food insecure, people on any given week, any given month have a hard time feeling of families. the republican budget would make massive cuts in nutrition programs by cutting $10 billion for the women, infants and children program over the next decade you know i honestly have a hard hard time hearing people talk about family values and how much they love families and children and you have a program which is done a good job in terms of prenatal care for pregnant women making sure that they get the health care and nutrition they need to make sure the babies get the care they need. who really thinks that we should cut these programs? what kind of nation are we? people would vote to cut

these programs not to mention massive cuts in the food stamp program. but mr. pres., in the midst of all of these devastating cuts to health care education, nutrition that impact working families the budget do something else. i suspect people were listening. he he is being partisan. it really can't be this bad. this is reality the republican budget. i no the media does not write about it much, but that is what it is. in addition to making massive cuts in health care education, nutrition what else do they do? at a time when the wealthiest 400 americans paid a tax rate of just 16.7 and 2012 at a time when

hedge fund managers pay a lower effective tax rate than working families are truck drivers are nurses oes based on an amendment they did is it ishes t is abolishes the estate tax. the the estate tax provides a $269 billion tax break for the middle class. low-income people. not so. this repeal applies to the wealthiest not 1 percent but the top two tenths of 1 percent. republicans pass the tax proposal which impacts the top two tenths of 1 percent means nothing for 99.8 percent.

cut education, cut healthcare, cut nutrition i give tax breaks to billionaires. by repealing the estate tax the average tax breaks for multi millionaires and billionaires would be about $3 billion. the around vermont. what we need from our major priority is not to feed the hungry, make college affordable got create jobs but to give a tax break to billionaires. now that only do they give a huge tax break to the wealthy for what else do they do? they raise taxes on low income and working families folks to do not make a whole lot of campaign contributions. what the republican budget does is increase taxes by

not extending benefits we put in to the earned income tax credit and a child tax credit and allows those additional benefits to expire which means low income and moderate income families will pay more in taxes. we estimate that that tax hike for low income and middle income families will be about $900 apiece. raise taxes on low and moderate income families and lower taxes for billionaires anybody believe those are the priorities that should be in a budget connect i we will have more to say about this budget later. not only does the republican budget not address the significant problems facing america, how we create the millions of jobs we need to how we raise the minimum wage to a living wage, how we address the equity so that women workers don't make $0.70 per hour how we

rebuild our crumbling infrastructure it does not address any of those issues. what it does is make a bad situation worse. and i would hope that my colleagues would have the courage to stand up to wall street, to stand up to the big money interest and start defending the working families of this country and vote no. with that i will yield. >> mr. pres. >> the sen. from wyoming. >> as part of this discussion i want to mention

something significant that happened after the press went to bed. a very important thing the doc fix past this body last night in a very bipartisan way after a series of amendments that are open for amendments. that is what is supposed to happen around here. one of the reasons i mentioned that is have always said if you can't see a dr. you don't have insurance. with insurance. with the way we have been setting up medicare payments for doctors evan driving them out. illuminating doctors. what congress is doing, holding them hostage. that got taken care of last night. we have been doing that for

about 18 years a step at a a time. it is nice that we were finally able to make a permanent. the 1st budget. the democrats got to work on the health care bill. that was part of the reconciliation of the budget which is a special way of passing something without 60 votes. hundred and $14 billion from medicare. just some comments about how the budget that i worked on has over 400 million in medicare savings.

that medicare savings is what the pres. suggested should be done in medicare savings command we put that medicare savings back into medicare. it is the only way you can save the fund. we have taken into consideration a lot of these things. i have been through numerous earrings. i used to be the chairman of the committee. i have been ranking member. i expired my time is ranking member but we did a lot of hearings on the cost of college. probably the biggest suggestion that i could have people living in the east is send your kids west. i was checking i was checking to see why more people can get into committee college on the east coast. i'm not talking about the big colleges which also have a very big problem a number of students that they can take. very selective in what they take. but i found out the

community colleges were filled out here. consequently some for profit colleges were able to charge considerably more. we looked in two ways to eliminate the practice. the way that they get eliminated. but the amount. i would mention that less expensive for an out-of-state student. get in-state tuition and most of the places in the united states. there was a mention estate tax a recommendation that was put into a deficit neutral thing. i'm not sure raising the taxes on the poor comes from except for the comment the extensions that we do annually.

a good reason why those were in their. we provided a reconciliation that would allow for tax reform although the chairman of the committee says we're going to do that in a bipartisan way, have tax reform that will take care of fairness and simplicity and accountability in our tax system. particularly important time to talk about that. today is tax day. i hope everyone has or will file their taxes today. has been difficulty. and i want to chastise the irs a little bit for that. trying to show the need more money instead of allocating personnel to where they are needed. the answer more questions right now they don't have as many things they have to do later and will collect more money than if they don't answer those questions.

now,. now the proper committee needs to take a look at whether they have adequate revenue to do their job. again, there are inefficiencies. they talk about needing more money because when they audit their the audit their able to get four to $6 for every dollar they spend. they should be embarrassed. public auditors expect to get 15 to $20 per dollar that they audit. they have got to come up with a better selection procedure for who needs to be audited and go after the big bucks. so there are number of things the irs ought to do. talk to different agencies. i was a freshman. a lot lot of time to do other things. the irs. as result a result of some of my meetings we had some hearings here about being taxpayer friendly.

people might recall the people who serve as witnesses had to be voice modulated. that should not happen in america. they should have a tax system that people can comply with without the gestapo kinds of tactics that are sometimes used. so we need to do something to make our tax system more efficient, more accountable and fair there going to do some things on taxes. think they will like it. they can get more accountability which will make the job easier and also make it better for hard-working taxpayers of america.

so there are a lot of things that the budget can do. i'm hoping that we will. i would yield the floor and reserve the balance of my time. >> let me just -- >> the senator from vermont. >> let me pick up on a. my friend from wyoming republicans often say that democrats cut $714 billion medicare. to the best of my knowledge that is a penny a penny involved in those cuts cutting benefits. the affordable care act attempted and maybe we made some progress.

to make medicare more efficient. what is wrong with that? what is wrong with saving money? with the american people want us to do is make programs more efficient. and he's right. but the idea the implications of those cuts resulted in benefit cuts is not accurate. furthermore what some of that money the savings went to his billing, playing the donut holes so the seniors would not have to pay money out of their own pocket for prescription drugs. if you could save money in a bureaucracy and god knows the united states healthcare system is the most wasteful and bureaucratic of any in the world if we can make the system more efficient save money, but that money into helping seniors afford prescription drugs what is the problem with that?

talked about the irs and people having difficulty making connections which is clearly not right. and he also mentioned quite correctly that for every dollar we invest in various parts of the aisle. we can make $46. that's a pretty good investment. most business people tell you back and give for six hours editor for every dollar investments do it. look forward to working with republicans who do just that. we can argue about the tax code and we we will, but we don't argue we should change it if we don't like it. if you can invest a dollar to and get six or $4 back, i think that is a pretty good investment. he was right.

we passed a pretty good piece of legislation. serious concerns about it. i voted for it. one of the reasons is that it intends for another two years a program that i worked very hard on. that is the federally qualified community health center which is playing a huge role in providing health care and dental care low-cost prescription drugs and mental health counseling to many, many, many millions of americans in all 50 states. we got a significant increase. i fought hard for significant increase in was going to inspire in addition to the dr. fix we were able to extend for another two years.

and something that i think -- but he is right. that is a step forward. that should not be confused with the budget. the republican budget is an unmitigated disaster. tax breaks tax breaks for billionaires, cuts in programs that america's desperately need raising taxes for low income working families. with that i would yield for >> later in the day the senate held the moment of silence marking the time to bombs went off to the boston marathon finish line two years ago. the explosion killed three spectators and injured more than 260 others. just before the remembrance massachusetts senators elizabeth warren and ed markey gave these brief remarks. mr. president two years ago today the people of boston came face to face with terror at the finish line of the boston marathon. the cowardly a tack and its

aftermath took four lives injured many more, and forever changed the >> two years ago today the boston people came face-to-face with terror. the cowardly attack and its aftermath hank flynn lives injured many more and forever change the lives of survivors and their families in the face of this horrific terrorist attack boston responded with courage and community. our heroic 1st responders acted swiftly, and their bravery saved many. in the days weeks, and months after families and friends came together to lift each other up, to raise the spirit and help us heal. now two years later boston continues to move forward together. a jury just reached a verdict. victims and families, victims and families the strength and perseverance of survivors continues to inspire us. our community works to keep alive the memories of crist campbell billing, martin richard, and sean collier. recently it was announced

that we recognize april 15 as one boston day. a chance to a chance to honor the victims and survivors of the marathon bombing and an opportunity for people to give back to the committee through acts of service. this helps us remember that in the face of tragedy and violence our community responds with an open heart. next monday tens of thousands of people from across the nation and around the world once again will come to massachusetts for the 2015 boston marathon. our commonwealth once again will commemorate patriots' day with reenactments baseball parades, and celebration. today we recall the spirit of strength and resilience that brought our city in commonwealth together. the same spirit of strength and resilience. as

resilience. as a tribute to honor the victims and survivors of the attack i asked my colleagues to join bostonians in a moment of silence at 2:49 p.m. today. thank you, mr. president. i yield. >> mr. pres. >> the sen. from massachusetts. >> i would like to join senator warren. observing a moment of silence in order of the victims of the boston marathon bombing. the people of the united states will always room for the victims of the previous act of terrorism that have occurred in the united states and we will always stand together as one people two years ago today three innocent people were killed and hundreds injured into bombings that occurred during the running of the 117th boston marathon. on the happiest day in boston, patriots' day to bombs detonated by two evil men took lives, lens, and livelihoods away.

that day we lost martin richard kemeny -year-old boy from dorchester mcchrystal campbell and lindsay who came to the united states and china 232 as an people were wounded. in the aftermath of the attacks officer sean collier of the massachusetts institute of technology police force was assassinated by the two twisted individuals who bombed our city. ofc. collier was not just protecting the best and brightest minds. he was the best and brightest. all of the a lot of officer who has been greatly missed on campus. i want to express my deepest thanks to the minute men and women of law enforcement for their unwavering determination courage command result to bring to justice those responsible. we were boston strong because we were boston ready

many of those responded. caregivers, armed forces command thousands more who through their many expressions of care and compassion brought forth comfort and hope and promise of recovery. today under the today under the leadership of the mayor the city of boston is turning april 15 the new a knew tradition a day everyone to come together spread goodwill and recommit ourselves. this is a day to display humanity and run a wrist together. thank you for helping us understand the compassion and support should never be

forgotten that should be a part of our lives. may the light shine as an example of our nation response to times of crisis. >> under the previous order the senate will now observe a moment of silence in honor of the victims of the boston marathon bombing's. [moment of silence]

>> coming up on c-span2 the senate foreign relations committee passes legislation to provide oversight on the iran nuclear deal. and pres. obama discusses the attacks plan and women's economic issues at an event in north carolina. after that after that frequent travels to iowa to kick off her campaign for president. later us ambassador to the un samantha power talks about her 2016 budget and addressed a global threat. >> coming up tomorrow on our companion network education secretary arnie duncan will testify on his department's 2016 budget request. see the senate appropriations subcommittee hearing is a gets a gets underway live at 10:00 o'clock eastern. >> at age 25 she was one of the wealthiest widows in the colonies. considered an enemy by the british who threatened to take her hostage.

later she later she would become our nation's 1st 1st lady at age 57, the washington. this sunday night at eight pm eastern on c-span original series 1st ladies, influence and damage examining the public and private lives of the women who filled the position of 1st lady and their influence on the presidency. sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv. as a complement lively stories creating an illuminating entertaining and inspiring read. now available as hardcover through your favorite bookstore or online bookseller. the senate foreign relations committee has passed legislation that would provide congressional review and oversight to the iranian nuclear framework agreement.

the bill requires the white house to submit details of a deal the congress. a review during which sanctions could not be lifted. this runs an hour and 15 minutes. >> this beating meaning -- business meeting will come to order. the only order of business today is f 615 the iran nuclear agreement review act of 2015. that bill is now the pending business of the committee. i want to start by thanking all the members of the community for the tremendous

amount of work that has been done over several months to get us to the place that we are. and in any peace of legislation obviously there are things that members would like to see different, but i think we have reached a balance here that is very, very appropriate. i want to thank former chairman former ranking member senator bob menendez for his tremendous efforts on all things are on but certainly this piece of legislation. i cannot imagine a member being more constructive. i want to say that to me today what may occur is the true reemergence of the foreign relations committee becoming more than just a debating society but a community that takes on the significant work that we have before us around the world. and i. and i want to say again to a former chairman and former ranking member, there is no question over the last two

years you have helped bring us to this time where instead of debating things we in fact, may well be taking up important legislation that will have a significant impact on the security of the middle east and certainly of our citizens. i want to thank tim kane for his incredible effort. tim is someone who understands truly the role of the united states senate and issues of the significance and has been a stalwart which i think articulates more clearly than anyone else why it is important for us to take the goal that i hope this legislation today will allow us to take and then to ranking member card i don't know how many times we have talked on the phone over the last several days. i cannot thank you enough for your temperament to offer your tone for your

seriousness on a very very important issue. i look forward to working with you on other significant issues. today to be really are no doubt is a testament to the type of senator you came here to be and i want to thank you for that. look, let's set the stage. in spite of what may be being said by buildings down the street on the other end of pennsylvania this legislation is exactly the congressional review view that we have been working on since day one, and i want to thank everyone here for allowing this legislation to be in the form that it is in today with 100% of the integrity that we had hoped to be a part of this process

embodied in this piece of legislation. .. the destabilizing effect that has caused them to want to be able to negotiate at the table. for we have before us today is a

bill that forces the administration before they are able to lift the sanctions that we collectively put in place that brought them to the table. it forces the administration to bring to us every detail if there happens to be a final agreement, every detail. we have less timeframes in here. we have worked through the parliamentarian and we import to the house to make sure the procedures are appropriate. i know that we will have a colloquy in a minute to further confirm that but what this does it mean that the sanctions that have been put in place by this body, by the senate and by the house cannot read lifted without the administration bringing to us every detail of the bill and then the clock will start and there will be a period of time in congress that congress will have the ability to debate and decide whether congress wants to

move ahead with the resolution of approval or a resolution of disapproval. during that time, no congressional mandated sanctions can be lifted. after that process is over there is a third process that is very important. i think everybody understands what has happened in north korea where arrangements were made but there was no follow-through. a very important aspect the third leg of this agreement is that congress say if it involved agreement is reached and if one is not disapproved congress stays in ball. every 90 days the administration has certified that in every way iran is in compliance. if there are violations within a 10 day period they have to give that to congress so we have the ability if we wish to quickly reapply the sanctions that if the deal is approved would be

alleviated. i think this puts congress in its rightful role. people should know and i think everyone understands the sanctions that are being negotiated right now are the nuclear sanctions only. the sanctions relative to ballistic missile testing testing may stay in place. the sanctions relative to terrorism may stay in place. the sanctions relative to human rights may stay in place. so today we are only focused on the nuclear peace but i would say over time the sanctions are lifted because the deal is approved and congress chooses not to disapprove it, i would just say to everyone here this bill gives us more reporting on terrorism than we have ever had, more reporting on ballistic missile testing than we have ever had, more reporting on human right and we have ever had. we'll have that entire arsenal

of sanctions that we put in place since 2010 to reapply if we feel like iran has again done things that are not in our national interest and certainly not in the countries. i want to thank again the ranking member. i want to thank everybody who has worked with us in this regard. i know that there may be some other many people may have opening comments but it's been a true pleasure to work with senator cardin and others for us to be in the place that we are with the entire integrity of the congressional review process that they started with staying in place and with that i will turn it over who are ranking member who worked with us to get this in a place that i hope many democrats will be able to join and and he did so valiantly, he did so toughly that he did so with a temperament that allowed us to move along in a very productive way. >> thank you very much. i want to completely agree with

you with regard to the role that senator menendez has played. i don't believe they would be here today on the verge of reporting out i hope a very strong vote, congressional review of the iranian course that we hope will be presented to us in june. senator menendez enjoys the strong thanks for the incredible leadership he has given the senate or in relations committee as its chairman and its ranking member. i can sure everyone here i'm honored to be the ranking member did want -- not want to become ranking member and to be some circumstances and i hope senator mendes -- will be resolved quickly. mr. chairman i look at my position in working with you to achieve are not goals and that this the foreign relations committee has an extremely important role to play and we want to do that in the best interests in of the united states. i represent the democratic members but in a broader sense

we represent all the members of the senate and bringing as much unity was recanted foreign-policy foreign policy in this country. i look forward to working with you in that regard. it's clear to me that there is a strong common commitment in the congress of the united states and in the white house to make sure iran never becomes a nuclear weapons state. that is our object if. that's a game game-changer for the middle east and something we cannot allow to occur. i think we all agree that the preferred course to achieve that objective is through diplomatic means to the negotiations are taking place with a strong agreement that would ban iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state. such an agreement would want to provide ample time before iran could break it to nuclear weapons so that they do not comply with the agreement we will know about those breaches and can take effective action to prevent iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state. the bottom line is there is no

disagreement by this committee are in the congress that we cannot trust iran and that the agreements must be able to ensure that iran does not become a nuclear weapons state. i think we also will reach agreement today in an appropriate role for congress in revealing what we must do in that regard. and i start by saying thank you to senator corker and thank you to senator menendez and thank you to senator kaine for giving us the grammar to achieve that. i agree with senator corker a bill that we are working on today provides a way in which congress in a thoughtful and meaningful way could weigh in a review any agreement reached between the go shooting partners in iran with regards to a nuclear weapon. and secondly it provides a means for we can give timely notice in the event there's a material breach so congress could take appropriate action. those two principles were in the original bill and they are still there today and i agree

completely with those purposes and said so well before the hearings of this market today. i am pleased that we were able to negotiate a manager's package that has broad support and input from many members of this committee and i want to thank numbers on both sides of the aisle for their input into the managers -- that reflects the best possible the members of the committee. it provides i think the right framework for congressional review and potential actions. mr. chairman i just want to pose some language in the manager's amendment that was sent to congress at the sanctions regime imposed on iran by congress is primarily responsible for bringing iran to the table to negotiate the nuclear program. these negotiations are critically important matters of national security and foreign policy for the united states and its closest allies. this legislation does not require a vote by congress with

the agreement to commence. this legislation provides congressional repeal including approval disapproval or no action on statutory sanctions under an agreement. i just really want to point out because people have asked we have to be involved here and only congress can permanently change or modify sanction regimes which are clear in part about the presence negotiating in regard to the iran nuclear program. secondly let me point out the manager's amendment i think has the appropriate role for congress in regards to when we get this agreement and how we act on it. it is clear that we will only act if the administration has presented to us in agreement. that is when the clock starts. we are providing an orderly way for consideration. we were will go to the timeframe in a moment but the assumption

that we are going to get the agreement on time there would be an initial 30-day review period for congress to review the agreement. we have checked that out. there is ample time to hold hearings into what is appropriate for congress to take appropriate action. we don't know whether there will be no action, a resolution of approval or disapproval resolution dealing with sanctions. all of that is possible. no prejudgment on that. we will wait until we see the agreement and we have a committee hearings to determine the appropriate role for congress. there will be no action prior to seeing the agreement. it's also very clear that the april 2 framework is not part of that type of a review process. the 30 days could be extended if there was action taken that required presidential approval during the period of the presidential review and potential veto period would be extended. no one can anticipate where we

will end up on this but basically as the 30-day review process. i want to thank the chairman because we got into a big debate on an impediment being offered on this. we have eliminated from the original draft certain presidential certifications that were not related to the iranian negotiations. and i think that was the right thing to do. this is a complicated enough agreement. we are not going to bail to solve all the problems with iran but we can prevent iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state state. does iran have other issues with the international community and us? do you bet they do and we are concerned about that. i just urge my colleagues to take a look at the manager's amendment because we have strengthened this bill as it relates to getting adequate information about terrorist activities and their violations of human rights. if we have that information and can use that information as we see fit i believe the manager's

amendment strengthens this bill as it relates to the other types of activities that are problematic to the united states that are caused by a ram but does it in the right way without interfering. in fact i suggest that this bill strengthens the president's ability to negotiate them regards to the nuclear framework itself. and lastly, let me just say i think there's an amendment offered that makes it clear that the security of israel is clearly paramount with paramount goals and i agree with that completely and i'm glad we were able to add that to the manager's amendment. i think senator ruby on senator boxer for their leadership on that issue. i want to thank senator coons for his help in shortening the period and senator shaheen for her work on the framework would with how we put this together and all the members on both sides for their incredible work. i think this is a proud moment

if we can get this type of legislation as to how congress can really weigh in on this agreement i think is the right thing not only for congress but for the american people. >> do you want to do the colloquy? >> mr. chairman if i might i just want to make one point on some the new text in the substitute amendment which has been agreed to between senator corker and myself regarding the period of congressional review. original build mandated a 60-day period or unless i'm the president would not be able to revise statutory sanctions relief. in a new text of the agreement is submitted by july 10 a congressional review period would be 30 days and during that period the president would be unable to provide statutory sanctions relief are the new text provides for 12 days for the president to consider a veto of the resolution of disapproval and 10 days for congress to consider overriding the veto. attend a period for congress to

consider overriding the veto would begin the day after a presidential veto. >> that is absolutely my understanding and i think it's your understanding that the timeclock only begins when the president submits all of the materials including all of the classified -- that the public will never see but are important for us to see and play in on any sanctions. >> i appreciate that and you are correct. the president has to submit the agreement. the agreement is defined in the manager's amendment which would include the relevant documents. >> and if he submits that all of our member should know because of the way congress functions during the period of august is a 60-day process we revert back to so that is the case. that's our understanding it certainly had spelled out that

way in the manager's amendment but i want to make sure we have an agreement. i thank you for that. at this moment i really think it's important for senator menendez who has been such a champion not only on this piece of legislation but regarding our mutual concerns with iran. i would like to call on him to make some opening comments. >> thank you mr. chairman. let me thank you for your gracious remarks and i've are g8 having worked with you on the legislation and your consultations with me on changes to the ledges laysha and which i support. i think this continuation of the bipartisanship that i have tried to set up whenever privilege of chairing the committee rises to the high calling of what the united states senate is all about. and particularly the significance of the senate foreign relations committee the senate foreign relations committee as a relates to

foreign-policy and national security so i want to thank you and congratulate you in that respect that i want to thank senator cardin a ranking member for his incredibly hard work work and perfecting the legislation that brings us to what i hope will be a broad bipartisan vote and i couldn't think of anyone better to take my place. i want to thank senator kaine whose thoughtful input on the genesis of the legislation was incredibly helpful. in my view the way to send a message to iran about expectations is for congress to put politics aside and pass the corker menendez iran nuclear agreement acts with unified bipartisan action than underscores congress is critical role in one of the highest priorities national security and nuclear nonproliferation challenges of our time. the fact is the p5+1 and iran ultimately achieve a comprehensive agreement by the june deadline. at the end of the day congress

must have oversight responsibility in this legislation provides it. this bill establishes a managed process for congressional -- and a framework for congressional oversight. now i differentiate between this agreement and others the administration has cited for exclusive executive action because of the congressionally mandated sanctions that are lost and is the author of the sanctions working with many others on this committee and beyond i can tell you that we never envisioned a wholesale waiver of those sanctions without congressional input and action. my goal is one goal and that is to make certain that iran does not have the infrastructure to develop a nuclear weapon in the best way to achieve that goal is with bipartisan support that strengthens the united states handed moving from a political framework to a comprehensive agreement and sets up expectations for iranian compliance. let's send a message to tehran

that sanctions relief is not a given end certainly not the price for signing on the dotted line. iran must fully comply with all provisions of an agreement that effectively dismantle this nuclear weapons infrastructure verifies compliance with every word of the deal. i have many questions about the framework agreement including but not limited to the diversion understanding of the agreement the difference in what iran can do with research on centrifuges for timing and pacing of sanctions relief the ability to snap back sanctions if there are violations talackova dress and a possible military interventions of iran's program the degree of the iaea's ability to have inspections not regular inspections, snap inspections among others but that's all the morrison for congress to have an in-depth oversight role. without mr. chairman nye thank you for your leadership and i think the ranking member were his and i urge is strong bipartisan vote on the chairman's part.

>> other additional opening comments? if i could i might want to go this way since we want to stay in balance here. >> mr. chairman first of all i want to join in with everyone in recognizing your efforts in this which is percolate to say the least. the reason this as difficult as reason this is difficult is the fact that we are negotiating to different goals. usually when people are negotiating to get to a particular point the united states negotiates to appoint for the iranians cannot now, cannot ever have a nuclear weapon. the iranians are negotiating to get a specific clear path forward to how they can get a nuclear weapon. people talk about 10 years, 15 years but this is a culture that has been around for five millennia, two and a half since they got power in the world. 10 to 15 years is nothing to them. under the agreement talks about they patiently can put one foot in front of the other and get to where they want to go and unfortunately that leaves people

that are going to be sitting in these chairs in the future to deal with that. that is what has made this a difficult, having said all that i think there are steps we can take at this point to at least slow it down and who knows maybe the iranian people will -- what they are burdened with what their government and decide they want to be reasonable actors in the world and at some point in time get to the point where they do abandon their nuclear ambitions. this agreement that we are talking about right now has not yet been to the point where they are abandoning -- abandoning their nuclear intention. having said all that there is some good stuff in here that i think we will have to get on board with. >> if i could just to clarify i think the comment you are making about the agreement you are talking about the agreement that's being negotiated between the p5+1.

>> today's agreement is putting in place a structure for us to be able to deal with that once it's presented and hopefully by giving us a seat at not the negotiating table but to be able to weigh in. >> well said mr. chairman. >> on that point i think it's critically important to underscore that. we have strong bipartisan support for this agreement and this review cost there may be different views on what is the negotiated today. i think it's very clear that this review process is not at all a reflection on how members feel on the underlying negotiations and quite frankly i speak or myself, i want to see the agreements before i comment on the agreements. it's still a process being negotiated. i do want to acknowledge the president success in keeping iran intact or in these negotiating period and getting negotiating partners in unity

and keeping the sanction regimes in place where many of us thought when the first remark was announced we would not be able to do that. so i think we will reserve judgment on the merits at a different point but right now i hope we will focus on the framework. >> someone on this site, senator boxer. >> thank you so much. i really do appreciate the hard work that you mr. chairman dead along with our ranking member senator menendez in so many other senator kaine and i don't mean to slight anyone, so many people involved in this. and to me it's very very important. i believe this bill has changed from a point which i did not supported to a point which i can in its it's because i believe the former bill would have disrupted an undated than

ongoing -- and i believe this new bill will not do that. now i have received assurances today all morning i was on the phone saying do you feel that if we vote for this bill we will upend negotiations and the answer came back no this bill will not do that. so i'm very pleased. the reason for that is there is no longer language in the bill. we may have an amendment to do that. my own view that would be a dealbreaker because we know how many problems we face with iran. we could count the ways and we'd be here all day but we are trying to take care of one of these problems today so i would urge colleagues to refrain from trying to solve every problem. there's a years worth of mistrust, years worth of problems, here's worth of

terrorism and we are still dealing with them and they will still do be with them. there is language in there that states that we will deal with them but that's not tied to this legislation. also i'm pleased that what is highlighted in this is the section that says we will not be voting on the final deal if there is one until after it is concluded. i think those are very important and i do so appreciate senators corchran cardin accepting the letters i wrote reaffirming the united states agreement with israel security and its right to exist. we all feel that way everyone of us. i'm proud that we have been there and i'm also glad the language i wrote on expediting language should there be a breakout so we would immediately go onto the floor of the united states senate and add back sanctions or do other things so

everything will be on the table if there is a breakout. so his true form the bill i think it's a very strong path forward for congress to vote up or down on sanctions that it has imposed. that's the way i view the bill. i view the bill on sanctions that we impose. now i want to be clear because i always them straight from the heart to the shoulder. if this bill threatens this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to deal with the looming crisis i will use every tool at my disposal to stop that from happening. this is just too important so i want to say not only to the leaders of this committee and that does include senator menendez if i failed to mention it before but also this administration for its extraordinary effort in putting together a framework addressing iran's nuclear future.

i looked at the framework and what i can say about it is that does call for -- not only of iran's nuclear -- for the supply chain and a rollback of nuclear capability. this is not a freeze. this is the rollback so i for one have positive views about the framework and pray that the progress will continue because as i look at the alternative to me -- who did you plan this? as i look at the alternative to this negotiation, this ongoing negotiation it's frightening to the american people. they don't want another war. we on the other side of the aisle actually call for -- iran now and i feel there's a lot more than one that feels this way and i think by taking control this committee taking

control of this process mr. chairman i think it's the best thing we can do. the very last point, i hope people read the letter we got from 50 liters bipartisan, eta demonstrations, five republican administrations and three democratic administrations urging us not to take any action to derail the ongoing negotiations and i have to tell you they are smart people. they know what you are talking about and that's why i was very very concerned. now frankly if i was the chairman which i'm not would probably start off by holding hearings and call up all those experts and look at the trademark before we went to today's market but we are where we are and i feel good that we have moved to a place that doesn't threaten these ongoing negotiations and i thank everyone again for their efforts efforts. >> thank you unaffected i want to move to center rubio but i want to clarify again it's my

understanding that no one is discussing waiting to vote on this legislation after it comes out of committee on the floor that we are ready to vote on the floor. you are referring to a approval or disapproval so we are clearing the way for a strong vote on the floor. >> if i could say what i meant. it would destroy this delicate balance that you have achieved and i want to put out there that i'm not going to sit back and say about her. i'm going to do everything at my disposal to keep it the way it is. because i mean there is no such

thing as perfection but i think the two of you have struck just the right balance. i want to protect that on the floor when this comes up. >> thank you so much senator rubio who has contributed heavily especially on the issues relative to israel and i want to thank him so much for his contribution and constructive efforts in that regard. >> i want to thank you mr. chairman and the ranking member for your corporation and your help on this issue. senator boxer who has this second degree amendment to work together but i do want to say i'm more concerned about not simply destroying the delicate balance of this bill i'm concerned about the destruction of israel and i will tell you y.. in july of 2014 ayatollah khamenei tweeted quote is barbaric was like an infanticide of regime of israel hashtag israel by the way which there is no crime has no cure but to be annihilated. in november of 2014 the supreme leaders twitter account posted

this. it's a chart showing nine questions about the elimination of israel. why should this zionist regime be eliminated? during the 66 years of life so far the fake zionist regime has tried to realize its goals by homicide violence and iron fist will post about it. it goes on to say he calls for some sort of referendum where the jewish cannot participate in they have to go back to their country whatever that means but until a referendum is held how should we confront them put up until the day this homicidal and infanticide were of regime is eliminated powerful confrontation and resolute armed resistance is the cure of this ruinous regime. the only means of confronting urging which commits crimes beyond once thought and imagination is a resolute in armed confrontation. here's another quote from ayatollah khamenei. it's the mission of the islamic republic of iran to erase israel from the map of the region. i think at some point when

someone keeps saying they want to destroy you you should take them seriously and our concern here but i want to do as i want there to be an amendment on this and the president would have to certify to congress that iran's leaders have publicly accepted israel's right to exist are at a minimum that whatever deal we are agreeing to hear is not for the existence of israel not to mention a security unstable ground. i appreciate there have been changes to the bill that gets the sense of the congress of that the president should determine the agreement in in no way compromises the commitment of united states to israel's security nor its support for israel's right to exist. i think that's better than not having it at all but this is an issue we will have to talk about on the floor and as we move forward beyond this place today because while we are concerned out doubt about that national security benefits and implications of nuclear iran that is also by the way moving forward on ballistic missiles. you don't build a list that missiles because you want to do some fancy fireworks show. you built a listed missiles because you want to put a nuclear warhead on it and as

they move forward not only does it those arrested in a safe poses an immediate arrest to israel. do you want to know i know back? the supreme leader has said it himself repeatedly so i appreciate the work and accommodations to include this language and is certainly better than not having it at all. this is an important debate for us to have an i appreciate by the way that we added in that the united states sanctions on iran for terrorism and human rights abuses and ballistic missiles were made in place under the agreement. i thought there was importance of thank you for allowing me to work with you. >> thank you. senator shane. >> thank you mr. chairman. i won't repeat all of the eloquent statements that have been made but i want to reiterate what has been said about the leadership or new senator cardin senator menendez and senator came relative to getting an agreement on this legislation. i think as you have said it's not only important to the future of the foreign relations committee and a very important work that we should be doing but i think it also sends a very

important signal to the people of this country that we can work together on big issues to address common problems that face the country and we should be doing that as often as possible in the future. i just want to congratulate you again for the great work that you have done and i do intend to support this legislation. >> senator johnson. >> mr. chairman i also thank the chairman and the people that i work on this agreement. i understand it's been a tough row to go and your challenge in trying to accomplish creating legislation that could get bipartisan support and overcome the presidential veto so i understand what you have been working with here. i understand the challenge but i did offer a number of amendments to provide clarity. now if we have reached agreement and we can take this to the floor of the senate i will withhold offering this amendments during this markup

but i do want to talk about what this piece of legislation is and what it does not to add clarity. you said it creates a rightful role for congress. it creates a role no doubt about that in right now we have no role so i would ever -- rather have her world and no role whatsoever from the standpoint of negotiating this agreement could i realize it's the executive commander-in-chief it is to negotiate this but this is a role. it's a congressional review potentially congressional oversight that is not advice and consent. it's a long way from advice and consent. from my standpoint i think this agreement that president obama is negotiating certainly rises to the level of a treaty and there's no set criteria for what a treaty is. there are considerations and the state department on foreign affairs manual list those considerations in one of them is the extent to which the agreement of both risks affecting a nation as a whole. i think this agreement affects

and above the commitments affecting the station. the third consideration whether the agreement can be given given given effective health enactment in subsequent legislation by congress. i think that applies so from my standpoint with president obama is doing on behalf of america is a treaty and according to the constitution treaty should be subjected to the advice and consent of the senate. now what that would mean if we were really doing, engaging in our world of advice and consent data require 67 senators to a proof of this deal. that is not what is going to happen. we will not have 67 senators approving this deal. that is not what this bill is going to do. there are basically three types of international agreements. there's a treaty that requires advice and consent and there's also congressional executive agreement. now if you have congressional

executive agreement subject to regular order that subject to filibuster cy case you would need 60 senators affirming what approving of that agreement. that's still pretty high hurdle. there potentially could be congressional executive agreements under expedited procedures that would not allow for filibuster so that would require 50 senators as well as the majority of the house of ferment of late approving the agreement. in other words allowing the american people to have a say in an agreement that involves commitments affecting the nation as a whole through their representatives. now what this bill does that kind of turns the advice and consent on its head because it basically allows for a vote of disapproval. in order for that vote of disapproval to actually have an effect at potentially stopping a really bad deal that involves

commitments or risks affecting the nation as a whole, if it's not vetoed that would require 60 senators voting for disapproval which means 41 senators could approve of this deal and we have not had voter approval. if that voter disapproval is vetoed by the president we would need to overcome that beta was 67 senators which means 34 senators would be required to approve of this deal. so again this piece of legislation which again i appreciate the fact that at least this gives us a role it is an incredibly blended role a role that is a far cry from advice and consent of 67 senators voting in the affirmative but this is a good deal for america. it's beyond me why democrats simply won't agree to the fact that more than one person should

actually fail to evaluate whether this is a good deal. the way it is now there is one person president obama's going to decide for america that this is a good deal or bad deal. i believe the american people should be involved in that decision through their elective representatives. i agree president obama's negotiation rises to the level of a treaty and we should provide advice and consent. i believe we should be approving this thing with 67 votes when in fact this piece of legislation. it made my point and i think i've provided clarity and i will support this as long as basically the deal has been struck and his approach here. thank you. >> i appreciate the comments and if i could wave a wand or pigs begin to fly we could turn this into the type of agreement that is begin to be discussed but i will say this the

administration as you know in a previous hearing we have has been fighting strongly against this. secretary kerry fighting against this earlier today. i know they relented because of what they believe to be the outcome here but i believe this is going to be an important role and especially the compliance pieces that come out. a very significant thing that did not occur under the north korean agreement and gives us significant t. if a deal is achieved what i want to thank you for your comments. >> again i agree with that i appreciate that. >> mr. chairman i don't think we will convince any of administration democrat or republican that congress should have any role in anything that they do. we understand that. that's a given. but i just want to assure you that in my conversations with

the administration it's been a very positive conversations over the last 10 days, looking for a way that they can resolve the concerns that they had in a genuine way. i just want to be clear that i think the administration is very open about trying to get to where we are today and i thank you for allowing us to have an open process. >> senator coons you also have been incredibly constructive and you make your first trip to afghanistan together and appreciate your significant input. >> thank you chairman corchran ranking member cardin thank you for the clear-eyed and tough way in which you have negotiated this compromise in front of us this afternoon. we have a rod and share a common goal which is to prevent a nuclear-capable iran. the only question in front of us is what world with this congress and this committee play in important foreign-policy decisions and in particular the consideration of a deal with iran and the p5+1 partnership.

so i want to thank senator menendez for his leadership of this committee and his role as ranking member and laying a lot of the groundwork for this and senator kaine for persistently raising on a bipartisan basis to congress that ever role and they want to thank you for including in this package to amendments i felt a week ago. look forward to supporting it and hopefully our moving it out today with a strong bipartisan vote. we have a simple question about which path forward today this committee will take. we can, by passing this package it sure in the event of a deal with iran congress has a constructive and a defined role to play in common opportunity to reveal -- review the deal and sync agent oversight. or we can reject it and dispose a potential deal with iran to endless attempts from congress to prevent that from being implemented. we can embrace this compromise and thus help our diplomats and their negotiators representing

innate unified position in a reasonable process for congressional review or rejected and heard our diplomats and negotiators by creating a partisan fiasco and sending mixed messages to the world. it is my hope that we will not reject this agreement. by doing so we will once again have this committee service a minor. >> him is this is a administration and featured administrations proceeds to make american policy and restraint. we can and not for some passes out of committee today and reassert the senate foreign relations committee has an important role to play in our nation's foreign-policy decisions. it is my hope that on a bipartisan basis we will do just that and take the reasoned and responsible path forward in thank you both for this -- for making this possible. >> senator flake has been so constructive throughout this from the very beginning. thank you so much. >> images to voting on this

before the administration to miss the final agreement i will yield. >> any other opening comments? senator udall. >> i agree with the thrust of what senator flake has i want to say briefly i don't want to take all my time here but i think this committee and what chairman corchran ranking member and senator menendez and the others that i worked on this has done has been incredibly important because arthur vandenberg is to use the phrase politics stops at the water's edge, which is the best tradition i believe of this foreign relations committee and i believe that is what we have seen today with you chairman corker and ranking member cardin and senator menendez. everybody working together to try to find their way through this. so i just congratulate you on doing that.

i think chairman corker you had incredible strength and not getting on that letter that was sent to the ayatollah and i think once again i pat you on the back for that because i think once again that is in the tradition of this committee trying to do the best bipartisan warren policy it can. so the one other thing i want to do and it's behind the scenes this agreement that the administration is working on has had a lot to do with the national laboratory. secretary moniz talk about it earlier. we have two of the three national security lapse in mexico. we can't talk about the great things though scientists have done and the contributions they have made but they are really on top of these nuclear enterprise issues and i know the story will come out eventually how important it is than i would have that the "washington post" editorial by moniz be put in the

record. thank you all for your work again. >> thank you and i visited both of those labs with you as a matter-of-fact and certainly they play an incredible role in our national security as is the lapan tennesean corporation on these issues. any other comments? senator kaine. >> thank you mr. chairman to all the committee members. i strongly support the beginning of the negotiation with iran went president obama announce it in november of 2013 and viewed it as the fruition of your efforts. i was not in the senate when the sanctions regimes were passed so to those of you who are the economic realities of that regime opened up an opportunity and our president did what we would want the president to do to seek a diplomatic answer to a very difficult question. i also have a number of questions about the framework of the deal that was announced that see much in the framework that i felt positively about.

the rollback of the stock fell from 10,000 to kilograms is massive and agreement of iran at least in the framework to participate in the iaea additional protocol for inspection is also significant so i am pro-diplomacy and i see positives in the framework that i've been strongly pro-for congressional approval. there has been some suggestion if you think congress needs to approve this you are anti-diplomacy. that's ridiculous. there has even been some suggestion that if you think congress needs to approve this you are pro-war. that is offensive. we have a role under article ii and i actually think congressional approval in this instance under the framework that is now before us is necessary helpful and with the american public to manson deserves. it's necessary because at the core this is a negotiation about what must iran do to get out from under congressional sanctions regime so congress will be involved. it's helpful because since congress will be involve the

only question is will that involvement be helpful and orderly or will it be in under free-for-all rules? much better for us much better for the administration, much better for p5 plus one, much better for iran that we asked them to make concessions, the concessions for them to see a process that is orderly and constructive and friendly something the american public and our role they really deserve it. i've been talking to virginians for many months and i've recently seen polling that seems kind of odd if you look at it but it does make sense. the american public just as we do is a big concern about an iranian nuclear weapons program. the american public just as we are really hopes we will find a diplomatic answer to that problem. they preferred diplomacy over war just like we all do. the american public is deeply skeptical just like we are about iran's intentions and will iran

compare the agreement. the american public overwhelmingly wants congress to approve a deal rather than the president to announce a deal. focus on that one for a minute. why did my constituents and yours want a deal to have to be approved by congress? it's not out of disrespect for the president and it's not because they love congress. let me share with you what they think about congress. it's not exactly great. they are so concerned about the magnitude of this deal that they will feel more comfortable at both the executive and the legislature take a look and say this is in the best interests of the nation. this is why people get a second opinion if they hear from a doctor the american public knows this is good and they will feel more comfortable if it's both the executive and the legislature reviewing it. that is why i'm strongly supported this and i want to thank you mr. chair senator corchran in finding a path forward. >> senator murphy. >> mr. chairman thank you to you

and the ranking member as well as the white house for ringing i think this incredibly productive compromise before us today to i have have been like-minded with senator boxer. i have leaves that this is has been a largely unnecessary in denver and the legislation we are debating today doesn't reserve for congress any power that we don't already have. we have the ability before this debate to be able to review this agreement with the -- wants it submitted to congress to take away from the person the power to waive sanctions and after the passage of this bill we still have that power. all along my concern is simply that whether we are engaged in the effort that's going to make it less like week rather than more likely that we are going to get a deal to review. i reserve the right to be able to weigh in on that. it does want to make sure we are not taking taking any steps that lessen the chances that we will be able to conduct that

oversight when the time is appropriate. i would reiterate what we have heard today from the administration. i think we have heard very clearly that the changes that have been made over the past 24 to 48 hours essentially make this legislation but nine as a release to the negotiations that there is a believe that with these changes the shortened timeframe, the removal of the terrorist certification that this legislation the passage of it is not going to affect the negotiations or the ability for us as a body to see the final agreement so i'm happy to support it. my final comment is this one and it notes frankly office for comment from senator kaine. i do worry about a double standard of oversight in this congress and i don't worry that when it comes to senator kaine because he was right there at the beginning saying we should oversee the president's proposed military action but we have a

constitutional duty to declare war and we have been in this committee now for about four months and haven't taken any progress to fulfill what is our constitutional obligation to oversee war. i would argue the differential position to senator johnson and we don't have a constitutional operation here and we frankly don't even have the ability to weigh in until after we see the final agreement. so i just don't want to be in a situation where we have a higher standard of oversight on diplomacy than we have for war. so i'm glad to support this compromise moving forward. i think it will provide for useful framework for the review of this agreement should it be entered into but i want to make sure that this committee moving forward is just as vigorous in his oversight over war-making powers as it is over diplomacy. i don't think this is an attack

on diplomacy.i'm hopeful that we will show consistency in the weeks and months to come. >> thank you. i do want to say this and i apologize but i think the reason the administration the last two hours has chosen the path they are not taking is the number of senators that are willing to support this legislation. i have a 180-degree different view of what has happened over the last couple of hours but i appreciate your comments. >> thank you mr. chairman and again i can't praise you enough for the way that you are conducting this committee. i think this is really in the best tradition of the senate foreign relations committee in the way that people might understand it to be when oftentimes it is not and i thank you senator cardin for your excellent work in helping to create it rich that has brought

us to this moment. but i also want to thank senator menendez and senator kaine for their work in ensuring that there would need a protection of congressional rockets especially in an era -- an area where the sanctions were actually a congressional idea and originated here and to a large extent that is why the iranians have failed to come to the table so it's altogether appropriate that we are at this moment and there is going to be an assertion of this congressional prerogative to oversee such an important matter. so actually all of you and by the way every member of the committee who participated in this process. there is no more important subject for the congress to have to deal with. the iaea is perhaps the least

well-known most important institution on the planet. that is what we are going to be debating over the next four or five months the role that the iaea can play in avoiding a dramatic escalation of nuclear weapons proliferation in the middle east that we have avoided for 70 years. so it's going to be critical for the senate for the house to be able to determine the adequacy of the inspections regime. the funding made available to ensure that the iaea can be the policeman on the beat, be the protector against a compromise of a civilian nuclear program that in the wrong hands can turn into a nuclear bomb factory. that is what this is all about.

that is why the israelis are looking at this so closely. it is why the saudi's the egyptians, the turks are all looking at this one issue so closely because if we get it wrong it is going to lead to the escalation that we have avoided over all of these decades. and so this is a big moment that i think this committee is handled this issue very responsibly. i think to a certain extent just listening to expert opinion i think there is kind of a surprise to some people are had with regards to the specificity in the agreement with senator kerry and senator moniz undersecretary monies and president obama have brought back to america and that you give us some hope that an agreement can be reached that accomplishes all of those goals. it's also appropriate for this committee and for the senate to advise and consent to have a

role in conducting the hearings and hearing the evidence and then making the decision because a lot the rest of the history of the 21st century is going to actually ride on how this agreement is in fact written. i keep coming back to thanking you for the way in which you are conducting it. it's the appropriate role for this committee and for the senate and i can't praise senator kaine, menendez and you mr. chairman for the incredible work which have done and i yield back great. >> thank you. are there any more opening comments? seeing none i would entertain a motion that we consider the manager's amendment by roll call vote. it's been moved. their second? >> mr. chairman? at the appropriate time i would make it just like to make a comment. >> actually i think if you want

to do that now that would be fine. thank you for your involvement in this in making this build betters it is today. >> i just want to thank chairman corchran ranking member cardin for their cooperation today. as many of you remember for five years i have worked to see to it that they 44 living americans who are hostages in iran in 1979 are compensated for their loss and their time. we negotiated the algerian accords to release those people at that time there were 52 living people. we negotiated away for their ability to get compensation from the iranian government. i have a bill which i offered as an amendment while -- for which i will would withdraw. it would allow us to claim compensation from the iranian sanctions money available to compensate each one of those remaining 44 citizens that are still like to be today. the chairman or ricky member asked me to withdraw the amendment because it's not appropriate given the nature of the framework of a deal and i agree with that but you are both

gracious enough to include it in the manager's amendment. i appreciate that very much and appreciate chairman corker's willingness to out of time the near future which hopefully will be the immediate future to allow the legislature to come before they committee. we owe those americans that were captured and tortured and beaten and -- that didn't get compensation back and i want to see to it that happens but i want to thank the chairman and ranking member for everything they have done to put that in the amendment and i withdraw my other amendment. >> thank you and thank it for your stead fast support of these families with everything they have gone through. is there any member that would like to offer an amendment to the manager's package? >> thank you mr. chairman that i would like to call up the barrasso amendment to the manager's amendment. this restores the language from the underlying base built and the terrorism certification. a simple straightforward it reestablishes the requirement the president certify iran is

not currently supported are carried out an act of terrorism against the united states or united states person anywhere in the world. this was in the original piece of legislation. it is a bill that had significant bipartisan support bipartisan cosponsorship. iran has been designated by the united states as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1984. think it's critical for the president to make the certification to congress and the american people. we are serious about our national security and i think it's important the committee clearly state that we will not tolerate terrorism against our nation. >> thank you. if i could just respond first of all i want to thank the senator for the way he has conducted himself and certainly raising this issue. i would like for the audience in the world to know this was a request by senator menendez actually that this be initially put in april. it's very difficult for me to understand why his certification like this would easily be made. candidly we have more information about terrorism in

the spell than we have ever had before and my guess is if iran attempted a terrorist act against an american they would not only would have sanctions but likely missiles and bombs so i don't know why this could not be agreed to but it was true the administration did not want to have other issues not relevant to the nuclear deal and this. i have agreed to that and while i support your amendment is important that they stuff it was before the senator knows i will oppose it and i think i understand this creates problems for the balance of the world that we have today. with that ranking member. >> thank you mr. chairman. let me explain first of all it relit the chairman that the sponsor of this amendment is well-intended and we want to see iran and its terrorism influenced in many regions of the world that are very very troubling to the world stability. ..

>>

>> it would very likely be used as a reason to say diplomacy cannot work and cannot make those certification isfahan -- and the u.s. is blamed in the end to put iran in a stronger position than they are today. i know that is not the intent but the think that is the consequences. let me point out senator mendez in the original bill had strong language on the terrorism activity of ivory and to be submitted to congress on a periodic basis. that language is not only included but strengthened. we also included other language that says the president must submit the

international forum from that acts to directly or indirectly carry out acts of terrorism against the united states the impact of the safety of the americans and citizens and with the additional paragraph if violations of internationally recognized human rights have changed increased toward decrease to the 180 prior dave period is to every six months so it is a strong provision to keep congress informed as to these types of activities. we always have the right to take action for by woodard colleagues to recognize the certification provisions could very well compromise the ability to continue negotiations where this manager amendment is very

strong on the terrorism issues. >> very briefly let me say i have no doubt that iran is a major state sponsor of terrorism because the state department says so. that is real but having said that i had concerns that nonnuclear sanctions would be waived as it relates to terrorism and in other elements. in view of the language that makes it clear that none of those other sanctions will be waived as a result of any nuclear deal i certainly support the bill as it presently stands and i will continue to pursue a region as it relates to state sponsor of terrorism another venue. but it needs to be clear that will not be waived under any set of circumstances to have this

type of process for the senate to review any deal at the end of the day it is not an impediment to our goal of due process to make sure it continues to suffer the consequences. >> was speaking in favor of the grasso amendment -- grasso amendment. with the "wall street journal" there were statements with the recent addition with all the strategic from waterways so less political restraint is linked the agreement to free iran from the tendencies efforts to excuse me with the linkage between restraint the traditional allies will conclude they have traded corporation to a

reading and hegemony. >> we have this in here as the secretary has pointed out. >> i spend a lot of time talking to lou secretary kissinger. i couldn't agree more with the comment and with the language that the senator has mentioned is cleared up to absolutely makes it known to all that no one asset agreement we will discuss later will sanctions be removed to the extent we have the information that is much more available from the intelligence standpoint what is happening. we have the tool to even add to that i know the senator would like to have a vote if there is no objection. let's have a roll-call vote.

[roll call]>> the clerk will report.

>> it is my vendors standing if there are no other amendments i think we have a motion and the second to move to the managers package that we will put on if the clerk will please call the roll. [roll call]>> are there any other

amendments to the base of legislation amended by that package? is there a motion that we move ahead then it was amended by the managers package? >> it was moved and seconded

the question to approve the iran nuclear agreements act as amended if the clerk would call the roll. [roll call]>> thank you.

the clerk will report the yay has said i asked my staff to make changes without objection and we will stand adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

>> ponce day leon may or may not have been searching for the fountain of return aleut -- eternal youth. some said he was out for additional properties for the king of spain which is true. but we do know that he cave ashore after searching for a good harbour to take on water and would this area is one of the few fresh water springs in the area around 30 degrees eight minutes also the location of the

first settlement of st. augustine 42 years before the settlement of jamestown and 55 years before the pilgrims landed landed:plymouth rock's. flagler is the man who is very little known outside the state of florida. but he was one of the wealthiest men in america essentially a co-founder of standard oil company with rockefeller. a man who always wanted to undertake a great enterprise and as it turned out to, of florida was it. he realized he needed to own the real road between jacksonville and st. augustine to ensure that the guest could get to his hotel conveniently. so the jury was beginning to

grow. he did have big dreams he was a visionary. >> please have the siege. thank you so much. this is fun. just hanging out with the cash and that back there. hello everybody. hello. the me start by acknowledging to north

carolina champions and congress who wore with may. ms. adams's year. and david price. [applause] and your own house sandy mayer. [applause] diana thank you for it the introduction by in here because she sent me a letter and wanted to reply in person money just read an excerpt of what she wrote me as part of the middle class i know how it feels to work hard every day and even with a college education and a full-time job finding a harder and harder to make ends meet. i think it is fair to say what she has said is true for so many people all

across the country. the kind of letters i get all the time from people that asked in america their hard work in a sense of responsibility is rewarded i know my working moms. >> yes. you to. [laughter] of lot of working moms talk about these issues so we decided to talk to them so i will keep my remarks brief so we can spend time talking. some of the decisions from the worst financial decisions we have created more than 12 million over the past five years the unemployment rate has fallen 10% right when i was coming

into office 5.5%. more kids are graduating from high school more are attending college. more are able to save more money at the pump because energy production has gone up clean energy production has gone up with the security of health care with the thing called the affordable care act. [applause] so the recovery reaches more americans every single day. so now will be except in the economy going forward just a few are doing exceptionally well or will we have been economy where everybody will work hard to get ahead? that is what i called middle-class economics the idea that this country we do best whenever betty gets a fair shot and anybody plays

by the same set of rules that is what has driven my policies ever since i became president of lot have been specifically focused on working moms because i believe when women succeed bill whole countries exceeds. i am a firm believer in that [applause] >> middle-class economics means dealing to be economically secure as a technologically driven economy which is why my budget cuts for were proposals to lower taxes for working families and try to pay for child care and college and retirement. having both parents in the workforce is a reality for many families but in 31 states including north carolina high quality child care cost are higher than

one year tuition at state university. the average cost is $16,000 for child care. that is why my plan would make it much more affordable for every middle-class family with children. higher education has never been more expensive that is why i want to bring down the cost of commuting costs down to zero. [applause] so they can get the higher education they need for a job. in today's economy women's still hold most of the low-paying jobs that often demand the hardest work that is why we successfully work with the states and cities and companies to raise wages without waiting for congress although prices on board for this we have members of

congress who don't get it when it comes to raising wages i know there are workers here organizing for higher wages it is time wasted alongside them to make it happen for america deserves a raise. [applause] it is significant today is tax day. [laughter] if you have not filed. [laughter] but the reason i mentioned those policies is overall when you put my policies to gather in the budget and want to cut taxes for those that pay child-care i want to cut taxes for more than 8 million families i want to cut taxes to of 30 million workers save for retirement and four of 38 million

low-wage workers the same way like the child tax credit and earned income tax credit. all told it would cut back 44 million working and middle-class families that is to the tax code should benefit those sitters struggling doing the right thing to support their families to get a leg up. is the good thing that republicans have started to talk about wages and the middle class so i am encouraged unfortunately the policies don't speak to the issues ordinary families are facing. the tax plan gives the average millionaire and billionaire of $50,000 tax ted that is what the average middle-class worker makes in

the entire year. also pushing a $270 billion tax cut for the wealthiest of the wealthy affecting 5,000 families all across america costing $270 billion. it would benefit here precisely 120 households. over $270 billion? that is the cost of the tax breaks i give to 44 million people. so their plan would cut taxes for the top one-tenth of 1% and let taxes go up on 25 million working families and in my view we don't need that for millionaires and billionaires. i don't need a tax cut. with the opportunities that

offers now lead to major ready has opportunities for young family that just had there first child and is still struggling that they get some relief. that is you need help what middle-class economics is all about and what i will fight for. but i will stop talking because i promised i would be short. will also want to do some listening i'm interested to hear from all of you about would be facing in your lives and how government policy would be helpful. what about folks in congress? what would actually make a difference? because we have some powerful hard-working women around here want to talk to

them in terms of what they think would make a difference and i will take my seat. >> thank you, mr. chairman president. i will be selfish to kick off the first question so raised your hand. i would like to cover something that happened yesterday with equal payday. that paycheck fairness act has failed four times in congress. i know you are a proponent and i heard from the user yesterday that works one and a half jobs to be a single supporter of her son making just enough that she cannot afford to get sick but also cannot achieve certain benefits and trying to save

for college and she is making less than men 10 years younger than her. women of color make significantly less so why is the act failing and then somebody dispute the assistance? director reason we have not got it done republicans in congress have blocked it. some do dispute it is a problem some say it is a woman's choice the results then being paid less than and of men. lifestyle decisions, rather stay home or work part-time. but understand the whole point of equal pay is people doing the same job. that is the problem of the paychecks -- paycheck fairness act not that they

should get more of the same but be paid same for the same work. there are other things they're pretty simple. to people doing the same job they should be paid the same this is personal for me because i think a lot of people are aware i was raised by a single mom who worked went to school not heard vance degree in and help to raise me and my sister and we also got help from my grandparents and the main breadwinner was my grandmother and she is a great story. grew up in kansas my grandfather fought in world

war ii when he came back he got the idea of bill but she was working back home on the assembly line and unfortunately she did not get benefits like the post and 11 gi bill where family members can get help as well so she never got a college education but she was smarter than my grandfather. i apologize. [laughter] i think everybody who knew her understood that. she got a job as a secretary and worked her way yet to be vice president of the bank but then hit the glass ceiling in for the next 20 years kept trading -- training the young your man who came up and then would go ahead of for including the president of the bank and that was pretty typical

at that time. but why is this still typical now? i have two daughters i expect them to be treated the same as somebody else's son when it comes to their opportunities on the job. so we had the elderly ledbetter act. [applause] named after a friend of mine who had worked for years and found out long into her work she was being paid less than the mini in then they said it is too late to file suit you should give filed when it started in she said i just about and they said it does not matter. . .

convincing a number of republicans to recognize that they have daughters, spouses. dollars, spouses. at a time when the majority of families have both spouses working or if you have a single parent that is most likely a single mom working this is an economic issue of our family issue.