the regulations, all the requirements and all the mandates created by this administration's health care law. poll after poll, mr. president, have money shoan that obamacare is extremely unpopular among a majority of americans. according to a recent cnn poll nearly 60% of americans said they oppose the democrats' signature law. i would hope that the president would begin to be honest with the american people about what this law truly means for jobs and for our economy.

and i would hope that he would begin to listen to americans. if he does, he'll find out what most of us have discovered a long, long time ago, the american people don't want this. american employers and small businesses believe it will lead to fewer jobs and lower take-home pay for the people that they employ. so, mr. president, i would hope that in the days ahead as we focus on the economy and as the president is sincere about his pivot back to the economy he will take into consideration what reallily ails the economy, that is excessive taxes, regulations, red tape, bureaucracy, mandates and requirements many of which are associated with his signature achievement and that is the obamacare health care legislation. what the country does not need right now is another tax increase. what the country needs right now, mr. president, are policies that will expand and grow the economy, that will reform our tax code in a way that lowers rates and makes us

more competitive in the global marketplace, that unleashes american energy to give us a competitive advantage over our foreign competitors and we can do that by all the president has to do is sign off for example on the keystone x.l. which would create thousands of jobs immediately and many more once it's fully built and working. mr. president, it would also mean we do away with the onerous, burdensome requirements of the obamacare legislation and replace it with policies that make sense, that actually focus on what will give americans more access to affordable health care in this country. that we reduce spending here in washington, d.c., and quit looking at every solution as -- every problem as an opportunity to raise taxes. that seems to be the democrats' solution for everything, their budget proposed a trillion-dollar tax increase, the leader of the democrats here in the senate has said tax reform has to include a trillion dollars in new taxes. it's not new taxes, it's -- i

shouldn't say revenues that is the problem here in washington, mr. president. it is spending. if you look at revenueses they're up $284 billion the first 11 months of this year. don't want have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. we don't need another tax increase, we need policies that will lower the rates, get rid of the he red tape and regulations strangling our economy and allow our small businesses to create jobs, make lives better for middle-class americans and improve the take-home pay for every family in this country. the job-killing mandates in obamacare are harmful to our economy, they are harmful to jobs. it is time, mr. president, that we delay or repeal it and replace wit commonsense alternatives and we believe that discussion needs to occur and i hope the president will allow it to occur. it's time to focus on defense revenue-neutral tax reform, repeal the mandates in obamacare, and get rid of a lot of government red tape and regulations that make it more expensive for employers, for small businesses to create jobs.

mr. president, those are the types of things that will get the economy unleashed, that will expand and grow the economy and create more jobs for ordinary working class americans who are without work and get the take-home pay for families in this country up and allow the quality of life and the standard of living to improve for every american family. mr. president, with that i yield the floor. mr. isakson: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. isakson: before i make my remarks i'd like to join senator thune on the others on the senate floor to expressed their compassion and sympathy to the survivors and victims of yesterday's terrible tragedy in washington navy yrd yard. yesterday was another grim reminder of the dangerous society we live in and the dangers that can confront all of us and the need for us to be aware and do everything we can to make sure our environment is secure and safe. but to those who were injured,

those who sacrificed their lives, those whose loved ones were hit, may god bless their souls and god bless them in their recovery as they deal with a terrible 2r5e7b8d. mr. president, in marietta, georgia, my hometown, there will be a celebration that i cannot attend. there will be a celebration to honor 50 years of medical service to our community by dr. john d. knox jr. i hate it that i can't be there because he's been an important part in my life but i wanted to take a minute on the floor of the senate to pay tribute to dr. knox and all those physicians who deliver health care to our people and citizens of our state, our district and our country. as i pondered what i would say about john knox on the floor this morning i was sitting in my office looking at the plaques and certificates that all of us receive for various things we've done in public life. and it occurred to me when you go in a doctor's office you'll see a diploma, you might see a norman rockwell painting but really the trophies and the tributes to doctors are people walking around with too two feet

around your community who survived a terrible injury, a terrible disease, living a normal life because a physician in his training or her training brought them back to life or cured a terrible problem. dr. john knox has done that for 50 years in my community, 50 years as an orthopedic specialist and surgeon. one of the largest orthopedic practices in the southeast. in fact, one of those great trophies to john d. knox jr. is my son, kevin, who in 1989 went through the windshield of a pickup truck, double compound fracture of his right leg, landed in a ditch of the dirty water and laid there for two hours before help came. fortunately he didn't sever an artery but he was in bad shape. i got the call at 4:00 a.m. no parent wants to guilty, they had think son, this did they want to take him to augusta, nobody in rural georgia had the sphailt to treat his injuries.

i asked them to bring him to marietta, to and immediately called john d. knox and asked if they would meet my son at at their emergency room. the next six weeks my son had four deliveries surgeries, had antibiotic they were to make sure his bone marrow did not get infected. for eight months he got psychiatric and psychological help and home recovery with his wife, with his mom, myself, doctors and those physicians recommended by john knox. and the great story is the night before my son was injured he started as defensive end for walton high school. one year later after this terrible wreck and the recovery he again started defensive end for walton high school. the miracle of medicine put my son back together. if it wasn't for john d. knox my son might not be here today. i want dr. knox to know what he did in 1989 for my son and for countless thousands of citizens of our community for years and

years never will go unappreciated and always be recognized. i'm glad my family was a part of his 50 years of service as a physician. god bless john dnchlt knox and congratulations on your service to our great community of cobb county, florida. i -- georgia. i yield the floor to the distinguished senator from indiana. the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. coats: yesterday the president indicated that we need to pivot back to fiscal issues facing this country, and facing the congress. this afternoon a year of little sense of urgency on perhaps the most pressing and challenging domestic issue before us, and, of course, issues like syria and foreign policy issues have to be addressed, but we have had a year in this congress, this current congress, to

address our fiscal issues 0 something knowing that we were moving toward a drop-dead date fiscally of september 30. here we are now more than half way through september just, again, beginning to take up the issue that is going to direct the festival future of this country. the clock is ticking away, and we have spent little time addressing this issue and preparing for what is coming. so here we are once again careening toward one more fiscal cliff. the american people are sick and tired of this. i think the senate and the congress are second and -- sick and tired of doing this. yet we find ourselves careening up against a deadline knowing that we have to provide funding to keep our economy moving forward and keep our government moving forward with essential services. clearly we can all argue for a number of things that don't need

to be funded or can be postponed, but they are essential functions of this federal government that can't be handled any other way and we have to provide that funding for that. national security being the top priority, homeland security, we continue to see issues in terms of providing safety for american workers at their workplace, for our military and the tragedy that occurred yesterday at the naval yard. these all come under the rubric of providing law enforcement, and homeland security enforcement for our people. so these are essential functions. and unless we come to some agreement by the end of this month we're going to shut all that down. our troops won't get paid, our homeland security people won't get paid, a whole number of other essential functions will not be able to take place. so we have a lot of work before us, and very little time to do

it. we also know that very quickly shortly after the end of this month, if don't want pass an ongoing resolution to provide for funding while we work out some of our differences, we also will be addressing reaching the national debt limit and we're going to have to address whether or not to raise and if so, how much to raise the current limit at which we are able to woreo -- borrow money from. we are today looking at a debt limit of -- unimaginable national debt of $16.7 trillion. and growing every day. all of you who have seen -- all of us who have seen the debt clock ticking away are astounded at the rate we spend. and how much we have to borrow in order to cover our spending,

because the revenues do not match the spending. we've been in a spending addiction here for decades. as if money just falls from trees or can justing printed down at the fed and we don't pay any consequences for that financially. we've been in a five-year limp growth of this economy, timid growth that's not putting people back to work, the economy is not working well, yet we still are spending way beyond our means and that also has to be addressed. in the last 0 years, federal spending has grown 63% faster than inflation. and so it's clear that without changes, mandatory spending including net interest is going to consume three-fourths of the federal budget in just one decade. almost half of that spending will go towards social security

and health care entitlements. in 2002, that percentage was 25%. and now it's 45%. far too little has been done to create address this runaway spending train. instead of waiting for another crisis to hit, instead of governing from one fiscal cliff to another, isn't it time that we work together on a plan to reduce our debt and curb the rate of mandatory spending? this is a matter of extreme importance. it can't be solved with a deal at the 11th hour. now, the fact is there's been a lot of talk around here about putting us on a path to fiscal solvency but no real action and the clock continues to tick. so i would like to ask the president and the senate majority leader at what point do they think we should start acting on a plan to reduce our debt.

$17 trillion? $20 trillion? $25 trillion? at what point, mr. president,, at what point do we say this is unsustainable? this is driving us toward insolvency. we need to take action. how much red ink is too much? when will the president draw a red line on debt and borrowing? when pressed, the president says he actually has a fiscal plan. just continue to raise taxes, pass another one of his stimulus spending plans --, the last one didn't work too well -- and adopt his budget that doesn't have the support of his own party. clearly the president is unwilling to lead on our fiscal crisis. and absent that leadership, i am urging my colleagues here in the senate, republican and democrat, let's focus on this important issue, let's put something on the president's desk and ask him

to either sign or reject it. but let's stop waiting for the white house to come forward with a plan, because their plan is going nowhere. it doesn't have the support of either side of this body, republicans or democrats. so i'm urging the majority leader to focus on the senate' senate's -- focus the senate's attention on reducing our debt, growing our economy and getting americans back to work. the best way to grow the economy and secure our country's fiscal future is by creating a long-term budget plan that focuses on restructuring mandatory spending programs, reforming our tac tax code and cutting unnecessary federal spending. this has been a mantra of mine ever since i came back to the senate. i came back for this very reason. and here we are three years back from the 2010 election, when the public was urging us to address this issue, still have not

accomplished what we came back to do. and it's because we have not had leadership at the white house from this president to address the underlying issues here that are so plain, that are so before us, that are so consequential to our fiscal future. and when you hone it down to what it means to individuals, whether it's saving money to be able to send their kids to college, whether it's getting a decent job after you graduate with a huge debt and be able to pay that back, whether it's getting middle-class people back to work that have been laid off for years, getting our economy moving again at more than a timid 1.8% or 1.5%, stumbling along after five years of policies. the policies, whether, frankly, you think they're right or not, haven't worked. so it's time to deal with everyone knows we need to deal with, this excessive spending, this addictive spending,

plunging into debt that is holding us back from doing what we need to do. i'm committed to working toward a solution to address our debt, to strengthen our economy, and help provide full-time jobs for americans, millions of americans that are without those jobs. it's time to stop procrastinating. it's time to start acting. it's time that the president and this congress stop delaying the hard choices and start representing the american people who sent us here. it's so of the that we cannot rely on the president, the leader of the country, to act. in fact, he's announced he won't even discuss this incredibly important issue that determines the financial viability of our country. the president says, i won't negotiate with congress on the debt limit. i won't negotiate with congress on the resolution coming before us to fund the government going forward.

how does this provide results to the american people? how can we work on a plan to reduce the debt if the president refuses to even negotiate it? to you, he's willing to negotiate with president putin of russia, but he rfs to negotiate with -- but he refuses to negotiate with congress on how we can stop the rising debt. this isn't leadership. we can't rely on president putin to pull us out of this one. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. coats: mr. president, it appears that no one is here to follow me, so i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk

will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. isakson: i would like to ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. morning business business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations, which the clerk will report. the clerk: patricia e. campbell-smith of the district of columbia to be a judge of the united states court of federal claims. elaine d. kaplan of the district of columbia to be a judge of the united states court of federal claims. the presiding officer: under the previous order, there will be 30 minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form. the senator from georgia. mr. isakson: i yield back all time. the presiding officer: without objection, all time is yielded back. the question is is on the

campbell-smith nomination. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. the question is now on the kaplan nomination. mr. isakson: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

the presiding officer: is there anybody wishing to change their vote? if not, the ayes are 4, the nays are -- yeas are 64, the nays are 35. and the nomination is confirmed. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: under the previous order, the motion to reconsider are considered made and laid on the table, the president will immediately be notified of the senate's action, and the senate will resume legislative session. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. a senator: madam president, i have six unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. i ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and that these requests be printed in the record. the presiding officer: w -- without objection. mr. pryor: i also ask unanimous consent that at 2:15, the senate will be in a period of morning business until 2:30, with the time controlled by senators

udall of colorado and bennet of colorado. further, that at 2:30, the senate resume consideration of s. 1392. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. without objection. mr. pryor: thank you. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate previous order, the senate >> senators are taking a break for the weekly party luncheon meetings. when they return at 2:15 eastern they will continue work on an energy efficiency bill. managers are negotiation off the floor for a vote. among the amendments awaiting consideration as one offered by david vitter that would require a certain federal workers pay their entire health insurance costs under the health care law. some tweets have been exchange on that amendment.

>> the flag flying above the capital is at half staff today in honor of the victims of the washington, d.c. navy yard shooting. 12 workers were killed, eight wounded, several members of congress have been speaking today about what senator reid called the worst loss of life in the capital region since 9/11. here's what steny hoyer said this morning at a political event. >> frankly, i don't know enough about the facts. i lost three constituents who lost their lives there were working at the navy yard. two of whom lived in charles

county and one lived in the county in which i live. i'm sure that it will renew the discussions about access to weapons that can be used to kill a lot of people quickly. we have seen, however, in colorado just in the past weeks, to legislators who had the courage to vote for a legislation which simply asks that we do a background check so we know who is getting guns. which 80-85% of the american public say is a sensible policy. withstanding that, these to legislators were recalled in a special election. one can analyze who comes out in special elections, but it does not bode well for asking people to vote for legislation, so to what went down in the senate just a few months ago. but i'm sure we will renew the

debate and the discussion, as it should. >> in terms of this access to navy yard, he appeared to have security clearances despite some very troubling events in his background, the alleged shooter. can you tell us anything about how we got the axis? is that something you will be looking into? it seems like there was some significant breach of security. >> i don't have additional information, but you're right, it's something that must be looked into. again, what we have seen in so many of these incidences are that the perpetrators have different previous indication of instability, even inclinations to use weapons and to talk about violence, whether they did so on a website, whether they did so with colleagues or classmates. in almost every one of these instances and we've seen the perpetrators be people who, individuals thought were

unstable and thought come in this case, apparently this guy was prone to violence. yet apparently shot the tires out of a neighbors vehicle. he shot through the ceiling of a neighbor number -- another neighbor. he was given a general discharge from the navy. so there was no doubt that this is somebody who had a record of instability, certainly should have been, i think, subject to closer scrutiny, particularly in access to a facility such as the navy yard, or any facility that has large numbers of people in it, that has security concerns of the united states. >> you can see that entire discussion online at c-span.org. defense secretary chuck hagel and joint chiefs of staff chair general martin dempsey a day later reef to honor the victims of the washington navy yard shooting. the wreath was placed at the u.s. navy memorial plaza next to the lone sailor who represents

people of served or are currently serving in the u.s. navy. >> [background sounds] >> [background sounds]

>> [background sounds] [taps]

[background sounds]

[background sounds] [background sounds] [background sounds]

>> coming up in about 15 minutes at one being used and we'll go live to the national press club where oklahoma governor mary fallin will speak. she's the chair of the national governors association and she will talk about her initiative on education and jobs training. that starts at 1 p.m. eastern. >> this weekend look for booktv lies full day coverage of the national book festival each of the authors include kay bailey hutchison, taylor branch, and rick atkinson. looking ahead to october, -- >> young people, young children say how can you be in the congress? you got arrested. [laughter] you violated the law. and i said they were bad laws. they were customs, they were

traditions, and we wanted america to be better. we wanted america to live up to the declaration of independence, live up to our creed. made real our democracy. make it real. so when i got arrested the first time, this book, i felt free. i felt liberated, and today more than ever before i feel free and liberated. you know, abraham lincoln, 150 years ago freed the slaves. but it took the modern-day civil rights movement to free unemployment rate a nation spent civil rights leader and congressman john lewis will be our in depth guest sunday the sixth and he will take your calls and comments for three hours. also scouted for in depth november 3, kitty kelley. december 1, christina hoff

sommers. january 5, radio talk show host mark levin. >> on the 50th anniversary of the bankruptcy of the lehman brothers investment firm, comptroller of the currency thomas curry said banks and other financial institutions still need to learn and implement changes from the 2000 financial crisis. he also said his office its continued focus on the significant emerging threat of cyber attacks. he made these remarks yesterday at a conference of the american institute of certified public accountants at the national harbor in maryland if we were shown as much of this as we can before the remarks from oklahoma governor mary fallin scheduled for 1 p.m. eastern. >> april of 2012, and you probably already know this but the occ supervises about 2000 national banks, and federal savings associations, and about 50 federal branches and agencies, foreign banks in the u.s. and the occ is ultimately

responsible for overseeing about two-thirds of the industry's asset of the commercial banking system. april of this year, mr. curry was named chairman of the federal financial institutions examination council, appointed for a two-year term, and this marks the fifth time that the occ has led the council. and prior to going over, becoming the comptroller, he served as the director of the fdic since 2004, and as chairman of neighborhood works board of directors. and so with that i will turn the podium over to comptroller curry. so please help me welcome him. [applause] >> thank you, sydney, for that kind introduction. i also want to thank all of you for this opportunity to join you at this important conference. over many years, the occ and the aicpa have built a fine collaborative relationship, and

it's really a necessary one, can be complementary and mutually reinforcing roles that bankers, external auditors, and bank examiners play in supporting, and reporting on, the health and stability of our financial institutions. these roles are spelled out in both law and practice, from the provisions of fdicia that require a bank to certify, and an independent auditor to attest to, gaap compliance of banks' financial reporting, to the review of internal control functions over financial reporting that is an essential part of every occ examination. i'm committed to advancing our relationship through open communications, and it is in that spirit that i am with you today. since 2012, the occ's national risk committee has been publishing a semiannual risk perspective, a report that evaluates threats to bank safety and soundness. it is a document well worth

reading for anyone with an interest in the health of the financial system. the most recent of these reports was published in the spring, and it identified three areas of particular concern to us. the first is strategic risk, which we define as the adverse financial consequences that can result from poor business decisions or poor implementation of business decisions. where we especially see strategic risk rising is in the decisions of some banks to venture into new lines of business with the potential to generate higher profits, but also bigger losses, than in their traditional activities. as supervisors, we intend to make certain that when they expand into new products and services, banks are not reaching beyond their technical competence, risk tolerance, and capital adequacy. the second area, which is a

particular concern of mine, is operational risk, the risk that arises from failure in the performance of bank systems and bank personnel. during the financial crisis, many banks cut back their investment in this area, making it harder for them to keep up with emerging challenges in such areas as cyber security and regulatory compliance. we will continue to drive home to the industry the importance of operational vigilance, and continue to take appropriate supervisory action when we find that bank systems and controls are wanting. finally, there is the risk associated with the current environment of sustained but slow growth. in such times, we often see banks reaching for yield, taking on more interest rate or credit risk to maximize returns. in this environment, it is particularly important that

banks maintain appropriate allowances for loan losses, and that is what i'd like to spend the rest of my time discussing with you today. to begin, let me go back to last year, when the occ, in public and behind closed doors, called attention to the decline in the allowance relative to the volume and value of the loans banks were charging off. we raised questions about the methodologies banks were employing to justify these reductions and whether the pace of reserve releases was sustainable. and we expressed concern about the rate at which banks were reducing allowances as compared to observations about the current loan portfolio. of course, it is to be expected that banks will release reserves accumulated during difficult times as underwriting standards, loan performance, and the economic climate improve. given the improvement that has

taken place since the financial crisis, releases are certainly warranted. and, to the extent that higher profits enable banks to generate additional capital, they contribute to safety and soundness. but for some banks, the ease with which the allowance could be repurposed as earnings has proved habit-forming. last year we noted a growing disconnect between the pace and magnitude of allowance releases and underlying credit trends. of particular concern to us was that significant reserve releases were continuing despite reports from our examiners that credit risk, as i mentioned earlier, was once again on the rise, with relaxed underwriting standards, pricing for risk, and more risk layering. it seemed to us a singularly bad time for banks to be scrimping on their allowances against

their loan losses. this was the message the occ rolled out last fall. i spoke about it and so did the occ's chief accountant, kathy murphy, in her presentation to this conference last year. senior occ experts joined other banking regulators and the accounting and audit oversight bodies in conducting outreach meetings with banks of all sizes, and their external auditors, to address trends, methods, and supervisory concerns about the appropriateness of allowance balances. with these and other concerns in mind, the occ also conducted a horizontal review of home equity lending, where we found repayment risk high and rising. many of the home equity loans originated before the financial crisis required interest payments only for a certain number of years, usually ten, before the loan either matured

or began amortizing. as a result, many home-equity borrowers today face one of two disconcerting prospects, a balloon payment that will require them to refinance or substantially higher monthly payments. refinancing may not be an option in the case of houses that are still under water, while higher monthly payments will impose a significant burden for people who, in the sluggish economy, have been unable to replace the jobs and salaries lost during the financial crisis. so we continue to remind lenders with significant exposure in this area that they need to prepare for the possibility of repayment problems down the road. the occ's initiative to flag imprudent allowance practices seemed to get the industry's attention. in the fourth quarter of 2012 and the first of 2013, the pace

of provisioning expenses slowed at about the same rate as the decline in net charge-offs. but this appears to be an anomaly in the longer downward trend. during the subsequent quarter, the decline in loan-loss provisions again exceeded net charge-offs. and, again, this is happening despite loosening credit underwriting standards, which suggests that risks are increasing that may result in larger charge-offs. i want to be clear. we are not talking about an imminent crisis. but there are steps we need to take to be transparent about the current impairment of the loan portfolio. these steps include reaffirming our commitment to supervisory vigilance and maintaining open and constant communication with key industry players like you. at the same time, we expect to see uniformly strong risk

management, including prudent allowance practices consistent with gaap and regulatory guidance, in all of our banks, and especially in our largest institutions. what we have seen also highlights the need for revisions in the way banksenso t bankers can start to increase, or at least maintain, reserves as the risks in their loan portfolios increase. that is why the occ supports the thrust of the new standard on impairment measurement proposed by fasb in december 2012. i want to say a few words about why we believe the approach at the heart of fasb's proposal, the expected loss model, is not only sound but preferable to the existing incurred loss regime. i also want to comment on what we think the impact of the new model, if adopted, will be on the institutions we supervise.

as you know, current accounting rules prevent banks from provisioning for an impaired asset until a triggering event occurs. in other words, banks must wait until the event has already occurred to recognize the loss. banks use different methodologies to calculate asset impairment amounts after such an event takes place, and auditors and examiners both play a key role in evaluating and assessing the adequacy of the methodologies banks use to make these assessments. the financial crisis revealed a distinct flaw in the incurred loss model. by requiring banks to wait for an incurred loss event to recognize the resulting impairment, the model precludes banks from taking appropriate provisions for emerging risks that the bank can reasonably anticipate to occur. ..

essentially requires us to do. don't get me wrong, past performance matters a great deal. no government agency knows this better than the occ, which is marking its 150th anniversary this year. without the perspective of history, we missed a key piece of the complex puzzle of

understanding financial risks and how to deal with them. we need all the best tools at our disposal, looking back as well as for word in an honest effort to get things right. i believe that the basic principles behind the proposed fasb standard take us an important step in that direction. it would replace the incurred a loss approach with a new current expected credit loss model, or cecl for short to use information, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts to estimate expected shortfalls over the life of a loan. further, the proposal would create one consistent measurement approach for all financial assets not accounted for at fair value through net income. thus, simplifying the system of multiple credit loss models.

after careful review, the occ and the other banking regulators expressed broad support for the fasb draft. we remain concerned, however, about the operational impact the proposed standards may have on community banks and have urged fasb to provide adequate implementation time for these smaller, less complex institutions and to modify a disclosure requirement in light of the resource constraints these institutions face. we also have questions about how the model will work for the federal securities, which we would hope fasb will soon be able to answer. nonetheless, we have concluded that the fasb proposal is consistent with the goal of supporting and returning on the balance sheet integrity and the ability of financial institutions to fully consider all the information, past, present and future and to do it

early when the risks are building and determining what amount of allowance is the right amount. in that respect, it mirrors the approach that has long defined the occ's risk-based forward-looking approached supervision. an approach with which national banks and federal thrift are thoroughly familiar. that familiarity alone should make the transition easier for national banks and federal thrift. banks have reviewed the fasb proposal with some in trepidation not only with regard to the implementation challenges involved, but also and perhaps primarily to the impact of the new regime of the allowance and capital levels. some industry groups have suggested that the new standard would necessitate an increase of 200 or 300 percent or more in the allowance. considering that many banks have already had to add capital to be

under new regulatory requirements, such concerns are understandable. but we believe they are somewhat exaggerated. there is no question that implementation of the fasb proposal will require most banks to boost their allowance. but the speed of's impact analysis shows that the increases would be far more perhaps in the neighborhood of 30-50% if applied today. for some banks it will be more, for others less dependent on the loan portfolio and environment at the time of implementation. still, these numbers are significant. and i don't want anyone to think that we are not sensitive to the cost and inconvenience of transitioning to a new system. but i want to point out that banks obtain important advantages in return. an allowance that is more transparent and consistent with business results and

risk-management and greater simplicity about how different kinds of financial assets are treated for that purpose. i also believe that it would enable bankers to increase reserve as they see risk building in their portfolios. if the cecl model was implemented properly, the data it uses could assist banks in better pricing loans and the repurchase assessment of investments. it could also lead to improved credit risk management and transparency to investors. we hope the industry will agree that these long term benefits are worth the sacrifice today. in any case, we have commented to fasb that all financial institutions should be afforded sufficient transition time to train their people and to reprogram their system -- >> we will leave this to go live to the national press club for oklahoma governor mary fallin who will talk about her

initiative on education and job training. this is live coverage on c-span2. >> thank you come angela to the it's a great pleasure to be with you at the national press club and i appreciate the kind introduction and it certainly is a great honor to see so many of my fellow oklahomans here today. it's nice to have so many friends represented in the room. before i begin my comments, i just want to say how heartbroken we all are as americans, as citizens about the terrible tragedy that occurred here yesterday in washington, d.c. and the tremendous loss of lives. our thoughts and prayers and condolences go out to those that lost their loved ones. and i know it's going to be a difficult time for washington, but we will certainly keep you in our prayers as you begin the healing process of getting this tragedy that has occurred here today. but in the meantime, i am excited to be here at the national press club and to join

all of you and excited to see so many of my fellow oklahomans and it to have the opportunity to be able to visit with you about a couple issues i think are important for our nation. and especially i'm glad to see one of my fellow oklahoma reporters i worked with for many years, chris who joined us today. it's good to see you again. i get to see you in a different role. you used to cover me when i was in congress and now you get to cover me a little bit as a governor of the state of oklahoma. but chris, it's great to see you and i appreciate all you've done for oklahoma. he's done a wonderful job over the years in our state and covering the national news and it's always interesting up here, chris. no matter what's going on, it's always interesting. well, i am here to talk to you about an issue that i believe is critical and it's important for the future of the nation's economy. and that is developing a highly skilled and educated, competitive work force and to

close the skills gap between what employers need and what our employees have to it in august i had the opportunity as was mentioned to become the chair of the national governors' association. and through the governor's association, we worked together to find common solutions to the problems facing not only on the state, but certainly to our nation. and we also worked together to identify the best practices and our individual states so we can share with each other. together, we look for those innovative solutions to the pressing challenges that are facing our state. and part of my duty as the chair is to launch an initiative and around a topic that is not only important to me, but a topic that i think is important to other governors across the nation. and i am working to establish a national dialogue between business, education and the public sector about how we can best prepare students, men and women to get good paying jobs

and for our nation to be able to keep pace and be competitive in global economy. my initiative, america works, education and training for tomorrow's jobs, is about making significant changes, significant improvements in education systems, and our work force training system and also to align those systems with the needs of our businesses and certainly the markets. america works will also help the nation to reassure american companies and jobs. governors i believe are uniquely positioned to foster stronger economic growth, and especially that between our businesses and our education systems. they are the primary individuals, the governors are, that are responsible for both public education and economic development in our state. states and the businesses that drive state economies can help secure their economic future by

aligning the educational institutions and work-force training program with the projected demand of tomorrow's jobs. preparing in an august 21st century work force to keep pace and is the competitive is an issue that not only calls for national attention, but i believe it demands gubernatorial leadership. and that leadership starts with recognizing some hard truths about our nation. navigating today's pathways to prosperity remains much more challenging than, say when my parents were growing up to it an example is that 50 years ago more than 75% of all the jobs in our economy required only a high school diploma or less to get a good wage job. but today that number has dropped to roughly 40% for the jobs available to high school graduates and dropouts. more than two-thirds of those

jobs will be paying less than $25,000 a year. so it is clear that a high school degree is no longer adequate to guarantee a good job and access to the middle class life. we must understand that a post secondary degree coming either a two year degree or a four year college degree or sometimes a courier technology work certificate is the new minimum in america for economic success. and by that, i mean both for individual success, finding a good paying job, and for our individual businesses to be able to find workers that they need. without some kind of post secondary education, a majority of our children and working adults will have difficulty achieving the american dream and being able to find a successful fulfilling middle class life and beyond. unfortunately, in many instances, we continue to fall short of this goal meaning that

we are falling behind both as citizens and as businesses. here are some facts. they may not be the most pleasant of truths, but they are facts. too many high school students don't finish high school. nationally 78% of public high school students make it to graduation. those numbers are even much worse for minorities and also for low-income students. too many students go to college underprepared and end up taking remedial courses committee and often those students will end up dropping out of college and also admitting they will still require a lot of debt while not being able to acquire a college degree to many employers in oklahoma and around the country are saying that they don't have the workers with the skill sets that they need and that colleges and universities in today's fast-paced economy are taking too long to create the type of

new program that will help the students developed the hi need skill set for today's job. all of these are contributing factors in a disturbing national trend. and while we once led the world in student achievement, now america ranks 14th in reading, 17th in science and 25th in an industrial section. all this in terms of the percentage of working adults means that an associate degree alone in the united states and having that meant that one out of every eight people in america will now have we went from six to aid in the nation and having associate degrees and work force. the bottom line is that we are just falling behind. and for too many students and individuals that are falling behind, they won't be able to

rea the middle class because they are not meeting what is called the new minimum for the work force. i had the opportunity not long ago to be allowed to visit with the ceo of simmons and he was speaking at a u.s. manufacturing segment and he gave a great quote which i want to share with you. he said america has a training that. until we put the burden on those who train, rather than those that need to be trained will never solve the problem. and i want him to know and i want you to know that governors are listening. it is up to the governors to build new pathways to the middle class built around the notion that post secondary education is a necessity. today, in a fast-paced world where technology is constantly ever-changing, these pathways must be flexible, they must be efficient and must reflect the

state's changing economic needs. they need to be developed with the employers, not just for the enough the employers. they need to meet the students' needs themselves. our future economic security will require significant improvements to our education system and our work force training program to aid it also will require closer working relationships with high schools, colleges, universities, career technology programs, workforce program and also with our employers. the challenge that we face is very clear. too few americans are participating in post secondary education and few graduates from high school are prepared to do so. so our goals moving forward are clear as well. we must get more students into

higher academic standards by the end of their high school degree. the high school diploma would mean a student is prepared for any form of post secondary education whether it's going on to college or a career technology school. and they must be able to do that without needing a mediation to bigot second, we have to create opportunities for them and adults to successfully complete a degree or career technology program to pay the path to a good paying job. so let me drive it home by using the home state of oklahoma and the tangible data that we have been able to collect on this issue. in oklahoma we spend a tremendous amount of time and effort to use the data to identify the work force challenges and identify the very specific solutions to help with that. we begin the process of collecting the data and being able to compare oklahoma's demographics with this emerging

trend and its workforce needs. using the data we identify the current education level of all of our working age oklahomans and then we identify the percentage breakdown of the degree level that is required for the jobs in oklahoma that will be created between now and the year 2020. the comparison of the to - assets -- datasets show there's a mismatch between the educational attainment and work-force skills that are demanded in the growing economy. for example, we know now that 77% of the jobs to be filled by 2020 in the state of oklahoma will require an education beyond a high school degree. however only 54% of our current work force are adults that are adults that fit into that criteria. so that means that we have a 23% plight gap between with the work

force needs and the educational attainment that we have in our working adults. if that gap isn't closed, we know when oklahoma that our jobs will go elsewhere. and in the simplest terms, my initiative, america works, will help the state's generate the detailed data set that the states can work together to identify the specific policies and budgetary strategies that will allow us to realign our education system and training systems to meet the needs of our emerging work force. it will also focus on five key elements to help the state's to be allowed to make progress to overcome the skills gap and create a more aligned education expected system. so the five elements are first of all, you have to have a statewide fishing for being able to close the gap between education and the jobs in the

economy. second, you have to have an integrated and ann proved that the system. third, you have to have the high quality public-private partnership to work together. and then we have to better align federal and state funding and other resources. last come state incentives to support cross system integration so let me just take a moment to describe what i hope the states will be able to accomplish with these five key elements. first of all, -- am i papers are sticking together. i apologize. first every governor has articulated his or her vision for education reform in their individual states and how they plan to improve their local economies. my initiative will help me get easier for these gunners and certainly to be a will to help them connect the dots between education and jobs. all states collect the data and

too often the data isn't used to answer key questions for policy makers to help them to double to improve the results in their state. for example -- i will give you the things we have been doing here and now proceed oklahoma for the data. we know when oklahoma that we have five key topic of systems that generate the best paying jobs and the most wealth within our society. we know that aerospace, transportation and distribution, energy, financial services, agriculture and the biosciences are the top wealth generating jobs and inigo systems in oklahoma -- ecosystems and oklahoma. we are trying to connect the dots between the educational attainment and the types of jobs that our employers need to be able to fill. what education level of the employees need to have or career technology certificates they will need to be able to meet the jobs in the marketplace pity and

my initiative will help our state be able to identify the best practices to do that and to be able to build a road map to be able to take action. the government alone cannot improve the education and training system in its realignment. the needs of our employers -- if we expect business leaders to be able to create these high wage jobs -- we need them to be our partners with us. we need to have them at the table working with us to identify and develop the skill set and also the talent they need for their job. my initiative will also profile expected partnerships and encourage more states to strengthen their efforts in this area. and we have all heard the old saying about feinstein that the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result. but through my initiative, the

states will identify and share strategies to advocate and to better align our federal and state funding. finally, we will stop doing the same things and pursuing the same old policies and then expecting a different result triet last but not least, my initiative will help us be able to identify problem areas that are currently built into our educational system and into a work force and people to bring about the closing of the gap between the skill sets needed by and for employers and certainly the skills that our employees have. bye framing my initiative, the education training for tomorrow's jobs around these five key elements we hope to leverage much of the great work being done in the state and deal to share that information without or fellow governors so that we can all do better. but to achieve this, we are going to be launching several

different initiatives and activities throughout the state. first of all, this fall we are going to hold regional summits in several states to bring together not only our states, but government, education and business leaders to share experiences and be able to learn from each other. i asked the governor out of connecticut to co-host an education and work force summit with me and also governor martinez and mexico will be hosting another summit in her state and other governors of course will be joining during the process. i will host a final summit in oklahoma city in we will dedicate a portion of our winter meetings and summer in g8 meetings to share and discuss the initiative and the results that we found. additionally we are going to provide each governor wet state specific data and what will be called the return on investment

as they invest in education and work to the education and the work force itself and to the level to help produce the kind of workers the need for their jobs. we are also going to produce case studies in the guide to highlight what is in our way and what will be the best way to profile what works and what doesn't work. then we are going to kick off an effort with 68 states build around these elements to help them to be able to accelerate the work in their individual states and become models for other states to emulate. these will engage but as i said the education, the business and government leaders in a dialogue about actions the governors can take too closely aligned k-12, the universities, community colleges or technical colleges and work force training provider to be able to close the gap between what skills are needed in the marketplace.

in closing as we begin this initiative, we need to understand that in today's modern high-tech society and the global economy in this world a post secondary degree is no longer than the future of the state in the nation. there is now in a minimum of education attainment that is required to the will to meet tomorrow's job and that's what this initiative is about, securing our economic future, about helping americans be able to prepare their work force and it's about preparing for tomorrow's jobs. thank you for the opportunity to be here with you today. [applause] thank you, governor. questioner says better

protecting the system and the state's economic needs is important and many organizations are already working on this. why do you think america's governors can accelerate that agenda? >> because the governors are at the heart of what happens within our individual states. we are the best of understanding what our businesses need, what our education system snead and realigning our education and our skills sets to be able to meet the demand of the job for tomorrow. >> is no tight left behind with its emphasis on test results helpful or harmful to your goals? >> all governors must believe we have academic rigor in our states and we must set higher standards for student achievement. as i talked about earlier, we are falling behind as a nation. as you compare america to the other industrialized nations and where we rank on reading and science and math, we are falling

behind. if we want to be a competitive nation, we have to raise our academic standards and have ritter in the classroom, but we also have to be able to tell the skills gap that we have in the nation to be able to take care of tomorrow's jobs. >> you mentioned that you think business has the responsibility to help with this effort. what exactly do you call on the businesses to do? >> we are calling on businesses to be our partners. tell us what you need as far as skills go. many times i visit with employers, especially small businesses in oklahoma that tell me they have some job openings but they can't find the right workers to take those jobs. on the other hand, i find employees or workers that are looking for jobs and it's being able to match them together to find the right type of skills that would be needed for those jobs, and that is what we are doing in my state of oklahoma. and actually, we have even established what we call in our

state okay job match dhaka, in which employers can match the skill sets the need or employees or people looking for a job can match their skills sets and we can match the two together so that we can better meet the future demands in our state. >> are you asking businesses to help the government pay for this? >> i think businesses can be partners with the state. there are certainly innovative programs that are out there. great examples throughout the nation and great examples in my state of partnership with education where there is k-12 and there is through the vocational training program or whether it is per your higher education system that the businesses can be great partners with us and we need to hear from them and the need to be at a table. >> in terms of money are you going to ask them to kick in? >> when you find is there are businesses that actually help support work force training programs in the state. we have a great career

technology system in the state of oklahoma and businesses that may be retooling in our state will go to one of our systems and say i need to be about to shift the type of skill sets uble to operate this newo be machinery in our state. that is a service this difficult, provides as economic development tool to be able to get these jobs and keep these jobs and maintain these jobs in our state but not asking for money will take if they want to givet to us that this is a partnership in which the states realign their education system and put it concrete's data what is going to be needed in the work force itself seeing as we provide those type of work and some really specific examples. we have as i mentioned a large sector of aerospace and energy. when someone is in the aerospace

sector and they are a computer technician or maybe they are a welder those same type of skill sets are transferable to the energy sector because they also need computer technicians or they may need a welder or both of them may need some type of engineering type of degree. so what we are trying to do is look at what level of educational attainment we need for our core industries and our individual states to be able to close the skill gap. >> you mentioned wanting to better align the federal funding for education. can you give an example of improvements you would like to see in that area? >> first of all we need to have the no child left behind reauthorize and make some improvements to that and listen to our governors and certainly our educators in that area. frankly with our schools and funding most comes from the state with education. there is some funding that comes

from the federal government and when it comes to the federal spending itself but we as a nation can continue to raise or academic standards and continue to have ritter in the classroom and continue to expect higher results from our students. >> you talk about responsibility being on the educational institutions and business and so forth. what about parents. where do they fit into this? >> parents should be involved in education and certainly that is something that is critical to the student success. but if a parent isn't involved in that success i will give you an example. we want a child to read at grade level by the third grade. we won't be able to continue to learn and keep pace with the of the students in the classroom so we have after-school remedial and the program to be able to

help that student and so if by chance a parent is not helping hopefully that will be able to help. >> who stand to benefit the most from your initiative? >> our citizens to read our citizens stand to benefit the most from our initiative because our goal is to help americans find good paying jobs to be able to help build a stronger and more vibrant economy in our individual states and certainly throughout the nation so that we can continue to be a competitive nation in the world economy. >> if you were to turn back time and start college today what would you major in the future? >> that is a good question. actually, i might major in political science. [applause]

i didn't really focus on that or speech or debate when i was in high school so i might go back and take some of those courses now. >> this fall the university of oklahoma began charging flat rate tuition and hitting it it's been reported that it's designed to increase the graduation rate to take more credit hours per semester. as the state of oklahoma feel that is the government's duty to ensure graduation at the coley jeal level? >> i think it's important to set the goal of having more college completion and degree completion. in fact two years ago we launched a program called complete college america, and which it is an initiative, too and which we encouraged the degree attainment in our state whether it is a career technology certificate, workforce certificate with an associate degree or college

degree as the statistics prove out we need a better educated, highly skilled work force to be able to compete as a nation. and so, you have set a flat fee as you mentioned with the goal of helping to encourage students to complete their degree quicker. we know that in many circumstances college students might take a little extra time. they might take five or six years to complete college but if there is a more impetus to create that degree in four years it is better on the parent's pocketbook, probably a little bit more helpful to the student and it certainly helps the workforce in america. >> could universities and up losing money from charging a flat rate to mission, especially if the same applies to the out of state students who pay more money than the in-state students? >> the president of o.u. believe

is by being able to help our students graduate on time that we will be doubled to run our higher education systems maurice efficiently in our state and will be more cost productive to disconnect the obama administration says it wants the privately run, which is to make standards that a sure that students find jobs where they can pay back their student loans or else the schools would lose eligibility for federal student loans and grants. do you agree with that regulatory effort? >> the national governors' association hasn't taken a position on that particular issue but would allow the owners to agree upon is that we have to continue to work towards raising our academic attainment levels and a nation whether it is through the public technology career systems or whether it is through a private career itself, but our goal as governors and we agree upon both democrats and republicans is that we have to

close the skill debt and raise the academic level in the nation. >> what is your opinion of the recent proposal but help the federal government grant colleges and universities and award students and others based on the national rankings. >> i can't speak for our other governors in the nation, but once again, we just continue to believe that we do all we can to make sure we have the best colleges and universities throughout the united states that we certainly put into place public policies that will help them achieve high academic standards. >> is there a need to reintroduce at the high school level or is college the ideal goal for every one? >> that is a good question. because what we find in our work

force and in the jobs that we have in america -- as i said the majority are going to require more than a high school degree with a different avenue continuing on with the education whether it is getting a technologies a ticket work force certificate or a particular type of skill on whether it is going on to get an associate degree or college for your degree or beyond that. but there are some students once they graduate from high school that may not have an interest in going to college. and i think that we need to a better job as a nation this is my personal thinking and helping to reach into our high schools even clear down to our level schools to be able to show students the different opportunities there are a different subject areas like stem education and science and technology and engineering and math we know those are skills sets water needed in the work force right now. so if we can go down to the

middle schools and high schools and get them interested in some type of a career technology certificate that deals with especially some of our stem subjects and professions that will certainly help boost our work force. >> looking specifically at oklahoma schools obviously, we all heard about the devastating tornadoes that hit so many people including schools. do you have any initiatives for protecting schoolchildren who might be in that half of tornadoes? >> i appreciate your comments on that. let me say first of all, thank you to everyone who has been kind to oklahoma during a tornado of which we have a tremendous loss of life especially with our children that were lost in the towers and even our adults and certainly the devastation to property and businesses in our state to the we are recovering and doing well. our children are back in school now. but i have actually been hosting

meetings not only with our local school officials, but also with some of our legislators and with our emergency responders in the state to be as a talk about ways that we can better encourage or schools to make sure that the safety programs in my state are up to date, that they have a plan of action if there should be some type of a storm or any type of disaster or catastrophe that might occur with students in the school itself and we are certainly having a rigorous discussion about storm shelters in the state of oklahoma. right now the way the system works is local school board both on bond issues to decide how they are going to build their schools, and i certainly encourage the schools that are considering to build new schools to look at putting safe rooms into the schools, but we also have a lot of schools that were built in the 50's and 60's that would cost a lot of money to retrofit. so we are looking to get there as a group to look at ways we

can not only use the federal fema money but private sector donations and the charities and oklahoma to be able to either retrofit the schools or encourage the schools and communities to build safe rooms. >> moving on to health care, republican governors have differed in their approach to the medicaid expansion offered under the affordable care act. you were among those that rejected the expansion. can you tell us how you arrived at the decision and not just for underserved oklahomans in light of the decision to not take the funding. >> they're certainly is a various opinion on the affordable health care act and how the states handle their health care and possible medicaid expansion of the choose to do that. and what we find among the governors is that there is a wide variety of opinions. there's not one single answer

what the governors would do or wouldn't do. so it's up to the individual states themselves with the governors to agree upon is that what's important to health care and to me and that we provide better access to care that we certainly work on the quality of our health care and make health care more affordable in our state. i felt in my state with the predictions of the cost of medicaid which we continue to see every day. it's not in our best interest as and 26 other states to expand medicaid instead of oklahoma, but i will tell you that we have a great program in our state to ensure oklahoma which is a three-way partnership between an employee paying a portion of their cost-cutting a stake in

the game and an employer who pays a portion of the cost and matching funds to the this is for low-income working people or individuals and mostly in small businesses. so we have a federal waiver that we were granted a back in 2005 to start this program using the tobacco tax settlement money in oklahoma and we have 30,000 oklahoma and vegetables that signed up for this and a lot of our small businesses to get advantage of the program. but we were notified back last may that we were no longer going to be able to keep the waiver. and so, the president and secretary sebelius if they would reconsider their idea because i felt it was important for my state to be about to have the opportunity to keep the successful program that a lot of

us want to do and that is to be able to provide health care at a reasonable cost especially for those that are not covered in our small businesses are lower income. and so, i was able to get the waiver approved, but two weeks ago when the state and we will be able to continue that program for another year to help our fellow oklahomans, and then we are continuing to work with a religious leader on our health care system itself and continue for another year to work on health care in general, and certainly we are working on what we can do to improve the health of oklahomans. >> looking at the next step do you expect smith implementation in oklahoma? >> there is no official policy. [laughter] by the national association of governors on this.

for me personally is challenging right now. if we look at what is going on in the nation and companies expressing their opinions and labor unions certainly the health insurance companies are coming out with the rates right now. and even seeing some of the recent reports with the navigators and training, it is challenging right now because it is a new system and it's a big system and is a tremendous amount of rules and regulations. so, we are watching and we are waiting and we are going to see what type of rules and regulations come down and how it shakes out in the future. >> oklahoma recently passed legislation to reduced the highest personal income tax rate. the report that came out in march during the 1990's states the biggest growth and grow jobs that one-third of the rate of other states. what services do you expect to have to cut to pay for the tax cuts and how willlp

oklahoma's economic growth? >> i hope we will not have to cut any service is because our demographics and the state of oklahoma sure that any time the last 20 years that we have made targeted tax cuts that we can afford that over economy has grown and that is why we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the nation and some of the strongest growth in the nation. in fact from the year 2011 to 2012 comalco per capita income grew by 9 percent which was number one in the nation. and some -- [applause] what we've seen in my state and oklahoma is that when we let people keep more of their hard earned money, the reinvested that back into the economy, businesses expand. so we have been fortunate in our state to have a strong and growing economy. i will also tell you when i took office back in 2011 we had a 7 percent unemployment rate and $2.3 on a rainy day savings

account. we had a 500 million-dollar budget shortfall. and i had to close the gap. and so for me as the governor of oklahoma i prioritized for the spending on education, transportation, public safety related issues. then i worked to enact the pro-business jobs policies in the state that you mentioned in my introduction where there was the reform of education reform, workers compensation reform, huge and to the government efficiency and limiting the stand we worked on pension reforms in the state. and as a result of that because of our tax cuts that you mentioned. we had won the first year and we will have another that will take place in 2015 and in 2016 if our economy continues to grow, which is at this point. we will seek the tax cuts in the state. so, the on employment rate went from 7% now down to 5.3%. oklahoma city has the lowest

unemployment rate of any metropolitan city in the nation at 4.9%. and that $2.3 in the rainy day savings account is at a time earlier this year reached a high of $577 million in two and a half years that's healthy. we like that. >> we have several questions about your neighbor, governor rick perry. [laughter] he is indeed running as and visiting our neighboring states here in maryland, looking to move some jobs from here to there. what do you think about his approach? is a constructive? >> there is no official policy -- [laughter] -- from the national governors' association. i will speak as myself, as his neighbor, as the governor of oklahoma. it's all fair.

the states that are creating a call the highly skilled education work force i believe keeping their taxes low making the government smarter and more efficient and addressing concerns for the businesses so they can invest and grow jobs so the states are going to be the most competitive. i like to tell the story in the governor perry likes to grow out and tell the texas story but you've stolen a few jobs from texas myself. [applause] to you have any plans to steal anymore? [laughter] >> you mentioned the tragedy at the navy yard. that again raises the question of security of sensitive insulation. can you talk about funding for

security and first responders in a nationwide time of budget cuts? >> this again will just be myself speaking as the governor of oklahoma because we don't have an official as the national chair. one of the things that is important to our governors is that we maintain our funding for the national guard because many times during times of crisis and how were nation and in our individual states it is a national guard and we are as governors the commanders in chief of the national guard. certainly the governors have been concerned about the disproportional cut the national guard has had to take during some challenging budget times and the financial crisis that the nation has faced. but as far as our first responders, certainly it's important that state's fund their first responder programs,

and certainly their emergency programs in their states. when i came into office back in 2011, we had a lot of natural disasters that occurred in the state and the state has not reimbursed the local counties and cities and municipalities for the funds that they expend it in that time so when i began the governor we passed legislation and put it through my appropriations bill to be able to reimburse those communities for their disaster programs. that was in my state. a wasn't about gun control but also about murder. are there any and i could have prevented them from being shot and would you favor a gun control measure as universal background checks? >> are you as committed as the national share of the governors' association

[laughter] >> no as the oklahoma governor. we have a tremendous tragedy and the scene of oklahoma with an innocent bystander, a jogger, a college student is a baseball player beloved in his community from australia who was in a local community and was gunned down by free individuals that's a group of three individuals and we are still of course working through the justice system on who is a perpetrator of that. but it is an issue of murder if someone is going to kill someone like press they could have used a car or a baseball bat or whether they wanted to use. if you are sending out to murder someone, it's very unfortunate that he was shot, he was an innocent man but it's up to each individual state to have their

own law and regulations about guns and different states feel different ways and different governors have different opinions on that. in the state of oklahoma we strongly support second amendment rights and the right for gun ownership. as oklahoma's first female governor how would you assess the status of the women's substantive participation in the state government business and education in your home state? substantive participation. >> it's a good. we encourage that in our state. and actually, for many years when i was a young girl beginning to run for public office in my early thirties, i had a lot of people tell me our state would never vote for a woman to be in a statewide elective office, but i've been able to hold for different offices in our state.

we do need to encourage more women to get involved in politics and melanesian. certainly they can make a difference whether it is running on a local level as my mother did as the major, or whether it is running for congress in the u.s. senate or running for a governor. maybe someday we will have a woman president. [laughter] but we encourage them to be made at the national press club curious to me as someone that ran for the office while you're pregnant and received some criticism at the time from strangers for doing so, what do you think of the much more present day criticism of yahoo!'s onerous of my years for accepting the ceo job while accepting a job and will never get past that type of criticism? >> you did a pretty good background check on media have you been working with the nsa? [laughter]

>> when i was a young businesswoman, i decided that i was frustrated with what was going on at the oklahoma capital and wanted to write a change on education, health, jobs and so i decided i was going to run for office and actually was pregnant at the time and so i had my son between the primary and the general election and so there were some people that came up to me and said you will never be effective, you will never be able to get anything done. it's certainly going to be hard for you to be a young mother -- i also had a three-year goal at the same time. on election night i had a three and a half month old baby when i took office three years ago in this coming november and it has not held me back yet. so not only did i serve in the oklahoma house of representatives that went on to become the first woman governor in the state of oklahoma, went on to congress and now as the governor. my children are normal. they are doing very well very

outgoing and very opinionated in their own right and a good way. so i think women can do what ever they want to do as long as they work hard certainly for me and my family, my faith, my family and my career. that is my priority personally in my life and what i think is important. [applause] i have to squeeze in a sports question. we have a couple. how can oklahoma's businesses achieve the same prominence as your football team? >> we already have. we already have. that's why we have one of the strongest economies in the united states. the drop in our unemployment rate, the new revenue growth that we have seen in our state certainly having one of the best job growth rates in the nation,

one of lowest unemployment rates in the nation. we are seeing great success in business recruitment and retention and of course we have been working hard to create the right climate for businesses to be allowed to invest and grow and expand but we also want to make up for state the best place to live and raise a family. we have a great football teams in the state of oklahoma. but of course i think all of oklahoma is great. >> we are almost out of time but before asking one more question i have a couple less important housekeeping matters to take care of by would like to remind you of our upcoming speakers. september 20, friday, we have dena mccarthy, administrator of the environmental protection agency to get she will highlight the administration's's climate change action program. on september 26, we have the new orleans mayor mitch landrieu and michael nutter, and on september 25, we have education secretary arne duncan.

second, i would like to present our guest with a traditional national press club coffee mug. >> thank you very much. >> and one last question. the first female president of the national press club was vivian, anno plowman that wrote for the oklahoma in. she was elected here in 1982. as oklahoma's first female governor what do you think is the secret for these pioneer women leaders from your state? >> the strength of the women from the south. [applause] thank you. >> you're welcome. [applause]

thank you, governor for coming today and all of you in the audience as well. i would also like to thank the national press club staff including our journalism institute and broadcast center staff for helping organize today's e zandt putative finally i would like to remind you you can find more information about the national press club on a worse light and if you would like a copy of today's program you can find there as well at www.press.org. thank you. we are adjourned.

[inaudible conversations] young people, young children come up and say how can you be in the congress? you got arrested. you violated the law. and i would say they were bad laws. there were customs, traditions. and we wanted america to be better. we wanted america to live up to the declaration of independence. live up to our creed, take it for the people and make it real. so when i got arrested the first time, i felt free. i felt liberated.

and today, more than ever before, i feel free and liberated. you know, abraham lincoln 150 years ago freed the slaves. but it took the modern-day civil rights movement to free e and the rate the nation. defense secretary chuck hagel and other military officials laid a wreath for those killed at the navy yard. the memorial along pennsylvania avenue about 24 ebbers after a gunman went on a shooting