court of law, and with winds up happening is you dirty potential jury pool. people watching the news and

when they are called to do jury duties cannot erase what has been shown whether it is relevant or not. there is a time and a place for information and we go through proper channels for those things that we don't mess up. >> let's say officer wilson had four complaints in the last six months. into fantasy land. don't put this on twitter. let's just pretend officer wilson faced four different complaints of using excessive force in the last six months. that information could poison that grand jury. we want to be fair, that would be a complete in justice to keep that secret because that might

be relevant. >> we call apples and oranges. of the record that is closed while somebody is leaving, just because -- it has been shown to the public. >> that is a fair point. >> another question coming. there is lack of trust between the public and police but also the public and media. how does this change that relationship? this discussion, will it change the dynamic, the public and media? >> this discussion here? i don't know. obviously the coverage hasn't changed since the media has been the poll that the media has hurt more than helped. we have a long way to go to make

people think that we are doing a good job. and it takes time to control what you see. if you don't like what is going on you can do something about it. >> i saw a question on twitter that had to do -- i don't want to get it wrong but it had to do with the emotion, when does your integrity come in to play -- i got to find a question. a role of social media making fergus and a national story. twitter -- twitter hash tag, short a spike when the washington post and helpful reporters were of arrested.

what point of the narrative of mike brown's jazz does the story become national? it sparks national coverage. if not what moved the story to the issue of national media? we covered that. leave mike brown why, he was unarmed, shot six times. how do we keep the coverage growing about something that is so important. the coverage is continuing in ferguson. i have not seen much more national coverage. >> i still get press calls. i want people to know that the world, seriously, the world is still interested, everyone has left, every day whether it is national reporters or even international reporters wanting to know what is going on.

it is not blared across the tv screen or on twitter all the time but people are checking in because i don't want people to get the sense the media wants to get their pictures and have taken off. i have relationships with some reporters and what is the next step? how did the council meeting go? what is the next protest plan? the interest is here, doesn't feel like months after we have been through. and this region moving forward from this. >> the role of huffington post is to continue coverage on ferguson. as you know ferguson is a case study of america. national media dwindled of the big news, people are gone but there still needs to be coverage on it. and locals are still going to be here and we will see what

happens. we need to know how ferguson changes after the verdict. and you can know what to do when it happens or how to heal. >> i don't think this is the story that will die down any time soon but just to give you a look into my life as a reporter i am a general assignment reporter so every morning we are taking a look at what is happening in the city and it is the bigger story, today i was doing a shooting outside a church in riverview. that was the big story of the day. that does not mean i am losing sight of what is going on in ferguson. i antiquing close tabs on what is happening. followers are keeping me updated. tomorrow i need to be in ferguson, then i will be in ferguson. the other bigger story, i get it. i am willing to do that.

>> i don't think this story will die down. last week there were all sorts of sudden financial public radio about the actions to try to change the way finds are weeded out in ferguson. there were several stories about the handling of the grand jury in st. louis county so i think the national folks are keeping their eye on it. think of all the stories out there still to do. all the developments in the criminal case, whether there is an indictment, but trial, acquittal or no indictment, federal investigation, and the pattern and practice investigation will go on for months about police practices, and that that is on the police end. what about the big issue of race, do we want to look at the

schools in that area? it is not just a coincidence the school district was an accredited school district from which michael brown graduated? we doing everything we need to be doing in those schools to educate our students? there are a million related stories. i don't think the story will die. >> in my story today in riverview talking about this double shooting all the people i interviewed were people who came from ferguson and moved to get away from the protests. now they're living in riverview and there's a double shooting so at the beginning of my package i'm talking about fergus and even though i am in riverview. -a not have been in ferguson, but they were back to back and ferguson was still coming up in the newscast so won't died down anytime soon. >> this is a question for

christopher. how did the media educate the public about where to go to get fair and unbiased non-partisan news coverage? how do you combat the false reports found on line and on social media? what is the post-dispatch doing to reach young audiences who tend to consume a share of their news and the news they find on social media? >> great question and a very complex one. we can talk a lot about it. i would say we have seen in our society in the last five years traditional journalism challenge, mainly for economic reasons. the business model for journalism, sorry to use coarse language but it is in the crapper. people don't want to pay for news. they think news should just be free. there is an increasing the especially among young people, an increasing tendency to save

it is big news it will find me. my friends will link to it. it will come to me. how do we react to that? the most important thing is to reaffirm our principles, ethical traditional journalism, reaffirm the search for truth, because if all that is left on those blowhards on fox news who want to give their opinion and the only other people of the blowhards at msn b.c. who want to give their opposing opinion, where are the facts? how do you find out what is real? there has got to be for our society a place to go for actual information, a radio station, television station, news web site, organizations like the post-dispatch exist to provide that and bias -- what we doing? we are trying to get much better

on twitter and facebook because as said a minute ago that is where people want to find their news, they don't want to go searching for it. it needs to be there when they wanted and that is one of the many things we are trying to do, we report fast and get stuff on our web site and push it out there on facebook and twitter. so visit any of those, please, and learn what we are doing. you don't have to agree with it, you can be angry about it. i'm thrilled you are angry about something we did. that is good because you care, you are in it, you living this life. i would say that that is what we have got to do. >> the entire point of -- that you made is to fact check, this

mind-set is exactly why citizens are blaming the media. >> do you mean the fact -- are you saying it is not up to you to facts check the media? if you want to say that you can. >> the entire point is to fact check and not leave it to the fact check. >> i disagree. if you say that you want to be a person that is easily controlled because it is not up to the media to always fact check. if i tell you something i'd tell you the bathroom is on fire. by you going to believe that? will you believe the data amazon fire and try to find out the bathroom is on fire. it is up to you to not only shoot things that get some perspective.

>> it is a relationship. you grow relationships with the news station, and a trusted relationship like i know i can watch this and they will give me the facts and if you feel passionate about that, you see something randomly on twitter and don't know who this person is, maybe you need to do a little digging. >> i want to give one example on that. this is not here gas. it was people like me and other people who were out there saying no. we know what t guess is. we experienced it, the fourth night, these are not smoke bombs. and all of us this is teargas, this is not right. this is teargas and the story changed so there is a time for citizen journalism and people

using social media, you guys did not get that right and that is how that works. >> so you have the police telling us it is not tier guess, it is smoke bombs. you want to report what you think is true but it is important to fact check, if police are saying that, and actually tear-gas, actually what is going to go. >> you have to smell the sweet smell of teargas wants to know tear-gas. how media outlets allow readers to comment on stories, fpl has a history of racist comments on any story involving african american victims. to these encourage negative editorials as a follow-up? >> i completely agree with the

premise of the story that some of our commentators clearly have opinions they need to keep to themselves and i wish they would. having said that, we allow comments on the stories and that includes some comments that frankly this me off but i don't pick and choose the comments i like. i don't have time, you see some stores have a thousand comments. we don't have the personnel literally to go through. however, abusive behavior and profanity and such we try to flag and get rid of those but it is a tough question. do they affect our editorial decisions about how to coverage at? absolutely not. >> this is something i disagree with. the newspaper has the responsibility to take a racist comments off and every ability to do that.

if they don't have enough people to do it, and don't run any comments. >> i would agree with that if someone is being blatantly racist above to lift that up. and we do, we have people here tonight, there is one right there who killed how many? 10,000 nasty awful comments? countless. so absolutely, we don't want to see that crap on our web site. we think it is hideous but at the same time there will be comments i disagree with but that is no reason to kill the law, because i disagree but when you get to profanity and racism and antisocial behavior, and i agree. >> after donald sterling's ranch, i was interviewed by i forget who it was and whether i think this is a problem. it absolutely is a problem. there was a time when it was not

politically correct to throws the n word out there, to be read people for their race or their gender or sexual preference. social media has changed that because people can hide behind a false name that they create, or an avatar and people's true feelings come out. when people tell me how we are opposed racial society i say read the comments. >> one of the things we have done is we force people to use their real names. we don't let people just have a fake name or no name to comment. those people are proud of their racist comments but nonetheless. >> a couple -- what exactly do the images they show? do journalists believe a robbery took place or something else? >> i say this might speak to that. when you look at the video tape

some people are saying they may or may not be mike brown, there were debate times, maybe that is where the comment came from. some people say he was wearing different stocks. how did he have time to leave the store at that point and all of a sudden different shoes and socks? how all of a sudden from the time he walked to ferguson market he has on a different pair of shoes? that might be where the question is coming from because i heard that a lot. is it even him? the guy looks heavier it and they fought in the video. i have heard that being asked. >> national media has been more aggressive covering and uncovering issues, local media failed to cover. i'm not sure that is true. >> i disagree with that. what happens is i took a quick look at the stories we have run concerning ferguson, michael brown, the associated events

since august 9th and today is september -- what is it? seventeenth. we have written something like 250 full-length stories, we published 200 photographs in the newspaper, we had more than a thousand, maybe in the thousands of photographs, videos, etc. online. and we are getting started. the last two sundays, sunday if you are not a newspaper reader for a sunday is the big showpiece day, we try to put our best work, work we think is most important, give a lot of space and attention. the michael brown story continues to be our focus on sundays and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. >> this is regarding michael brown, darren wilson's family network.

they are convinced whistle was nearly beaten to death. why can't the media dig up this information. i remember we were seeing a couple weeks ago there was somebody who talked to him and gave an account of what actually happened and the media played this up. was on a national cable channels. michael brown -- i forget who this person was. she had talked to him, it was -- it was a second hand account of what happened that day. are you responsible for putting that on the air when you don't know who the person is? they could be making it up. >> you are talking about darren wilson. there was a woman who talked to a female friend of darren wilson and she calls the conservative commentator. so i don't -- i guess i don't

really -- think that it is responsible to use -- i was reading it because at that point we really didn't have a good night the at all of what the police account was so i sort of read it for background information but i don't think the story about that was responsible. or if you are going to write that story you have to say this is third hand account war firsthand knowledge. it is a pretty good rules for journalists to stick with what they can figure out firsthand. >> is it okay to report an official tweet or read tweet of the journalists? when is that official? every week is the official whether it is true or not is a different story. >> is okay to report a tweet that was proven to be true.

how do you prove it is true? >> darren wilson was -- suffered a broken i saw it. >> mike braun was in a red shirt the day he was shot. that is the tweet. if you look at video you see mike braun was not wearing the red shirt. you do a good job as a journalist, figure that out when you report on it. >> a tweet may tipped me off for an instagram and i will try to investigate it some. there are times when i knew bradley, he has been out there and went i am on -- basically because i trusted him but i didn't to do that for everybody because i didn't know everybody. >> tweets can be totally wrong like christopher's example of the i saw it. they can be the first place, the

first place, almost all the news about what is going on in ferguson would have been first reported in a tweet. i got the idea of how powerful tweeting and read tweeting can be. i groote fairly pedestrian story about nixon couldn't order wilson to be arrested and through tweeting and where it was posted, ended up with 100,000 hits which was a new experience for me as a reporter. the tweets are really valuable to magnifying the power of journalism. >> this is a question i had myself. what coverage or action will take place if there is no indictment? and will be me and politicians pursue this? the question i have is you know

the indictment, you haven't noticed the indictment coming down to be able to gear up. >> nobody knows after the election. >> there are so many unknownss right now that it is not even responsible to give a full picture, to even speculate what can happen because i don't want to think that he is -- there should be enough to move forward for trial and i don't want to assume any rioting is going to start again because there are people on both sides it will be upset regardless whether they get an indictment or not. so it is kind of we don't know what will happen, we don't know where people will come from or how they will be feeling to come out of a bag.

it is hard to think of a contingency plan for what if because you can't plan for everything. i will certainly say this is on the minds of just about everybody who cares about public safety and we're going to different scenario analyses the we are trying to be prepared for anything. >> i wrote a story yesterday, if there is no indictment, he is going to release the transcripts and audio of the grand jury with the approval of the judge. he will do that immediately. that is highly unusual. but i don't know that it is going to -- that it would convince anyone. >> the question is how people are supposed to trust the

transcripts. >> there will be transcript and audio. at some point you got to trust something. generally court reporters to provide accurate accounts of what is said in trials and they can in grand jury proceedings where they are recorded. if there is an indictment, an interesting question is maybe the judge would open that to tv. the dean of the university law school suggested that would be a good idea. our investigation goes for possible federal charges going ahead full steam, so there will be that potential back up. again i don't know the combination of the transcripts of the grand jury and the audio

of the grain jury and promise of the federal government to pursue the case would keep people from wanting to be out in the streets, but that is sort of -- i don't think even though the grand jury extended -- and the post-dispatch, testify for four hours to the grand jury yesterday. i think one might think it could wrap up before january. >> who else testified? >> what mccullough's people have said it is this is controversial in itself, they are putting all of the potential witnesses and video and everything in front of the grand jury and letting the grand jury make their decisions than they are not providing them with a narrative, here is what happened that you would normally expect a prosecutor to do with

the grand jury. some people, washington post columnist says this is proof the grand jury process, the fix is in. because any prosecutor who wanted an indictment would provide a narrative and been holding facts in a way to get the indictment but i talked yesterday on the other side to a guy named david rose who used to prosecute police -- he thinks it is a good idea to let the grand jurors hear all the evidence. apparently mccullough is going to provide more legal guidance at the end of the grand jury wants all that material is before them. that is the back and forth. >> when the curfew effect, most reporters went into the press playpen, wrote off area far from the action.

why did journalists comply with this? can you talk about this? >> we did not comply with it. i was out there in the neighborhood, there were a lot of times i was in the safe media area. there was more teargas and stuff like that. one is to be in the sixth area, at that is where our equipment is, where we can put our zea's together and love our interviews then where our equipment is but that didn't stop us going down into the neighborhood and getting the story and bringing it back. >> in reference to after midnight, i don't have a lawyer that can bail me out of jail when you have police with tear gas. stay in the area, please stay in

the area. as a student still, you get -- you don't want to get arrested. >> i didn't have a press pass to getting to the media staging area. remember a policeman saying i can't help you if you are out of those ropes. i was scared and didn't know what was going to happen to me so i beg to get into the on media area. >> after midnight there was a curfew, the first amendment won't keep you from getting arrested and there won't be any defensive you get arrested. >> i will say there were -- i did not adhere to the curfew and could have been in the media. many other elected officials ritter and other journalists in

the mia area but because the arduous east 40, as they put you guys in the pin and they were able to -- >> i believe there was a police tactic. they saw the media, they were exposing some of the police actions so whether i put the mall in the area far and away from the action, report what is going on for tactical use by the police. >> they should go where the mine was. ferguson avenue is by the mcdonald's and the ferguson liquor mart. was usually where the police line had been. ..

especially the photojournalist. i was surprised by how much they put themselves in the line of danger just to get that shot. i have new respect for the pictures that come out. i got mad with you over the media regress over the media request but i did buy the paper because the two photographers, they made me by the paper. if you wind up having to stay in immediate pm, please know the real good stores recorded, from you hiding in bushes, putting on

a gas mask, running from the pushes up and possibly being arrested. it was awesome, absolutely. >> another important point to make is a lot of the journalists who came to town used report in cities like baghdad and beirut. it's like a bad thing you seem have to put on bullet vest and gas mask in america because these are not the countries going to war. this is america. >> photographers have deleted the photo. you have to get close to whether killing is still a video camera, although the good guys can stand back because they can zoom in. i'm a radio guy. in order to get the sound i've got to get close. what are you doing about it? to the police to say this is your area, you to stay here. this wasn't a crime scene. how can they get away with the? >> you've got to remember the

governor of missouri declared a curfew and made it law and gave the law enforcement the right to arrest anyone who violated the curfew. on the ground, the commanders on the ground said if midnight is curfew, you journalists can stay here commentary. you cannot be on the street. he have to stay in this area. i think what bradley was saying is, its home. your choice is arguably the guy with the gun or you get arrested or worse. let me tell you something. those of you who are think about being journalists or who are starting to be journalists, this is real. this is things journalists do. we've had a couple who got decapitated because they were reporting. and ahwar area in the middle east. think about that. we had one photographer was

taking a picture of the looting and totally focused on his job and one of the looters stop to look at him and said what are you doing? i think you're some of the words in there besides that but what are you doing and he started approaching. the photographer something effective advocate, your face is covered because the guy was wearing handkerchiefs. the guy backed off of it at the same photographer got knocked down and hit and kicked. it's real. it's not easy. >> him and after the verdict, the one in oakland where the guy was shot laying down handcuffed and shot in the back. one of my friends was punched by a guy. it happens. being a journalist, you to be done we were respected. you're taking your life in your hands. we only have about, i got a 10 minute one of my watch says it's

vital. this question has been asked, kind of what has as much research been done in the back of darren wilson. him country and. >> that effort is ongoing. it didn't help that a given time to scrub the record if that's what he did or someone did. bleed and is continuing on. [inaudible] >> has the media told enough of officer wilson stored to be considered fair and balanced coverage? >> we've done everything we can do as major investigative journalism operation, the biggest one in the region. we've done everything we can do. all i can say is it ain't over yet. this tour is not going away and we're continuing on that until we get to them, and to we understand this will record. not the kind of record.

>> why is it okay to kill children wikipedia cannot be used as a source but then he used twitter, instagram as a source of? >> i think we cover the comrades the? wikipedia, you don't know the reason why. and i just don't take tweets and run with it. i'm tweeting it anyway. wikipedia you don't know who put it out there at all. >> we are going to take for the media st. louis to cover other important issues like the guy choked a new city and the guy shot in california.

>> i think my focus right now locally, so much going on in st. louis that my focus right now just as a general assignment reporter is what's going on locally. the national media outlets can handle more of the national source because i can't do them justice in st. louis. >> he was choked before the michael brown shooting. local coverage really is local. it is national coverage to all of the local media has national coverage but it does mean going to spend my money covering local because there's only of national people. >> how useful is utilizing progress in as a monitor, i think you meant hashtag. what discussion about giving recent events at different designations the?

i guess all the stores are kept at hashtag so you want to keep all the information to that one hashtag. >> it's also wa a way to catch p if you missed something. >> hashtag ferguson. >> i'm trying to find questions him we haven't asked yet. can immediate stimpy considered unbiased -- can the media still be considered unbiased? candidate can pay unbiased information while there on the scene? the committee sees it but the media does or chooses not to cover it. we all make decisions on coverage based on journalistic experience. you might think it's a really big story. like that my radio station we

ask who cares? if it's one street that cares as opposed to e-market, we are going to cover the story the whole market wants. >> path we should tweak it or facebook it. [inaudible] >> he was the guy who was shot, killed in the city holding a knife. >> why was there no coverage of the? >> we covered of that. >> we wrote about it extensively online and in print. >> what also makes that a different story is its controversial but he did have something in same and he wasn't completely on armed. >> we found out the same type of situation happen on southside. him and him we definitely covered it.

is it to the of ferguson? no, but i think more so where coverage was of ferguson not only the facts but the emotions and all the protests and stuff like that going on. that wasn't happening with the stuff in st. louis the that didn't stop us from covering it. i know if you search for three or four stories will pop up. >> did you respond to the medical examiner on new stating the reason michael brown's body could not be picked up was there was fear from, fear of life from the crowd. i guess they were afraid the crowd -- to the crowd prevent them from picking up the body? >> that's a controversial statement. the fact that he laid there for a while actually the crowd more embattled. i've been saying the crowd, they made it worse in my opinion. that's just my opinion, letting him sit there longer.

>> -giving clear statements by police experts that there was no justification for him to lie out there for that period of time. >> we have run out of time. we have answered a lot of questions. i can't think apparent enough. -- i can't thank the panel enough. [applause] >> today on c-span3, defense secretary chuck hagel and general martin dempsey go before the senate armed services committee to testify about your strategy in combating ices.

>> the senate is in this afternoon at 2:15 p.m. eastern. vote on two judicial nominations

and later work continues. the house has passed its version of the measure. [inaudible]

>> just a minute here. leader mcconnell, you said that -- >> ready? >> let me just say this is a lot happier occasion. we are excited about having a great new bunch and we hope they will be joined by sullivan and bill cassidy shortly. we are here to make the place

function again and to begin to make progress with the american people. >> you said you're ready to work with the president. does that mean you're trying to move towards the middle? >> the problem is the president continues to send signals it's no intention of moving towards the middle. i was particularly distressed about the deal. apparently has reached with the chinese on his current trip which as i read the agreement requires the chinese to do nothing at all for 16 years while these carbon emission regulations create havoc in my state and other states around the country. i would welcome the president moving to the middle. i said before i hope we can do business on trade and maybe tax reform act. first indications have not been very helpful. [inaudible] >> how do you do to expect with the china issue?

>> we will discuss that with our colleagues in the next few days before we get ready take over the new majority. >> thanks everybody. thank you very much. >> thank you. [inaudible] >> thank you, everybody. >> how does it feel to be here? >> thank you very much. let's go. thank you. let's go. time to go. everybody, let's go. >> the senate reached an agreement. the house votes on a bill today sponsored by louisiana

congressman u.s. senate candidate bill cassidy. senator landrieu came to the for wednesday to speak about the pipeline and call for a vote. she was joined by fellow democratic senators joe manchin, jon tester and heidi heitkamp. this is about one hour. >> i was hopeful to catch the sender before he left because i wanted to ask him, and i'm not sure he's going to slip back in but i was going to ask him if he thought maybe because i agree with him the new approach to bipartisanship could start today. i don't think we have to necessarily wait until january. ththere are some of us have been ready that have worked in a bipartisan way literally for years getting really important things done for our nation. i'm sorry the senator slipped

away. i'm sure he's got some of the pressing business. because i wanted to ask him, i agree with him on the priorities that he just laid out. i think he just said that the american people want us to act and act together in their interest. i think i heard him say on the top of his list that he was particularly anxious to work on was the keystone xl pipeline, the expedited export of natural gas. i think he said it was important for jobs in america helping strengthen the middle class is sending a very positive signal that we heard been in this election that he was troubled about the falling median household income and wanted to do something to raise it. i think i heard him say that he was concerned or that he was, how shall i say, thinking some

of these things would push putin back on his heels. i've been -- there are a few others were on that list. i've been of the mind for a while. i think he also said and referred to ted kennedy, one of our dear friend and mentor to many of us, not just democrats but republicans as well with his straightforwardness, his honesty, his passion, his capacity for extraordinary work and his willingness to work across party lines as the senator from texas pointed out. called up the great partnership with senator kennedy and senator hatch and talked about the 80/20, let's agree on 80%. we might not agree in everything but let's move forward. i think were his words on each% that we do agree on. so want to come to the floor

today to ask senator cornyn from texas particularly, and senator mcconnell and senator reid and others if they would join me in moving forward on the keystone xl pipeline. this has been a project that has lingered far too long. is clearly supported by 60 or more members of this body. it is a piece of legislation that has been endorsed him by the new majority leader, to be majority leader, is a cosponsor and a leading cosponsor of the legislation. there are a significant number of democrats on that legislation. i believe with a push, significant push in the next few hours that we could actually get the votes that we need to pass the keystone pipeline.

in an hour or so at the request of the minority i'm going to wait for about an hour and then i'm going to propose a unanimous consent to do exactly that. to set up two hours of debate tonight after the vote and didn't have a vote on the keystone pipeline tomorrow. i believe it is time to act. i believe that we should take the new majority leader at his word and stop blocking legislation that is broadly supported by the american public, and has been for quite some time. i want to say yes to majority leader, new majority leader mitch mcconnell to the time to start is now. the public is clearly focused and i believe that we can move forward on several important

pieces of legislation. senator reid mentioned the marketplace earnest act. that is another very important piece of legislation that i believe needs to be moved through, and with a little push right now they could get done and it would be a significant boost to business and retail are being hurt everyday by our inaction. but my comments today are going to be about the keystone pipeline because i am chair of the energy committee for the united states senate and i'm going to do everything in my power here and at home on the campaign trail where i'm still in a runoff as you know to get this project moving forward. one of the extraordinary facts about the keystone pipeline is

not what it is and what it does but one of the most extraordinary pieces of argument for why we should pass it is the unprecedented coalition that supports it. .org other bills that have a longer list of supporters get to our bills the pages and pages of lists, but this particular bill has a relatively short list of organizations, but they are extremely powerful and they are extremely diverse which makes it compelling and i think it makes us, or should make us, want to stand up and responded to this coalition i'm going to reduce their names because i got time to do this before call for unanimous consent to pass the

original holton, landrieu keystone bill which is a standalone keystone bill as originally introduced with 45 republican cosponsors, every minute of the republican caucus is already a cosponsor of this bill. and we have on the bill about 12 democratic cosponsors. i am confident that we have the additional votes necessary to pass it. the american chemistry council, the american concrete, pipe association, the american exploration and production shelter from the american highway users alliance, the american petroleum institute, the american road and transportation builders, american truckers association,

associate general contractors of america, association of oil pipeline, concrete reinforcing steel institute, this division contractors association, independent petroleum association of america, industrial minerals association of north america, institute for 21st century energy, international brotherhood of electrical workers, laborers international union of north america. and let me stop there and make a point. many bills that passed here or attempted to pastor either have a list of all business organizations or all labor organizations, or all environmental organizations, are all highway contractors. this bill has such an extraordinary diverse group of some of the strongest business leaders in the country, and i want to underscore to my

democratic colleagues that are supporting this piece of legislation, tremendous support from labor unions. because labor unions, like business leaders, want jobs. they want profits. they want success. they want more investment in business creating good middle-class jobs. the difference between on gas industry which i've been pleased to be strong advocate for, this industry does produce the kind of jobs that americans really want. not minimum-wage jobs, not just slightly above minimum wage but jobs that in my state, the sender to knows this, start at 60, 70, $85,000 for a young man or a young woman coming out of high school or trade school let

alone college. these are very important jobs. that's why labor unions are represented here along with portland cement association, the plastic industry, the united association of journeyman and apprentice is a plumbing and pipefitters industry, american concrete, the business roundtable, american supply association, american iron and steel institute, national association of manufacturers, national electric contractors association, national roofing contractors. why would rethink contractors be supporting the keystone pipeline? there are no roads on a pipeline but there are thousands of roofs on workers needed to build a pipeline all along the route of the pipeline.

the north american diecast association, the national utility contractors. again, associated businesses. u.s. oil and gas association and finally steel manufacturers and western alliance. this is an extraordinary coalition that has come together to support the trend by bill. the bill am going to call up in a few minutes for unanimous consent to pass. because i believed what the new majority leader has said and i believe what senator cornyn has just said, the senator from texas. i believe with the current majority leader has said soon-to-be minority leader in the next congress that we need to work together and that we can work together and we need to begin to do that today, not

tomorrow, not in january, not in february, not in march, not around the corner, not next week but today. that would send the most positive signal. and i'm not asking to have unanimous consent on 10 bills that are controversial. i'm not asking us to do the impossible. i'm not asking us to do something that just came up last week. i'm asking us to move forward on a bill that has labor support, business support, general contractor support and the american people most importantly. the latest polls on the keystone pipeline not just in my state, and i see my colleague from west virginia, and not just in west virginia but polls in this country in california to new york and michigan to

pennsylvania to ohio to florida and to texas. not everyone but overwhelming support to both the keystone pipeline because americans want jobs. and american families deserve good paying jobs. and americans are tired in addition to powering to mideast powers are two russian dictators about what our futures going to be. americans operate. we want to stand proud and we believe the keystone pipeline is an important first step. it's a signal. it's a symbol that represents american energy power. it's a symbol moving past