this changes the bureaucratic convenience that will negatively affect -- identify new issues this choice program faces and recommending reasonable solutions. yesterday we gave her a second report evaluating this program was made 13 recommendations on how to ensure the intended goal of expanding access to health care for americans veterans. our initial report identified a gap between a the number of veterans who are eligible for the program and those who were given the opportunity to participate. our second report has found that the va has made progress in addressing this gap. 35% of second survey participants who believe they are eligible were given the opportunity to participate. that's a 16% increase for her initial survey. for 30-day years participation hinges on va schedulers

eligibility. the lack of systemwide training for front-line staff has resulted in veterans receiving dated or misleading information to va continues -- must contain to improve this process and training to ensure that all veterans who are eligible for the program are given the opportunity to participate. our second report found a decrease in satisfaction among veterans to receive non-va care. this is a direct result of veterans not being able to find viable options in the private sector. the 40-mile standard used established geographic raised eligibility for the veterans choice program was based on eligibility for tri-care prime however there is a distinct difference between the veterans population in the military population. 36% of veterans enrolled in va health care lipid rural areas. thus measuring the distance servicemembers traveled to military treatment facilities

and using that same standard to measure distance traveled by veterans to va medical facilities does not properly account for the diversity of its population. our second report found a commute time standard based on population density would more appropriately reflect the travel burden veterans face in accessing va health care. regardless and the va must commission a study to determine the most appropriate geographic a standard for health care furnished by the va. is the future of va health care system are evaluating it is important to recognize that the quality of care veterans receive from the va significantly better than what is available in the private sector. moreover many of va's -- could not be duplicated or properly supplemented by private sector health care especially for combat related mental health blast injuries or service

related toxic exposures to name a few. with this in mind the must continue to serve as the initial touch point and guarantor of care for all enrolled veterans. although enrollment in the va health care system is not mandatory and despite more than 75% of veterans having other forms of health care coverage more than 6.5 million of them choose to rely on their earned va benefits and are by and large satisfied with the care they receive. moving forward the lessons learned in the veterans choice program should be incorporated into a single systemwide non-va care program with veteran centric and clinically driven standards which afford veterans the opportunity to receive private sector health care if va is unable to meet the standards. more portly rva care must supplement the care that veterans receive from va medical facilities and not replace it. ideally va would have the capacity to provide access to

direct care for all the veterans it serves. we know however that va medical facilities continue to cooperate at 115% capacity and may never be able to build enough capacity to provide direct care to all the veterans it serves. va must continue to expand capacity based on staffing models for each health care specialty and patient density threshold however the va cannot rely on building new facilities alone. when thresholds are exceeded they must use agreements with other health care systems and affiliated hospitals when possible and purchase care when it must. mr. chairman this concludes my testimony. i am prepared to answer any questions you may have. >> mr. fontes at the beginning of your testimony is that va must immediately address and i couldn't find it in the printed testimony.

writing your first two or three sentences? >> my first statement was the change that was announced on how veterans elect to use the choice program. right now they are scheduled with the va does that appointment is beyond 30 days they keep that appointment and they call triwest or healthnet and explore what their options are in the private sector. that means they are making an informed decision when they decide to essentially reject the va -- if you change that to having a veteran make the election before exploring their private sector options is not an informed decision and actually leads to veterans if they go to the private sector having to go to the back of the line and restart their rescheduling process all over again. >> i want to make sure i

understand this. i'm a veteran that was more than 40 miles from the clinic so i'm eligible for veterans choice. you are saying i should make a private appointment through the midwest, what's the name? and make the va appointment and i can choose which one i want and not automatically go to the private provider? >> for 40 miles i believe they should continue to contact triwest however 30-day or sit va can't find an appointment within 30 days right now the va schedules that appointment. let's say it's 60 days from now but in talking to triwest for example for dermatology the average appointment is 60 to 90 days so now i am choosing for waiting six days in va to waiting 90 days in the private sector. i should know that the wait time in the private sector is 90 days before making that choice.

sloan if you will answer this question. if i'm a veteran in over 40 miles from the clinic i can automatically call triwest to make an appointment, right? >> over 40 miles yes sir you can. example he is citing is 30 days wait time and the proposed process we were talking before senator boozman mentioned about all of the administrative material for clinical information is being sent over. what we are trying to do is to streamline that part of the process. when this case said that veterans are not pleased with the appointments that process happens within a couple of days and they should build a come back to va to say i wasn't able to get a timely appointment for the tpa refers the authorization back. but it is a consequence of making a change rather than booking the appointment with va and referring to veteran over to the third-party administrator.

>> mr. chairman just to be clear there are two distinct processes processes, one for 30 days and one for 40-mile or so. i think one of the issues that the proposed changes is looking to address is now shows and cancellations. so when they veteran alex, when the veteran accepts an appointment in the private sector triwest or healthnet until the local facility this veteran has chosen choice cancel that appointment. however currently have va schedule or if va staff member has to go and manually cancel the appointments. this will prevent that however this will come at the cost of the veterans experience. >> that is what i was getting at because i was hearing their words a potential problem. >> there are better ways to address that issue. i feel a process could work but

just a more seamless way of triwest and healthnet notifying va that the veteran has accepted a private sector appointment. >> i want to open a hornet's nest but i'm going to go ahead and do it anyway. i had to pay $30 penalty for not keeping an appointment at glanna for health care was getting and i think you can't put everything on the shoulder of triwest or the va. if somebody doesn't do their job by letting va or tri-care to know which one they are going to keep i would be the first person to say there ought to be a penalty for not keeping that appointment that way the communication is complete. i know there will be some that don't like that idea but it gets everybody's attention. if we are going to be more efficient i think everyone has to be part of the efficiency including the veteran getting the benefits. i just wanted to put that in

there. not to start a hornet's nest but thank you for raising the question. it's very help pull. senator blumenthal. >> thanks mr. chairman. you know we have been talking a little bit about how to pay for the denver crossover. >> we just figured it out. >> the chairman has told me that we just figured it out. so this has been a more productive afternoon then you could have ever hoped. >> i apologize. >> i want to thank all of you for your thinking through these issues in such a construct of them positive way. i was taught as a trial lawyer never ask a question if you don't know what the answer is going to be but i want to ask an open-ended question. given that the choice program

and the choice and accountability act creates this fund of $15 billion my view is that the potential rate on this money and the effort to use it as a kind of slush fund to pay for cost overruns in aurora and orlando and new orleans and las vegas where in fact in total there in 2.50 yen dollars in cost overruns is a real threat to veterans health care. we can debate how much private care should be provided and how much it should be through va facilities but there is no question in my mind at least at va facilities are an essential part of the health care mix of

opportunities that we provide to our veteran. therefore to say we are going to defer projects and delay construction on those facilities all around the country to pay for cost overruns and those medical facilities under new construction is a very dangerous threat. so let me make that statement and throw it open to you for comment. >> we have gone on record to state his position that he opposes taking money from the choice program and using that funding to support other means i've heard a lot of interesting conversations today about exploring of options thinking

outside the box. so i think members of congress, the va need to do just that. they need to put their hats on and to think about what is best. how can we come to a resolution that was served veterans the best without taking money from a program that is early in its stage and utilizing that funding for other means and purposes. if that's an option that should be the last option after you have explored all of the other options. >> let me just chime in. i would agree with him in what you are saying is we do not want that money rated grade i worked at the va from 2001 to 2000 worked in dha for two years and every time there was a management failure there was no accountability.

it was just give me more money, give me more money. having been at the va i used to do an audit on the books. i would love to see an audit to see what is really there and what is not. >> veterans should not suffer because b.a. is unable to get -- the va must atone for its gross mismanagement. they should find cost savings in this program and other programs in any way can. ultimately congress does have an obligation to ensure va has the means to complete this project and additionally further delay and uncertainty will only lead to higher cost overruns. >> there is no easy answer and i believe the facilities are necessary and must be completed. where that money comes from is

another question that i think it was said it's about veterans and veterans need to be cared for. congress needs to find the money somewhere to continue these. it should never happen again. i think the va should get out of the business of building hospitals. >> we would agree with regard to the construction and more broadly and in all cost overruns of va provide a high-risk of not providing the highest quality care for veterans. that's the bottom line. i va supports the secretary's budget request. we also support his request for greater flexibility and assisted in the previous hearing in theory without greater flexibility it would allow him to move more money back into choice so we support his request for that. more broadly we believe choices an opportunity to better understand how veterans and where veterans want to receive health care that they deserve.

that frankly ties into what everyone is talking about which is a strategic plan for coordinated care and mr. chairman i think i was the phrase he used in a previous hearing and we have started to use that. ultimately we believe whether joy stays in its current form or fashion we think it's an opportunity to better understand the customer or members of the va can move forward with a strategic plan to provide the best service possible. >> i appreciate all of your answers which confirm my views and the chairman and i have stated those views and the chairman has dated and i have as well but we have alternative different options that we think absolutely have to be explored and we look forward to working with you on those options and also on the concept of a con ability which all of you have mentioned. you have heard me talk about it earlier which includes looking backward, holding people

accountable who in fact are responsible for this nightmarish debacle and also looking forward and i might mention mr. violante in your written testimony discuss the va's need to redesign its performance and in the accountability report you make reference to the department of homeland security's similar regiment known as planning programming budgeting and execution as a possible model. i am sure there are other models as well but to your point mr. rausch i have said that the va ought to be out of the business of construction. the corps of engineers or some other agency should take over this function. no disrespect to the va. it is not within their job description to manage these

mammoth multi-million dollar impact billion-dollar projects on which the future of va health care depends and when you and i go to build a house we don't ordinarily we are not our own contractors. maybe some of you are but we tried to get a little professional help and that may be in an exact analogy but for all the government agencies, not just the va there should be some professional center of management that maximizes resources, reduces costs, makes it energy-efficient decide what material should be incorporated so i think we have a lot to discuss going forward. i welcome your participation in i thank chairman for this

hearing. thank you all. >> thank you senator blumenthal and let me echo everything that richards and point out a couple of things. originally in our first hearing the va testified told us on the 40-mile world in terms of distance driven versus growth line that was going to expand the number of people out of bowl bull for va choice. it would cost more money. now that we have talked about the care you need and that definition which we are working on one of the estimates is that it will cost more money than we planned. we understand that to go from point a which was the disaster in phoenix that lead to other problems to where we want to go it's going to take time and it's going to take money and it's going to take ordination. which is where the coordination word comes from. there are savings and coordination want to accept a few principles. principle one is that it views the private sector well and veterans like it and some alternative to make the system markets not a substitute.

in certain cases it's an alternative venue or saving the va money and getting the private sector investment in getting better health care to the veteran. i'm willing to look at this in a macrosense. we just did a budget in the congress. a tenure balance budget in 10 years. b.a. has problems that will take 10 years to financially solve the deal have to begin at some point in time. hopefully as we work through this problem in denver and get resolution on who builds what and when they built the we can also look at them macrosense of how we find savings to pay for the changes we need to make it eventually will have a delivery system that's less costly but it will take us a while to get there. but that said i want to thank you all for being here and thank you for your service to american appreciate the time you have given us today. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> so this is really cultural tourism so when they would set up their villages along the way along the tamiami trail

sometimes only lean to's, the buses would stop this here was a tourist attraction. seminoles camping by the road and so when they came into the tourist attractions they were getting food and weekly allotment of food and they were also getting sometimes the rental of sewing machines that they would have rented let the people use them when they were in a tourist attraction. they also sometimes got fabric because it improved -- but who them to supply them with fabric so they were sitting there selling and making things for craft market. this is a little voice belted shirt from the 1920s. this was an experimental time for patchwork and you can see on the bottom this is not a design that is native today. the designs were bigger in the 20s and sometimes they were not used any longer than during a particular decade.

>> the thing about the devil's triangle is there all kinds of things that happen. a regular navigation training measure. they would take off from the base and they would go east towards the bahamas. there is an area and they would drop bombs on that it continue another 70 miles or so and make a turn north. the then they would make a turn back was towards fort lauderdale. they never came back. later at night after they were sure they were out of fuel they would send out big rescue planes looking for them. the next day they started a five-day search with hundreds of planes and ships and didn't find anything.

vlassic house majority leader kevin mccarthy talked about foreign policy and his views on american exceptionalism at the reagan library in simi valley california. he also compared the foreign policies of the carter and obama administrations. this is a half-hour. [applause] >> thank you very much. very kind. the. [applause] thank you. don't go too long. you haven't heard me yet and i want to thank john. that is probably one of the nicest introductions i've ever had. i have been a big admirer of john's because he has never lost what reagan taught him and he is willing to make sure the torture continues to be lit. to make sure the values of

reagan are taught in other places. when i walked into the green room i was shocked there is was a picture of myself up there. how did you get that already? i helped lead the 100th celebration where we went to london we went to prague, and we went to budapest and we went to pulled in. they wanted to honor reagan. they understood when reagan talks about the liberty. they saw first-hand the changes he brought to the world. i stood before then they put statues they are and i wondered who made sure those were their. john pay for some of those themselves why thank you john for the work you have done. [applause] i know she can't be with us tonight but i want to thank nancy reagan. ronald reagan was a tremendous man put together this energy those two had showed the rest of the world that values meant and what the bond two people can

have. and the opportunity to speak here. there are two other people in my life and bear with me here tonight. my wife judy. [applause] and my mom birds. [applause] we don't get to pick our mothers but if i could i would. mother's day is coming. sitting next to them is a dear colleague of mine stephen. [applause] is a freshman but is no freshman by any means. he has hit the ground running and making sure he is keeping the torch as well. i want to tell you about myself to i see friends in the room and some that i have not met before so why you understand who i am and where i come from. i come from vegas. it's where i was born and raised tonight can't get elected anywhere else.

you all know vegas -- i went to all public schools. i grew up in a family of -- but i was the first republican. of all the speeches i've given this is the one and makes me a little nervous because of the name on the podium. i am a child of ronald reagan. i come from the reagan revolution. he has had more effect on my life than he never really met me. you see when i went through school i applied myself but i didn't do as well as i should. i admired my parents. they knew that values and they worked hard. my mother worked jobs, my father worked too. he was a fireman and -- furniture.

we went to grocery store to cash his checks. we didn't go to the bank. when i got out of high school i couldn't get a scholarship. i went to my local junior college but i always had a summer job since i was 12 years old and i would save my money. i always wanted to invested. i met this guy when i was 18 who owned a liquor store. you can figure out how an 18-year-old meet someone like that but i talked him into bringing me to l.a. for the car auctions. i would go there and i would die and sell cars to pay my way through college. i found out later i don't think it's legal that i was an entrepreneur. and then one friday night after a few of my friends went to san diego state to visit someone in college. i went to the grocery store to cash a check. he was 1985 and the day before the lottery just started so i

thought i will buy a ticket and i won the lottery. true story, $5000. i took my folks to the nicest restaurant in town gave my brother and sister $100 and i took the majority of the rest and i bought one stock. i believe in taking risk and i believe in america. we did pretty well. it was the 80s of the end of the semester i told my folks i wasn't going back to school. i took my money out and refines and -- who refinanced my current car and i want went to buy a franchise. i soon found out no one wants to sell a franchise to a 19-year-old. so i open my own business. ..

>> >> for a few different reasons. think about what government had done. we have the virginia system -- veterans system that hid from the facts so people could not find out you had to fight to get the answers. the iris system goes after you based on philosophical beliefs when someone is caught they said the loser e-mail and are allowed to retire with no accountability. the government spends billions of dollars on a new health care system that cannot even build a web site.

it goes all the way down to the secret service. a man who does not even have both slaves working perfectly jumped the fence and then found out they did not lost the white house and the alarm did not go off and instead of fixing a date turned it off. someday off-duty caught him. when ebola hit america we did not trust the cdc we had to bring in the military. government is incompetent. we did not think about foreign policy. when was the last time as americans we watched other americans being held hostage? 1979 in iran? when was the last time u.s. ambassador was killed on foreign soil?

but the direct reflection of the respect other countries have for us is the fear of america. in 1979 in afghanistan with ambassadors stevens was in libya, when was the last time we watched the soviet union invaded another country and felt the response from the president was weak? we invaded afghanistan and we decided not to send our olympians from jimmy carter. what did they think then? great. no gold medals for them. today they invade you crave. no stopping with putin but he continues to push the envelope analyzed to though

world but there are russians on the ground. when jimmy carter was president he went to sign the assault -- the added salt treaty and now the president's aide talks to iran. the administration today that when we go round the world our friends don't trust us and enemies don't fear us. why? when jimmy carter was president the u.n. ambassador had to resign he privately met with the plo when we had told our best friend, is real, they would not. and they were caught. then save time i don't tell

you but talk about this if there was ever a time to embrace the reagan revolution is now. with my research to speak tonight i thought long and hard i want to read one passage. do not mistake me note reasonable man who sees the world as it is to use the deterioration of our economy and though waiting of a relationship with our allies and the suffering of our recent past to underestimate the difficulties before us. those are not my words. candidate ronald reagan on the eve of his election in 1980. ronald reagan spoke directly

to the people and bought all three networks that exact same speech could be spoken today. and to talk about the growth of government of the weakness of america when somebody else fills love for a into except the new normal. but he said there was the better way. i believe that same thing could be spoken today. my office inside washington i had never been in this room until after i was elected by did not know it existed.

one of abraham lincoln one of rollo reagan lincoln was black-and-white for when he served and reagan is all in color and smiling. i talked to my paintings. it may sound strange but i ask whether advice would you give us? i would watch with the administration tries to do into moving govern legislation but i think he would tell me a story. anytime anything would go wrong he would just be that's the old man having a heart attack. the 85 year-old married to his wife more than 50 years and has a heart attack. he wakes up in the hospital and says you have always

been there for me. when i first came home after i got married and i got fired you stayed with me per grey try to find another nobody would hire me and i joined the army and he joins underscore. when the men shot me with there to care for me. but when i created those three businesses and didn't bankruptcy you did not leave me for i had a heart attack that i would die and icu. now i'm beginning to thank you are bad luck. [laughter] if you look at the administration they blame us.

with that problem reps so when i talk to these two men on the wall what do they say? i think by far there the finest presidents we ever had. one was the first republican president in the timely served one term in the house staffs i believe god put him there for a purpose. the same thing i think about ronald reagan. key iran before but the time god put him in there is when we needed him to transform. so what advice? the first is the same to believe in the exceptionalism of this country and do not be shy. there is the reason why we are exceptional because we were created differently than any other country

before. lincoln would say that based on the "gettysburg address" do you ever read the words beyond fourscore in seven years ago? our forefathers brought forth on this continent a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. but if we failed government of the people by the people for the people shall not perish from earth. he didn't say france england to pick up the torch but we would make it. no other country was created that everyone is equal. ronald reagan knew this better. because he understood something very fundamental that america is more than a

country, an idea that the free people can govern themselves that government powers are derived from the consent of the governed and each and everyone of us are endowed by our creator within a beatable rights of life liberty in the pursuit of happiness. so if you ever ask why that pitcher of reagan is in color and smiling he was unhappy conservatives because you understood his policies brought greater freedom and liberty. if there is one bit if i say to give to anyone, be happy about our policy. we don't need to yell. we need to show. the second tidbits of advice , don't blame others for your problems.

linkedin would say that he was elected november 186033 states and the union. he was not sworn in until march 1861 in that short a matter of time seven states left the union. the technology today searched every word of lincoln he never blamed buchanan. he brought up the 11th commandment he never spoke ill of someone else he went to the same primaries and difficulties and lost the race for the presidency he brought his opponent george bush sent to be a vice president when he makes a speech on the eve of the election he had george bush

next to him. i think it is our responsibility. someone to run for president that's instill the value that reagan talked about. let's keep the 11th amendment and not speak ill of other republicans. the next vice i believe that reagan and lincoln knew best peace and freedom or a piece without freedom is meaningless. you cannot sacrifice one for the other. lincoln understood and could have ended the civil war a little early. he would have gotten peace but would he have freedom for all americans?

the "emancipation proclamation" but not the 13th amendment. would though war before not? reagan understood this better than any other president. on and then even of 1986 in iceland the whole world was watching. they thought the agreement would be signed with gorbachev he just wanted one thing. reagan understood that by freedom president reagan offered the technology to the russians as well. gorbachev said no thinking reagan would want peace more than freedom. he hinders stood you cannot have one or the other bed those.

history has shown they you have a better agreement in reagan understood he never went into a negotiation without the willingness to walk away if there is ever a time for the administration to look to reagan al is the time. to negotiate with iran to not just hope for peyser sign an agreement unless you get peace with freedom. [applause] the other question is reagan could negotiate with the soviet union but he was never afraid not to say who they were or what they did. he spoke citrus he made that

negotiations about human rights that's why they didn't want to negotiate with them. reagan talked about defeating the soviet union. his own staffs agree have to have a meeting we have to make a plan he believed in the common sense he lifted so they said we have to have this whole discussion we win they'll lose. everybody knew that. if you ask reagan today because the senate just voted and holding the president and jack -- in

check. [applause] if you ask reagin j. schiff she come to the current agreement he would use two words. hagel no. [laughter] -- held though the administration today has the same challenges as they did mr. mcartor those two presidents won the nobel peace prize. [laughter] but president reagan brought more freedom than most other presidents there is a quality of reagan that every elected official should understand and he did not care who got the credit if he cared he would have signed the agreement with gorbachev because the world was prepared to give him the

nobel peace prize this was never about himself. about a trait we should therefore as we move forward the other advice don't put off political decisions for future generations but the whole role is about ideas the first thing that best illustrates that slavery didn't start in the 1850's but stock with the creation love our country. the forefathers thought it was too divisive so they opted out and by making that decision they decided hundreds of thousands of grandchildren would have to die.

we have the same tough decision reagan got tax reform, the democrats when they controlled the house in this and that. reagan got social security reform to protect us from the next generation. how could he achieve this? he doesn't get the talking points:directly to the american public. he trusted us. he trusted our intelligence he didn't say government had to be so big to tell us what to think. talking about what america could be. tip o'neill is famous to say i have a 20 vote margin i will exceed any plan reagan has said he lent directly to the public and told a story

and watched the news reels to day and thousands called the switchboard and changed that opinion. he just trusted us. everyone who wants to run i will tell you one of the last ones and reagan would sum it up best that with the present crisis government is not the solution, government is the problem. but at the same time on the eve of the election ronald reagan said he didn't believe in no government of limited government. but he also believed the very best people ocean survey and the government. he put the team together

before he was elected. why? fin now what does regulation cost of business?

we love to talk about manufacturing today but less than 50 cost $35,000. how do you compete like that? hundreds of thousands of new pages of regulations. i was in napa county talking about the challenge of what government regulation can do. i believe and common sense. he said how can we fall so far behind? i said to you play a sport? let me give you an analogy. i asked him to pitcher america competing with every other country right after world war ii.

he goes to this when meet to jump in the water. we are so fast we drive off. the next year comes and we say that was not fair. some others have to rebuild more we should swing with though weight belt so at a higher tax so we jump back in the next year comes around we should have a little higher regulation. year after year 5410 then it comes to the obama administration with a new health care system. add another 25. no one says take the weight belts off. it is time we remove it to

compete with the rest of the world to compete with the rest of america. [applause] >> i will tell you i just brought together a task force of a lot of new members we would be to my office regularly and i want them to become the individual paul ryan. if we created the agency today would daybook the same? said kohl is make them efficient and effective and accountable why do we have so much duplication? why would we not modernize?

the v.a. system still uses paper when a first started the newspaper with the news from the radio. we should be able to change. we know it isn't an easy task that we will not give up. i'll is like to say when i give a speech you should be like liz taylor. she says there will lecky pilon. [laughter] tonight i talked about to a significant and that they were just that. just men that they had transformed this country and this world. there are certain things that you never forget they

are significant to me i remember the day i fell in love with my wife. the day i got married the birth of my two children children, the day i accepted christ in the day i became a republican. all in a different order. but i will tell you why i became a republican i watched jimmy carter put on a sweater and tell me i had to except something else in the best days were behind my country than ronald reagan said go to "the shining" city on the hill. i knew what he meant. that was america i knew what he meant by the light it was freedom and liberty and it went beyond california or main.

but they would protest in in europe and on the other side of the berlin wall they would celebrate it inspired shipyard workers those are the words that inspired me. don't you all believe that shining city on the hill is america and though we also agree? i love america. i will tell you this. eight years of this president has done damage but we can correct it but the task before us is to join together and god willing together we will do

it just as we did 1980 for the leadership under ronald reagan. god bless. [applause] but spanish she did say the portrait of washington this something that endeared her to the entire nation. >> but she was wearing were what she looked like that would help to sell papers she takes over a radio

station and just hours to run it. hollowed you do that? a spirit she exerted enormous influence. >> now a book published by publish affairs looking at the first life of every woman in history based on interviews from the first lady's series lured about ambition into the partnerships with allies of 45 iconic american women filled with lively stories who survived the scrutiny of the white house said a great personal cost. and eliminating an entertaining and inspiring read available as of hard cover or online bookseller or bookstore.

spero'' we just saw here was pretty shocking has there are limits to what can be accomplished with the american people try to audit the government. but of course, it doesn't mean russia should not work for bipartisan solutions that make sense for our country. it offers the perfect opportunity to do just that.

we believe strongly to lift of the middle-class to knock down unfair barriers that discriminates in the 21st century. on this issue the president to greece so we were given a good faith all year long to formulate a package that both parties could support the top republican senator hatch engaged in lots of good faith negotiations with committees of senator wyden. the and looking closely at colleagues over in the house. so difficult concessions had to be made.

many believed in agreement with never emerge. a strong bipartisan trade package is the oh when to secure economic growth to not give in to this special interest of countries like china for leadership from around the world. set to talk about the importance of the position of the pacific with the defense and foreign policy point of view and the former

defense secretaries so the rationale would allow the senate to debate the issue was overwhelming supported to really against the future. but today is no ordinary day. so when they said the hard left makes stuff up when the president said the bizarre arguments did not'' max stand the test of time in

scrutiny'' it is hard to argue with him. you don't make change through slogans as he reminded his adversaries or by ignoring reality is. that is something worth reflecting on. this doesn't have to be the end of the story. it has been a bipartisan issue cutting across the partisan divide. to have economic benefits for the constituents but what we just when this is the democratic senate showdown the opportunity to debate the top economic priority of the president of the united states.

i suspect some they park their vote rather than that outlandish rhetoric but certainly that is my hope that we have to be realistic. for instance the idea that any senator can make day guarantee that a bill would be enacted into law is impossible. i assure you have the different outcome that would force through through scheerer will alone. but what we can guarantee they will receive a fair shake on 21st century american trade agenda.

that is what happens when we get with tpa i could recommit my process to tpa and taa and others that they can agree to. a place where our country debate's end considers. but today we don't even consider a. for predetermined outcome is. for a when they proceeded to your data. with the precondition. the blocking the senate from

even having a debate of such an important issue is not the answer. senators to do so will stand a special interest against the american jobs knocking down more unfair trade barriers will he rethinks the choice. opening debates on this issue to be engaged with both sides to have the open and a process. there was a goddess through

so much already to get the bill to the floor is no small accomplishment to get as far as it has come given the various points of view and the chairman's deserve a lot of credit. before we have a chance to produce something important for the american people. so i hope that folks on the other side do present this debate will seriously consider the implications of this. other countries are taking a look at us. id here is the headline to

prevent the mechanism to have trade considered to even turn to the senate floor. that is not the kind of headline we want to send around the world that america cannot be depended upon or can deliver to those who are apprehensive about the chinese who thought it was in the lead time for commerce but security him so i move to reconsider for people to think this over to come together to go forward on a bipartisan basis for

the american people. >> the majority leader has one person to blame who are debating this important piece of legislation who is responsible for the robust amendments? we're in this situation rewritten today by a large bipartisan vote the majority leader decided on his own the others would figure out some other way as republican leaders said this morning

then restart given the process after those two bills. and of course, is a logical why should we have to do to? it does not make sense. now the republican leader is very aware. during the last four years the republican a cynical approach to government is everything that we try to do. but we are willing to work with legislation. but we think the bill is what put out of the finance committee. that is the fair thing to do. so we just ask for a pass

for a realistic path. if we are stuck here it is too bad. i'm always available to speak with him. to figure a way forward on this legislation. over the last week as saying all that came out should have the robust demand reprocess on those bills. >> mr. president. obviously the most sensitive political issue surrounding this is the currency issue and to make sure woody has a clear understanding of where

we are. by explicitly did not offer that amendment to the tpa bill. we were told that it would not be a part and if it were we knew it would kill it. ; not to use currency to kill the tpa bill but to get currency past that is why reoffered it to the customer is billed that nobody disputed community blood dash committee to get a vote separately on the floor then it comes to the floor like the other bills so currency is the committee dealing on the customs bill and not tpa.

but we need to be clear the currency issue to deal with currency on the customer's bill. so everybody would understand the significance of that issue spirit that is exactly what senator schumer said in committee. it is not clear from my notes that he said it but that is exactly it '' and i did not offer the currency amendment to the tpa bill we were told it would not be part it might kill it. my goal is not to use currency to kill the tpa

bill and not to kill a but to get currency passed. further, that is my offered it to the customs bill with the view that nobody disputed in committee we get a vote separately on the customs bill on the floor it would come into the floor like the other bills that is senator schumer in committee. >> mr. president? he has been involved in the currency issue ever since the time he came to the senate. he needs to speak for himself. i am not an expert on the bill. people know how i feel about the legislation in generally but from an the best way to move forward is the best way to come up with a program in the same time so we should

take a deep breath to without disparaging either side think the vote was important as the republican leader can understand i think we would be better off to have a say what goes on we believe that eliot for tier continue the process to move forward says bela for word right now but the process is not looking very good. >> will you yield for unanimous consent request?

>> i ask unanimous consent of the ranking member is recognized to speak with the chairman of the senate finance committee derecognize to speak. >> the majority leader has entered a motion and to reconsider the trade legislation and i want to be clear to the majority leader and all colleagues but i am very interested in working with the majority leader and colleagues on the other side of the ideal to have a bipartisan path at the earliest possible time. 14 pro trade democrats met

and i assure all the senators here that these are senators who are committed committed, strongly committed to insure that this bill passes. so with respect to another brief description oh the hard work that the majority leader describes in connection with the legislation with the trade promotion act with the enforcement to help the displaced workers then preferences for the developing country.

salon of finance committee to tackle the issue is. the trade promotion and authority help to rip the secrecy of a trade policy. so second is the support sister from american workers that is known as assistance. so to put the trade enforcement policy into high gear indenture renew those trade programs that our crucial to american manufacturers. together they form a legislative package that throws out the 1990 nafta playbook on trade with those

policies that have high-wage jobs that opportunity is lost if it is whittled down at two. mr. president in particular in my view is legislative malpractice in the calculation here is simple the finance committee gave the bipartisan trade enforcement bill to protect american jobs to protest experts that i believe every member of this body supports it closes a shameful loophole to allow for products made with forstmann child labor to be made in

our country. it is 2015 there is an obsolete and no room for a loophole that allows slavery in american trade policy is the decision is made to drop the bipartisan legislation than that would live on. and the senator who goes home to speak as i do about the virtues of job-creating trade policies has a special obligation to insure the trade enforcement is tough and effective and builds on american values that is what the enforcement bill is all about without proper enforcement no trade deal could ever live up to the hype it needs to get to the

president's desk. now some elements were present priorities that have traditionally belong to two republicans. other elements are traditionally democratic but taken as a whole both sides support strunc strongly with the a understanding that the component parts you cannot make this stand-up with just to lay eggs. the senate should not begin debate until there is a clear path for word for each of these four bills in the use it specifically to talk with colleagues. we will work together in a bipartisan fashion in and to be grateful to him that is

the way he tried to carry out his responsibility when i was chairman. we will work together but to find a clear path for word for each of these four bills i urge my colleagues to continue down the finance committee bipartisan route to find a path that lose all of these for word and i want to reiterate the majority leader having entered into a motion to have the trade bill reconsidered by want to express to my colleagues i am interested to work closely with both of them to find bipartisan to get back to this legislation soon as

fast as possible. >> asset the finance committee be recognized. >> i thank my colleague for his kindness but i am very disappointed. everybody new that senator schumer accommodated us, ranking member and myself to put the language to specifically say i did not offer the amendment with the tpa bill we were told it would not be a part of tpa it might kill lipper bill my

goal is to not use currency for the tpa bill. but nobody disputed bits in committee on the floor, with that it is just like the others in then that way we longfellow all together purpose of that we agreed to do that because there was concern on the democrat side that we could see if taa now which is ridiculous because we know tpa cannot pass a list to give the unions what they want with taa so we are

willing to do that. so we put it together. it was completely understood. the next two bills are voted separately. and senator schuman new and it would give the house a bad stomachache because it could not put that through. i even agree to me could have hearings later because we would have a marked up because there is a lot of people who would like to see something done on currency but not to destroy the tpa bill or all of the negotiations this administration has been

conducted with dpp of 11 nations to including japan and it should not be that difficult to get to the table because they had great concerns with they were willing to come to the table 50%, of between 40 and 60 percent of all trade. >> rand but we can over the foreign policy agreements.

but the first time i heard that was yesterday. i was flabbergasted. to have the colleagues voted is cloture on the bill? more than any other bill. after i talk to all then it is astounding to me mr. president perot will take a moment to talk about what transpired here this afternoon because the warrants further discussion. as i said we tried to do something good for the american people to events our nation's trade agenda to provide good jobs for american workers that we should have if we get it through both houses of congress to do that we

cannot have killer amendments that everybody knows will kill it. people disagree with how we intended to get there but sadly these colleagues who have voiced been against tpa are willing to have the discussion about their disagreements and i have to say all of them on the obverse side today instead they voted to prevent any such vote from taking place. no debate or amendments also only willing to abide by the agreement of senator schumer with the customs bill. that was an agreement in a compliment the senator because he knew it would

kill tpa. needless to say i am disappointed by this outcome talking about trade policy but the bill receiving the most attention was the tpa bill which is bipartisan. i nature so we can work together and come together and feel good in the past. >> so i compliment the distinguished member to work hard civic and trade policy at large which is but not to

mention in the president of the united states under his administration and. coming at of the senate finance committee 20 / 67 democrats voting to report the bill which was president obama is stopped -- top legislative priority had a wave of clinton headed to the floor by yet today the mere thought of even debating the bill was too much to bear. nothing changed mr. president it is the same bill we reported on in committee. you can remember that happy times hall finally it would feel good to get it out of committee. this is the same bill we

have been talking about for months. deleting that is different is the strategy employed by the opposition. the tpa bill wasn't the only bill we also reported a bill to reauthorize trade some trade preference programs and the customs and enforcement bill. so to begin the debate on trade policy we heard references from colleagues on the other side to hear statements from those who were supportive of tpa that all four bills would be debated and passed at the same time.

but was problematic because but as a number of problems letted in this bipartisan efforts we made to give there. >> i think the we knew about your situation and we had people on the committee that were totally opposed i made sure they had a right to renew their voices. i don't agree but i respect them i cannot even agree how they reach the position is that they do but they have a right to do that and we protected the right.

that is why the ranking member of the finance committee agreed the market up to move the trade bill separately because if three of the four but want to be clear because apparently there has been some confusion on this point. there is never a plan to move all of these bills together as part of tpa. but they would have to move on parallel tracks but then only is a commitment. >> seven nacreous of.

>> to be fair some of the democrats for not insisting they be part of this aid package but there will all be in to lot. i do not even know how to comment. it is simply absurd to think the senate leader can guarantee in the bill will

become law even before the debate begins. yet those are the demands we faced over the last few days and even though there were obviously impossible it was a good thing to those who do not work in the head did not originate in the finance committee. pressed to become directly for the leadership. >> marathon -- where the initiative could we have

been talking about pet bed is injurious to seventh in the oven but that work of his continued even after i

took share of preferred even if they are off but even after the new demand came of pledges in and debris civil and wrote the we have had to root but to go for for a

path for were but until then the president will have to rate - - wait like a factures farmers and ranchers in those suits desperately need water in the international playing field in order to compete. seen agriculture and manufacturing so in particular the overwhelming economic influence the militia back at today's events wondering why we could not get our act together. why couldn't we? i certainly hope that doesn't happen. >> these other nations take advantage without getting our act together.

perhaps being a little dramatic i have no doubt some will regret what goes on today in one way or another. i have regrets per grey have done all i can to get them across the finish line and will continue to do everything it can in the future. unfortunately after today's is unclear how many colleagues on the other side are willing to do the same. i believe there are honest good people who want to make up for what happened today and.

>> but touche looked at international trade lake but mr. president i yield the floor. >> i heard it said that and to help u.s. economy to have the benefit of all marriages. the filibuster that but the

true says that is what we're here for if we agree on the principle. we don't agree just to agree but sometimes it is easier to say i disagree with the president. but this is one area where the president is absolutely correct. we are here but 80 percent of the purchasing power in

the world lies beyond the borders of the united states. why and the world would and we to the things that we grow, ranchers and the of with the right to work with anybody including the president to get our economy

growing again in doping rates but it benefits the entire country including hard-working families. the irony is last week the senate voted on the of the will to this -- so far it has been vague it is important we a understand which one is in it. refitted janet did i have

bipartisan support here in the chamber and it isn't something just over the next 22 months in an and by a large margin i will say it again supported by the administration but it wasn't

good enough and wanted to renegotiate the deal. but from my perspective there are two types of folks in the camper across the aisle. those who would invite.

>> yes. so what they do is throw up barriers with the attempt to renegotiate two-step this -- with this obstructionism we saw this with the anti-trafficking legislation as well with afterpiece past at of the senate judiciary committee unanimously come to the floor then someone woke up to say we did not read the bill now we object. this will give congress the opportunity to examine any upcoming deal the president tries to cut to make sure the they are non.

>> we have no guarantee without this provision. trade promotional authority promotes greater transparency with the negotiation process. some understandably a complaint. >> but to the rest assured

they are getting a good deal. the filibuster that was here that congress could get to the actual implementation of the deal. >> as we heard from secretary carter at lunch for career this important

with our trading partners because there is a strange but simple phenomenon but if they do business and talk to one another. from a national security perspective we need to make the rules and that we don't default to china which they are happy to do oh first time and to stick care of but not even a 95 percent of our customers live outside

of the united states. this legislation welcome that -- small businesses to the markets around the world to help our economy his the

you -- the u.s. is a leading exporter firs said renters who could benefit tremendously from this dead-end texas to come up with a brief economy too

fast for remark like asia. but what we also know is as i suggested to earlier but

to really out into the open to let all americans examine it that we are the representative to ask the hard questions why is this and the best interest of the american farmer and rancher and manufacturer? we know dpp along the big asian trade agreement makes up about 40 percent of the world economy with the tpp. i did it i was a little disappointed that the democrats with the exception of one senator would block this piece of legislation. there is so much purchasing power located beyond our borders on a bipartisan basis we would all support to open access to consumers

and markets and manufacturers that should be a top priority. so our colleagues across the aisle unfortunately did not see our businesses and the economy as they're main priority. i hope that after today's failure of this legislation we will engage in serious negotiations but i agree with the majority leader that the american people gave united states senate new management on november 4th. they were dissatisfied in previous years because all they saw was dysfunction but now all they are starting to function again with the important pieces of legislation like the first budget since 2009. is a great deal to do

something good. so i hope after rekeying the mistake of blocking this legislation our colleagues colleagues, was the pro growth democrats will see fit to work with us to move this legislation forward. >> mr. president there appreciate the leadership of the senator on this because if you leave out certain bills that help workers the what you are left with the essentially is a package that ignores their needs.

i do want to say that i hope we will not proceed to this debate on the free trade agreement as someone who comes from california rive voted for half of the trade agreements and have voted against half of them i think a a fair voice. talk about the economics of today it is this. the middle class's having a very hard time in america today. but a new university of california poll said how the middle class is being hollowed out to with the dynamic work force and they're doing very well that the study found 12 percent

of california workers has seen a decline by 12 percent since 1979. think about that this is a great country we always say we have to be optimistic about tomorrow if you do everything right and play by the rules then the income goes down by 12 percent there is something wrong. to say to do more for the and though class but instead what do we turn to? that threatens the middle-class. what should we be doing?

about how to push a trade bill we should pass a highway bill. it is critical with businesses that thrive in all of our communities of over 60,000 are structurally deficient more than 50% of loans are not and good condition even though the highway bill expires in no more money they are bringing forward a bill that is a threat to the middle-class. maybe it needs to be raised for the minimum age. this states do with bill let's keep people working

full time in poverty. so instead of how to push a trade bill we ought to be raising the minimum wage. we should make college more affordable. to have social security that still pay off student loans. that is a shame upon america. . . about how to bring a trade bill to this floor why don't we fix the student loan problem? why don't we raise the minimum wage? why don't we pass a highway bill that is funded to help middle-class people? it's all a matter of perspective, my friends. we still haven't done equal pay for equal work, so women are not making what they should. and that hurts our women when they retire. they've lost more than