you? nice to see you. in real life.

>> we just got back. we were in ames earlier today enduring the family leaders event. it went well. big crowd. you were there? [inaudible] >> well, it's my opportunity to

talk to you today. the county chair puts me here. he asked me to stand in for him. welcome. i'm going to call on hester kim crummer from the monroe united methodist church for an opening prayer. -- pastor. >> i asked god if i could write my hartnell in this piece of paper so i can pray for all those who live in this great nation. so let us pray. mighty god we thank you for your presence here today. we thank you for your wisdom and love that god is great nation. we thank you for those observed in our military to shore our liberty and freedom that allows

us to meet this day for the good of our country. our hearts are heavy this day for the unnecessary deaths of our marines within our borders. we reach out to the families of these brave men who selflessly served our country, and ask that you hold them with your love. sometimes we forget how fortunate we are to live in a country where we have the freedom to openly congregate and share our thoughts and and opinions. lord astor many of us feel our nation may be headed down a path of danger and immorality where our constitution is not being adhered to in a way that is always guided this great nation in the right direction. with the threats of terrorism and violence and tyranny and unrest within our borders, we need you even more. god, help us to follow your laws come and give us the assurance that you're you are always in control. we gather here today with governor huckabee as he makes a bid to become our next president

of united states of america. may just be a time where we express and share our th

>> and it was just inch by inch little by little we kept building a group of people that are willing to support me and when we won the iowa caucuses in 2008, we ended up having the largest number of caucus voters for me than had ever voted for a presidential candidate on the republican ticket in in the history of the iowa caucuses. the good news is, that's a wonderful milestone, but it does not mean that i think for one minute that i can just show up a time or two in iowa and sight well, you voted for me before, i expect you to do it again. i am grateful for the people who voted for me before. what i have no expectation there's obligation people do it again. i feel i've got to earn it just like i did the last time. i hope i can do that. because i really believe that i

have the right skills to lead this country. if i didn't think that, believe me, i would not have left the wonderfully pleasant job that i've had for the past six and half years. over the past quarter of a century i have been a candidate for office and i can say to you that's pretty hard work. well, we get music. that's actually coming from another room. it's not even in here. is that what your trying to do? between the speakers next door. so let me pick back up here. running for office is really hard work. then i got elected. first lieutenant governor, then governor. that's even harder work. it's a challenge. especially when you govern in a state like arkansas where it was the most partisan state in the country. and i know that may be a surprise to you that arkansas

was more partisan. we had a more lopsided political structure then massachusetts did, vermont, maine, oregon, california come in the state. most in the country. been serving as lieutenant governor for three years governor for 10 and a half years, i could tell you that was hard work last six and a half years i've hosted a talk show on television. iodine radio talk both commentary and every talk show. i travel around making speeches. i'll be honest with you. talking about the people who are candidates and officeholders that's the easiest job i've ever had in my life. and get a better money than anything i've ever done. i got and used when some reporters wrote that huckabee as a serious about running for president. is just trying to build profiles we can get a tv show, sell some books and make some speeches. and i'm thinking what idiot wrote that?

i had a television show. i've written 12 books but it more speeches than i could accept. if that's what i want away from and left to come back and run for president, the only reason i would do that is because i truly believe our country is in real trouble. something i have i did not eight years ago five grandkids. by the way, all five of them are for and under. one of them is less than four weeks old. the fifth one, a little boy, george. and the oldest one just turned four on the second of this month. so imagine how bad things are when they all get together. one of the reasons i'm running for president, because my grandkids. either a money because i really want to say this nation for them, or i'm running because that way i don't have to hear how loud they can be when they are altogether. i think all of you know the

reason that anybody would do this has to be for something other than ego. i've been in politics too long to let the to be the reason for which i would run a campaign because quite frankly the glory of being a political candidate that disappears in about 15 minutes. and then it just is hard work. nothing is better for one's ego than just to be on tv. nobody hate you. people love you. you run for office and people hate you. that's your own family, not to even think of the other people out there. now let me say very honestly i'm very blessed. my wife was a little upset with me for not running for years ago. nobody is a stronger supporter and a more committed participant in this process then she is. and, frankly, i wouldn't be doing it if i did not have her wholehearted support, and that of my family. this is hard to do when your family is with you. i find it impossible to do if

your family is not with you. and, frankly, they divided them something that none of us can afford to have. but we have a divided country. is a very divided country. we are seeing the effects of the. we're seeing the effects of economically. i'm in a town where once many people go to work everyday to make that plant in new and i'll. people knew that was here in newton iowa. i did live there. i lived in arkansas and i knew you had a maytag plant i remember when willful but maytag because there was a big whirlpool plant in my state of arkansas. i remember when this plant close to i remember when the fort smith whirlpool plant close. i remember when the arkansas maytag plant close. we lost all those jobs. every one of them. all went away to mexico. a lot of people but you know, perhaps some of you for all i know, may have once worked there and lost jobs.

i'm tired of seeing america lose jobs. i'm tired of seeing americans work year after year after year really hard at something only to find one day they walk in and they are told the job is gone. the president has been telling everybody economy is in recovery. i don't talk to a lot of people in places like this where people say yes, the economy is just doing swimmingly well. people to me quite the opposite the economy is not recovering for many working americans. if anything it struggles because when people have a good job a few years ago that the benefits and even a pension and today a working two and three part-time jobs, no pension, no benefits at all. a couple of weeks ago i was in aiken, ma south carolina. we're spending a day there and we were staying at the fairfield inn in aiken south carolina. nice little hotel, budget place free internet and free breakfast. we are cheap.

we have to be. i got down to when it opened up for breakfast at six and i was really went down there except that i work at the fairfield inn, taking care of the tables for people coming down to have breakfast. because i was bill went down that we struck up a conversation, after visiting. his name is mark, he's in his 50s, maybe just a few years younger than me and his low '80s 82 83. [laughter] just seeing if you're listening. we got to talking and until three years ago he was one of 300 people that worked in manufacturing plant in aiken south carolina. one day they closed the whole plant, all 300 lost their job. he was a college educated as an account for the company. but the manufacturing facility closed down so his accounting job went away with it. this man who had a good degree good job worked there for 20 something years, now found he had no job and he was working

three part-time jobs, one of which was to get up at 5 a.m. and go down to the fairfield inn and serve breakfast to people like me were staying at the hotel. he finished that inyo county to more jobs. entity that because his house is almost -- and he did it because his house is almost paid off him he can't afford to move anywhere. can't find another job anywhere. that is the america i see happening all around us. it's the america we need to fix. we also need to fix an america where people are in danger not just the to go to the movies but they are also in danger to stand outside and army reserve recruiting station or a marine recruiting station or a marine and naval wrestler reserve unit. that happened in my home state of arkansas. a young man by the name of anti-long standing out in front of the army recruiting station june 1, 2009. he was assigned there after

having gone through his attorney, having been in combat. ease standing outside as the recruiter at a young radicalized islamic jihadists from memphis who grew up a baptist in a nice neighborhood by the name of what was carlos bledsoe became abdul hakim mohammed went to yemen, got radicalized them came back. his father called in the fbi is that i think my son is into something very bad. the fbi didn't take it seriously enough. and hit several attempts to do some horrible things. he was pretty bad at being a care. his attempts failed. what of the things he wanted he was blow up times square. that didn't work. he never got caught in these earlier against the one day he drove over from memphis about a two and half hour drive to little rock took a long rifle, held outside his car and fired shots that killed transix and

very severely wounded another u.s. army soldier. stand in front of the army recruiting station in a strip shopping center in little rock, arkansas. when this happened the other day, this year, went on this rent it and shut up the front of the recruiting station in a strip shopping center, my first reaction was my gosh, i seen this movie before. and it doesn't end well. and one of the things that was most distressing was that these are the most trained capable people we have to handle weapons but when they of duty like that we make them put their weapons aside, and they were sitting ducks for the terrorist. day one when i'm president, decided a defense will be notified that military members will be free to carry the weapons for which they are trained. we are not going to disarm our soldiers it is a marine airmen and coast guardsmen, and have them walking around vulnerable

sitting ducks so that savages in the name of islamic jihad will murder them in cold blood on the streets of america. that must stop and it must stop now. people ask me sometimes what do i think is the most important thing we've got to fix in america, is it the economy? or is it national security? i tell people that's like asking which went on the airplane is the most important, the one on the left or the one on the right? when i thought i want both wings to be attached to the fuchsia lodge. a plane flies better but this one of the things the plane needs other than just those two wings. backplane needs a steering mechanism. it needs to have flaps and

we don't have a string mechanism and this country still crashes. i'm running for president because i believe with all my heart that it's not just about saying we must get the economy back in shape. yes, we do and it's why i support that the fair tax which would in all the attacks on our work in savings and investment. we pay tax to the point of consumption and we have seen jobs come back to this country and capital comeback and people able to manufacture and make things again. but it's also about protecting america,, protecting americans americans with half of the season protections in your on our own soil so the women working in oklahoma city don't have their heads cut off by terrorist at work, for heaven's sake.

that is dependent upon a president who understands how to lead with moral clarity. and understand that we can't be a great nation. it's just not possible if we try to separate ourselves from being a good country, a country that is on its knees before an almighty providential god without whose help we would not be a country. i believe with all my heart this country has no way of existing apart from the explanation that god's providence was, in fact involved in how we got here. i don't think this country is done. if i did i would just gather my grandchildren together huddle up, go to disney held at the best lives we could for the next two years until it all fell apart. i think it's worth the fight. america has been really, really good to me. probably like it has too many of

you. i grew up dirt poor in south arkansas, the son of a man who never finished high school his dad never finished high school and his dad never finish high school before him. and the first male in my entire family lineage to ever graduate from high school much less go to college. my family has a long history of just poverty. my dad used to tell me son don't look very far up the family tree. there's some stuff up there you don't need to see. of course, that made me curious and looked up and realized the old man is why there's some stuff up there nobody ought to be seeing. but i'm blessed because i was born in the united states of america i didn't have to stop where i started. and the opportunities that were afforded to me because i lived in this country meant that i wanted to become the 44th governor of my state even though my dad at age eight would've never believed that he told me when i was an eight year old kid, son governor of the stable company and dedicate a late.

he's going to make a talk. i'm going to take you down there to the governor make this talk because you may live your whole life and you may never need a governor in person. my dad could not conceive that i would ever have the chance to meet the governor again, much less become one. why would he think that? except that we live in america where that's possible. i want that kind of opportunity for my grandkids but i want for your grandkids too and for your kids. and if we continue on the path we are on that's not going to be the case. that's why i'm convinced we've got to get our shoulder to the wheel, we've got to get this country back on track and we need to make us of our kids and grandkids love kind of america that we grew up taking for granted. that's what i'm running for president. i need your support in in the caucasus and it will provide you

something, you've been to the caucasus before i'm pretty sure here in iowa and i'm asking you to do something that's not easy. i'm going to ask you to get out of their comfortable homes on a cold wintry february evening with snow all over the ground chances are it will be snowing that night as did get a new car and drive across newton to get to your location where you would caucusing incentive for two or three hours in front of your neighbors and coworkers invokes the go to church with and stand up and say mike huckabee for president. and persuade your neighbors to vote for me when you're there. and if you were willing to help do that gosh, we need you. and we need you to multiply with your friends relatives the people you work with and your neighbors. if for some reason, and i cannot imagine why that if for some reason you think you might vote for someone else in the caucasus, then i tell you it's going to be cold that night. [laughter] you need to stay home where it's

warm, put your feet up, pop some popcorn, watching on tv and say boy, i should have gone down there. but for heaven's sake, if you're going to vote for somebody else don't show up at night. [laughter] i want to take your questions. who has one? >> what is your stance on immigration and sanctuary cities speak as we should have sanctuary cities because that's basically one form of government aiding and abetting in the breaking of law in front of another area of government. and we've seen the disastrous impact of that in san francisco. we have seen elsewhere but this was so vivid to see that young precious 32 year old girl gunned down in cold blood in front of her father. it hit me hard because my own daughter, the one who just delivered my fifth grandchild and her third, she's 32. and i tell you that got close to home.

and we can't fix the immigration problem without having control of our borders. i pledge will control our border and we will secure it within the first year of my presence. if that sounds a little bold, although operations, we built a 70 can70, welcome we built a 1700-mile road, 73 years ago between redish colombia and alaska. keep in mind that's pretty tough weather conditions in which to do any construction work and we did it with the technology and internet skills that we had 73 years ago but we did it in less than a year. i hear people say there's just a way to secure the border. yes, there is. if you have a president who decides it's a priority to get it done. and if we can build 1700 miles of road 73 years ago in winter in british columbia and alaska we can secure the border. and we will. but we can't fix anything wrong with immigration until then.

that's first and foremost job one. [inaudible] >> what are you willing to do to protect israel from the inevitable? iran wants to blow them off the map and here we are you know helping iran out. >> i have read all pages on the uranium deal. i was really, really disgusted when i heard it was a deal and i thought maybe if i read this i will find some comfort. i didn't. i found more outrage. this was a colossal disaster of epic proportions. you mentioned israel. i first went there in 1973 42 years ago this month july 1973 my first triggered i've been there dozens of times. three times last you. i've been there once this year. i'm going back next month.

i know the people of visual very well. i know the country. in 42 years i've watched this nation and here's what i've seen. i've seen the prophecy of ezekiel, true. the dry bones have come to life. i've seen the desert bloom with my own eyes. i've watched the sleepy tiny little struggling economy of the country, life and become one of the powerhouses of the world into economy and in high technology and medical advancement. like america the only way you can describe what issue is about, it's god's intervention. i shudder to think what we have done with this iranian deal. because what we did, we in essence empowered and emboldened terrorists are not a government terrorists could use of the people who 36 years ago took over that country and held americans hostage for 444 days. these are the people that never kept a single deal they have ever made. is other people who have kidnapped americans, murdered

americans, consistently over the past 36 years. these are the people that sponsored hezbollah and hamas, who paid for the very rockets were fired into israel last year from gaza. i was there last august when the rockets were being fired i was at the southernmost airbase were all those their missions were launched when the end israelis would have put into gaza and saw a spectacular care that they took to try to keep from having civilian deaths. but i also saw the videos where hamas would move civilians including children, in front of with the new were the targets. that's who we are dealing with. the iranian government can't be trusted, even while we were in the midst of negotiating the president rouhani was screaming death to america and vowing to wipe israel off the face of the map. but i would remind america, this is not just about israel. iran has repeatedly said israel is the little satan.

america is the great satan. they didn't chant death to issue. they chanted death to america. israel is not their primary target. is the warm-up act. we are the target, then why would we help loaded gun that is pointed to our own head? only an idiot would do that. and what we did was nothing short of idiotic. we ought to reverse it. we are to be imposed the sanctions. we have to bankrupt iran. we are to utilize our own forms of energy to bankrupt what their capacity is because the only way that money is a develop an export energy. ..

we would take the markets from russia, the saudis and iran, and in so doing we'd be the supplier to europe, africa, and asia. when we do that, we not only transform our economy and bring the jobs, what we also do is we reset the whole balance of world power and we take the power of putin away to invite crimea and ukraine, take the power of the iranians away to finance terrorism, and take the power of the saudisway to train terrorists to fly planes into our buildings on 9/11.

this is how he should change our policies for sure. somebody else. >> health care. i think a lot of people agree that obamacare should be. >> eliminated. >> but i think a lot of people also agree that healthcare system in the state is broken. a lot of people aren't able to afford it. >> the real problem with what obamacare did was it didn't address the real problem. the problem in america is not a health care crisis. think about this. we have the best health care in the world. ever know anyone in your family or you you had a does from the doctor he said, you have cancer. did anyone say get me to havana cuba, because that's where i need to be for the best healthcare in the world. ever hear that.

>> guest: never. ever hear anyone say i neat to get to shanghai? no. i want to get to mayor or m.d. anderson or the clinic in new orleans. there are a lot of places. but it's in america because the best health care is here. what we have is not a healthcare crisis. what we have is a health crisis. let me describe that. 80% of all the money we spend on healthcare in america is spent treating chronic disease. which means that what we have is we have a very sick population and it's very expensive. what we should be doing in the healthcare system, instead o just saying putting more money to treat people who have illnesses at the catastrophic level, it's let's put the money to prevent the illnesses from ever happening and to cure the ones that are curable. what would happen if a president named huckabee said we're going to find a cure to cancer, diabetes heart disease and alzheimer's. the four biggest economic

drivers of disease in the country, and here's what we decided. just like we eradicated polio in the '50s and i was there. and i'm old enough to remember this 60 years ago. and i remember lining up at the courthouse lawn on a sunday afternoon and betting my polio vaccine. i never got polio because of that. kids two years older than me had polio and had to wear braces on the legs. i never did. we didn't spend money on polio. why? because we beat it. what if we did the same thing to heart disease diabetes, cancer and alzheimer's? do you realize the hundreds of billion's dollars maybe trillions we would save, because cancer dream is over hundred billion a year. heart disease, 313 bill a year. diabetes nearly half a trillion dollars a year. alzheimer's will be $1.1 trillion in cost biz the year 2050. we transform not just the

economy but think about the impact on your life and that of your family. when we find cures to these diseases that right now scare the daylights out of us. most of us have gone through one or more of those diseases in our immediate family. and we know, we know how devastating it is. all four of those have touched my family, either my father, my mother, my wife my mother-in-law. touched my family, and it's touched yours. if we put our focus on cures and prevention rather than intervention, then we bring the real cost of health care down so that those folks who have medical conditions, for which they can't afford, they can be covered. and should be. but obamacare has done exactly the opposite of what it promised. it said, what? if you like your doctor, you can keep him. you like your health insurance you can keep it. and it's going to cost you

$2,500 per family less every year. i'm waiting on somebody to say kept my doctor, my health insurance, and cheaper. what i'm hearing is the opposite. i lost my doctor, don't have my health insurance i used to have. i have something now i can't afford don't want, don't need. and the bottom line of all of it is it's costing me more, thousands more. business owners are now making decisions not to grow their business but to shrink their business. this is the fir time in american history a business owner is trying to figure out how to keep his employee us are in 50 and the hours each employee works under 30 because he can't afford to grow his business. he is having to shrink his business. that's not how we make america a great country and grow jobs? we make it by saying, grow, make it better, serve more customers not but back to the point that you can keep shrinking because you can't afford the government

mandates on top of you. and as president, that's exactly what i would absolutely get done. the quickest way to do that, by the way job-wise, is the fair tax, quickest way health care-wise is to focus on prevention rather than intervention. it makes a huge difference. thank you chris. i think i need that. i hope that's just water. i'll be talking funny soon. that's just water. you have to trust me on this. it really is. let me take a couple more questions. you may have places to go and things to do. anyone else? yes, ma'am. >> i heard that donald trump made some comments today about john mccain, and he was a war hero but he didn't like people who had been captured.

he what at the family leadership thing. do you have anything to say about that? >> unfortunately he did say that something to the effect that he likes -- he was being disparaging toward mccain and then said that he wasn't a hero because he got captured. and that he people that got captured were the losers. i fine that offensive. disgusting and i'll be honest with you. john mccain was my political opponent eight years ago. i'm happy to say i beat him in this state there you go. but ultimately he beat me and i came in second to john mccain in the republican primary but i was never personally bitter about that. that's how politics works. you work hard, try to win you lose you shake hand with the guy that won. within all over the country and campaigned for mccain because he was our nominee and i was committed to helping the republican. one thing i'll tell you about john mccain. i have so many disagreements with many of his positions or

votes in the senate, but i will never, ever, ever question that man's sacrifice and service to this great nation of ours, for six yours he was a prisoner of war and was tortured, mercilessly by the north vietnamese brutally tier toured. i read the account of mccain's incarceration and torture and it is just stunning. i don't think most of us are made of the stuff that he is made of, to take that kind of torture, as he did over and over for six solid years. and he did something that very, very few people can claim. through all of that, he returned with honor. he returned with honor. and i don't care if he were the most liberal democrat in the world, i would say he earned my respect. i can disagree with a person politically, but i will never ever disrespect the service he

put forth every veteran put forth. i want to be clear with you. i get to walk on free land and breath free air because of the men and women who put a uniform on and sacrificed to keep me free. and whether they saw combat or wore pows, they served, i live free. there's one thing in this country we should make sure we do every promise we made to those veterans we keep in full, because they kept their promises to us while they were serving. that's not a money issue for me. not a political issue. that's a moral issue. keeper word. make a promise keep it.

can't keep it, don't make it. that why i feel the sam way about things like social security and medicare. i get tired of people saying, we're going to change the rules for those folks getting 55 and below. i'm thinking, hold on, partner. many of us have been paying into the system since we were 14 years old and got our first job. nobody asked me if they could take that out of my check. they took it whether i liked it or not. with the caveat and promise if they took it out by gosh, when i got to be 65, social security some medicare would be there. now i'm not going to hopefully have to depend socially on social security and medicare, but there are 90% of the people in this country who have social security and medicare and that is their primary source of income and medical care. are we honestly seriously thinking that it makes sense to take that away from the people who have done their duty? and have accepted having that confiscated out of their check and then suddenly let the

government lie to them and steal from them? don't think so. god help us if we're that dishonest. one final question if anyone has one. yes? >> you speak about -- the mayo clinic and centers like this. how much does it cost to be treated there? >> how much does it cost? depends on what you're being treated for. >> say, colon cancer. >> i couldn't give you a dollar figure at the mayo clinic for co lon cancer mitchell wife has spinal cancer 40 years ago and i was just -- 20-year-old kid freshly married about a year and a half, and scared the daylights out of us, and we were fortune enough, we had health insurance. it cost more than we made over the -- over several years. people shouldn't be penalized because they get sick. and i never have suggested that it's okay to say well i'm sorry, you're just going to have to tough it out.

that note kind of country america is. what i don't want city us do is to create this monstrous government program that it's all about what the government tells you, you have to do have to have and have to pay for. it is about insuring that people have access to health care. but making sure that what hey have access to is affordable and personal and it's portable and it goes with you just like your car insurance or your home insurance or any other insurance you have. your life insurance. also means you have some responsibility. if i set fire to my house don't think i get to call the insurance company and say would you build me another one? i set fire to this one. if run my car into a tree i can't call the insurance company and saying i was pre end tending was richard petty and wrecked my car. i have to show some responsibility. if i want to live as recklessly as possible it's going to cost

more to insure my car and my home and probably cost more to insure my body if i'm careless with my own health, and that's the way insurance has to work. you can't work where we let somebody else pay for our irresponsibility. >> i understand that. right now at this point the average person, middle class person cannot afford to go to those fancy clinics. >> well you may not need. to i've never been to the mayo clinic myself. i pray i don't have to. i'll go to the local facility where i live. and i didn't mean the mayo clinic is the only place a person could or should get medical care. but it's one of those places -- here's what i'm saying. there should be a means by which middle class working class people should be able to access the system, and that is something that we didn't work on with obamacare. what we worked on was making sure that we forced people by

government edict to buy a level of insurance that they may not have needed, may not could have afforded and did not want. for example because obamacare man dates all the coverage, i'm a at-year-old mail, have maternity coverage. i'm not sure you -- you laugh because you're thinking how ridiculous any man whatever his age, but especially one my age i'm pretty sure i'm not going to get pregnant, and i i do i'm going to get a reality show and make so much stinking money off the show i won't need insurance i'll be the first man in history over to give bing. this is going to be huge. but i have to have maternity benefits. i also have to have benefits for drug counseling. i'm not a drug addict. i have to have benefits to cover alcohol treatment.

i've never even tasted beer. i know that sounds crazy to a lot of people but i haven't. i've never tasted beer i. don't drink, it's not because i'm some moral giant but as a teenager something offer met and i smelled it and i thought, this smells horrible. this smells like something that set out and spoiled. and my friends said, you got to develop a taste for it. and i'm a very logical person. i may be crazy on some things but i'm very rational and logical. i said, let me get this right. i have to develop a taste? what that means is you're telling me if i go and i continue to take something into my mouth that i find repulsive but if i do it repeat lid i'll break down the resistance to where i'll be able to tolerate it accept it, and many an some point actually like it. i said that doesn't make any sense to me. i said why would i beat my body into submission to force myself to accept something that my natural reaction to is to

reject. now, my point is, i'm not at risk for getting somehow addicted to alcohol. but i've got to pay for coverage not because i need it or want it or can afford it. i have to pay for it because if somebody else out there wants it i'm subdiesing the people for whom that really is something they need. should i have to pay for that? i don't know. i mean, i don't think so. so that what i mean by that. well folks you have been wonderful to be here. i want to thank you very-very much. i hope i answered the questions on your mind and heart. remember february, when the caucuses come, where are you going to be? at a caucus. you going to vote for? >> huckabee. >> not going to vote for huckabee. what re going to do that night? stay home. we got it, folks. thank you very much. it's great to have you here. [applause]

>> thank you for hosting the event. thank you guys. nice to see you. thanks for coming out. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> when i first came here she looked me right in the eye and said when you talk to me, you always look into my eyes. >> that my mom. she is 91. >> i said, yes ma'am always look her in the eyes. >> how are you guys? mike huckabee. nice to see you. how are you doing? i see you got your hands full. i realize that.

hi there how are you doing? >> how are you doing. >> mike huck hung. how are you doing? nod conversation [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> thank you. it's really a pleasure to see you. great to be back. hold the liven over there. good to see you. [inaudible conversations] >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> can i get a picture? >> absolutely. we just need you to caucus for me again. >> of course. >> okay. >> all right. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you so much. >> nice to meet you. >> good to meet you too. >> you're welcome god bless you. >> here we go. >> thank you for your prayer this afternoon. >> you're welcome. >> that's man that has no confidence in his photography. take another one. >> i smiled 99% of my time, when someone asks me to smile -- >> you say yeah. thank you. >> god bless you. >> thank you very much. >> you did all that without a teleprompter. >> i did. those are expensive. >> you most be -- >> well, can i get your

autograph? >> sure. absolutely. my dad raised my to believe if you tell the truth you don't have tomorrow what you said. just tell the same thing the next time, and i believe that's true. >> let's hope that's a -- i don't not what your thinking about vp but -- >> i got to get the first slot first. >> we'll worry about that later. >> that's right. >> but i like dr. carson. >> he is a good man. i'm plugging for both of you. >> that's not a bad idea. thank you. appreciate your question. >> thank you. >> you bet. >> you must like to hunt. >> i was actually a storm chaser for national weather service and just happened to be driving by to get some -- and i just drove here. >> do you live here in iowa. >> i live in des moines.

>> how long you been chasing storms. >> since i was 16, able to drive a car. so it's very -- >> very rugged work. >> in iowa we have a lot. >> we have a lot in arkansas as well one of the amazing things i did as governor was dealing with the aftermath of tornadoes. i have been in two personally, one win i was 11 years old and one win i was governor and hit the grounds of the governor's mansion in or neighborhood, killed 28 people. terrible stuff. >> i'm glad your running. know you know how to beat clinton. the only one on the platform that knows how to beat clinton. >> i've done it. be care when you're out there. >> thanks. >> good to see you guys. >> good to see you sir. >> yesterday the senate held a rare sunday session and continued work on the highway and mass transit bill. members voted to advance unmaimed offer bid mark cushing that would reauthorize the

export-import bang, and we could see a final vote on that amendment later today. but a sunday session opened, senate leaders mitch mcconnell and harry reid came to floor to discuss the highway bill as well as an amendment offed by majority leader mcconnell that would have repealed the healthcare law. here's a look. >> mr. president, our country freeds a multiyear highway bill and we're close to finally passing a fiscally responsible and bipartisan one. time is running short to get a below through congress. but as with most legislation we still intend to consider some amendments from both sides of the aisle as we continue to work to pass it. we'll start on that today. most important is a proposal that would repeal obamacare and allow our country to start over fresh. with a real health re form

proposal. there's no question that i'll be voting for it. there's no question that every senator should join me in doing so. this is a law filled with higher costs, fewer choices and broken promises. this is a law that has failed repeatedly and that continues to hammer hard working middle class families. the vote will take this afternoon represents a stark choice for every senator. protect a president who likes law with his name on it, or stand with the middle class by finally opening the way to truly affordable care. another proposal relates to the export-import bank. i'll be voting against it. it's a new deal relic that has outlived any usefulness it might have had. if a project is worthy, private banks will step in to finance it. and if it's not worthy, we should definitely not be

financing it but putting american taxpayers on the hook. either way xm is not necessary. at the same time i understand that many senators on both sites take a different view. a significant percentage of my conference and many democrats support the xm's reauthorization. they're entitled to that view. i don't see a reason why they shouldn't bev allowed a debate and then a vote to sort all of this out. i've said repeatedly, and i've said publicly, for months, that the xm supporter from both parties should be allowed a vote. i also said publicly that the highway bill would be an obvious place to have that vote. so mr. president when there is overwhelming bipartisan support for an idea, even if i oppose it it doesn't require some

special deal to see a vote occur on that measure. this is the united states senate after all where we debate and vote on all kinds of different issues. the supporters of xm can still lose the vote, of course. they're not the only ones with passion on their side. those on my side of the issue are passionate, too and this debate heist just present the perfect opportunity to make the case against xm and carry the day in an open and democratic vote. but whatever the outcome the slots for these amendments will be open once the senate disposes of them. that will open the possibility of considering other important amendments. so let me repeat that. the slots for these amendments will open once the senate disposes of them. we know there are many other ideas from both sides of the aisle about how to improve the

highway bill further before its completion. but we also know that time is running short to complete our work on the underlying highway bill. jobs mr. president are on the line. infrastructure projects important to the people we represent are on the line. so we have to get this done. we have to get this done. and with cooperation we can ensure that more ideas from both sides of the aisle are still heard and voted upon. this is a new senate. amendment votes are hardly a rarity here anymore. we will have more opportunities soon to address other issues in the weeks and months ahead. and i will work with colleagues to help ensure that votes on other priorities occur. i ask unanimous consent that the clerk be allowed to make

technical changes to the substitute amendment regarding titles and line numbers. >> without objection. >> mr. president. >> the democratic leader. >> motions to overturn ruling of the chair brought by disgruntled republican senators. at another time, republican senators would have called this a number of things, not the least of which is the nuclear option. republicans have controlled the senate for seven months now. and it's becoming increasingly clear that what is wrong with the senate today is the same thing that troubled the senate before runs took control. dysfunction in the republican caucus. republicans probably won't succeed in overturning the rules of the senate today. but an honest observer to the senate will recognize the day is coming when they will unless the

republicans become a party of eisenhower, dirksen, and even president reagan. mr. president, i was amused to hear republican leaders say he looks forward to amendments. many senators on our side look forward to being able to offer amendments, for example to improving work safety provisions in the bill. but the amendment tree is filled. we're not going have that opportunity unless something untoward happens. today the senate will vote on two amendments. how senators vote on these amendments will demonstrate their priorities. who is for american families, and who is doing the bidding of special interests. consider today's vote on yet another republican attempt to repeal the affordable care act obamacare. by all accounts it's really working and working well.

is it perfect? of course not. that's why we have invited the republicans for years now to join with us and have a better healthcare delivery system. but obamacare is helping families all across this great nation. there are many, many facts insurance companies can no longer discriminate against people with preexisting conditions. can't discriminate against anyone as they did when the discriminated basically against everyone. 12 million more people now have coverage through the medicaid programs and chip programs. healthcare costers growing but very very slowly. slowest rate of growth in a long long time. and perhaps most importantly a share of americans who lack health insurance coverage is dramatically declining. after the latest supreme court victory, less than a month ago i urged at that time my republican friends to stop bang their head against the wall

because obviously doesn't feel good. why do they continually try to repeal the affordable care act? two supreme court wins and over 50 votes by congressional republicans to repeal and undermine the affordable care act is not enough for the republican leader and his friends. they're insisting on yet another partisan attempt to strip health insurance coverage from more than 19 million americans. coverage that a recent commonwealth survey found that more than 80% of americans are satisfied with this program. republicans claim that this obama repeals part of their crusade. but the nonpartisan budget office estimated that repealing the affordable care act would increase the federal budget by more than $350 billion. so today's vote is really about reducing deficit. it's about caving to special interests. it's about the republican and

their leader desperately trying to appease their base. i'm really appalled and more than that, disappointed, by these continued partisan attempts to strip away insurance coverage for almost 20 million americans. congress passed the affordable care act. the president signed it into law and the supreme court has put a stamp of approval on it, not once but twice. so it's time for the republicans to move on, not take another mixering motivated vote that's going no 0 where. finally on another subject mr. president. expert-import bank. after the obamacare vote we will then consider the rethere's of the export-import bank -- the reauthorization of the export-import bank. how senators vote will reveal loyalties.

boeing, cat piller, general electric honeyell, dozens of companies in nevada, along with thousands of small businesses across the country use this bank to find a market for billions of dollars of their exports. not only for boeing and caterpillar, but thousands and thousands of small businesses. most of the jobs in america are created not by the great big companies but by small businesses and they need this. they want this. that's why even the u.s. chamber of commerce, even the u.s. chamber of commerce, must have been desperate to finally side with us on something. they support the xm bank. this year aloe the export-import bank supported 165,000 jobs here in america. a vote for that bank is a vote for jobs to help the economy and frustrated american familiesment conversely a vote against reauthorization is nothing more than shameless attempt to garner

affection of the koch brothers. the koch brothers. after all opposition to at the expert-import bank is a prerequisite to having their support. every person running for president stumble over themselves to say oh, what do the brothers want today? what they want today is a vote against this bank. contrary to the needs of the american people. the koch brothers contribute a surveyed to republican presidential hopefuls that obligates those candidates to oppose the xm bank. so i ask my colleagues here today, are you waiting for the american people or doing the dirty work for a couple of billionaire oil barons? vote nor export-import bank is a vote for american families. a vote against the repeal of obamacare is a vote for families. today the senate democrats will vote for american families. mr. president, i wasn't to say

one more -- not on the floor but i hoping he would be. the northwestern senator from oklahoma a very conservative republican senator. and he and i disagree on a lot of things, but i have great respect for his clinch on this legislation. i think this legislation that we're moving forward on is far from perfect. but i listened to senator inhofe yesterday when he was on -- answering the president. republican always follows the president, and did a fine job explaining our important it is that we have a bill, a transportation bill. so said a lot of nice things about senator boxer but time the said nice thing busy jim inhofe because this bill would not be where it is without hit efforts. >> following a dispute between mitch mcconnell and texas

senator cruz has friday, where senator cruz accused the majority leader of lying to him over an amendment to at the export-import bank. several standard came to floor to -- we'll begin with remarks from california's senator barbara boxer. >> well, it's sunday and it's unusual for us to be here, but as i said many times this is the reason we're here, mr. president. look at this photo. this is the bridge collapse in california and there's another report coming that says this is going to be far from the last one we have. this is the bridge that carries thousands of people a day from california to arizona. mr. president, this can happen in any one of our states, and the fact is we need to pass a transportation bill, and i am so grateful to my colleague

senator inhofe, to all of us on the committee that got this really started. the environment public works committee had a 20-0 vote, so we don't have to face this anymore. and after that, we had other committees act not in as bipartisan a fashion so it was difficult, and at that point leader mcconnell and senator durbin stepped in with senator inhofe and myself, and all we did was try to get to where we are right now. which is a place where we can pass a fair funding bill. mr. president, i have a list here. it's really interesting and i'd ask unanimous consent to place into it the record. >> without objection. >> my state counts on the federal golf for half of its transportation funding highways and transit. rhode island counts on the federal government for 100%.

alaska 93%. mt., 87%. south carolina, 79%. hawai'i, 9%. north dakota, 78%. wyoming, 73%. connecticut, 71%. new mexico, 70%. and it goes down from there but the vast majority of our states count on the federal government for funding. and what we have done as both senators reid and mcconnell have pointed out is we just keep patching up the highway trust fund. and if i were to go to a bank and say i want to buy a house and the banker said, you have great credit, that's the good news. the bad news is, it's only a five-month mortgage. what would i do, mr. president? i would walk away sadly. i can't afford to invest in a

home if i only have five months of a mortgage. it's the same with the states. the way the house went about it, and the way some of my kole legs on both sides here want to handle it, it another five-mon extension and our states are stopping. tuesday, the general contractors told us that in 202 -- 25 states they have begun to lay off mentioner many, many construction workers. 25 states. we all know at the height of the great recession we had millions of unemployed construction workers it's been tough to get them back to work, and remember, the businesses that employ them, tough to get them back to work. it's been so hard, and now we're seeing reversal of all the hard work we did because we did a two-year transportation bill that was very helpful. this would be the first six-year

authorization in decades and the first three-year funding i believe it's ten years. it could be more. we need to do this. i just want to close by saying this. working across the isle is always difficult, but it's exciting it's interesting and the staffs on both sides have shown that they can do it. last night i was on the phone with senator mcconnell's staff. i think it was 20 to 12:00. and i kept saying, if we can't fix this, i have to call the senator, and they said, oh, please don't please don't. we worked it out this morning. so i see the senator from rhode island, senator whitehouse coming in now, and i told the senator, that rhode island counts on this federal highway trust fund for 100% of its funding itch also did not

mention that senator whitehouse us on the environment and public works committee, very active and productive member, and there's a program in there that is important to all our states, major programs, that will finally have a fund, regardless of whether it's in kentucky or utah, rhode island, or california. this is a fair bill. a good increase for highways, good is increase for transportation states want it. cities want it. yesterday i found out from senator inhofe, who did a terrific, by the way national radio address on this -- i thank him for that -- that the mayor from oklahoma and the mayor from new york, a mayor from oklahoma city and the mayor from new york city wrote a letter saying how desperately they need this certainty. we're on the cusp. i personally support the xm bank. i know my colleague, senator mcconnell, we do not agree on this. i think that the xm bank is important and i ask unanimous

consent to place my full statement into the record on why i think it's important. >> without objection. >> to sum it up we have a slot of small beens that count on the xm bank who financed them so they can export their products. we have so many in our state. so i hope it passes on a bipartisan vote, and i want to thank leader mcconnell. i know this is not something he likes at all. but he made a commitment and he is sticking to it. and lastly, we're going to have a vote to overturn obamacare. and senator hatch and i were discussing before how much we disagree on this point. but i told him i wouldn't hold back. and i just think it doesn't make any sense. we are looking at millions of people millions of people nationwide who now have health insurance, who cannot be told by their insurer you have a preexisting condition like high

weather pressure, forget it. we have family with their 25, 26-year-olds on their insurance and i have stories. stories that would really make you feel good. stories from people in my state. one whose cancer was caught at a very early stage mr. president and as a result of that, she has lived to tell the tail. tale because before obamacare she couldn't have gotten the tests she needed to discover this deadly cancer. so i just say rhetorically to my friends on the eye side -- they are my friends. we have really built up some relationships over this bill, which i'm so happy about. why don't we work together to fix the problem? because we know, no bill is perfect. the transportation bill is far from perfect. we have to fix that, too. maybe there's a new day dawning here. we keep saying that. doesn't seem to happen, but

maybe something good is going to come from this bipartisanship, tough as it has been. the transportation bill is far from perfect. i wanted to do so much more on safety and i want to say senator nelson did such a good job. senator widen i must have talk to him a half dozen times. he kept putting on paper that was good. they were rejected by the other side. we could have done so much more, senator, if we had gone that way. we did what we could do. and just as in the trade bat'll our caucus was very split our caucus is very split here. but i hope we can find enough courage and interest and moe important, keep this in mind. this is to me the poster child of why we have come together. this is america. this doesn't look like america. it's wrong. and we can come together

hopefully vote for xm and against the repeal of obamacare and then move forward with a good cloture vote tomorrow night on our very much compromised because it is a compromise -- bill on transportation. again, my thanks to people on both sides of the aisle. democrats, republicans everybody. for moving this along and i yield the floor. >> mr. president. >> senator from oregon. >> mr. president i have spent much of my time in public service, working to promote bipartisanship in health care. in fact the distinguished chairman of the finance committee is here, i think he may speak next. our colleague from tennessee senator alexander cosponsor of my comprehensive health reform bill so for me, bipartisanship in health policy is enormously important, and there's certainly

plenty of ways in which democrats and republicans could be working together to strengthen the affordable care act. unfortunately, that does not seem to be on the menu either today or in this congress. today, instead of looking forward on health care in america, the senate, on a transportation bill, will have a vote on whether to go backwards on health care. backwards, for example mr. president, to the days when health care in america is for the healthy and the wealthy. and i specifically use those words. because the moment you repeal the affordable care act millions of americans lose protection against preexisting conditions.

the moment that happens mr. president, and colleagues, if you're healthy no sweat. if you're wealthy no sweat. but for the millions who aren't, they are back into that abyss where they good to bed at night worried that they may get wiped out the very next morning because they have a preexisting health condition. so protection for those individuals. gone. the moment that the senate votes and -- i hope the senate will not vote for ending the affordable care act this afternoon, but the moment it does gone is that protection for preexisting conditions. gone are the tax credit credits. tax credits. these are opportunities for americans to get a little bit of tax relief when hard-working families pay for health

insurance. gone when you repeal the affordable care act. gone would be the protections that bar insurance companies from charging top dollar for rock bottom coverage. gone would be the protections for young adults. right now they can't be locked out of their parents' insurance plans. gone would be the protection for individuals to make sure their insurance isn't cancelled the moment they get sick. once again pregnancy could be considered a preexisting condition. so what i think this shows mr. president, and colleagues, is this debate is no longer about numbers on a page. bills we write lots of charts. lots of gravel. lots of small print. but this isn't an abstraction. when you go back, as i've

described, to the days when health care is for the healthy and the wealthy. more than 16 million americans have gained health insurance coverage by virtue of the affordable care act. their health is on the line every single time there's a vote to repeal that law. so those are the consequences, mr. president, and i'm going to wrap up because sigh any good friend from tennessee here, and my senator and my colleague from utah. because both of them have joined me repeatedly in trying to promote bipartisan approaches on healthcare policy. i don't take a back seat to anybody in this body on working on health care policy in a bipartisan fashion. there is nothing that i think would be more valuable than to

have democrats and republicans come together, not to talk about repealing this law but to find ways to strengthen it. there is not a law that's been passed that you can't strengthen and having talked with my friend from utah, my friend from tennessee, and repeatedly, i think they know that i'm serious about reaching out for common ground with respect to this issue. but this pie in the sky -- >> senator's time is expired. >> ask for 30 additional seconds. >> without objection. >> but the pie in the sky insist stands, mr. president that the affordable care act will be repealed and somehow we're not going to have the suffering that i have just described that's not reality. what we ought to do is reject this amendment to repeal the affordable care act and then get

back to work in a bipartisan way to strengthen the law. i yield the floor. >> mr. president. >> senator from tennessee. >> mr. president please november me when ten minutes have expired. >> the chair will so notify. >> thank you mr. president. mr. president, today there will be at least three votes. the first is we have heard is to end debate on senator mcconnell's amendment to repeal obamacare. the second will be to end debate on the export-import bank. and then there may be a third vote on an appeal by the senator from texas senator cruz to overturn a ruling of the chair that an amendment of his is not in order. now, this how that came about. on friday, senator cruz off erredden an amendment regarding iran. the chair ruled the amendment was not in order because -- this is what the share said at the time -- it is inconsistent with the senate's precedence with

respect to the offering of amendments. the senator from texas then appealed the ruling of the chair. his intention today will be to try to obtain a majority vote to overturn the chair's ruling. i respect the senator roz strong desire to offer his amendment but i believe he ought to do it within the senate rules or i believe we should change senate rules in the way our rules prescribe. if instead majority of senators agrees with the senator from texas, the senate will be saying that majority can routinely change senate rules and procedures anytime it wants on any subject it wants in order to get the result it wants. the problem with, as former senator carl levin of michigan said a senate that changes its rules anytime a majority wants is a senate without any rules. think of it this way. football season is coming up its

let's said the tennessee tight taps burglar football again the indianapolis colts in nashville and the home team sets the rules of the game. so when the titans gain nine yards, they change the rules to say, nine yards is a first down, or when the colts gain 100-yards the titans say sorry you need 110 yards to score a touchdown. no one would want to play such a game. no one would want to watch such a game. no one would respect such a game. that is why every monday in new york city, a team of former national football league official review every referee's call or noncall from the previous sunday's game, played in the nfl. the league wants to make absolutely sure its rules are followed and the nfl has a rules committee that meets between seasons to consider changes in the rules. it has rules about how to change it rules. the nfl of course, wouldn't even consider allowing the

titans to change the rules in the middle of a game in nashville in order to defeat the colts. mr. president, the united states senate has a ruleses committee too, and we have rules on how to change our rules. we should follow those rules. the united states senate is the chief rulemaking body for the united states of america. if we cannot follow our own rules, how can we expect 320 million americans to follow the rules we write for them? if we render ourselves lawless how can we expect our fellow americans to respect and follow the rule of law? there's a practical problem with what the senator from texas seeks to do if he succeeds. it will destroy a crucial part of what we call the regular order in the united states senate. he will create a precedent that destroys the orderly consideration of amendments. there will be unlimited amendments there will be chaos. and ironically, while destroying

regular order he wouldn't get to vote on the iran amendment he seeks. that's because if the overrules the chair and creates another branch of the amendment tree, the senate leaders have a right to offer an amendment to fill that new branch of the tree before he does. mr. president, the united states senate is unique in the world. it's been called one authentic piece of genius in the american political system. it's uniqueness is based upon aviette of rules press dens, agreements, that encourage extended debate this process encourages consensus. consensus is the way you govern a complex country whether it's save rights bill or trade agreement or education bill. but a body of 100 of us that operates by unanimous consent requires restraint and good will on the part of us senators to function. we saw a good example of that a couple of weeks ago when the senate passed 81-17 in one week

a complex elementary and secondary education bill. any senator could have made that process much more difficult, about not one did and the country is impressed with that result. there are different ways, several different ways to establish senate rules and procedures but they all fall under the same umbrella. there are standing rules adopted by the first senate in 178 pop the advice of thomas jefferson. there are standing orders. sometimes we set rules by passing a law such as the budget act. sometimes we establish a rule by unanimous consent. or by agreeing to a new press tent taken together, all of these represent the full body of the senate's rules and proceed sures. these rules of proceed sure have several things in common. no matter how they were established. the authority for establishing and changing each of them comes from the same place. article 1 section 5 of the united states constitution.

every one of them could be changes by 67 votes following rule 22 of the senate, except a starting order may be changed with 60 votes. one other thing the different forms of rules and precedents have in common is that the latest change supersedes whatever rule or precedent was established earlier. so if the senator from conclusion persuades the majority of to us overrule the chair today that decision governs the senate forever until it's changed or unless it's changed. so there's no real difference between changing a rule or changing a precedent. what is important is not how the precedent was established or the rule was establish it but what is being overturned. it is true that occasionally the senate majority uses its power to overturn the rule ago the chair to refine the interpretation of rules or precedence. this means that in some limited circumstances, the senate changes its rules by majority vote.

the question today is that whether we can overturn the ruling of the chair. but who we should overturn the ruling of the chair. i i believe we should not do so. to do so would destroy regular order in the senate. it would create chaos in the senate. most important a senate in which a majority reto anally -- routinely changes the rules by overruling the chair is a senate without any rules. mr. president, there's a right i would and wrong way to change our rules of procedure. this would be the wrong way. i urge my colleagues not to agree with the senator from texas in his effort to overturn the ruling of the chair. >> senator from utah. >> mr. president, i rise today to address the senate in my capacity as president pro tem. i hope my colleagues with give

attention what i'm about to say and will take it to heart because i speak from the heart out of respect for the colleagues colleagues and of his great body in which we're all privileged to serve. mr. president, the senate has a long and justly celebrated tradition of comity and respect month members. all although there have been occasional exemptions, on the whole senators have taken great care to treat each other with courtesy and respect. both in private discussions and in public deliberations. we do this for several reasons. first, because mutual respect is essential for us to be able to work together, to forge consensus on difficult issues, that stir deep and sometimes divisive feelings. passing meaningful legislation in this body typically requires the two parties to work together, and that in turn requires the trust and a certain level of good will.

courtesy and decorum foster an atmosphere where we can work in good faith to find common ground to do what is best for all americans and not just those of a particular partisan persuasion. the second reason we treat each other with recourtesy and respect is because it's the honorable thing to do. we come to this body as 100 men and women with vastly different backgrounds, life experiences and views on how government should operate. but we share a common humanity and a common goal to improve this great nation and to secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our prosperity. we divide into parties and join caucuses. we fight passionately about matters of tremendous consequence but we do not become enemies. we remain colleagues. and colleagues treat each other

with respect. we treat each other with honor even when we feel another has perhaps not accorded us the same esteem. squabbling and sank more any may be tolerate inside other venues or perhaps on the campaign trail but have no place among colleague friday the united states senate. the third and most important reason we treat each other with courtesy and respect is because we are the people's representatives. we are not here on some frolic or to pursue personal ambitions. we are here because the people of the united states have untrusted us with the solemn responsibility to act on their behalf in shaping our nation's laws. this is a high and holy calling not something to take lightly. it a sake credit trust in -- sacred trust in which pettiness or grand standing should have no part.

we're their do serious work, and degree these work egos will inevitably by bruised. feelings from time to time may be hurt. this is inherent in the nature of politics. but we are here to carry out the people's business. we serve the people, not our own egos. when we are on the losing side of a particular debate, when we are disappointed, we pick ourselves up and move ahead to the next challenge. our nation's founders designed the senate to play a special role in our constitutional system. in contrast to the more raucous house, the senate was to be a body of deliberation and reasoned judgment. senators were to seek the common good and consider national, not just parochial interests in drafting legislation and considering nominees. mr. president, the quorum is essential to executing this constitutionally ordained rule.

deliberation and reasoned judgment require an atmosphere of restraint and an atmosphere of thoughtful disagreement. deliberation without decorum is not deliberation at all. it is bickering. and bickering mr. president is beneath this body. regretably in recent times the senate floor has too often become a forum for partisan messaging. it has been misused as tool to advance personal ambitions venue to promote political campaigns and even a vehicle to enhance fundraising efforts. all at the expense of proper functioning of this body. most egee agree obviously mr. president, the senate floor has even become a place where senators have singled out colleagues by name to attack them in personal terms and to impugn their character in

blatant disregard of senate rules, which plainly prohibit such conduct. mr. president, the senate floor has hosted many passionates debates on crucial issues over the years. tempers from time to time have flared. voices have on occasion been raised. we have also -- re we have almost universally confined our kit simples to policy and to -- criticisms to policies and ideas 0 what thing i can wrong about particular bills or proposals have not at fleece my memory, called or opponents differ honest or sought to disparage their motives. to bring personal attacks to the senate floor would about to import the most toxic elements of political discourse into the well of the senate, into the very heart of this institution. this would serve only to pollute or deliberations to break the bonds of trust that are essential, for achieverring some measure of consensus and to

invite the dysfunction that so saturates our media and popular culture into this storied chamber. force those of white house care about the senate as an institution and want to once again help solve the vexing challenges that face our nation, such misuse of the senate floor must not be tolerated. each of us, runs and democrats a -- republicans and democrats alike, must stand together in support of the senate's time are honored traditions of college wyattality and respect. we must stand resolute in requiring the senate's formal rules concerning dignity and deer toum be observedded and we must ensure that the trend of turning the senate floor into a forum for advancing personal ambitions for promoting political campaigns or enhance fundraising activities comes to a stop. there are enough other platforms for those seeking to accomplish

those objectives. the senate floor need not be one. mr. president, i recognize that many of my colleagues are new to the senate, and may not yet haven't had many opportunities to experience its proper institutional role as a forum for reasoned discussion. and constructive debate. some are less familiar with the traditions of comity and respect other. s may know little of the senate's history and rising before parochialism and narrow self-interest, and a few i regret so say seem unconcerned for its history of consensus and overcoming our anything's challenges. mr. president, as one who has had the privilege of serving for the palls four decades i can attest from first-hand experience that the senate can be and has been in times not too far past, a distinguished and constructive body that does much about for our nation.

i recall vividly times when this body was marked by cooperation and good will, rather than ranch core and disrepute. in some respects the senate is but a mere shadow of its former self. another casualty of the permanent political campaign. this deeply disheartening to those like myself who are here to experience this body's better days 0 -- or were here to experience this body's bet dares dares and is verve low damages the proper governans of our nation. mr. president i have been frank in my remarks today. this candor stems from my genuine concern for this body and its fewer. i have been frank because i have seen so much about what i love about this body frittered away in recent years for small-minded short-sighted pathway gains. by virtue of my long service here in the the senate i am aning constitutionalist and care deeply but this institution and i want it to work. our current majority leader has made important strideses in

putting the senate back on a path towardses meaningful deliberation and constructive lawmaking and at the common good. but his efforts and those of other senators on both sides of the aisle who take the long view to seeking to build up this institution will not suffer identifies unless each one of us is committed to instilling comeie and -- comity and respect as a core feature of everything we do. let us each move forward with a renewed sense of honor and respect. and resolve not to tolerate misuse of the senate floor a commitment to do our part to restore civility and constructive debate as defining characteristics of the body, and a renewed willingness to work together for the good of all americans. thank you, mr. president. >> mr. president. >> senator from texas. >> mr. president, i thank the senior senator from utah for an excellent speech. and i entirely agree with his

call for civility and decorum and respect. no member of this body should engage in attacks directed at any other member of this body, be they a republican or be they a democrat. at the same time, i would note that it is entirely consistent with decorum and with the nature of this body, traditionally as the world's greatest deliberative body to speak the truth. speaking the truth about action is entirely consistent with civility. indeed in a quote often attributed falsely to george orwell the sentiment has been expressed thusly. in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. i would make four brief points. first of all on friday, i gave

an unusual speech, a speech unlike any i have given is in chamber. not a speech i was happy to give. a speech to which the senior senator from utah is reresponding. i would note in the course of that speech, i described an explicit promise the majority leader had made to me and all 53 run senators. neither the majority leader, nor the senator from utah nor the senator from tennessee has disputed the majority leader in front of every republican senator made that promise looking me in the eye namely there was no deal on the export can impore bank and its proopponents could offer it in the regular orders and there would be no special preferences whatsoever. we saw on friday that promise was false. in particular, for the amendments on the export-import bank first of all it was not

awe of offered by promoan ennets. it was called one the majority leader. the major leader has priority of recognition and can edge out any other amendment in this chamber. secondly, the majority leader followed that by filling the tree. a procedural mechanism he had often decried when the former majority leader employed it to block other amendments, and third, the majority leader filed cloture on the export-import bank amendment, tooling he has used only once in his entire tenure as majority leader. those were extraordinary steps designed to force a vote to reauthorize the export-import bank and they were directly contrary to the promises the majority leader made to all 53 republicans and to the press. my saying so may be up comfortable but it is a simple

fact entirely consistent with decorum and no member of this body has disputed that promise was made, and that promise was broken. the senior for from tennessee gave a learned speech on changing the rules of this body through appealing the ruling of the chair and i very much agree, when the former majority leader used the nuclear option it was wrong to violate the rules, but the amendment tree does not come from the rules. the amendment tree comes from the precedence and precedents are set precisely through pedestrianing the rulings of the chair by a majority vote. indeed i would note that previously many members of this body have voted in favor of overruling the ruling of the chair, including my friend the northwestern senator from tennessee who voted four times in his career to overrule the ruling of the chair. my friend, the majority whip, who has voted five times in his career to overrule the ruling of

the chair and indeed, the distinguished majority leader who has voted 14 times in his career to overrule the ruling of the chair. i would note beyond that, that is a recently as april 2 2014, there was a third degree appeal precisely like the one i have filed, that was filed by senator vitter the ruling of the chair was appealed. and a significant number of republicans voted in favor of that appeal, including the majority leader, and including the majority whip. many republicans railed against the filling of the tree when the democratic leader was the majority leader, if it was an abuse of power then, it remains so today. indeed i would note with the current majority leader said at the time, which is the practical effect of filling the tree, is to disenfranchise the people i and my members represent and

more significantly a significant number of the people his members represent where their voices are simply not heard in the senate. beyond that, let me say on the substance, if you oppose filling the tree to silence the amendments of members be they in the majority party are minority party you should vote in favor of allowing my amendment to go forward. i would note the senator from tennessee was incorrect that it would allow unlimited amendments. it would add simply a third branch to the tree, not unlimited amendments. at the same time, if you are resolved to stand with our friend and ally, the nation of israel if you are resolved to stand with american hostages in iran and if your are convince that lifting sanctions on iran, unless and until iran recognizes israel's right to exist as a jewish state and releases four

american hostages, then you should vote to allow that amendment to be voted on. needless to say if you oppose the export-import bank, you should vote to allow that amendment to be voted on. and finally if you want other amendments on pressing issues, be they defunding planned parenthood be they stopping sanctuary cities, passing kate's law or ening the congressional extension for obamacare you should vote in favor of allowing this amendments to be vote on. a great many men's of the body have again lon speechings as the senate operates when each member has a right to offer amendment or even difficult amendmentses we debate and resolve them. that this heart of this vote, and i would encourage each member here to vote his conscious or her conscience on both substance and on the able of the senate to remain the world's greatest deliberative

body. i yield the floor. >> mr. president. the majority whip. >> mr. president, i ask unanimous con spent to speak up to five minutes. >> there is objection? without objection. >> ms. president, i have listened to the comments of my colleague, the junior senator from texas both last week and this week, and i would have to say that he is mistaken. first of all if in fact the majority leader had somehow misrepresented to 54 senators what the facts are with regard to the xm bank, i suspect you would find other voices joining that of the junior senator but i hear no one else making such a similar accusation. and secondly i would just say to my colleague that there is an alternative explanation. there's an alternative

explanation. as majority leader has said time and time again anytime 65 senators want to do something here in the senate, sooner or later they're going to get their way. and indeed that represents the vote in support of the xm bank. something i will end up voting against but where i realize that majorities will carry the day eventually. but if the rule that the junior senator from texas is arguing for is embraced, we will lose all control of the senate schedule. there will be chaos and indeed we won't be able to meet simple deadlines such as the one that exists on the 31st of this month with regard to expiration of the transportation funding because even after we closed off debate any senator who wants to get a vote on an amendment will be entitled to do so, and that can't be the rules. it's not the rule. it's never been the rule.

and that's why what the junior senator is attempting to do is so extraordinary here. i will be opposing that. i hope all of our colleagues will join news opposing that, because ultimate my what that will mean it that determined 51 senators who want to raise taxes who whatnot to pass obamacare 2.0 who want to pass a cap and trade bill or carbon tax, those who whatnot to pass dodd-frank 2.0 or any additional government spending, they'll be able to do it. they'll be guaranteed an opportunity to get an amendment and be able to vote on that amendment and it will pass in the united states senate. i don't think that is in the best interests of the united states senate. i don't think it's in the best interests of the 27 million people that the junior senator and i represent together, and i certainly don't believe that's in the best interests of this institution, which we all revere. if all 100 senators have the

opportunity to offer an amendment without restraint then there will never be any deadline never be any conclusion, and we won't be able to do the simple work we have been asked to do on behalf of the american people. and the final point marx president, i know the senator the junior senator feels passionately about this amendment but the fact of the matter is we have a process that's been set up to review the iran deal that president obama and secretary kerry negotiated, and we're going to have a chance to examine and it debate and it review it over the next two months and then have a chance to vote on it. there is a time and place for this vote, and i will no doubt support the same position that the junior senator is supporting, but it's not on this bill. it's not now. and it's not at the expense of breaking the orderly procedure that has made sure that everyone gets a chance to participate. and i would just say in conclusion that there was no

misrepresentation made be the majority leader on the xm bank. the only thing the majority leader promised was anen an opportunity to offer an amendment on a bill and recognizing that if he denied that opportunity when 65 senators wanted it, not just one senator, who we know can stop things around here, slow them down but 65 senators who would be bound and determined to use any available leverage until they got that vote. so i agree with what the majority leader has decided to do and how he decides to happen it. i know that there are passionate views around here, but that doesn't justify changing the rules of the united states senate through such an extraordinary means. so i hope our colleagues will join me in voting against -- to ratify the rule ago the chair when that time comes rather than to overrule it, because as i said to overrule the chair on something this important to the orderly consideration of the senate's business, i took be a terrible mistake.

>> following these remarks and two amendment votes the senate decided not take up senator cruz's appeal of a ruling this that his proposed amendment relate together the iranian nuclear agreement was out of order. leader mcconnell brought up senator cruz's appeal for the vote but there weren't the required 11 senators needed for a role call vote. and more on that we soak if the capitol hill reporter. >> good morning to you. >> good morning. >> explain this criticism that came up yesterday and where it came from. has thisline long subjecterring between senator ted cruz and the majority leader, mitch mcconnell. >> yes to answer you briefly. cruz is running a campaign that is essentially running against republicans in washington. trying to showcase the conservative leading the charge against what he considers, quote, the washington cartel and they've been

fighting over strategy, ranging from over the budget conference in 2013, to of course the government shutdown, in 2014, there was -- or 2013. was there a debt ceiling fight in 2014, a fight over immigration at the end of last year. there have been newman are you tactical battles and this is the latest example of this, cruz ratcheted it up to a new level on friday when he accused mcconnell of lying during his floor speech over mcconnell's strategy to move the export can-import bank. so just to take a step back, this all started in the end of may when the senate was trying to pass a major trade bill. there were three senators who were holding out their vote on that trade bill, and mcconnell needed to get his votes to past the bill. so what he promised those people who -- those senators

who were demanding a vote on the export-import bank and he said he give them a vote. the debate is over exactly what he promised. cruz says that part of that promise, mcconnell looked him in the eye and assured him he would not move the export-import bank on his only, only that he would allow those senator to offer it as an amendment but as we know? i senator can block any amendment from being considered so what mcconnell did was that he filed cloture on friday to move to a vote to override a philadelphia buster on the d filibusters on the export-import apple to the highway bill. mcconnell's office and other senators say look, all along there's been no secret, mcconnell said they the export, import bank would webedded would be added to the highway bill. that's the nature of the dispute. cruz yesterday was very angry, coming off the floor lashed out at the senate majority leader for telling lies and for not

being truthful and for essentially colluding with democrats to pass a big government agenda. cruz wanted a role call vote on a separate amendment to the highway bill, but given the way that he had handled himself runs essentially did not allow him to have a vote because a there were not enough senators who seconded his motion to have a role call vote. shot was disexpensed with by voice vote. i it was a remarkable scene on the floor crowd and the haylages theyline from politico on the story you contributed to senate smackdown ted cruz, mike lee effort commonwealth etch witness leader, the rift between mitch mcconnell and ted cruz widens. the talked about ted crazy's version of these events being disputedded by mcconnell's office but has the majority leader directly responded to ted cruz on the floor of the senate?

he way seen him respond in kind? >> he has had -- yesterday when mcconnell spoke yet there was a subtle reference from mcconnell to can you see. didn't call out cruz bit name but said there was no special deal. this has been discussioned all along. we tried to ask him a question in the halls on friday after cruz accused him of lying, and mcconnell just smiled at us and automobile away. mcconnell does not address the press until tuesday. he will certainly be asked then i think what you'll hear him says is probably something similar to what he said yesterday, something we said all along, not any war that -- or that i backtracked on. but it's a complicateed procedural dispute, and a dispute that happened behind closed doors. so there is no transcript of the remarks of what mcconnell promised cruz and the rest of

the republican conference, though it may end up just being the game of the said/she said. >> before we let you go, we have been talking about emergencyity leader mitch mcconnell but in the leadership of the republican ranks and the senate i includes summon john cornyn, senator cruz's colleague from texas. who is seen as the voice of conservatives in the group of senators who make up that key republican leadership staff? >> you know, from the leadership perspective, it's hard to say exactly. cornyn is one of the more conservative members of the senate republican leadership team. the team is sort of broken down into several senior members including john thune roy blunt senators who have been serving for some time. unlike the house where are thick

members of leadership who are liaisons toblock blocs there's nothing like that in the senate. and in part of the frustration from cruz and others is they believe that the voice of the conservative movement is not being represented in the party's leadership and so that is part of the reason why you're seeing some of the disputes. one reason why cruz is kind of in the minority of the minority in the republican conference, a lot of people -- mcconnell has deep support among the republican senators but a couple of very notable standouts and ted cruz is one of them. i. >> a congressional report for politico. you can see his work at politico.com. the store we have been talking being we appreciate your time. >> 9/11, thank you. >> we go live now to the u.s. senate where members plan to continue work on the highway and

mass transit bill with the possible final vote on an amendment that would reauthorize the export-import bank. live now to u.s. senate here on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, incline your ear and hear our prayer, for without your presence and power, our striving is in vain. preserve us with your loving providence, guiding us through each season of life's sojourn. lo