quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president snr. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: it's hard to think of a time in recent memory when the number of threats facing our country were more diverse or more threatening than they are now. from isil to russia from china to the taliban from iran to al qaeda. the threats are real, the threats are worrying and these threats make the political games democrats continue to play with

our men and women in uniform all the more hard to understand. democrats have spent months upon months blocking funding for our troops. they've tried to hide behind a whirling kaleidoscope of excuses, moving from one to another as each is debunked. but with the settling of a top-line budget number last week the final excuse is gone. what is the excuse now? it's time for the appropriations process to finally be allowed to move forward. that means it's time for the men and women who put everything on the line for us to finally receive the support they need to be safe. it's time for our troops to finally get the certainty they need to plan for training and operations. the defense appropriation bill is half of all discretionary spending one-half of all discretionary spending. the defense appropriations bill

contains no controversial policy riders -- none. the defense appropriation bill was supported in committee 27-3. 27-3. nearly every democrat voted for it. democrats even sent out press releases praising the bill. it's obvious why we should pass it now. president obama's own secretary of defense just wrote an op-ed titled "u.s. military needs budget certainty in uncertain times," in which he implored congress to authorize long-term funding for the military. here's what he said. "in this uncertain security environment, the u.s. needs to be agile and dynamic. what it has now is a straitjacket. at the defense department, we are forced to make hasty reductions when choices should be considered carefully and

strategically." and he concluded with this, "a peel to congress to act on -- i appeal to congress to act on a long-term budget deal that will let our american troops and their families to know we have the commitment and resources to see them succeed and send a global message that the united states will continue to plan and build for the finest fighting force the world has ever known." so look, our colleagues across the aisle are just completely out of excuses. it's time to move the bill forward. once we do, we have every intention of then moving on to other appropriation bills as well. remember our members worked very hard on these bills. nearly all of the appropriations measures passed committee with support from both parties -- both parties. we obviously want to process all of them. if democrats hadn't wasted literally months blocking every last one as part of some political game, we could have

passed all 12 appropriation bills a long time ago. but since they did it's forced congress up against a december the 11th deadline of democrats' own creation. now, we're going to work within that deadline to get as much done as we possibly can. with bipartisan cooperation, we can get a lot more accomplished. with more political games we can get a lot less done. now, mr. president i ask consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. res. 306 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 306 306, designating the week beginning november 2 2015, as

national apprenticeship week. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to the preamble be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i now ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. thursday, november 5. following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day. further, following leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to h.r. 2685 with the time until 11:00 a.m. equally divided in the usual form. finally, that the cloture vote with respect to the motion to proceed to h.r. 2685 occur at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there's no further business to come before

the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning -- a senator: mr. president?

the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. ms. murkowski: mr. president requesthat e or >> . pres >> mr. president i thank my colleague from iowa who has led the effort as reese resolutio speak of the waters of unity thi state's rule and the effort that she has led to lead to a resolution of disapprovaln of this wrongheaded ruleto aga also to a acknowledge the good work from my eight imp colleagues in that tsa had the opportunity to discuss the impact of the rule as be referred to it but the combined effort to to address the concerns and stemm that so many of us have

across the country about the heard rule that has stemmed from the epa and the army corps.verreach you have heard so many of us speak to this it is not only an overreach but a significanct overreach toulate allow for expansion and i f say a dramatic expansion of ate the federal government's ability to regulate our lenient and waters off for in the people and state of term alaskas looking to this particular rule that is out state a there to say in no uncertain terms this could have had as as the regina impact to the anything tha engage in any level of it. development this rule will have greater impact than o

anything we have seenwe before. now i did here to urge my have an colleagues to support theave resolution of approval that we will have the opportunity meengs, to vote on in just over one hour. the c have had dozens of meetings iss with institutions across the t country to have raised this as an issue. hring the questions and epa earlier administrator i had thejoining opportunity to have a fieldusing hearing in the alaskao be focusing on those areas of what we consider to beic federal overreach that holdsft our state back from activityhe and development and time

after time the concern was with the interpretation of the clean water act as defined by the epa. how the negative impact tointerior a our state will be felt with inc those legislative efforts asill chairman of the subcommittee a provision within the interior appropriations bill to halt implementation of the waters of the u.s. ruleha i have a co-sponsor of the bill as we try to advance c yesterdaoly and it was blocked i am also a co-sponsor of r the resolution offered from a a colleague from iowa. my position is simple thisoard.

cannot be allowed to stand. sta the agencies have to go back to the drawing board.n it is a highly controversialut of rule and it stands out by that those we have seen finalized tier, by this administration but the those controversial ones i certain wouldly argue if the not the top it is number gerald and it drives bipartisan o opposition to the rule as well with a bipartisan majority of the house that if you look to the state's 31 states including the state of alaska have tried

to pocket a large amount of groups have done the same with this circuit of appeals issued a nationwide urts h injunction. i welcome what the courts we have done so far battledd think congress should set tha t back and hope for the right legal outcome because that outcome may come months or years from now these are of based not fully on what the court say but to reach to the i impact of this rule then to determine whether or not it is appropriate.

her j the answer is no injustice not appropriate. c agencies arela claiming to be clean just a clarification and to go one step further to call it the clean water rules that w because who will oppose clean water? this doe not know what and. we all strive.o. this is something we should work towards. but just changing the name excus does not make it sell is and it just muddies the waters del excuse the pun we are creating uncertainty and confusion opening the doornics for projects over the country.re many colleagues have talkedwhen about the mechanics andl

unfortunately theren complicated when you talk about the jurisdictional asis, waters or to explain thelawyer s significance of texas the only people in the hour group better captivated areost, the lawyers that might be in a position to gain benefits because they were cases. most barbers in iowa or minders in alaska are not th thinking what a jurisdictional bader is or if it is a set of indexes from my operation to a bodyo of water.n the this is not what people are thinking. to

and how in the state of alaska people will be harmed by application of this rulef to understand their reach. all o it is so big we cannot even fit on that chart but we have the bulkier. alaska plane and short is covered in water. it is what. according to our state government it has more than 40 percent of the surface water resources. think about that. think about the entire united states of america and then appreciate in my state

we have more than 40 percent of the nation's entire surface water resources. over 3 million lakes over 12,000 rivers we have approximately 174 million acres of wetlands for go there more wetlands in the state of alaska of an and the entire rest of the country combined so all colleagues that our conservative the impact i don't mean to diminish your problems but think about where we are in alaska we have more wetlands and all of the rest of the country combined. out of 283 communities in this state, 215 are located

within 2 miles of the coast where a navigable waterway. we live on the water. even on the inland. the lakes the river's coming up in north country in bill whole southwest of alaska you look at it and it is dotted with little water lakes and bodies and it is just what. and surprise it is frozen. think of the permafrost that we have. how do we deal with that? how was that considered in

this rule? >> we don't know. freewill just assume it will be covered. we have a map of what you see all of this is water. these are the streets rivers embodies september 2015 the epa has now produced in each of the 50 states that colleagues have to force the agency to release these maps pulse almost the whole state of alaska is shaded and that is what the epa wants to

regulate. so what could that cover? what do we talk about? it could be where it is all about fishing and what is subject to regulation or bristol bay. in the interior in in fairbanks it could be a new neighborhood to accommodate a growing population it could be a parcel of land that just so happens to be in the wetland area to have a small river presence the fact it was under the native claims settlement act is not beyond regulation and it

could be the the energy project on the north slope that it wants to pursue but it is either a wetland but it is firm -- permafrost or the gas line we hope to run back down from the tidewater it is a major project the legislature is working on right now. talk about a wetland and river that is subject to the permit requirement. it could be many more that brings us to the potential impact.

i am not certain the agencies will try to stop every project but i recognize that they could use the rule to stop any project that they want for as long as they want. maybe not any project but think about that. if you try to make an investment decision if you're seeking to expand the you have that level of uncertainty because you don't know if you will be targeted it would be tough to make these decisions. they are casting the extremely wide a net and rigo from keystone xl and also from alaska the regulatory decisions are not always fair or impartial and

almost everything in alaska is near water or wetland or permafrost if you add that up almost every project in alaska could be subject to federal permitting under the clean water act that means most projects in our states will end up costing more and take longer to be delayed. i would remind france the cost of securing that permit could easily run 3300 -- $330,000 your adding cost and delay. some raise the white flag to say i am tired and frustrated i just cannot run

the regulatory government for all of this is an addition to this in the neck and burdens that alaska is already facing. this is a small town of about 1200 people. we have a local tribal organization that wants to construct affordable housing project the army corps required $46000 down payment to waive mitigation bank prior to permitting. this is for a small project in the community of 1200 people trying to bring in low-income housing and you'll have to spend $46,000 just to get started think

about what they could have done with the dollars toward that project. this is a town like craig what does that cost mean to you? i strongly oppose this rule because of the uncertainty it will create the delay and the cost will impose. because alaska is the only state to and has no idea or what circumstances this is regulated and as this could dampen our efforts which we depend on for a majority of our state's budget. . .ll over the country. and this is on top of all of the

other regulations that we have seen in our state, from the interior department's antienergy decisions to e.p.a.'s quest for project veto authority before, during and after the permitting process. if gets to a point mr. president, where it's just too much. it's just too much. and this is where we must come together and stand to stop it. so i thank my colleagues for their leadership in this and look forward to the opportunity to support the disapproval resolution that is pending before the body.the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: thank you mr. president. in a few moments we'll have an opportunity to vote on the congressional review act on the final rule under the clean water act on waters of the u.s. under the clean water act waters of the us. and yesterday we had, i

thought from a rather robust discussion and debate about this in the bill that would have not only presented the file off going forward border change the underlying bill. allow this rule to go forward and the main reason for saying that is the congress since 1972 had a proud record on behalf of public health our environment and the people of this country from the dangers of dirty water.

they made a commitment as a nation is a commitment that we would take steps to protect drinking water public health, and the environment. so the people of this country and legacy would be a clearwater for future generations. a couple of supreme court decisions which unsettled what most people understood to be regulated waters. the five before decision supreme court sent back to epa to come up with additional regulatory guidance this final act

this final role is a response to spring court decision order to give clarity to those who are affected by the clean water act and their activities. so if we reject the role we, in effect, a removing clarity and will go back to the stage where people don't know whether a particular water is regulated under the clean water act or not. and i was listening to my colleagues on the floor give all of the examples where they said regulation will take place. when, in fact, if you are in agriculture there is

basically no change in the regulatory structure. there is no knew permitting requirement for agricultural activity. the risk factor, if we do not go forward with regulation is that we are talking about approximately one half of them streams in this country will not be fully protected. that is a hugea huge risk to the public health of the people of this country. approximately 20 million acres of wetlands will not be regulated. wetlands are the last run to the filter order the water systems, strange, drinking water supplies. that type of deregulation of clean water which is critically important public health and breaking water supplies.

one 3rd of the people in this country will see that we are not fully protecting there drinking water. i assure you we have an episode and they will be asking what we did in order to protect the basic health. they expect us to make sure that when they turn their on their getting safe drinking water. if we are doing everything we can to do that by blocking this going forward.

we -- let's get this sooner rather than later. it's important for lossless to allow this rule to go forward. let me talk again on a business concern. my company depends on people enjoying our time recreating

outside the especially in and near watersheds. clarifying which waterways are protected and it's nice to have. it is not nice to have, it is a business imperative. allowing this rule to go forward helps america's businesses helps our economy. one in three us residents. american public health association who states our nation relies on clean water for basic survival.

americans are at risk to exposure. vital to protecting the public from waters aleutian i yield the floor. >> the senate went on to passed apass the resolution expressing disapproval with certain epa rules governing streams and wetlands.

>> i apologize for the brief delay.

>> the news out of london. [inaudible question] >> are briefly delayed the briefing. i don't have any information to share. they continually that investigation. lost their lives in this tragic incident. and i don't want to say anything that would interfere with the outcome of that ongoing investigation. we obviously have a strong desire to get to the bottom of what exactly happened.

as it relates to procedures around the sinai peninsula. a notice to airmen that was published earlier this year assessing that us civil aviation operating in to come out of, within the more over the sinai peninsula is a potential risk from hazards associated with extremist activities. let me be clear, this is something that has been in place for the faa prior to this tragic incident. this is what is called a note him. now my understanding is

prior to this march 2015 announcement there actually was a previous order in place that urged flight operations about 24,000 feet. it had been in place since at least 2014. civil aviation operators. the potential risks associated with operating in airspace of the sinai peninsula. now, the 2nd relevant piece of information for you to understand is that there are no us carriers that regularly operate out of the sinai peninsula. and in fact, the airport in question is not the last.of departure into the united states for any airline including foreign airlines

that do operate in the sinai peninsula. if it were the last point of departure for any aircraft operating regularly in the united states there would be a set of security regulations that would be imposed to ensure the safety of the traveling public. i would say all of this to illustrate that there is a long-standing policy or at least policy related to security precautions for aviation and around the sinai peninsula that has been in place prior to this tragic incident over the weekend. so obviously the british officials are announcing steps that they have included are in the best interest of ensuring the safety of the british traveling public and i we

will let them speak to any decisions that they have made about that. >> on the elections yesterday i wasi was wondering if you could give us a sense of what the president thinks of the fact that the democratic party has a number of state and local residents? >> well, as it relates to last night the fact is that the election results in red states like kentucky and mississippi were good for republicans. a result in some blue states like pennsylvania and new jersey order for democrats. i understand the democrats and new jersey actually now have the largest majority in the state assembly that they have enjoyed since the 1970s. and the results and arguably the purple list of the most purple states, virginia

essentially the status quo was left in place by voters, which means the democratic governor of virginia will have to contend with the small republican majority in the state senate in virginia. so i guess that is why we would be reluctant to draw significant conclusions from the results of yesterday's election results beyond the issues and obviously were at stake in each of the elections. so democrats all across the country it's good for the country and has been an important part of advancing his governing agenda here in washington that have been other democrats that sought

to run on this agenda these kind of political debates are important for our country and indicate that our vibrant democracy here is alive and well and there are some things that we believe would make that democracy more efficient and effective for that is the political debate.

[inaudible question] >> generally speaking i think that the president generally wants democrats to win elections. and i think that there are -- yeah, exactly. >> talk about the exceptions. >> exactly. but the -- and there are a lot of theories that have been proffered about why democrats have not performed as well as we would like at the state level or town off year elections. some of the observations have been made by some of the strategy that republicans have focused on redistricting efforts and that has recently started to bear fruit for them.

you know, even some demographers have observed that democrats are more likely to live in more densely populated urban communities which has consequences for drawing legislative lines. you know, in other cases it is just that particularly in off year elections that republicans have been more effective in turning out there vote. so ivote. so i think that there are a variety of explanations here i will leave it to the experts to determine what is really driving the outcome but obviously the president would like to see democrats do better. >> the republican one on the platform of obama care in the states how would the white house feel about a rollback ofa rollback of

obama care in the final years of the president's term? particularly in kentucky talking about shutting down the state. >> i wouldi would note as a factual matter at a couple of days before the election governor elect bevans said a couple of things including that he wanted to work with cms to actually come up with a program that will provide for these folks. by these folks he means people in medicaid. when asked if people would be kicked off medicaid he said, no one is losing anything. you know, in a different interview he noted you don't just pounds a person off medicaid. so this is an indication of something you have heard me say on many occasions which is that vowing to repeal the affordable care act in some cases has been used as an effective political strategy but it is not a terribly effective governing strategy.

the fact of the matter is, since medicaid was expanded in kentucky more than a half-million kentuckians have gotten health insurance through medicaid, government health care coverage through medicaid or chip. that is a testament to the us down the impact of the affordable care act is out on the lives of half 1 million kentuckians, to say nothing of the more than 17.6 million americans have gotten health care is therefore will care act went into effect which is why the uninsured rate across the country is at an all-time low and even the uninsured writing kentucky has been cut in half since the affordable care act went into effect. so i think youi think, you know, the real focus your should be on the people of kentucky and what impact these campaign promises are going to have. i leave it to you to assess

the explanation for the change in rhetoric from the governor elect. previous years. >> we have made quite clear why we believe that is a bad idea and why that language is only serves to make it more difficult for the president to succeed in closing the prison at guantánamo bay command national security press -- national security promise a reason it has not happened is because we have seen obstacles thrown away by the united states congress.

so these are concerns we have expressed before. but we will have to take a look at exactly what passes congress before making aa determination about what the president will sign. the current version is different than the one that the president just vetoed one week or two ago. the updated version includes language that essentially fixes or at least addresses the concerns we have raised about attempting to use a slush fund to fund our basic national security priorities. congress has abandoned that bad idea. there are other elements, and the pres. noted this when he was actually vetoing legislation. there are other elements that are important and that are useful and supported by the administration, but this language that prevents the administration from effectively closing the prison at guantánamo bay is something we have long opposed and continue to

oppose now. >> separate topic the scandal continues to deepen in europe and the us. is this something the president has discussed with chancellor merkel? is the white house concerned about the fallout? >> i am not aware of discussions between the two leaders on this particular topic. it is apparent from reading the news coverage that executives of that company are struggling to get there arms around the problems that have been uncovered there. and the environmental protection agency obviously has a significant responsibility to ensure that automakers are abiding by the environmental standards that ensure fair competition in the marketplace and ensure the health and safety of the american people. so these are important rules. it is important for the epa

to enforce them. and i don't think that again, based upon the limited coverage, that that is something that volkswagen executives of disagree with. but i do think that it is apparent that they are struggling to get there arms around what appears to be a pretty significant problem. >> canvas prime minister was sworn in today. >> i don't have a scheduling update at this point. you know, obviously the president had the opportunity to speak with him via telephone shortly after he was elected in my guess is we will have an opportunity for the president to sit down with him at some point relatively soon. >> two questions. a follow-up underlings question about the flyover of the sinai. i don't think

you directly answer the question of whether or not the administration would urge flying in and out of the us a more directa more direct way them what had already been in place in the past. any need for a more urgent or more different type of warning now? and the story earlier today about gitmo. >> the faa thing and i can better answer your 2nd question. >> i know. one of the many reasons he has the job that he has and i have a job that i do. so just to clarify, as it specifically relates to aviation operation in the sinai peninsula. this is an advisory that the faa has shared with civil aviation operators.

and this is based on their assessment of the security situation of the sinai and i am not aware of any plans to update those specific or that specific advisory. this is one that the faa can tell you. so does that clarify? >> given the fact that britain looks like it's gone further than what we have -- >> i don't think that's true. they have flights that operate in and out of the sinai peninsula which means that in order to land you have to go below 26,000 feet. so that is -- and for the british at least for some airlines the last line of departure flying directly to the uk.

for a good reason primarily related to the existing ties. it is much more common for british citizens to vacation >> and secondly do you have any update on when this decision will come? >> i don't have a timeframe to put on it. it is something that we are hopeful we will be able to produce members of congress members of the public.

classifying. review the status of these detainees. the 1st category a complicated process in place to verify mitigate risk that they may pose to us national security. now, the 2nd category are a group of individuals that would not be transferred that can be prosecuted.

there are a variety of considerations for how to do that, but there is essentially a system in place for managing that. what is often described as an irreducible minimum herbert detainees that are too dangerous to transfer and for a variety of practical reasons cannot be effectively prosecuted through the justice system and the proposal that the administration has been considering for some time is actually transferring those individuals to the united states where they can be securely held. and that is also a stumbling block that congress has erected to prevent a transfer of any of those detainees to the united states. and this is a rather nonsensical position when you consider that there are already dozens of convicted terrorists who are doing time in prison facilities

all across the country. there is no reason that these detainees who have been held at the prison at guantánamo bay for some time now could not do the same. >> you described the prospect for obama care in kentucky positively and optimistically. work something out with them? >> the results of the election the comments of the governor elect. he himself says again, earlier in his comment, our requests to cms for the ability to take aa block grant and customize as indiana and others have done so if he is envisioning any initiation along the lines i

would not predict at this point exactly whether that would be successful, but we will obviously participate in that discussion and it beats the alternative that he colorfully described has bouncing people of medicaid. >> he did talk about rolling that back. aback. a state homegrown obama care exchange. >> it was a state -based exchange that has performed quite well and has served the people of kentucky quite well. and it was a marketplace that was built and operated by the state of kentucky, the commonwealth of kentucky. and to their credit, it allowed thousands of kentuckians to shop for and

purchase quality affordable health insurance. now, the fact is there are dozens of states across the country that have either by request or by there own refusal to go through the work of setting up a system have the federal government come into operate these marketplaces. i'm confident it is something we could do in kentucky as well. >> either way people in kentucky will have access. >> as a practical matter there is no reason that should have an impact on people's ability to get health insurance to the marketplace. they are run based upon the same standards. so again we would wait for

a formal request from the gov.'sgovernor's office command he is not even in office yet. >> one more question. right now democrats have the fewest elected offices across the country since the 1920s. pres. obama has presided over the biggest drop in his own party's numbers of officeholders. does he feel responsible for that? >> i feel i went through with their lien the variety of theories that have been flip -- floated to try to explain this phenomenon. >> well, there is no doubt that we have had a rather vigorous debate in this country over the last six or seven or eight years about the direction of the country. and that debate has a lot -- allow the pres. to build on public support for an agenda that has showed support in terms of allowing our country to recover strongly and to make historic

progress to five carbon pollution to make progress when it comes to equality and ensuring that people cannot be discriminated against just because of who they love. this is an agenda that has enjoyed strong support across the country, and, you know, that is a result of the president success and winning a broader national debate in 2008 in2008 and 2012. so, but i will leave it to the pundits and political scientists to draw their own conclusions about why the local and state level trajectory has not followed the path that we would have liked. okay. >> one of the things -- >> congratulations. a lot of attention today. >> one thing that popped up to me was that officials have said that the plan will not include a specific site for the team -- for the detainees. wondering if you could

confirm that and have true or assuming that it is even the possibility how can congress evaluate these plans? obviously you said and we know that officials and it is especially relevant because we all see this plan as a last offer to congress to sort this out before potential action and how can congress really justifiably do this a fair evaluation. >> that assumes that congress is interested in a fair valuation. i think it is fair for me to say that is not what we have gotten for them over the last seven years and there is an open question of whether or not congress does want to fairly consider this proposal. i guess we will find out. i think what congress will receive without getting into the details is a carefully considered, thoughtful proposal for closing the

prison at guantánamo bay. again, the pres. has identified this is national security priority because he does not believe that it is worth areas of dollars per year to hold these detainees in a way that only serves as a recruiting tool for extremist organizations around the globe. there is a much better way to ensure the safety and security of the american public. that to continue to operate the facility. so congress will receive something that is thoughtful and carefully considered from the administration about what we propose to do and it remains to be seen whether or not congress will thoughtfully and carefully consider it. >> i want to put out the appropriations process specifically whether

delaying the fiduciary role or changes to .-dot frank rise to the planned parenthood level of vetoing a bill. >> we have tried to be as clear as we can about how this process should play out. and our view is that the appropriations process should not be bogged down and controversial, divisive, ideologically driven writers that is exactly what the proposed planned parenthood writer would do. any effort to defund planned parenthood is because of concerns that people may have about abortion are ideologically driven primarily because we know that planned parenthood does not use federal dollars to

perform abortions. it is a law that has been on the books for quite some time and has been enforced by the administration and his wife is particularly dishonest to float those kinds of policy proposals. and so that is a good example of the kind of writer that will bog down the appropriations process in a way that would risk a government shutdown command i continue to have confidence that the speaker will not want to be presiding over government shutdown engineered by congressional republicans during -- after six weeks on the job. >> it does not really answer the question. my question is is -- are these financial reforms something that rises to the level? >> we are certainly going to oppose efforts as we have in the past, to get the wall

street reform legislation we have not seen the text but the presence commitment hopefully they don't get those regulations because if they do it will lead to a government shutdown primarily because if they include those kinds of provisions in the appropriations they will find that they will not actually pass, so it is not a matter of the present vetoing them but what they can get past and the congress. spending a lot of time on

ideologically motivated and divisive writer provisions is not a particularly good use of anyone's time. >> the actual text. >> i no that there has been a lot of important progress that has been made in working through this rather arduous task of finalizing that texas at agreement. at this point i am not going to make any -- hazard any guesses about when exactly this will be released. there are a lot of factors that will determine when it will actually be completed. but theycompleted. but they have made a lot of important progress of the last several weeks and hopefully they will be in a

position to release it soon. >> okay. >> suggesting china may be significantly imposing its coal use. the seriousness of beijing. >> at this point what we have concluded is that this report does not have significant implications for the upcoming global climate negotiations. we continue to expect that china remains committed to cutting carbon pollution and making a constructive contribution to this international effort. i think what it probably does show though is the need for strong transparency provisions as a component of the paris agreement. we are going to need countries to show up to paris prepared to make

specific commitments commitments, but also be prepared to explain how they are going to document their adherence to those commitments. transparency will be an important element of the negotiations on the stocks. >> do you think you might need to move beyond transparency to verification? >> again,again, this will have to be something that the negotiators will discuss at the climate talks in paris later this year. >> a brief question on the timeline in china. the presidential candidate is expected in washington soon if not already. will anybody at the white house meet him? any concern? >> i am not aware of his upcoming visit but let me see if we can follow-up with

follow up with you for reaction to this plans. >> okay. >> josh we will talk co-ops and thecollapse and the big numbers. as many as 12 of 23 reportedly have failed and will not be offering coverage beginning next year, and i am curious given the enormous amount of loans that have been provided to many of these co-ops command is this a failure of this program that could around the affordable care act? >> what we have been committed to all along is the successful functioning of marketplaces across the country that will provide an environment where insurance companies can compete to provide quality affordable health insurance to americans across the country you seek to obtain health insurance through the marketplace. these are essentially those americans who are not able to obtain health insurance either through their parents or through their employer. so will we have seen is that people who are shopping on these marketplaces in

general are finding a good product as an affordable cost. another yesterday, seven in ten americans, when you factor in the kind of assistance they can receive from the federal government in affording health insurance can purchase health insurance for $75 a month or less, so that is a pretty good deal. >> a great deal, but what about the 12 and 23 that have failed? >> the point is, even some of those co-ops will remain in business but it will not affect the overall competitive balance of the marketplaces as evidenced by the fact that they can purchase health insurance. >> what about the people who have these particular co-ops are coverage? >> they will be able to go to the marketplace as of sunday and they will be able to shop for coverage. a good news is, because the affordable care act, just because they lost their health insurance actually cannot go to the marketplace and have options.

they can see what the options are available understand the services provided command will see the costs associated with them. this is an opportunity of millions of americans have and as of today can get to healthcare .gov and start shopping. >> what happens to the money? who is going to foot the bill? the 2nd part is,is, even if they can go to other exchanges are marketplaces now that there are fewer doesn't that go against the argument that more is better >> i don't have a detailed event but marketplaces provide a competitive environment and that means there are more customers who will be going to the marketplace and seven out of

ten of them will find that there is aa good option available to them for $75 a month. >> how concerned are you? >> can you say what president obama will discuss on the conference call? >> an opportunity to talk to individuals not of gets across the country you are doing the important like work of educating people about the options available to them and an opportunity

for the president himself to express appreciation for the important work there doing and your mind and how significant it is. people's lives have been transformed the as you had people who could not purchase health insurance. no longer. >> we will see if we can arrange a way for you all to

at least get a sense of what the president said. >> i don't have any updates on the president's travel schedule to announce but there is an international summit whether going. would not be surprised if it adds to the schedule. >> how does that work? unpresidential mission. to advance up an administration priority and

international group that is committed to expanding opportunities for women and girls. when she travels to jordan she is going to spend time at the school to highlight efforts underway to ensure that they have access to education and it is one that is educating a syrian refugees were now in jordan which underscores the contributions of the united states can make. >> government funds are involved in the travel and the president is authorized a trip of this nature. >> we can look into that. >> lastly, the dmc says there will be 350 people at

the fundraiser night. is there a reason they could not cover that? >> yes, the reception will be held a private home. the ground rules are for private homes the principal will be admitted to here the presidential remarks that will be on camera. >> there will be plenty of room. >> i have not seen the space. i'm not sure i could us 350 people at my house. >> the report this morning of the president is doing radio interviews this morning, can you tell us more about those interviews? >> we will have more details about the radio stations the president is interviewing with tomorrow but this is consistent with the effort that you have seen from the president in the past to interact with journalists and local communities across the country and in this

case talk about the importance of going to healthcare.gov to get a sense of what healthcare options are available to people in need to purchase health insurance which would primarily be the president's message, an opportunity to educate the public about these options and today or tomorrow we will be doing it differently. lighting radio hosts, this jockeys to participate. [inaudible question] >> the president has been involved in the two previous open enrollment periods to raise awareness command i think you can anticipate over the next couple of months over the course of the startup enrollment pres.

will spend time talking to the american people about the importance of signing up >> maybe we will trot and a 3rd firm. [laughter] >> so closest ally appears to be very seriously. why is the white house taking it to the level. >> the differences there are different aircraft.

>> there were flights that fly from the sinai peninsula directly to the uk which are not regularly scheduled between the sinai peninsula in the united states, so the situation is different. and obviously the british authorities are taking the steps that they believe are appropriate to safeguard the british traveling public. public. the united states has taken steps that we believe are consistent with protecting american travelers overseas. >> so american travelers this area, egypt command certainly a huge area of travel for americans going to see places over they're you do not think that it has raised to the level where american catholic level officials should be seeing whether or not this was an act of terrorism? >> the specific concern is the sinai peninsula, and there is a resort area that i have referred to in the sinai, but there are no american carriers the regularly serve the airport.

and there are no direct flights between there in the united states that are regularly scheduled by any american carrier or even by foreign carriers. so that is just a difference between the us connection in the british connection. it is understandable that they are taking a different approach. i did mention that we are interested in understanding exactly what led to the tragic airline disaster over the weekend and the sinai peninsula and egyptian authorities are conducting an investigation obviously russian authorities are involved given the substantial number of russian citizens that are involved and the united states has been in touch with those authorities, but they are the ones conducting the investigation. >> a follow-up on the defense department bill that is coming up with the presidents review the issue

of paid patriotism. in this bill they make that practice illegal. the department of defense has been uncooperative the military about the practice of paying for patriotic. you will beyou will be happy to no the kansas city royals are not 13. but what is the white house position on this? >> i don't know that the president has carefully consider this. it is possible he saw the abc report. what i would say is that the

teams themselves have come out and said that they are not receiving payment from the federal government to recognize troops that may be in attendance at the game. so you have a defense department and the individual team saying that the allegations from these senators are just not true. so i guess i am at a loss to explain what there argument is. i think that the fact of the matter is that when you go to the ballgame and the team the public address announcer acknowledges the presence of military service members are veterans and the crowd stands up and deposit that is an appropriate thing and then authentic gesture by the fans of the stadium to honor the service of those who have so bravely served our country and i

think that that is separate and apart from what i think is a more logical financial transaction between the department of defense and teams for things like signage or other advertising that could enhance the military ability to recruit. >> so specific amounts are made between the teams which call for specific amounts for singing of the national anthem, welcoming home wounded warriors unfurling the flag on the field for the honor guard do you believe that practice should continue? >> i have not review the individual contracts contracts with the teams and department of defense say that those are -- that those kinds of displays are not subject to the financial transaction

between the department of defense and the teams. the financial transactions are specifically focused on more conventional advertising that is designed to enhance the military recruiting effort. >> and finally it is in the bill. they put it in the defense prohibition act that the practice must stop putting the figures in the contract and actually paying for this patriotic acts, not for signage, but for the patriotic act. with the president sign that? >> it sounds -- based upon the fact that the department of defense said that this is not actually what they do it sounds to me like the president-elect they would not have an objection to it, but for the details of how those contracts are structured to my certainly

encourage you to check with the department of defense to see if they can provide greater clarity. >> back to the plan to close the detention center at guantánamo. you mentioned there are a number of detainees they could not be prosecuted and would have to be transferred to the us. that remains a major sticking.with members of congress and you are not sure whether or not that is a matter that you will be able to resolve legislatively. ..

>> okay .gov. >> but even right now you referred. >> you don't think it would be disruptive? >> i suspect that that potential exists. i think that the question is that is one that the governor elect we will have to consider about whether or not he wants to disrupt the thousands of kentuckians who have benefited from a kentucky-based marketplace that has worked really well. it does seem curious for someone who says that he believes in smaller government and that he believes that federal government shouldstop interfering with activities that can be successfully managed by the state friend to take something that is working well right now and turned to the federal government. but again that is something

he will have to consider. >> and on the situation the sinai. [inaudible question] >> right now they are not. this is an egyptian investigation. >> that kind of. >> as a general matter us officials have been in touch with bush -- both russian and egyptian officials about this and have offered assistance. >> the threat posed by isys to commercial aircraft is that something this administration will have to pay closer attention to? >> given that we had these restrictions or at least this advisory about the operation of civilian aircraft over the sinai that have been in place for quite some time we are already

cognizant of the risk that is faced by the airline industry when it comes to extremists. >> what happened. >> i think that -- >> and not suggesting -- >> the awareness is something that has already been heightened. certainly anytime you see an incident like this where these public claims have been made we certainly are interested in understanding exactly what happened in understanding the potential risk or increased risk that may pose those in maybe flying and us aircraft. >> was sparks is the president trying to reach some are? >> in these five markets.

>> urban latino jan, who? >> this jockeys. ijockeys. i think we will be in a better position to talk about this but we have the markets in the outlets for you. but the president will be talking to radio personalities we want to reach as many people as we possibly can. a substantial number of people have not yet availed themselves of the opportunity to get health insurance to the marketplace. and so that is the message the president will deliver tomorrow. >> about 10 million people are still without insurance. with that is there concern

with this white house that the penalties are not really sticking people where it hurts for them to go on the website and get entrenched somewhere? >> well, the way i understand the penalties work is that there is a phasing in and an increase of the penalties. i think this past year was the 1st year of people did not have to pay a penalty for not signing up for health insurance command those individuals in particular are keenly aware that it does not make a lot of sense to pay those penalties when in many cases a smaller sum of money they could actually get health insurance. soinsurance. so pay less and get a significantly better benefits than they would failing to sign up for health insurance. this will be part of the case we will make.

>> everything you had on the website. is there aa tracking mechanism? i hate to add something else knew. who was penalized and if they are to get a choice or if they are getting insurance. >> i am not sure that there is aa way to do that but you can check with hhs. in the 1st 48 hours ahead a quarter million people submit an application to get health insurance. the 1st couple of days of the 1st open enrollment is comparable to the right of application submission that we saw in the 2nd open enrollment. and it is an indication that

they are looking for quality affordable healthcare options. >> maybe you said this. i just want to make sure i understand it. prevent him from closing guantánamo? >> at this point we will take a look at what congress is able to pass. we continue to oppose language that makes it more difficult for the administration of follow through on our strategies to close the prison but i don't have a veto threats offer. >> is the president think the american people are with him on this? does she feel like he has a sales job today? >> i think given the kind of

opposition that we see in congress it might be an indication that this is something we spend more time talking to the american public about and we have quite a strong case to make one that even former president george w. bush has been persuaded by. he made the observation that continuing to operate is not clearly in our interest. and so that is an indication that we are pretty powerful argument. >> he said you would not take anything off the table. ..

the president is using every element of his authority to make progress in the same way he has another areas where congress has refused to work constructively with

the administration. >> one more on the affordable care act. despite what is happening in kentucky you think there will still be the same number of people? >> that remains to be seen. >> and despite the closing down of several exchanges do you think those consumers will find alternatives? >> there are not exchanges that of close down, kevin was referring the co-ops. the case we have made is that just because those nonprofits are no longer functioning their customers can go to the marketplace and shop for other available options that are available for the 1st time because of the affordable care act. >> the administration's projections that the total number of uninsured will continue to drop by how much? where do you expect that is

going to be after the enrollment? >> for latest projections i refer you to hhs. our expectation is that next year we would have about 10 million people signed up for health insurance through the marketplace is that are to five to marketplaces across the country. and, you know, we have seen coupled with our efforts to try to expand medicaid coverage across the country we have succeeded in driving down the uninsured read to the lowest levels in recorded history. and if we could get more states to cooperate with us when it comes to expanding medicaid i am confident that we can go farther. >> where is the expansion coming from? is there a demographic of consumers where you think this is possible? >> when it comes to medicaid expansion this is republicans almost all republicans that have

prevented the government sending in an expanding coverage to people who make just a little bit more command it is a shame that we have seen them but there zeal to oppose obama care ahead of the basic healthcare of hundreds of thousands of citizens in there own safe. >> expanded medicaid normal people signing up to the minute marketplace they should support a program funded almost entirely. the states are bearing the cost of providing health care. ..

the president will spend sometime next year talking to the american public about the progress that they have made under the president of brock obama. in terms of reducing our deficit by three force and enjoying the longest in history. we can look at education and talk about the number of students we now have going we're at the graduation rate that high school we can look at the progress we have made and are not discriminated against against the globe. i think we will see democratic

candidates up and down the ballot running for office in 2016 there bound to show progress. i think they'll be an important validator, you guys are much more attuned to the public polling. if you look to the president's poll more than any other politician in america it would be effective. we love. [inaudible] considering there in german to

regulate. >> at this point we believe it is the responsibility of the authority of each of these countries to enforce the rules that are on the books. i do think the revelation of the cars in the united states has prompted authorities i take a look at what volkswagen is doing in their country. the decision they make on their own, that's really seems one that seems prudent to me. [inaudible]

we talked about the fight against isil is at the heart of the discussion. [inaudible] >> i don't have the meeting between the two leaders to announce at this point. let me just in a general matter that the united states deeply appreciate the significant commitment that the canadian government and military has made to our 65 member counter rifle mission. canada has made an important contribution and we certainly value those contributions. those contributions have enhanced national security across countries around the world including canada. i've easily the prime minister of canada is the one responsible for making those decisions. we have two agree with which the

canadian government has worked and we are confident that tank of relationship between the united states and canada will continue under the leadership of resident obama. [inaudible] >> i think we have a strong case to make in terms of the important contribution canada has made. why that is a worthwhile investment. we have made important progress in implementing our strategy to destroy isil. there is important work to be done. we would welcome canadian contribution to that international effort. [inaudible]

>> we talk shortly after the election about the degree to which the president valued the relationship he built with prime minister harper. by working together they were able to advance the interest of both of our countries and a variety of air the areas from environment to national security. the president is hopeful with working with the new prime minister that we can continue that relationship because it so clearly enhances the relationship between the two countries. when it comes to climate change, it is quite clear that based on the little but i've read about the campaign that this is an issue that prime minister trudeau plans to prioritize in his agenda. it is honestly an issue that president obama has prioritized

on his agenda. we welcome the opportunity to work closely with the canadians. >> if he thinks in the short industry, does the president feel the short industry has backed his legislation up, i mean politically in a sense. is the president satisfied with with what the insurance industry and providers have done with the obama care. >> i think the sense of denial is that we have seen a lot of insurance companies across the

country work with the marketplaces in each state to put forward plans. these are plans that are transparent, they can look at the plans in advance and see what kind of benefits they include. there transparent to get about the pricing. because insurance companies are competing we see pricing has been quite competitive. that has been a good thing for the market. it has also been a good ink for for the bottom line of the individual insurance companies around the country because, as you point out there signing up customers and that is good for their business. this is always been the essence of the strategy, the form of the private insurance system, that is why we don't send a lot of time trying to rebut this phony claim of some opponent that suggest this is a government takeover.

this is an important step of a private healthcare system modeled after a proposal that republicans originally implemented, it is one that the president has taken across the country. i'm sure that our experts would tell you there's more we could get the insurance companies to do to cooperate and to offer you put four different offerings. thus far, i think it is hard to argue with the result. last question. [inaudible] on the issues on syria, is the united states at war in syria? >> will the president has been quite clear about what the mission is in syria.

our special operations forces that are operating in syria are involved in a train and advise and assist mission. it means that we are seeking to build the capacity of local forces inside of syria to better take the fight to isil on the ground in their own country. there is ways that we have offered support to those forces including re- supplying them with equipment and carrying out military airstrikes in support of their operations on the ground. they have made some important gains the president believes that by committing a relatively small number of forces, fewer than 50, they conserve as a force multiplier and further enhance the efforts of the local forces on the ground. what the president has been determined to do however, is not allow the united states to be drawn into a second terry and in

syria. that is a risk that is highlighted by the military strategy that has been implemented by the russia. it is quite different than the strategy that has been carried out by the united states and coalition partners. >> of american pilots who are flying bombing missions in syria and now we have american advisers who may not be firing the shots but they are standing alongside the people who are directing them. how is it not that we are in combat in syria? these are combat forces and to say they are not isn't that a distinction. >> was an attempt by the administration and by me to be as clear as possible about the mission these special forces have been given by the commander-in-chief. that mission specifically is to train, advice, and assist advise, and assist opposition forces. the reason for this is we have also tried to be as clear as possible about the whole

animating principle here is that the united states cannot impose a military solution on the problems and situs syria. the previous administration tried to do that and it in iraq and it did not serve the country well. either that country or our country. the president taken a different approach and that is we have gone to great lakes to be as clear as possible about what their mission is. let me also be clear that that is not in any way to diminish the service, the sacrifice, or the risk that our men and women in uniform are taking when they are operating in syria. these are americans who are bravely serving their country. >> there are 50 today? what assurance do we have that that number will not increase?

>> what we have set is in order to carry out the mission the president has authorized that it would require fewer than 50 american military personnel to be on the ground operating alongside of these people in syria. that is the strategy we are pursuing at this point. i don't have updates about any future decisions the president may or president may or may not make. thank you everybody, we we'll see you tomorrow. >> coming up tonight on c-span2, presidential candidate senator marco rubio campaigns in manchester new hampshire. that house porn affairs committee hearing on russia's involvement syria. later, senators makowski and cardin debate epa water regulations. >> all campaign long, c-span takes you on the road to the white house. on filtered access to the candidates, at town hall meetings, news conferences rallies, since beaches speeches