but for syrians and iraqis it has to do with sectarianism in iraq. it has to do with money and business in syria. still ideology is very important but not the only factor in this case. so they were able to recruit more and more people, gain more and more money, and control more and more land. this is the recent map now. the small spots, black spots, grow to the black increase areas which is controlled by the islamic state which is the new version of the isis. then came the international coalition air campaign against isis, first in iraq and later on in syria.

and the question here is, who is eligible, who has what it takes to control the areas that this international campaign is going to liberate from isis? definitely it is the assad regime, because as i said, or 16 months the moderate rebels were desperate, and doesn't enjoy any kind of support, either we are talking about weapons or training or financial support. so unfortunately, the people in syria now are not optimistic when they think about this war against terrorism in their country and in iraq, because they think at the end of the day

it will help the regime. my last point is, is it a lost case, or is there still hope? this is what gives me hope actually when i think about syria. people are still going to the streets, chanting against the regime. they started to chant against the regime like four years ago, and now they are saying in every single occasion, down with the regime, and down with isis as well. they think they deserve a better choice. they don't have to choose between bashar al-assad and his regime and another taliban in syria. this is what they have got. more than 200,000 died, more

than 7 million are now refugees in neighboring countries, and more than 3 million internally displaced, and half a million beseiged in the towns. this is how they portray the relationship. i think it tells a lot. still there is a way out by reinforcing the moderate rebels in syria, in order to exert more pressure over trenton, -- assad, to bring it to the negotiating table to make sure there is an orderly transition of will not turn into another libya or iraq but will make sure that there will be and only transition into a more democratic society in

this country. my final note is that, that's also a good one from one of the demonstrations. this is not the way out. thank you very much. [applause] >> do you want to take three questions? >> yes. >> any questions? no speeches now, just questions. >> can i ask you please a question? >> lease. >> -- please. spent as we know from the lessons of history, no country can deal with a challenge of terrorism alone unilaterally, and i think in your talk you

spoke about the needs of support those forces who actually demonstrated before for freedom. now we do have a coalition, and we spoke about the role of the military. what specifically on the basis of your experience in syria and, obviously, in egypt has to be done by the coalition in terms of trying to in just some hope -- in just some hope for the future? if you mentioned that struggle can last for many years, i suppose decades, if not the next century. so what specifically would you

recommend that the coalition are those who want to protect democracy and human rights and minority rights, what should they do? >> fortunately, we do have to think the first of all, an offer from four countries in the region, saudi arabia, qatar, turkey and jordan to host training camps for the rebels to be trained. fortunately, also, we have the president of the united states allocating $500 billion for the training, and also for cynics and weapons to moderate rebels in syria. if we are keen enough to draft a plan, to train like 15, 20,000 soldiers in these poor countries

in a timeframe that doesn't exceed a year, from february 2015 by the end of the year, we will have enough soldiers to replace isis in syria and northern syria, and to exert some pressure on assad in order to bring them into the negotiating table, and then try to find a way, to try to deal that will move series into a condition of the transition period. yes, sir. >> one more. >> excellent presentation. question, former commander of u.s. special operations command, admiral mcraven, the new chancellor of the university of texas, one of his favorite phrases was, ma you can surge forces but you can't surge

trust. the problems which you haven't a lot of the countries in the world and the way we treated the shah of iran, everett people think the way we treated the park, the pakistan's, how much of an increasing problem doesn't and how do we resolve that? >> which you explain more? >> in other words, the confidence of the leadership of the country in the area, whether it's saudi arabia, the leadership in egypt, promises that we're making, drawing red lines, the confidence that we commit all sorts of promises, but can they trust us on backing up those promises? >> obviously there is a problem here, but i think still there is enough confidence in the region in the u.s. in order to bring the change into this area. yeah, there is a problem here, i only think about the public opinion in the region, not only

about the regime. i have dealt with the syrians for more than two years and they were really disappointed back in august 2013 when the u.s. promised to conduct some sites when assad use the chemical weapons against his own people. so from time to time you hear them saying that the americans promised and never deliver. but i think it's not yet a lot, or a lost case, and the war against isis is a wakeup call. it brought the international coalition into the air it again. they are already conducting airstrikes in the city. the only thing is to make sure that assad is not making use of this air campaign, and to enable the of the rebels to control

more and more land, at least the ones that they controlled last year. gentleman in the back. >> go ahead. are you going to make a speech or a question? no speeches. >> i want to applaud your use of maps in your presentation. i want to ask, so one of the reasons were able to successfully negotiate in bosnia was ambassador holbrooke not only knew more about the facts on the ground and milosevic did come we are able to demonstrate we knew more about the facts on the ground than most of which get. i noticed your nose map was six months old. how would we draw those kinds of maps if he wanted to do it in near real-time? 24, 48 hours old. >> it was a this year. >> but because it's on facebook doesn't mean its true spirit

some of them are not on facebook. some of that i got from the intelligence community itself. some of them taken, were drawn by independent institutions in europe, and i used to verify this information with the military advisors of the united nations special envoy to syria who is very capable military officers there. >> well, thank you. antigen on behalf of the institute, i want to thank all of our distinguished panelists and speakers. i hope that you will go away with the idea that whether you are talking about a military type of strategy, and action, a war, a sibling type of strategy action or national security are really all of the above, because there interconnected, i hope that you would help us send the message out to the world that

this is a complicated type of operation. we have to have very clear war or conflict aims before we start. we certainly have to give some thought to how we want it to look when we are done. this is not just on the political standpoint or the military standpoint of economic standpoint or the cultural standpoint, but all of those views, and others as well. we have to have mechanisms that can translate these plans into actions. we don't have to have that very well today in this country, and we need to do better. we also need to understand clearly that we have to be adaptive along the way, because clients and considerations change as we all know. the business about whether we are like or not really is, it's a crucial one in many ways, and

we also have an awful lot of lawyers involved in operations, and that bothers me, too. fundamental in you want to understand that the military is that fundamentally you want to understand the military goes summer. there's a couple basic rules got to remember. one, don't ever do anything that hurts the people you're trying to help. soldiers and marines, the lower the rank the better they are, and they understand that and that really doesn't need too much in way of legal advice or anything else like that. that's common sense. during the eisenhower administration for guy named later wrote a book called the ugly american and he was talking about the way americans acted in the way we will look at by other peoples around the world in laos and places like that. eisenhower put the word out to the military, he said start learning about cultures and languages and people and how

they live, and start looking at the world through their eyes instead of yours. we did that pretty well for a while but i sense what kind of drifted away from that a little bit. so i think that's very, very important. but anyway, i could? on but we really over time. are there any sandwiches left? okay, thank you all very much. [applause] >> [inaudible conversations]

>> last week john kerry warned diane feinstein t that the relee of report on cia interrogation tactics by her committee could put americans in danger overseas. as a result, he asked that adequate time be provided to prepare for the reports released. that's not expected to occur today. senator feinstein will talk about the report from the senate floor at around 11 am eastern. we'll have that live here on c-span2. >> here are a few of the comments with recent receipt from our viewers. >> i am very interested in this program of the american indians. i didn't watch the whole thing. i came in and found it on when i turned the tv on and watched

what i could for about an hour and a half or two hours. this program is absolutely wonderful, and if it's going to be on again, it will be a bigger audience by go to all the local societies and asking them to spread the word, something that i've never seen on before. added to watch a lot of c-span. thank you. >> i am calling from greensburg pennsylvania that american history tv. i love that channel. every weekend i watch it almost religiously. i love all the history stuff you have. please give us more history programs. history in the sense of, you know, like something before 1950

or 1960. it's going to have these political commentary type things, you know, from the 1970s on, you know, that's later or during the week or something, but not during the history weekend. and i really love your history lectures. i would like to have another chance to do that, or even see it again several months later, like today instead of this reaganite that you have on here ranting u ranting about ho is. >> i love c-span. i love the nonfiction books and i love it when you have the books on. always belated on the weekend watching c-span. it's the best thing to do and it's the most fun. my son teaches history in a junior college, and i never used

to be interested in a lot of history. now i am. so thank you very much. >> continue to let us what you know about the programs you're watching. call us at (202) 626-3400, e-mail us at comments@c-span.org or send us a tweet at c-span hashtag comments. joined c-span conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> c-span2 providing live coverage of you senate floor proceedings and key public policy events, and every weekend booktv now for 15 years the only televisiotelevisio n network devoted to nonfiction books and authors. c-span2 created by the cable tv industry and brought you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. >> next, a conversation with tennessee senator bob corker. he's ranking member of the foreign relations committee

antiracist book of the foreign policy initiative about iran's nuclear negotiations and u.s.-iran relations. this is 35 minutes. >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. my name is chris griffin, and the executive director of the foreign policy initiative. on adobe acrobat of our board of directors it's a great pleasure to welcome you to our forum and. a quick moment, want to thank our presenting sponsor this year, raytheon for their support for this year's forum there before introducing our first panel i want to note that the framing issue for our discussion this year is "a world in crisis the need for american leadership." and we could have no better introductory panel to address the topic and senator bob corker, moderated by fred hiatt addressing the question of what the train it should do in response to iran's nuclear ambitions.

fred will be moderating the discussion. he is well-known in this room but he served in 2000 as the editor page editor at the "washington post," the paper he joined in 1981. every other what he publishes a column in the "washington post" which i believe everyone here reads religiously. it's a great column. and is also served as bureau chief in both tokyo and moscow, and it's a great pleasure to welcome him and to welcome senator corker to the discussions this morning. thank you both. >> thank you, chris. thank you all. thank you, senator corker. i think you all know senator corker was elected to the senate in 1996 -- >> 2000. >> reelected in 2012 after serving as mayor of chattanooga, active on the banking committee but also for purposes of today ranking member of the senate foreign relations committee. forces that he may be tapped for

a high job there in the coming session. our schedules were supposed to talk about iran, and i would like to begin with that but the senator has agreed we can range to a little further field so we will solve all the problems of the world. let me start with iran. you have said better to postpone and to come back with a bad agreement. they have now postponed. what would a good agreement look like, and is it still possible, do you think based on what you know, the administration and its allies have already agreed to? >> so i think, this is i think they'll in a bipartisan way. i know senator menendez has been pretty vocal the last 24 hours but i think we began in a place with initial agreement that put us on the line not to do the kind of deal that most americans

thought would be an appropriate deal with iran. and so we are starting in a place where we are already behind the curve. and so how do you figure out a way to make it better? i think one of the things to put in context is, i mean basically if you think about where our negotiators are, they are hoping to stave off for a period of time until there's a different regime in iran. they are production of a nuclear weapon. what iran is doing is helping to alleviate sanctions until such a time there in a better place to be in a position, to very quickly move to a nuclear weapon. this is an interesting dynamic, and when you think about the length of term of the agreement, it becomes pretty frightening. we all begin talking about a 20

year term with us having incredible insights. into what iran is doing. now the administration is talking about a double digit length, which based on the way they approach to most things means 10 years. iran is talking about five. you get concerned that likely they will split the baby and end up with a seven or eight year deal. so very quickly you realize that over a seven-year period, eight year period based on the way they'rthere going today you endn a situation where iran is in a situation where they are treated like any other ntt country. if at all of those sanctions removed, and they're in a much, much different place, and all along the way they're developing the ability to deliver. one of the things that's not covered under this agreement in any way is their ability to

continue to develop delivery systems and warheads. it's pretty problematic when you think about it in that context. and so what can congress do? obviously the easiest thing to do, simplest thing to do, it's not probably going to happen, but we can just do away with only national security waivers that are in the existing legislation so that they would have to come back to congress. i think some article ii people and others with me to criticize that approach. the other thing we can do is what the corker-grandville states which is they have to come back to us to approval which gives the administration the ability to negotiate a much stronger arrangement. it look at everything that's happening with iran, the ayatollah is the one that's the backstop to keeping something more moderate from occurring. i think congress in being ballot

process by a productive role in this vast market i think the negotiators would agree with that. so length of the term to at your question, i think something far more robust than what they are today. and secondly, getting into the past legitimate chance of what they have done, i think to go beyond the is a total loser for us. i think we have to get down to come clean with what their past military dimensions were. i think that gives us some insights into the irg and other operations that otherwise we would not get. but i'm very concerned about where we are, and i think we are headed to a place where we're going to lose leverage and not get much. we used to talk about dismantlement. now we are talking about basically unplugging, dealing with plumbing in a different way. i think you're going to see a more robust, you will see

congress and the senate plays a much more robust role during the first quarter spent some people in congress seem to want to go further than your bill, that is impose more sanctions now. this would help the negotiators. susan rice says that would blow up the talks. i think that's what she was referring to when she said that. what is your view of? >> i cosponsored a bill that does that come and we actually had some language in their that laid out what a good deal would look like. by the way, these sanctions are not sanctions that will go in place today. if i remember the bill correctly what would happen is they would put sanctions in place should i do not be reached but also with snapback the sanctions had been alleviated should i do not be reached. it's very difficult to understand how that is problematic and meaning you are not really adding any sanctions

at present be purchasing if we don't reach a deal it's going to get much tougher on the country itself. i think, look, there's not a lot of credibility that exists to to threats that this is going to blow things up or put on the other hand, i will say, fred, look, we are in the majority. although this is a bipartisan issue. in the majority you can write letters and say a lot of things that you know are never going to make it into legislation. we are going to be in the majority. we are in the majority, january. certainly the things that we do need to be thoughtful. they need to move us to the place that makes our nation much stronger, everything that needs to be a lot more discussions about why, why imposing additional sanctions if we don't end up with a deal would cause the situation to dissipate. it's hard to understand why that

would be a problem. problem. >> you refer to the things iran is doing. part of what's underlying some of this i is that people who argued that iran is naturally a u.s. -- if not an ally, a partner. we don't really have competing interests. obviously, both countries look at isis as a threat now. the administration at times has seemed to look at these talks as opening the way to much broader operation. other people have a few that's naïve. how do you see what, if there were an agreement would open up the possibility of a better relationship? >> well, we don't know, do we? again, it looks like an agreement, if one is reached, will be of a very short-term nature. i do think that secretary of state kerry, one of his traits is to see the world as he wishes

it to be. that's an acknowledged world view. so it's hard to say, isn't it? it worked with us some i guess in south africa to deal with them in a way that they came forward and began to deal with the world community in a different light relative to their nuclear weapons. but there's no indication that that's the case with iran. certainly pre-79 they were an ally. things have changed. i think that prudence would go on the side of not being naïve about what could happen but actually wanting to see some changes of behavior as things are taking place. ..

>> the agreement is at least one

component of a more robust policy in syria because of the ties that exist between the regime and assad itself. so, i mean, there's no question that there's a tie there that is an inhibitor or not, i do think at the end of the day the president is not at a mace where he really -- at a place where he really wants to, i mean, i think this is a personal thing, i don't think this is the people around him, but i believe he's in a place where he's not ready to have a more robust policy in syria and still has concerns. i'd be the first to admit we have a complex situation there. but i'd also say the negotiations with iran certainly are another impediment to that, because i think there are discussions about cooperation as you just mentioned. that cooperation, certainly, means that at present thed administration doesn't want -- the administration doesn't want to overly agitate the e -- the regime in iran right now. >> the arguments i hear, aside

from what personal feelings and convictions he may have, against more robust actions against assad, there seem to be two. one is iran would take it to iraq and make life more difficult there, the other is you would open the way for sunni extremists, isis or others to take over syria. how do you respond to those two concerns if you're advocating a more active anti-assad campaign? >> yeah. so i think, you know, the anti-assad campaign doesn't mean anti-al a white --al alawite, ad i think if you listen closely to the conversations that are taking place, there's a desire for assad to leave, but then there's a desire to figure out some way of having a government. by the way, this is all easy to talk about, much harder to do as we've seen over and over again. but to create some type of partnership government between

the bureaucrats that do exist within syria, do have the ability to cause the government to function so that we don't do the same kind of thing that we did in 2003 in iraq, but also bring the sunni population into the fold. i mean, again, that's so much easier said than done, but when we say assad, we're talking about him as an individual over time but keeping many of the alawite intellect, if you will, in place. back to iraq, i mean, at the end of the day it's obviously not in iran's interest for the, i mean, they have some -- they have actually aligned interests with us in many ways. it's not in their interests that these sunni extremists continue to gain territory. so, look, we have allowed a situation that was already complex to become even more complex by not having a policy

in syria for as long as we've had it. it's made it much more difficult, and at present that's the reason we've continued to talk to just yesterday talk to the administration about the aumf issue, and that is that they, they're not ready to come to congress for an aumf because they are not yet in a position to or articulate a strategy in syria that passes the, you know, the common sense test. i do think that general allen -- >> so the president said he wanted congress to pass an aumf -- >> well, he kind of -- >> you're saying they haven't -- >> typically, look, i think everyone here is obviously steeped in the traditions of how we deal with foreign policy. typically, when an administration seeks an authorization, they explicitly seek it by sending up a draft of what it is that they are seeking. they don't, this thing, and i

became particularly are upset with kerry the last time he was before us when he said that, look, we don't really need an authorization, but if you guys want to be constructive and write one, that's fine. well, that's a silly game. and what is left out of that is the administration coming up and explaining very clearly and selling to congress what it is that they're attempting to do and telling you how they're going to go about doing that. and that's why to me it's very important, as i stressed again yesterday, for them to come explicitly ask. but the piece that's so important is they've got to lay out the outcome that they are seeking. they cannot lay out how they're going to go about making that happen. as i just mentioned, it's easy to say what i just said, but it's much more difficult. and by the way, it is difficult, i acknowledge that. so what i hope is going to occur is that during this first quarter they are going to come

forth explicitly, but secondarily they're going to -- and importantly, they're going to be able to talk with us about how they're going to go about achieving that. they have no idea yet, i think general allen is making some good strides. i think this focus on this northwest triangle where around the aleppo area you don't create a no-fly zone. that's a word that people don't want to use. i forgot the word we're using now, but it's, in essence, a no-fly zone. and in essence, you allow refugees to be there but also some training of the moderate levels, but also you begin to show, you begin to deal with assad in such a way because turkey becomes more involved. he realizes that over time he's being patched in being such a way that maybe there's a reason for him to negotiate a settlement where he's out of there. i do think, again, allen is making some good strides. i think left, giving them some

time although, again, these nuclear negotiations create some complications, giving them some time, i think they may come forth with something that congress can buy into. now, for the good of our country one of the things we need to absolutely insure doesn't happen is that they come seek an authorization and we're not able to pass it. i mean, that is a loser for or country, it's a loser for our middle east policy, and that's why in advance we need to be working together to begin talking about what that should look like before it's actually explicitly laid out. >> i want to -- two more questions on iran before we leave it entirely. if you look forward six months and they, again, don't manage to come up with an agreement which seems quite plausible given how far apart they are, the president has always said no options are off the table. >> yeah.

>> but there's been a lot of speculation about whether he means it, and there have been a lot of people who say military option is a loser because at most you set them back two years. so even if it's morally justified, it's strategically a mistake. you're going to be in a position where your views on that could be very important, and i wonder how you think about how we should think about that. >> well, i don't think that, first of all, you go back in time when we did what we did in iraq, and i think it's acknowledged it had a pretty big impact on iran. i mean, they had illicit -- i believe, most people believe -- they had an illicit program that was underway that had military dimensions to it, and it stopped for a period of time.

so the threat of force, the concern about maybe the same thing happening in their particular situation certainly had an impact. i don't think they have any degree of thought that today while these negotiations are underway that there's a potential for a military situation. i mean, i think they believe that this president, i mean, i think our intelligence officials would say that they're not discussing in iran the threat of kinetic activity. if it falls apart over time with a presidential election coming up and another potential president coming in, would that be of potential concern to them? i think it would. is it a loser? it is. and that's why i think people have been, like senator menendez yesterday although he's been there the whole way, i think that's why people have been so concerned about the path that

we're on, because we have had extreme leverage. the international community has been together in a very unique way. and out appears we're about to -- and it appears we're about to let that leverage dissipate over a very, very short-term deal that will very much change the dynamic of what we have to work with them. and this is where the administration, i think -- i know they get caught up in their own rhetoric all the time, but people have concerns about the deal or warmongers. no, it's just the opposite. people that are concerned about the deal are concerned that we're giving up the leverage that in a bipartisan way we've all worked hard to create, and we're going to end up in a situation where over time when we're in a very different situation, they have much more capabilities relative to breakout capacity. >> and if they came back with an agreement, a short-term agreement that you thought was

weak, i'm wondering no matter what you do in the senate, won't every other country say, look, this was good enough for president obama -- >> yeah. >> -- we're not going to -- so is there any possibility of keeping sanctions up at that point? >> well, a great point. i was talking to a democratic senator yesterday that's not on the foreign relations committee, and, obviously, you know, foreign policy is something that you want to develop bipartisan consensus on always if you can. and he was, i was talking to him about this bill, wouldn't it be good if the president had to come back to congress for approval? and his response to me was, well, what worries me is what senator would really vote to approve a deal with iran? i said, well, look, you know, the fact is that i think when you get to that situation, fred, exactly what you just said is

true. what a senator's going to have to weigh is, look, the international community's going to fall apart. i mean, in essence, what iran is urging the president to do right now is to go ahead and temporarily suspend. they're not concerned about whether congress approves this or not because they know when he temporarily suspends, the deal's over. you understand? i mean, the international coalition is broke withen apart at that -- is broken apart at that moment, and that's why they have said directly to the administration it opportunity matter to them whether it's permanently done, the temporary suspension meets their needs because they understand exactly what you're saying. again, i think as much as all of us have concerns about where we are, i do think a congress faced with the situation of approving or not approving would certainly take into consideration the reaction of the international community and our ability to work together towards an end relative to iran, and that will

be a factor that certainly would be on, i think, any thoughtful person's mind. and i think most people when it comes to issues like this, a thoughtful component hopefully comes out. >> let me -- i'd like to let time for at least one or two questions, but let me ask you one more on russia, and then we'll open it up. the question of arming ukraine, sending -- >> yeah. >> -- lethal, also nato stationing troops in the baltics as some people say why would you provoke, other people say let's deter. how do you look at that kind of a question, and how do you think a republican senate will look at that kind of a question? >> let me go back and just briefly state that i think the worst moment in foreign policy -- in u.s. foreign policy since i've been here according to the world where we were as a

nation was august a year ago when we had a ten-hour operation, a ten-hour operation that was getting ready to take place in syria, and it didn't happen. and not only did it not happen, we didn't communicate with those folks who were going to be a part of it with us until they watched the president on cnn. that was devastating to us, i think. in essence, we -- sorry to be slightly rhetorical -- jumped in putin's lap, and, you know, we are where we are today in syria. we lost a lot of momentum, i think, with the syrian rebels at that moment. the moderate opposition. so let me go to russia. i think that was a learning experience for putin. i really do. i think it's had some, some effect on his calculations in ukraine. and, again, i thought that when he had 40,000 troops on the border before anything had actually happened in eastern ukraine, that was the time for

us to hit them with senate sectoral sanctions. we didn't. we tweaked some folks around him which, by the way, their wealth has been created because of their relationship with him. i don't think complaints to him do a lot of good. and so, you know, we let the genie get out of the bottle. he's now riding this nationalistic wave that everybody in this room knows about. it's very difficult to dispoint off of that especially -- dismount off of that especially when you have the economic issues inside the cub that you have. -- inside the country that you have. you have to have something holding things together. look, i've been very disappointed in the administration which held off for some time and still, i don't think, is fully clean here. we had intelligence inside ukraine -- inside ukraine, not on the russian border inside russia -- inside ukraine we knew exactly what russia was doing, where they were doing it, and we would not share that with ukraine, a country that we urged to move west. remember, we urged them to do

what they did, okay? and we wouldn't share that because, quote, it would make us appear to be operational. look, the lethal support to me is something that certainly is not going to mean that they would ever be able to stand up to russia. it's not going to happen. it raises the price. it shows a little bit of a deeper commitment. the language, i think, is nuanced in such a way that you're talking about lethal support. it authorizes, by the way, the president to do this, lethal support that they are capable of utilizing. in other words, we don't want, obviously, we want them to demonstrate the capacity to be able to intelligently use what we would give them. but, look, this passed unanimously out of the foreign relations committee. i wrote a bill in advance with 23 other senators. i don't think, six months ago. i don't know, six months ago. now we have bipartisan agreement, passed unanimously

out of committee. we hope to run a hotline on it in the next short period of time, and, you know, we have, there are some various senators who have some issues. but it's my hope that we're going to be able to get it potentially -- and i know this is based on the way things are somewhat difficult -- but potentially get it out of both bodies before we go home. we have a lot of work to do to make that happen, but i think it's a strong piece of legislation that pushes the administration for slightly more robustly -- forward slightly more robustly. but, again, we waited too long. the genie's out of the bottle. it's very difficult to see how we don't end up in a frozen conflict there. but we are where we are. yeah. >> is there somebody who wants to -- sure. >> [inaudible] my question -- >> hold on. i think there's a microphone coming.

and would you identify yourself again, please? >> [inaudible] russia -- [inaudible] the question is about the bill you talked about just seconds ago. how do you expect will white house sign it? >> will the white house sign it? um, you know, it's authorizing legislation meaning it authorizes, it doesn't demand. i think, again, it passed unanimously out of committee. if it passes this time, it means it has to pass through unanimous consent meaning every senator has agreed to it. i think they'd have some difficulty vetoing something like that, should it occur. i don't think they would. >> do you think the impact of the oil prices will be on putin? >> well, you know, it's actually much better than any of the sanctions we've put in place.

[laughter] one of the things that, you know, i had a group in yesterday. one of the great privileges that people like you and certainly the people in tennessee give me is to be able to sit down with intelligent people like people in this room, but others from all around the country and world on a daily basis. one of the things that was discussed yesterday was, look, does it make any sense for us to begin looking at opening up exports on our petroleum but also con den sates to take advantage of, basically, going back to the iran issue, does it maybe help some with that, with some of the countries that over time will be demanding a relationship with iran to supply their own petroleum needs? does that help us strategically? but, certainly, back to this russia, certainly, is reeling. i think you saw yesterday where

they have, you know, officially proclaimed that they're going to be in recession this next year. and, again, i get back to the nationalistic fervor that's taking place. you know, probably causes putin in some ways to even ride that horse harder because that's all he's really got to ride with right now. so we need to certainly pay attention. you know, really weak nations and weak states sometimes certainly don't do rational things relative to outward issues, and we certainly need to pay close attention. >> uh-huh. let me -- >> [inaudible] >> no, i'm sorry, because we're really out of time. if i could just close with a slightly more philosophical constitutional question. you wrote an excellent op-ed in "the washington post" not too long ago, and you said obama's an unreliable ally, and it's hard to watch. now you and the republican

senate are going to be in a position to do a little bit more than watch. when you think of the next two years, how much influence do you think the senate can have on foreign policy, what -- how do you think about the role you can play in a divided government? >> yeah. well, again, i hope, look, i am very disappointed in the administration. i don't think there's a republican senator that's spent more effort on a myriad of issues working with them to come to conclusion, and i'm disappointed not just in their, in their approach, but i'm also disappointed when you have something working, their inability to even coordinate making it happen. i'm disappointed. we have two years more. at the same time, foreign policy in spite of that disappointment is something that we should as a nation do everything we can to

deal with in a bipartisan way. bob menendez has been a very good partner in that regard. so what are the things we can do? certainly, one of the things we can do is actually pass a state department authorization, by the way, which hasn't been done in years. i can't remember the last time -- look, it hasn't happened since i've been here, and that helps lay out little things, but it certainly causes the state department to pay far more attention to the foreign relations committee, that effort of laying out what you're authorizing them to do or not do. let's face it, most people on my side of the aisle are strong article ii folks, right? i mean, the president is commander in chief, and we need to understand what our role is. but things like this ukraine legislation we will address can, i think, in some form or fashion in a meaningful way with, congress playing an appropriate

role in this iran issue. but, look, there's a healthy respect for the role that the president plays in foreign policy. i do believe that we can shape things, and much of what we do is really helping shape the american people's perspective on what we should be doing. the foreign policy committee, foreign relations committee, if you think about what the administration does on a daily basis, all administrations, they deal with things coming in over the transom every day k right? crises. that's kind of what administrations do. one of the things the foreign relations committee can do is to set a context for our nation to understand what is in our nation's national interest. and when these occurrences come up, allow us to think about how we go about dealing with them on a much more thoughtful, longer-term fashion. that's a role that i hope we will ascend to.

i know it's been that in years past. it's sort of lost that luster in recent times, but i think we can have -- as long as we handle ourselves in a thoughtful way, as long as people understand this is not about some partisan dig, but really about our nation's national interest, i think we can have far more impact than we've had, and that's what i hope to achieve should i be given the opportunity you talked about earlier. thank you. >> unless fbi wants to give us another half hour, i'm afraid we have to stop. so thank you very much. [applause] >> the house oversight committee holds a hearing today to look at health care enrollment under the affordable care act. the witnesses include economist and former adviser jonathan gruber who has said details in the law were intentionally

obscured in order to enable its passage. we'll also hear testimony from may lin tavenner who -- marilyn tavenner. that's live this morning at 9:30 eastern on c-span3. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> this week on "q&a," politico reporters share stories about being on the campaign trail with senator mitch mcconnell. >> he had planned for four years this campaign. this started in 2010 right after he saw what happened in the republican primary for rand paul, the kentucky republican senator. rand paul beat mcconnell's hand-picked guy, trey grayson, in that primary. at that point mcconnell realized i have to recalibrate everything i know about republican primary politics in my home state, and he started to make changes. he hired key staff, and he started to build this very

sophisticated infrastructure knowing this would be the most difficult race in his campaign. >> so they knew they were going to spend a lot of money on technology, they had watched the obama campaign in 2008 and 2012, they had watched harry reid's re-election in 2010. they knew that they needed to go from his 2008 race where he beat democrat bruce lunsford by six points, it was a tough race, he was going to have the latest technology. i had done an interview with him in 2013, and he said he was going to build the most thorough senate campaign ever -- >> in american history. >> in american history. and he probably got, he probably got there. >> sunday night at eight eastern and pacific on c-span's "q&a." and we're airing one program from each year starting december 22nd at 7 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> senate majority leader harry reid paid tribute yesterday to retiring senators carl levin and jay rockefeller in remarks from

the senate floor. this is 20 minutes. >> i'm very happy to be here today to talk about a couple of my friends. i should say the senate's friends. i have received a lot of, um, friends' gifts while i've been here, my colleagues over the years have given me things here in the senate. but one gift stands out really strongly in my mind. in my desk not far from here, i have a big painting, a very famous from the national portrait gallery of mark twain. mark twain, i tell people, was born in nevada which is really true. samuel clemens wasn't, but mark

train wasn't. mark twain was. wayne clemens -- excuse me, was chosen as territorial secretary of nevada, and he told his younger brother, samuel -- i'm sorry, mr. president -- he told his younger brother come west, and i'll find you a job. he'd been fighting, which he didn't like, in the civil war. so he came west with his brother. but his brother couldn't find him a job. so he bummed around for quite a while, and without belaboring the story too long, the fact is, mr. president, that mark twain finally went up to virginia city which was booming at the time, went to the territorial enterprise newspaper and got a job as a reporter. and he was stunningly good and

important. that was his first writing that he had done. and that's where he started his fame. he would have stayed in nevada longer, but someone challenged him to a duel for some of the things he wrote. being the smart man he is, he didn't want the duel. he left town, went to california where he wrote two books, his experiences bumming around nevada until he found a job. these were bestsellers. these were great books. so the point of the story, though, he went to virginia city as samuel clemens and took the name mark twain. that's where the name came from. mississippi river boat meaning mark here. so this means a lot. it's a story that i tell many

times people that come to my office. so carl levin, the wonderful, kind, thoughtful man that he is said can i come and see? i said, sure. and he brought with me, i guess it's the most, one of the rare double signatures of samuel clemens. there may be others, i just have never heard of one. and this was at a club in hannibal, missouri. the club's name was hannibal spelled backwards. and mark twain in 1902 knew how famous he was, so he signed samuel clemens, mark twain, and wrote through the hole -- he didn't want anybody else's name there. so that's the gift that he gave me. and, i mean, that was so

fitting. it fits my office perfectly, and it means a lot to me. carl levin brought with this a handwritten note. "i got this at an auction ten years ago not knowing why." "it just dawned on me." "best in the new year, carl." that was so nice for him to do that. hard for me to explain my appreciation, but i'm trying to do that by explaining here what a wonderful human being carl levin is. what he did for me is an example of who carl levin is, how he thinks of people. he remembered a story that i told him about mark twain, and he said to himself i've got this

thing i got ten years ago, i'll just give it to the senator, his friend. so he gave me that plaque just because that's who he is. he's always been attendant to the interests of the people of michigan and our country. he's the longest serving senator in the history of the state of michigan. 36 years. his legislative accomplishments are significant. i would say they're unmatched by almost anyone. he has stood his ground on controversial issues, and that is an understatement. he's fought to give americans, average americans a fair shot at what's going on in the world. he's always spoken with a clear voice, speaking for justice, equality and fairness. mr. president, if you want something done that is full proof, the presiding officer's a lawyer, i know, but i'm not sure i would be the best person if you gave me a document to look

it over to make sure that there were -- in that document, in that was what you wanted in it. but carl levin, that's who you'd want. i call him my nitpicker. he is so good at making sure everything is right, every i is dotted, every t is crossed. bring in carl levin if you have something you really need someone to look at and think it through. he was a prominent lawyer, as was his dad, in michigan. his dad served as a member of the michigan corrections commission. after graduating from high school, his father worked in -- [inaudible] carl levin also knew how to work with his hands, but he followed in his father's footsteps by being an extremely hard worker. he attended college and got a bachelor of arts degree, and he

attended harvard law school and received his degree there for law school. he has a juris doctorate at harvard. he practiced in the private sector for a while. he began his public career as first general counsel for the michigan civil rights commission. he was elected in 1968 to the detroit city council. he served there until 1977. he was elected to the senate in 1978. he has funked in this body -- functioned in this body as a level-headed mediator, has guided people in michigan and this country. in the past 36 years, carl has cast over 12,000 votes. some of those votes were hard, not all the popular, but they were carl levin votes. he did what he thought was

right. when general motors and chrysler in the last few years faced potential collapse, he recognized their bankruptcies would devastate the people of michigan and have a detrimental effect -- and that is a gross understatement -- to this country. he pressed the incan coming obama -- incoming obama administration to support the companies with loans. people said leaven is wrong, obama -- eleven is wrong levin is wrong, obama is wrong, but they were right. look what it has done to the whole detroit metropolitan area and our country? tens of thousands of new jobs as a result of his advocacy. as i said, it wasn't a popular position at the time, but carl knew what was good for michigan and good for our country, and he's been vindicated a hundred times over. carl's been chairman of the

senate permanent subcommittee on investigations for ten years. during that period of time, he's done some unusually important things for our country. through this committee. corporate money laundering, 1999, he delved into that very deeply. carl levin is not a headline hunter. carl levin is a substant legislature. he held hearings about every six months because he wanted the hearings to be carl levin hearings. every i was dotted, every t was crossed, but they were very, very powerful hearings. gasoline price discrimination, enron scandal, misconduct in the united nations oil program, tax haven banks and offshore corporate tax evasion. he's talked about that ask talked about that -- and audiocassetted about that --

talked about that. notable legislation a result of the work he's done, consumer protection act, credit card act, patriot act. carl levin is really a very fine legislator. he fought for wall street reform when others were afraid to do so and helped restore the broken financial system, held powerful institutions accountable for their action. carl's persistence earned him a slot in "time" magazine's best legislators -- i'm sorry, best united states senators. they called him the bird dogger. mr. president, that's what he is. put him on an issue, and he will come back with the prey. he is very good. he never stops. he's a sharp-eyed overseer of the united states defense policy. he has spent his entire career promoting defense policy that protects america's interests at home and abroad. while safeguarding the men and women who serve. he is the chair of the senate

defense committee. and during the nation's most trying diplomatic times, he has done a remarkable job to make sure that the military's protected. but even though he was chair of this big, powerful committee, do defense committee, he felt so strongly, and he foresaw what a lot of us didn't see, mr. president. he saw the disaster that would accompany an invasion of iraq. accordingly, he talked about how bad it would be and voted against it, and carl levin was right, and a lot of us were wrong. i've said before on this senate floor all the votes that i've cast during the time i've been in government, the worst was voting for that iraq war. but i did. carl levin didn't. for all of his accomplishments in congress, his greatest achievements reside in his home.

carl's wife of over 50 years, barbara, have three beautiful daughters, kate, laura and erica. my wife and barbara are friends, they're part of a book club, they've been friends for many years. so is as carl retires from the senate, i know he's going to cherish the time he's going to spend with his family. but also carl and i have had a long, long, ongoing conversation. he and his brother sandy own about 100 acres. they've had it for a long, long time. carl levin is not a man of wealth, but he and his brother bought this 100 acres. it has nothing on it but trees. he calls it his tree farm, and he's shown me pictures of this. i've had, i don't -- i haven't seen out lately, but i've had for 20 years, 15, 20 years a hat he gave me. green baseball cap that says "tree farm" on it.

and i used to tell him i've still got that cap, and i still have that cap, carl. he'll be missed here in washington. he'll be missed in the senate by all of us, but he'll be missed more by his older brother, sandy can, who's a ranking member on the ways and means committee in the house. they have served together in congress for 32 years. i've said this on the floor before, i'll say it again: i remember carl levin for a lot of things, but i was in the house, i came over to visit with him. i was thinking about running for the senate. and i said, carl, you know, i came to the house with your brother sandy. he looked up at me, he said, sandy, you know, is not only my brother, he's my best friend. that speaks well of of the person that carl levin is. it's really been a privilege and

an honor to serve with carl. i'll miss him so very, very much. i'll miss having somebody to take the difficult issues to him to get his view as to what we should do, how we should handle it. his voice will be missed here in the senate. i congratulate him on his incomparable career in the senate, i wish him the very best. mr. president, i'd like to say a few other words because others will want to speak, but i want to make sure that there's a separate place in the record for what i'm going to say you. i ask consent that be the case. >> without objection. >> mr. president, it's said that you don't choose your family, and that's true. we're born into our families. we have no way to determine the family we're born into. yet as a 27-year-old, jay rockefeller chose to make the people of west virginia his

family. how did that happen? how did jay rock fell orer, born -- rockefeller, born in new york to one of the most famous american families, one of the great dynasties in the history of this country, end up in west virginia. >> he was a student at harvard, undergraduate, and he decided that he didn't like some of the things harvard was doing. and so he left. he dropped out of school and went to japan. he spent three years in japan. he became an interpreter. he knows the japanese language extremely well. hehe loves the japanese people today. he started out at harvard, came back. after i indicated after his junior year, he left for japan,

was there for three years. he came home, returned to harvard, finished his degree. jay rockefeller, as a 27-year-old, could have done anything, gone any place, gotten any education, started any business, or he could have sat around on a home on one of the beach withs around the world and just done nothing. but that is not jay rockefeller. he wanted to do something. he didn't know what he wanted to do. this rockefeller wanted to do something that was different. a friend of his published here for many years a magazine called the washington monthly,. peter:rers. he was a man about -- pete peters. he was a man about town. everybody liked him very, very much. but he was very close to jay rockefeller. so jay talked to him one day trying to find what he should do in life. here he was one of the wealthiest men in america, had a harvard degree.

what should i do? and pete peters told him what you should do is go someplace and work with poor people. where should i go? why not west virginia? west virginia. so he joined americorps as a vista volunteer. he moved to a small mining community in west virginia. that was in 1964. this man of means, this man of stature, this man of notoriety went to this small little town in west virginia. it wasn't easy for jay rockefeller to suddenly find himself in a setting that he had never imagined. the first six months he was there, he could hardly get

anyone to talk to him. you know, he's kind of an intimidating man. his name is rockefeller, and he's six foot seven. but eventually his goodness came through, and people in west virginia started talking to him, and they really liked the man. but from 1964 when he moved there, he knew that he wanted to identify with poor people, and that's what he's done since 1964. in 1966 he was elected to the west virginia house of delegates, assembly. in '68 he was chosen to serve as secretary of state for the state of west virginia. he then became president of the university in west virginia, west lynn college, served there for three years. he then twice was elected governor of the state of west

virginia, serves from '76-'84. governor rockefeller became senator rockefeller in 1985. from the time he first stepped onto the senate floor, he made it clear he was here for one reason: fight for the people of west virginia. senator rockefeller fought to provide his constituents with health care. he was an architect which have c.h.i.p., child health program. it's an insurance program that is so important. children's health insurance program, one of the most important health initiatives in american history for kids. he fought to procure medicaid for half a million west virginia ns, but millions and millions of americans. senior member of the committee on finance and chairman of the commerce committee, chairman of the intelligence committee. i mean, what a remarkable career he's had.

he's fought very hard to protect the american people from president bush's efforts to privatize social security. he's protected the retirement disability benefits by doing that for millions and millions of americans. his efforts to help west virginia haven't been confined to this building. as senior senator from west virginia, this big man -- i repeat, six foot serve with a very, very long reach -- has used that reach to bring jobs to his home state as governor and senate. because of his recruiting, there are thousands and thousands of jobs in west virginia. i'm sorry, kureha plant in the town called bell thousands and thousands of jobs, diamond electric -- [inaudible] ngk spark plugs, oil companies.

senator and governor rockefeller helped bring these to west virginia. the people of west virginia have been blessed, mr. president, to have senator jay rockefeller as a family member for the last 50 years. they've been blessed to have a person with his integrity, his tenacity looking out for them in the senate. my respect for jay rockefeller is unlimited. he's been my colleague for the entire time i've been in the congress, 32 years. now as his time in the senate comes to an end, he'll be sorely missed. i'm sure jay's looking forward to spending more time with sharon, this wonderful, wonderful woman, who, by the way, whose father was a united states senator. his children, john, valerie, charles and justin, he has six grandchildren. i so admire this good man. i congratulate him on a very distinguished career, including

five terms in the united states senate, two terms as governor. i wish him the very best in life. >> democratic senator mark pryor of arkansas came to the senate floor yesterday to deliver his farewell address. senator pryor was first elected to the senate in 2002. he's leaving after two terms in office. his address is followed by tributes from senators susan collins, dick durbin, tom carper and jeff sessions. >> senator from arkansas. >> mr. president, thank you. i have to begin today by saying one thing, and that is to god be the glory. and i'll finish with that, too, but first let me offer a few words. since election night, i had many, many arkansas kansans come up to me and thank me for my service. i appreciate that, but i need to

thank them for allowing me to do this for the last 12 years. it sounds like a cliche, but it isn't. serving in the united states senate has been the greatest honor of my life. it truly has been. i have loved it, and i've always done it with a cheerful heart. and i go back to my beloved arkansas. i have to thank the people of arkansas for allowing me to work for you, but i must confess i'll miss waking up every morning and thinking how can i make a difference for arkansas and for america today. those years were momentous in so many ways for our country and for our world. i had a front row seat to making history, and i hope i made a little bit of it myself. on a personal level, those years were filled with family and friends, a remarkable staff, my senate colleagues and a whole series of rich, once-in-a-lifetime experiences. the lord has given me two wonderful children who are now in college. i know many of you all saw them for the first time when they

were in elementary school. i'm very proud, and their mother is very proud of adams and porter pryor. and i'm very excited about their future. god has also brought an old sweetheart back into my life, joy, and whom she and i attended the sixth and seventh grades together. so when i say god has brought joy into my life, i mean it, literally. many of you know my parents. of course, i would be nothing without them. david and barbara pryor have touched so many lives, and they continue to do so. for the last eight years, i've lived with my brother, david and judith and hampton, pryor, when i'm here in washington, and i will always be grateful for their love and hospitality. scott and diane and deffen pryor in -- deafen pryor in -- devon pryor in new york.

my staff is awesome, i love them all, and they are all part of my family too. there are too many to mention, but words likal eleven, commitment, public service, effectiveness all come to mind whenever their names come up. and i have said this many times about my staff, and they keep telling me not to stay it, but i'm going to say it one last time: they do 99% of the work, and i get 99% of the credit. so i want to acknowledge them for a job well done. they should all hold their heads high for the difference they've made and, mr. president, i'd ask for unanimous consent that a list of their names be permitted to appear in the record. >> without objection. >> what can i say about my colleagues? what can i say about my colleagues that they haven't said about themselves before? [laughter] but, you know, politics is about people. not just the people out there, but the people in here, the

people, -- the people the people elect. i have served with some greats and giants, robert c. byrd, ted stevens are at the top of the list. but the truth is that every single senator i've served with is a giant. i've served with about 175 other senators, so there are too many to single out, but i have made lifelong friendships here, and i've done a lot, and we've done a lot of good things together. this is what i'll remember; all the personalities, all the times when we came together to do the right thing and all the successes that we had together. while in the senate i have more than 70 initiatives signed into law, and almost all of those have been bipartisan. mr. president, i would ask, if there's no objection, i'd like to submit that list for the record as well. >> without objection. >> i don't do very many press conferences, as you all know, and i've always been first in line to work with any and all of my colleagues to try to get

things done. the senate is a special place. on a personal level, we talk about the senate family, and it is a family. when people mention the senate to me, i think of other senators, of course, i think of legislation, but usually the first thing that comes to mind are the people who work here. the parliamentarians, the clerks, the doormen, the capitol police. i'm appreciative to the other senators' staffs and the committee staff and even to my house colleagues, most of them anyway. [laughter] no, each to my house -- even to my house colleagues. but i've always been mindful of the people who really make this place run, the janitorial staff, the folks in the restaurants, the maintenance guys, the painters, the carpenters, the tech anemia, and the list goes on and on. all of them contribute to making the senate what it is. we work here together. we do be through life -- we go through life and budget cuts and changing political winds together.

there's a bond that we all feel because we all have been in the senate together. please give me just a few moments of your time to make this next point. as great an institution as the senate is, the senate is broken. and the american people know it. in fact, this is an area where the american people are way ahead of washington. people around our nation look at washington, and they shake their heads. we sometimes cannot see the forest for the trees because we get bogged down in personalities or perceived wrongs or whatever the case may be. you know, this isn't a barack obama problem, this isn't a george bush problem. in fact, all recent presidents have gone through periods of deep unpopularity. this is an all-of-us problem. the political environment today grinds the trust and confidence out of our system. and let me tell you, that's not good for anybody. the republicans have a great opportunity in 2016.

they've convinced the voters that they're the party that can govern. now it's time for them to turn off the rhetoric and turn on the governing. in the united states senate, if the new republican majority will run the senate the way they have said it should be run, then this is a very good start. if we can replay the tape of the last two years, we will hear republican senators time and again clamor for an open amendment process and for regular order. when the democratic majority changed the rules -- which, by the way, i did not support -- so let's change the rules back to what they were. let us govern in the way we know we ought to, and democrats -- and this is an important message -- democrats should help them, democrats should help the republicans govern. but the rules aren't the problem around here. we're the problem. all 100 of us. hyperpartisanship has gotten the best of us. when things get too partisan, good judgment and common sense

go out the window. the big and most serious problem facing our nation today is the dysfunction in our political system in washington. america has incredible potential, but we cannot reach it unless washington starts to work again for all of us. if we're to continue to be the greatest nation on earth, we must work together. that is, after all, the american way. that's our history. this country was created, this one was forged -- this country was forged. the great melting pot is just that, a melting pot. e pluribus unum actually means something. out of many, one. we have had many different view points, many philosophies, many backgrounds, many priorities, so we have the pluribus part down pat. that's not the problem. no, the challenge comes with the unum. from my perspective, i see the ultimate question as a question of loyalty. who are we loyal to?

i just mentioned that we have many different viewpoints, philosophies and agendas, but if we have different loyalties, then we are a divided nation. that will only lead to bad things. when each of us take our oath of office, we swear allegiance to the constitution, not a party, nor a president, nor an interest group. we don't swear allegiance to those who pay for our campaigns or to a certain agenda. we need to hash out our differences in the senate in committee and on the floor, then hash them out with the house. but at the end of the day, produce legislation. that is the essence of the legislative branch. we--- we also must exert our authority as article i, the first branch of government. we have checks and balances, and we cannot provide the check or the balance if we're not functioning. making this place function is part of our oath of office.

one thing we should all remember, the senate is bigger than us. we don't have to look further than our own desks to see that. look inside your desk, and you see the names written in the drawer. in my desk i see senator gran that, elected in 1911 from north dakota, names like everett dirksen and george mitchell, david pryor, joe lieberman and carl levin. these men molded history. these are senators who shaped world events. these senators were good stewards of what our founding fathers created for us. we should be too. each and every one of us. the father of our country had a lot to say about partisanship. in his farewell address, he warns us of the continual mischiefs and the ill-founded jealousies caused by parties. we should take heeled. .. allow these

prophesied mischiefs and jealousies to divide us and damage the american political character. abraham lincoln once famously said a house divided against itself cannot stand. that is so true, and his voice is echoing down through the halls of history to us. if we are divided, we cannot stand, and we won't stand a chance in the future. let lincoln's words be a clarion call to all members of the congress, and that includes all senators. look at what is happening to us. the congress is getting more liberal and more conservative. look at the wild swings in regulations that have occurred from president clinton to president bush to president obama. obama. no wonder we are seeing a sluggish economic recovery. washington is creating uncertainty and instability and the private sector cannot make

investments or take risks with confidence. it should be the opposite. the federal government should be fostering economic growth. this country need washington to function, and that starts in this chamber. one thing i like to say in meetings is this. don't just bring me the problem. bring me the solution. so i identified a big problem here this afternoon so it's fair for you to ask about the solution. regardless of your political philosophy, bipartisanship is the answer. let's take off the red jersey and take off the blue jersey and let us all put on the red, white and blue jersey. our nation's challenges, large and small, require us to get on the same team, that's team u.s.a. remember i mentioned abraham lincoln saying that house divided against itself cannot stand? well, he was actually quoting an itinerant jewish rabbi who said that about 2000 years ago. jesus was right then and he is right now.

a house divided against itself cannot stand. good government is good politics and, although there are short-term aims to be had by political division, the long-term consequences are bad for the country. it is time for the giants of the senate to emerge. jesus also offered us some advice. probably the best practical advice he left us here in the congress is called the golden rule. do unto others as you would have them do unto you. if we applied that around here, about three quarters of our problems would vanish. poof. is that impossible? not at all. most of us claim to have a judeo-christian faith. so why not apply what we know to be true? the first step in this process is another one of jesus admonitions, forgive one another. i know each senator from time to time feels betrayed or let down or slider or somehow wrong to.

we need to forgive one another and let the healing begin. i'm not trying to combine religion with politics, but i think most everyone in the world agrees that jesus is one of the greatest moral teachers of all time. he has a lot to say about how we should treat one another. there are and will be 100 senators. healing the senate and getting it to function as it did for two centuries is up to each individual senator. that means doing the right thing, but also persuading others to do the right thing. it isn't about us. it is about our country and our children and grandchildren. it is about being good stewards. in closing, let me say i loved my time with you. i will always remember you with fondness and i will always be cheering for you. i expect great things from you because i know you are capable of doing great things. god bless the senate and the work we do here, and god bless

the united states of america. mr. president, i yield the floor. thank you. [applause] [applause] >> mr. president, i'm pleased to rise to give attribute to senator pryor, whose remarks we have just heard. nearly a quarter century of dedicated public service, senator mark pryor has

established a strong reputation as a voice of reason. from an arkansas legislator and attorney general, to a united states senator, senator pryor has always put the people first. to me he has been an admired colleague, a great collaborator, and a treasured friend. working with senator pryor during his service in the senate, i know that he acquired his voice of reason the old-fashioned way. he is such a good listener. you know, all of us are pretty good talkers or we wouldn't be here, but senator pryor has the distinction of being a good listener.

whether debating colleagues on the senate floor or interacting with his guests on his pryor side chats back home, he has consistently demonstrated that he is one of those special individuals who can disagree without ever being disagreeable. he always sticks to his principles, yet he respects the principles of those with whom he disagrees. he is well informed, but always open to new information. it has been a particular pleasure to work with senator pryor on the homeland security committee for many, many years, and on the committee for appropriations. his work ethic, his attention to detail, his willing once again to listen to alternative views,

have been great assets in addressing the challenges that we face in our country. he has been a diligent fiscal watchdog for the nation's taxpayers. to me, senator pryor's approach to public service is best defined by the crucial role he has played in ending the government shutdown in the fall of 2013, and as a member of the gang of 14 back in 2005. in each case he worked closely with me and with other members to end a crisis and to achieve a responsible commonsense solution. in each case he listened and he led. as a charter member of our common sense coalition last

year, senator pryor stepped forward to restore both government operations, and helped to restore some modicum of citizen conference in our senate, in our government. these is certainly not the only times that senator pryor's bipartisan approach and concern for the well being of americans have been evident. in 2007, after a large number of recalls and following injuries and deaths caused by, americans throughout america to be concerned about the safety of their children's toys, especially those manufactured overseas, he once again stepped forward to lead. after an extensive investigation into homeland security and

governmental affairs committee, senator pryor worked with those of us on the republican side on a bill to strengthen the consumer product safety commission so that we can now better detect and counter threats to our children's health. before these threats even reached the store shelves and eventually homes, schools, and day care centers. from restoring trust in government to protecting our children, senator pryor has proven over and over again that bipartisanship works. and i think it's so significant that his message to us today is that the dysfunction and hyperpartisanship that have characterized the senate cannot stand. that is a wonderful parting message, and it is typical of

senator pryor, that rather than talking about all of his accomplishments, he instead is beseeching the senate to work together in the interest of all americans, whether we are democrats, republicans, independents, green, or not affiliated with any party at all. the 2014 election did not produce the results that senator pryor had hoped for, but it did reveal another aspect of his extraordinary character. his message to the people of arkansas, and to the new senator on election night, was genuine and it was gracious. to the people of arkansas, he simply expressed his sincere gratitude for the opportunity to

serve. but these words spoken that evening to us here in the chamber, which he echoed today, be his legacy. he said that night the biggest and most serious problem we are facing in this nation today is the dysfunction of our political system in washington. we have incredible potential, but we won't reach it unless washington starts to work again for all of us, end quote. mark pryor has been an extraordinary individual who always did what he believed was right. he has contributed enormously to our country, and served his state well. i commend him for his service,

and i thank him for his commitment, his integrity, and most of all for his friendship. thank you, mark. i yield the floor. >> mr. president? >> majority leader. >> mr. president, the great caesar chavez said if you really want to make a friend, go to someone's house and eat with them. to people who give you their food, geeky their heart. that's true to sometimes they give you more than that. sometimes they give you an adventure in eating that you will never forget. that's what happened to me when, in january, i was invited by mark pryor to be his guest at a legendary arkansas political event. i'm talking about the historic well-known annual gillette arkansas to supper. never heard of the gillette coon supper in arkansas? it is to arkansas what tom

harkin steak fry is to iowa. only its nonpartisan. it draws about 1200 people, and, unfortunately, they don't serve state. coon is right tune served in large buckets -- raccoon. folks reach inside and pull out a chunk of coon as they say in july. i was there that night with mark pryor, wanted to make sure i had my best manners as a visiting guest. certainly appreciative of the invitation to a packed room with the governor and every walking politician in arkansas. though clinton had been over and over again in his terms as governor. you just never miss this up and we were not about to miss eddie dean. i watched as they put the balls of coon and other meats on the table and i noticed something interesting. all of the visitors, like myself, had bowls of coon put in

front of them. all the folks markets over eating out of the beef platter. it struck me that perhaps this was a delicacy they were saving just for guests. we asked for advice from mark pryor about the proper selection of the took coon coming he said get one with a big boned because they have the least amount of meat on them. [laughter] we followed his advice and nibbled at the corners and smiled and said what a great dinner it was, and looked around and saw the only handful of local people from arkansas were actually eating the delicacy of the evening, including one old fellow whom i went up to afterwards to introduce myself, who was wearing a real coonskin cap committee told me he shot the raccoon. in this capitol been in his family for a long, long time and again passed on to his daughter first of course and then to his grandson. mark twain, another mark, as it turns out love roasted raccoon

as well. but he always kept an open mind when it came to the issues of the day concluding the issue of the afterlife. mark twain once said, i don't like to commit myself between heaven and hell. you see, i have friends in both places, mark twain said. welcome one reason mark pryor has been such a good senator is he has friends on both sides of the aisle. you just heard this warm tribute to mark pryor from my friend, susan collins of maine, and others i'm sure will join in the course on both sides. mark pryor is a man of deep faith who takes seriously the abolition of the prophet isaiah. come now, let us reason together. y. kay hagan and mark udall, mark pryor has politics and public service in his bloodstream. mark prior is the fifth generation of transport to serve in politics in his state. the first three generations serve as sheriff's. mark pryor sir for your in the

arkansas hills and four years as arkansas attorney general, 2000 elected u.s. senate. same seat his father david held in the senate for 18 years. mark pryor place on his desk the same motto that his father placed on his. it read simply common arkansas comes first. but he made his own decisions and 11 a considerable mark in the senate. halfway through his freshman term, just a new member himself, mark pryor was called to join forces with the lions in the senate. john warner, robert c. byrd, daniel inouye, to forge compromise over judicial nominations that furthered to threat a bigger confrontation. that compromise, mark said, was the result of her spur ration and not inspiration. i disagree. it involves the inspiration of young senator from arkansas who realize that public service often meant trying to work together and reason together and to try to break down in your own

individual fashion the dysfunction of washington. i worked with mark on so many things over the years, and as a weapon i would too many times and we talked about difficult things. i always found him to be honest, straightforward, highly principled. we didn't always come to the same conclusion on the vote by the respected him every time because i knew that he gave thoughtful consideration to both sides when it came to his vote. he was going to do what was right in his own heart, and especially what was right for arkansas. and they knew that is what would make the final decision when it came to the vote. i also want to put in a word of thanks to mark as the grandfather of two, three year olds who are anxiously awaiting the arrival of santa claus. mark had responsibly of reforming the consumer product safety commission. it was an assignment long overdue. that commission was grinding to a halt, was not exercising its authority, and it wasn't keeping

americans safe as it should. mark stepped up in a bipartisan fashion he stepped up and he ended up strengthening the consumer products safety commission through its efforts on the senate commerce committee. that will keep toxic toys and harmful products out of the stores. many people recognize what mark pryor, contributor in that effort. parent magazine applauded mark pryor as one of the three movers and shakers in washington in the year 2005 for his work on the consumer product safety commission, work that will continue to this day to keep america safer. consumer protection has always been a hallmark of mark's service, dating back to the days in arkansas as attorney general, and certainly as united states senator. mr. president, fewer than 2000 men and women have ever had the privilege of serving in the united states send it in our entire history. with hundreds of millions of people in our population, fewer

than 2000 have been sworn in to represent their states in the united states send. in mark pryor we have a person did an extraordinary job as united states senator for arkansas and for america. he spent a great friend of mine, someone i'm going to miss very, very much. but hope you will keep in touch. we say that somewhat loosely when people are leaving here, but i needed. because mark pryor always brought a smile to my day, and i recognize that his work in public service aspired to the highest levels and always will. thank you, mr. president. >> mr. president? >> the senator from delaware. >> try to i came to the floor without any prepared remarks but i would like to say a few words of the could about our colleague mark pryor. i of actually call him hey man, because in arkansas and when you see one of your friends you don't just say hi, tom or high, mark. you say hey man. for the last 12 years with exchange a lot of heymans.

hopefully we will for a long time to come. 10 days, 12 days ago i was down in honduras, trying to figure out how to help save a nation that may be a failing nation. they have a lot of games down there, gangs that are involved in extorting money from business, kidnapping people. here in washington, d.c., senator collins and senator durbin have talked about similar gangs that this senator from arkansas has been involved in, which i think most of us would say doing the lord's work, doing good work. he's a man of deep faith as we know and has been a great role model for the rest of us, and he is reminded me before and maybe some others as well that in the old testament in proverbs we reminded we should always pray

for wisdom. always pray for wisdom and that's something i pray for every night. not just for my colleagues of course but certainly for me. all i can say is a good lord answered his prayers because one of the reasons he ends up as a member of these gangs for good is because he has so much wisdom. he's a good listener. he's a very, very wise human being. it's been a joy to serve when he got in 2003. i think he raised his right hand and took the oath as office into thus in three. he came through orientation for new u.s. senators at a talk to him but later and i said i was orientation, market? he said while, not that long. but it was over and the democrats was over here and if you're a republican we will put you over here. it's like have added to he and i talked about and he said that doesn't make much sense. as attorney general, as governor for me, former governor, national governors association,

we have rogue was orientation programs. new attorneys general and for new governors. i think one of the reasons why the governors less partisan, more likely to work across the aisle and get things done together and the same reason, syncing with the attorneys general is because of that orientation that occurs a couple weeks after they're elected. it's a great thing. we didn't have anything like that in the united states send. senator pryor along with senator voinovich, alexandra and history decided we'll see put into some kind of orientation program for u.s. senators. when people show up as the new u.s. senator after couple weeks of being elected, they never -- no longer get put in one corner. and told to go at it. they spent some time together. may be the most concentrate on the hunt together are here with folks of the other party. those of us who are senators, and spouses, chaplain and so forth and provide, just learn

from our mistakes. god knows we made one of those. one of the things that senator pryor is especially good at doing is trying to connect each new senator with a mentor, a democratic mentor and republican mentor. it's not that everybody who comes who needs a mentor. we need friends on both sides of the aisle. it will bear fruit for a long, long time. when i was a naval officer for 23 years, 23 years, when i was 17, graduate from ohio state i've been 17 or so, graduate from i was going to date, became the midshipmen. hot war in southeast asia, another 18 years in the cold war as a naval flight officer. i retired in 91. i started learning about leadership when i was young.

learned before i was a midshipmen but among the things i learned about leadership is leaders should be humble, not hockey, -- hottie. leaders should as they do as i do, not do as i say. leaders should have the heart of the servants, and we should come your with the idea of serving your the scripture we read, must be servant to all. he would be first should be swayed to all. leaders should have the courage to stay out of step with every one else is marching through. leaders should know what easy thing to do, the expedient thing to do, you should ask what's the right thing to do. and leaders as he already said, leaders should ask what the rabbi said 2000 years ago in the rabbi was asked what are the most, what's the most important commandment of all?

he mentioned wind, and the second one is to love our neighbors as ourselves and i think that's the most important one of all. leaders are like the. leaders are like that. i just want to say that i think my friend hey man, also known as senator mark pryor, personifies the kind of leadership. god knows we need more of him. he's demonstrated by his own character, his own behavior what a leader is. we will miss him but we will still see a lot of them. they can be often enough. in the navy when somebody has done a great job, we say two words. we say -- i say that to you, my friend. we also have this admonition when -- when people come in we have an event, call it hail and farewell party. when it's over those that are leaving we say farewell, and a

following see. so i would say farewell and a following see and we'll see a lot of you in the future. god bless you. >> mr. president? >> the senator from alabama. >> mr. president, thank senator carper for those good remarks. i think they touched the quality and character that mark pryor has displayed as a member of the senate. i've been asked who are some of your favorite people across the aisle, democratic people that you respect and like, and mark pryor has always been the top of that list. we have both serve as attorney general of our state. we had a number of things to talk about. i've been able to commensurate with him over arkansas football in recent years. we can keep up with those things a lot, but i just would want to say something that i basically

said at the senate, at the national prayer breakfast several years ago. senator pryor and i were co-chairman and i was able to say with great confidence that mark pryor is one of the best people i've ever stored within the united states send. he is a man of faith, integrity, his ego is under control. not always so about this place. it makes it run better, collegial, willing to work with people across the aisle, work within his own party. not one that had difficulty making decisions, done what he thought was right year after year here in this great senate. but we have the opportunity to lead the senate progress was and then the national prayer breakfast twice, and it was a special time. and mark really did a great job,

a great deal of time meeting with people from all over the world. and i think the depth of his faith is quite obvious. and i just, mark, want to say you are special to me. your service in the senate has been very special. you have always done what you thought was right for your state, and done so in a way that is so pleasant and collegial to work with. i know you'll have some great adventures ahead, looks even like the razorbacks are coming back. they may give alabama and auburn a hard time next year, who knows? hope springs eternal, and they did pretty well at the end of this year. i've got to say, a monster may be a rising in arkansas. who knows? but, we do have a great senator at less than 2000 people of the research and despotic, people of talent and ability throughout but there are people over the

period of years that touch you as genuine as the genuine article, people that you respect and admire. mark, you're one of those. god bless you, and godspeed. i thank the chair and yield the floor. >> and the senate about the gavel in for the day. procedural votes at 10:30 a.m. to move forward with two nominations to the tennessee valley authority. after that, california's dianne feinstein, the chair of intelligence commit is expected to release a report on cia interrogations. of report the last week sector is day junket asked to be delayed over concerns relations with middle east countries. the hill reports in the season military of facilities around the world are bracing for the release of this report. it details enhanced interrogations under the bush administration, including waterboarding. the report has taken years of analysis, editing and negotiations to be put together. it's the executive summary of a

6300 page analysis produced by the committee that still remains classified. you can read more at thehill.com. in the senate today, expect a recess until 1:00 eastern time for party lunches, then general speeches ahead of the 6 p.m. confirmation votes for those tennessee valley authority nominations. the president pro tempore:. the senate will come to order. today's opening prayer will be offered by guest chaplain father pomerleau also holy cross church in oregon and also a vermonter. the guest chaplain: let us pray. father, whose presence is so