vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the ayes are 88, the nays are 1. the motion is agreed to. under the previous order, the senate will proceed -- mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: -- to executive. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that following the cloture vote on calendar number 858, the senate consider calendars 961 and 533. these are career ambassadors, in this case anyone wants to know. there will be two minutes of debate equally divided between the leaders or their designees. the senate proceed to vote with

a no intervening action or debate. any roll call votes be ten minutes in length. if any nomination is confirmed, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, with no intervening action or debate, with no further motions be in order to the nominations, any statements related to the nominations be prescriptived in the rod and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. spher officer is there objection? the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. reid: we expect these nominations to be approved by voice vote. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, there will be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the abrams nomination. is there objection?

without objection. the clerk will report the noings voke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of leslie joyce abrams of georgia to be united states district judge for the middle district of georgia signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: i unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of leslie joyce abrams of georgia to be united states district judge for the middle district of georgia shall be brought to a close? the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senator in the chamber wishing to vote or wishing to change their vote?

the presiding officer: if not, the ayes are 68, the nays are 28. cloture is invoked. under the previous order, there will be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the cohen nomination. aw[inaudible] the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. [inaudible] the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the clerk -- all time is yielded back. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion. we, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions ofly standing rules of the senate, move to bring to a close the debate on the nomination of

mark howard cohen to the district judge for the united states district of georgia for the northern district. signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on mark howard cohen of georgia to be united states district judge for the northern district of georgia, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or wishing to change their vote? if not, the ayes are 67, the nays are 29. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: mark howard cohen of georgia to be united states district judge for the northern district. the presiding officer: under the previous order, there will be two minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the ross nomination. mr. leahy: mr. president, i ask consent --. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, hereby move to bring to a close the debate on

the nomination of eleanor louise ross of georgia to be united states district judge for the northern district of good, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: without objection the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is: is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of eleanor louise ross of georgia to be united states district judge for the northern district of georgia shall be brought to a close? the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote sph if not, the ayes are 66, the nays are 29. the motion to invoke cloture is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: eleanor louise ross of georgia to be united states district judge for the northern district. the presiding officer: the senate will proceed to the consideration of the following nominations, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nominations, department of state, barbara a. leaf of virginia to be ambassador extraordinary plenprotensionry of the united states to the united arab emrates.

theodore g. osius iii of maryland to be ambassador extraordinary to the republic of vietnam. erica j. barks ruggles of minute to be ambassador extraordinary to the republic of rwanda. karen clark stanton of michigan to be ambassador extraordinary to the democratic republic of timor-leste. the presiding officer: without objection, all time is yielded back. the question is on the leaf nomination. all in favor say aye. all opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. the question occurs on the osius nomination. all in favor say aye.

all opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. the question occurs on the ruggles nomination. all in favor say aye. all opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. the question appears on the stantostanton nomination. all in favor say aye. all opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motions to reconsider be laid on the table, and the president

will be immediately notified of the senate's action. mr. reid: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. reid reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule 22, following the confirmation of executive calendar 858, the senate consider calendars number 927, 954, 1047, 1048 and 1052. mr. president, if you would be kind enough, let me -- i just want to see who we're approving here. mr. reid: mr. president, during these calendars i've read the numbers, that there be two minutes for debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees prior to each vote, that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the

senate proceed to vote with had no intervening action or debate in the nominations that were listed. that any roll call votes following the first in the series be 10 minutes. that if in nomination is confirmed, all nominations be considered made and laid on the table, with no intervening action or debate, no further action be in order to the nomination, that any statement s related to the nomination be printed in the record and president obama be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate then resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: for the information of all senators, we expect nominations that i've listed here to be by voice vote tomorrow, confirmation would be by voice. i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business, senators be allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the debate time for s. 2282 be divided as follows: two

hours under the control of senators hoeven or his designee. one hour under control of senator landrieu or her designee. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: there are two bills due for a second reading, mr. president, that is before this body. oh, mr. president, i did this earlier. it's a -- strike that. i understand that h.r. 2 is due for a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: h.r. 2, an act to remove federal government obstacles to the production of more domestic energy and so forth and for other purposes. mr. reid: i would object to any further proceedings at this time. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. reid: i ask consent when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. that following the prayer and the pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of

proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. following any leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of s. 2280, as provided urn the previous order -- under the previous order. the senate then recess from 12:30 to 2:15 to allow for our weekly caucus meetings. for the information of senators, if all debate time is used -- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: thank you, mr. president. for the information of all senators, if all debate time is used, there will be up to five roll call votes at approximately 6:15 in relation to the keystone pipeline, confirmation of abrams, cohen and ross nominations and then 30 minutes of debate fryer a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to the u.s.a. freedom act. so if there's no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order -- the provisions of s. 579, as a further mark of respect of the late howard o. green. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on tuesday, november 18,

2014, urn the provisions of rest sez 579, as -- s. res. 579, as a further mark of respect >>

>> covering the debate in the senate what is behind the senate taking of the keystone measure? >> there is some political implications. the senator from louisiana is in a very heated runoff with congressman cassidy a republican and serving in that house and for landrieu this is the key to demonstrating she can legislate and hold her own on the floor of the senate even when her leaders are not necessarily behind her.

and then to go back to louisiana to show she can get things done. >>host: what does the keystone bill to? >>guest: basically takes the approval process away from the president and gives it to congress and it would be a pipeline move to consider the environmental statements as a state department issued to fill those requirements under the policy that has to be followed to be considered. >>host: let's get the 60 votes needed to pass the measure. you'' senator landrieu as saying i am confident it will have 60 votes to pass. >>guest: as of right now it does appear that she has 59 votes. last week senator crupper and bennett pledged support for the bill.

we have not found the 60th vote yet but they don't think she would have pushed this target she did not have 60 votes. that will be going into today and tomorrow. >>host: there does seem to be pressure. given that environmental activists that warning shots were fired to the democratic leadership and that senator schumer marched with that keystone pipeline he's never invited again. >> they are feeling pressure for a the climate change and a pipeline to gather that to go forward with exacerbate the emissions of greenhouse gases we already experience. the one to be taken serious on climate change and for senator schumer he said he

will vote no against the pipeline. >>host: bill cassidy was pastor his measure then what happens with cassidy is measure if senator landrieu passes? >> of her spouse's passes then the house bill is considered past so that will be the bill that is sent to the president's desk so have capacities name on it is she said it doesn't matter as long as it reaches the president. >>host: with the politics you write in roll-call that keystone dominates the senate runoff but does louisiana care? what is the story behind that? >>guest: there is a lot behind the vote they want to take home however they get it to the voters but the question is do they think this is a wedge issue?

but senator landrieu in particular legislative victories of the campaign trail haddad direct impact for louisiana. for example, earlier this year when she negotiated the bid premium increases for people selected is the big issue that whether or not the president will veto the bill? >> but president obama repeatedly said that he wants the department process to a separate the process in nebraska. and he had his druthers he would not have the bill on his desk but they have not said they would issue it definitively. >>host: readers can go to roll call.com and folly space twitter. thank you for the preview. >>guest: thanks for having me.

>> i have long felt what is getting overlooked with the debate generally with the

big picture is the question about broadband, how will they get it? no one is addressing that right now. a gives the agency more power to do things like mandate universal service like we did for telephones in the 20th century. and it collects money to go subsidize television it is good to be positioned to create a role broadband service but tying it to the future president to say we need a universal program people all over the country need the broadband there is more power for that

>> graduated from university have massachusetts and anthropology and however background of primitive culture for trading for government work and went on to have her master's degree from tufts university environmental health and engineering and planning. she began her career in 1980 and from there she went on to other positions first massachusetts rashid shared a little else in common with dukakis and mayor romney then moved slightly south

for the connecticut it epa and obama us nominated her in 2009 where she earned the nickname the president's brief quarterback. and after a lengthy confirmation battle the administrator and her husband have three grown children she relaxes by reading government documents thence a biographical portion of the program fell onto the mechanics. the natural gas alliance sponsors the breakfast today and our thanks to the ceo and the colleagues aware sitting in the back at the table to save me from the pain of premature retirement. we're always on the record no live plucking or tweeting

or no fighting while the breakfast is under way to listen to our guest. there is no embargo after the breakfast. we will e-mail pitchers to all reporters as soon as a breakfast and. as regular attendees no to ask a question please send me a nonthreatening signal that i will call when you and the time we have available. we will start with the opening comments and thank you for doing this. we appreciate it. >> thanks for coming this morning to give me the opportunity to talk for a few minutes then i'll be happy to take questions but let me just begin by saying most of what is on your mind will be related to a climate in particular may be that china u.s. joint

announcement as well as the $3 billion commitment to the green climate fund. so i will begin with that then they will talk about other things going for word but the most important message is the fact that a joint announcement between china and the west was a historic announcement. it was a significant step forward and it is attributable to president thomas leadership on climate change domestically and internationally. i think the step before the president stuck to put out the climate action plan to show that the u.s. could be aggressive on climate change but also that it was done reasonably in concert with a growing economic climate is important and it sends an

international signal which was intended. it is pretty clear that the epa put out for what was proposed was seen as a significant confirmation of the president's leadership as well as our ability to move forward under the clean air act to regulate climate change and a significant way from the power sector. so i think there is growing confidence not only the president was showing leadership but the work on resiliency to understand the economic impact that there was significant need for work with our communities to ensure that they are safe

and the climate impacts that we were seeing and the efforts under way like the power plant to develop a methane strategy that it is entirely consistent with a growing economy with continued investment and technologies of the future consistent with a low curve been future -- carbon future and to send clear signals are that investment could be made or opportunities to take advantage of the changes that result from understanding that climate is necessary with those actions the president outlined. the joint agreement with china is an indication the president said is about taking domestic action

they're obviously the two largest economies the largest sources of carbon pollution in the ability to work together in a joint agreement through the climate action plan and beyond how would interpret the responsibility is a big step forward. you all know that we believe it is significant but achievable to indicate the commitment of china is a big step forward if any of you have been involved for any length of time as i have you would appreciate the fact china and never put the absolute reduction on the

table with the commitment they have made which is the 23rd a commitment really does require immediate action. we do consider both commitments to be solid steps forward not only of a good signal for the international community but it represents half of the carbon budget in the world and others will want to take similar actions that would fade to an aggressive commitment. so with that i should stop other than to say one of the great things about the joint commitment or announcement is the fact there represents

the a acknowledgement that carbon pollution to put that in context of what we're doing could really stop investment international to achieve what science tells us that we need. i would just introduce it by saying the commitment was for irving and shaping of those that have already made commitments and will stock significant additional countries to join in the robust way and we think that this will be an opportunity for us to invest in a

significant way with the innovation and investment strategies to address climate change to get to the levels necessary. it will provide opportunities to work strategic areas but also deal with the resiliency challenges we need to address and is likely to continue. >>host: thank you for that summary. next we will go to our panelists to start. you are bullish on the china arrangement there are critics that don't share your enthusiasm and the senate majority leader said it requires the chinese to do nothing for 16 years.

they're recipes over the weekend to say it is not enough to make any new obligations they left them sells plenty of room to use the back what are your critics missing? >> i don't believe it is that necessary it is as i make it sound. i know if anybody looked at the numbers in the way china has relied on coal as a growth strategy it is kelly a signal that they need to make significant economic changes how they look at their economy and it will require significant investment of zero car been technology. it will result in the need

to make the immediate shift how they look to grow the economy and use at as the time to cap but no later than 2030 they would top off but if you look at the renewals to construct the results of this talking on the order of the entire generation capacity of the u.s. so this is the big change that requires to turn this large of an economy around. >> bet the good folks had an article last week with the majority leader.

and the sense was there was a war on cold now he will run of war on obama and one is the spending process. and christine todd whitman told the chair of the environment committee so how vulnerable is the epa to a strategy by senator mcconnell and others? >> i feel very confident the american people understand the value of the epa and 40 plus years they could do their jobs and i feel confident then those the testified before a the very committee.

and the cry of the redaction. this is an agency that has done its job. and i do not believe the american public does not want us to see us do that. >> you have had conversations with senator mcconnell recently? >> not in recent days that we have met before and i certainly respect his position. but i think the american public will speak. >> looking at the u.s. commitment that the power alone will not get us there.

so not just with the voluntary standards. >> but you may recall that we do regulate the compounds well but the question is how do we continue to get those reductions? so we are exploring this and the president called on and as a reduction in strategy and we are working on that with the rest of the administration it is not just what the epa can do but were received the commission's of methane that are readily reduced that could be done in with certainty so we are clearly looking at both regulation and voluntary actions in the business community as opportunities for reductions and come out with the plan.

and still to be analyzed to make cost effective reductions to go after those stiff neck and alaska and on climate question. two decades ago epa tried to accommodate the industry since the court since then congress has tried several times with the way that it will be. is it a situation the epa could take administrative action since people are still dying of asbestos? >> we have the ability to get this issue through a number of access. we know we can help provide standards and do in a

healthy way the talents that you raised is if we have the tools that we need. but from my perspective not the strong this statute that we have available we have shown that time and time again. cooking and where the opportunities are with the pesticides and other issues but it would be welcome there is an active interest to do that. >> republicans are clear

that they're targeting those priorities but also not necessarily a climbing related. are you prepared to negotiate with the republicans? t think you and the president will or do you see compromise? >> no. i feel confident the president is in the best interest of the epa in mind. you can make clear what his priorities are. i feel we are on very solid ground to recognize there may be challenges ahead but the president will do the right thing.

the other point double-a-2 make that while there is a lot of discussion the president has been very clear what that with this agency and feel very well supported making sure what we do is write in the appropriate way but the most important thing to your note is the people that we regulate, the stakeholders are playing -- paying very close attention sitting at the table with the sleeves rolled up. space is banking on us to get stopped they acknowledges the epa does its job well then they should be at the table working with us to make sure interest roper and that is clearly happening.

so even with a lot of rhetoric it continues with the stake holders at the table. >> talk about global warming and climate change and the successor of treasury. calculating the impact or the economic impact of climate change and global warming to say if there was a 30% increase in temperatures rather than the 2% increase the cost globally would be a 1% reduction of the economic output.

is that a reasonable estimate? what about that output? >> i do have a difficult job that i would rather be doing nothing else to be honest this is where one to be. this is across the administration because we have had a lot of opportunity to have the economic representatives of this administration talks on climate change. they tried to talk about the discussions but also the climate in action. added hasted the taken and

they are moving in the direction that the energy world is moving and then to grow jobs. and that is how we evaluate that honor ruled by rule basis but he clearly says how dangerous it is that if we know nothing on climate with that strategy moving for it is not the way to go.

. .

>> host: if you have heard the term or use the term net neutrality then you can praise or curse our guest this week on "the communicators" columbia university law school professor tim wu. when and how did