7:40 a.m., in the town of chardon, ohio, about 25 miles east of cleveland, allegedly a student brought a gun into the cafeteria of the high school, opened fire. as i stand here today, three of those students have succumbed to the injuries and have passed away, two continue to be under medical care, i would indicate that in these tragedies, there are also items of heroism and an assistant coach at chardon high school, chased the victim out of high school. perhaps saving further tragedy. on. behalf of my colleagues i would ask the house to observe a moment of silence in honor of the fallen the staff at the school, their families, and the city of chardon. >> please observe a moment of

silence. >> and that was followed by a moment of silence as seen on the house floor earlier today on the c-span networks. the congressman with reference to the incident yesterday, the tragic incident at chardon, ohio. speaker bey ne down playing gun legislation. he was asked about this at a news conference earlier today. >> the tragedy in ohio yesterday, your home state, do you think that tragedy will prompt any new legislation in this country? >> well, clearly, our hearts go out to the families of those two victims. the violence like this should not be tolerated in our society. let's be honest, there are about 250 million guns in america and so, there are out there. but people should use them responsibly >> the comments of house speaker john boehner earlier in the day,

he's a native of southern ohio, making reference to the two, now three victims who now passed away from the shooting. t.j. lane made an appearance in a dhardon court you're listening to "washington today." it's just past 6:30 here in the east. 3:30 in the west. polls in michigan still open for an an hour and a half. live coverage of the speeches by the winner and losers of the michigan primary. also, arizona voters going to the polls today. some other news today on wall street, the dow gained 23, closing above and staying above 13,000 for the first time since 2008. final numbers of 13,005. nasdaq was up 20.

s&p was up four. government accountable office said that the federal government has done little to duplicate 80 areas that it fails to collect. the report set off a new round of finger pointing by the white house saying lawmakers should give it the ability to make the government more efficient. since january the president has been seeking this fast-track authority. the supreme court's conservative jgss voicing some skepticism allowing companies to be sued in court. the high court weighing whether a law over 200 years old given foreign victims of abusing a right to sue u.s. courts to prove that their companies played a role in atrocities.

at issue is 2 harvard lawsuit by 12 nigerians who want to hold she shell. to save the endangered spotted owl the obama administration is moving forward to shoot a rival bird, the plan is the latest attempt to protect the spotted oil. the government set aside acres of forest to protect the oil. the bird's population continues to decline. the plan announced today would designate has bebitat for the bs survivabili survivability. and the house speaker announcing today that john sullivan is going to retire after nearly eight years in that

post, sullivan is 60 years old, he served with the house of par lem tarren. and president obama today speaking at the uaw today shg, vowing to buy a chevy volt in five years, as soon as his presidency is over. he said even though secret service wouldn't let me drive me, i enjoyed it sitting in. when i'm not president anymore in five years, i'll buy one and drive it myself. back in a minute with more "washington today." david gregory. george stephanopoulos. >> your five sunday tv networks replayed on c-span radio. noon eastern, nbc's "meet the

press." abc's this week. cbs' face the nation. the top issues, key political leaders, brought to you as a public service by c-span and the networks. replay of the sunday tv networks talk shows. welcome back. this is "washington today." republicans politics, first on the issue of senator olympia snowe, news tonight that she's not running for re-election. she's confident that she would have won, but she's frustrated by the atmosphere christian science monitor pointing out that rising gas price prices, improving economic data make it more difficult in a head-on assault on the administration's economic

policies but gas prices, well that's fair game and today on capitol hill, a number of senators including matt blunt of missouri taking aim at gas line prices now averaging between 3.50 and $5 in many parts of the country. in california, it's now close to or exceeding $5 a gallon. >> this gas issue at home when i was at home, one was a person who i didn't put $10 worth of my gas many my car today because i wanted to come back to the gas station tomorrow where i would use that less than 3 gallons of gas. that's all i had. i'll have to figure out to come back in the next day or. another person told me as they're standing watching the pump, it goes 30, 40, 50, 60, every one of those jumps they were thinking about something

that their family wouldn't be able to do. high gas prices have real impact on families and they have real impact on our economy. they have real impact on consumer confidence and we need to send a strong message to do something about it and just good policy, if you announce it and show commitment, if you send a message before you get the energy, if you send the message that we're going to get it, it does make a difference and we have been sending all of the other messages from the secretary of energy's view before he was nominated that what we really need was our gas prices to be as high as the gas prices in europe, which the day he said it was $8, $9. it looks like they're making real progress toward that. >> senator roy blunt of missouri. >> looking at all of the energy

prices, hard to reach a conclusion that high gas prices are exactly part of the president's plan. and that the policies that he has put in place have intentionally elevated the price of gasoline much to the detriment of the american consumers, also experiencing higher gas prices and healthish insurance, when you think about the keystone pipeline as has previously been mentioned, when you think about the restrictive actions of the fish and wild life service, dramatically increasing the number of endangered species, the epa's investigation of the 60-year-old practice known as fracking. they were designed to discourage the rise of gasoline prices. leaving us more dependent on the

middle east. i would just add to what the doctor said, the strategic petroleum reserve is for emergencies. not something that is entirely predictable and we know that it's going to happen but yet the president and his administration's policies have intentionally driven up the price at the pump in order to serve their other interests. >> the republican senator from texas, jon cornyn. using gas prices as the latest target to go after the president and democrats. the reaction from senator harry reid who spoke to reporters earlier today in washington, here's a portion of what he had to say. >> if higher gas prices threat on the economic recovery should the president -- >> that should be used in a case

of an emergency as the president said in his remarks the other day, there's no easy fix. there's no easy fix. we're going to do anything that we can that's reasonable to try to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. as everyone knows we're producing more oil now than we had in several decades. that's very, very important. we have to move away from our dependence on foreign oil, we know that. that's another reason why i was disappointed with our republican colleagues, they wouldn't let us extend our tax cuts for energy. >> a white house effort, do you expect legislative response every couple of years? will that happen? >> there's something being looked at again, it has been very unproductive in the past.

maybe the evidence is so overwhelming now, the federal trade commission can do something. we know that there's rampant speculation going on in driving up the price of oil, we knew that before. when we had this problem a number of years ago. and so, i would hope that maybe the federal trade commission could help us. >> senator harry reid responding to republican criticism of the energy and gas prices. and his response that everything is being done to keep prices in line but also look for new, clean sources of energy. the president talking about gas prices a and the auto industry, by the way, earlier the day before the uaw, the legislative conference here in washington, d.c., about 1600 members of the uaw, we point out that because it's also primary day in michigan. well environmental committee, the

committee on energy and commerce, lisa jackson the epa administrator saying that the agency needs the money that it's requesting for the budget. the budget's request does reflect in her words epa's core mission of protecting public health and the environment. while making tough decisions to reduce government spending. as is the case with republicans taking aim at the administration's budget the republican from virginia asking lisa jackson about ongoing regulations. who say the epa is doing much to place a stranglehold over industry in this country. here's some of the exchange. the comments of the lisa jackson. >> secretary jackson, the d.c. circuit is hearing oral arguments in the green gas

argument, in your brief, it indicates in that brief that there would be a need to hire 230,000 full-time employees, that there would be additional 80,000 permits per year, 6 million title v permits and a cost to the epa of 21 billion on top of the current budget, 21 billion per year. i'm looking at the brief where i get these numbers, the paragraph, based on this analysis, the epa found applying the statutory thresholds of 201 would quote, overwhelm the resources of permitting authorities and impair the functioning of the program, you would agree with that assessm t assessment, yes or no? >> yes, sir. >> and that's why you all have defended the tailoring rule based on the theory, there's theory of law if it's not

practical you don't have to do it, isn't that correct in. >> no, sir, if the result is absurd or increases administration burden, can't be implemented we were giving relief, it's a rule designed to give relief. >> wouldn't you agree that the businesses of the united states of america find themselves when they're looking at cement, universities, that many businesses of the united states of america find themselves in exactly the same position that the epa finds themselves on this case where you all have said the burdens are too great by our own rules to follow our rules and don't you think there should be a tailoring act for the job creators of america to assist them in creating sxwrobs fe ini hardworking day payers of america. >> i don't agree with your premise, sir. >> it's okay to have one standard for the epa and another standard -- the standard isn't

for epa. >> let me go forward and make my statement. i get passionate about this because my people are losing jobs and let me say this as well, when we here earlier this year and ms. bennett was kind enough to be with us, some of the money that had been committed, some of which was more than five years old, perhaps other permitting requirements or other requirements by the epa or other agencies. she indicated some of those were more than five years old. i asked her at the time, why wouldn't you all back the ability to move to five years for businesses in america because they need that and that's in the bill hr 2250, he said at that time that wasn't her position to make a statement as to whether or not she was supporting the bill or not. why wouldn't you adopt and accept the fact that the businesses of america can't

comply with the time requirements even if we can argue about regulations? there are numerous businesses in this country that can't meet the standard currently if code. why have we seen nothing from the epa that says, you know what, maybe we need a longer time line to get these things accomplished? >> that's not true. epa is reconsidering the rule to give greater clarity -- >> but i'm correct. epa is not backing legislation to change the time line in the law. is that correct? >> that is correct, yes, sir. >> thank you. let me talk about another subject briefly, you have -- i believe, that you would agree, or that you would feel that the epa is doing a better job today than it did in say 2001? >> i don't have any feeling on

the subject. i believe we're doing a good job today. >> all right. because i look at these -- i have a chart here you have 1,000 less employees now than you had then, was there ever a study to show a diminishing return on investment or at some point, you get too many folks and you can't be too effective, exactly how many employees you need to be most efficient in accomplishing your tasks? >> there have been workload studies done in the past. we can get those to you. >> because, you know, look, you can go to absurdity, you can't go to one employee and be efficient mo efficient. i'm just wondering where the break point is, we're trying to find money and i hope you appreciate that and then, my time is up. i yield back. >> the exchange between

representative morgan griffith, he questioned epa's lisa jackson. the epa administrator outlining the budget for the next fiscal year and the representative made mentioned of something else happening in washington, d.c. taking place before a three-judge panel in the u.s. court of appeals here in washington. those judges considering challenges that green house gases are determining when states and industries must comply with regulations that would curtail their use. some of these companies energy and states led by virginia and texas seeking to stop the agency the epa through more than 60 different lawsuits.

you can read more on this story by logging scandal. you can read more by logging on to bloomberg business week which is looking into the separate issue from what you heard a moment ago which is lisa jackson outlining her budget and taking questions that the epa has in place with questions from representative griffith. for the first time, the defense department acknowledged that some cremated remains of the september 11th were dumped in a landfall. this disclosure in what was an 86-page report released today by an independent task force reviewed by the military at dover air force base in delaware. it was a contentious briefing earlier today and trying to keep the fok cus that the 9/11 findis

were part in the work of the task force. here is more from today's briefing. >> it says the incinerations of the unidentified portions of the remains. >> can you give me the page that is on? >> page six of one of the subsequent sections. under section 2, background and introduction. if you look on page six on the third full paragraph. it says this policy began shortly after september 11, 2001, when remains could not be tested or identified. these cremated portions were placed in sealed containers that were given to a disposal contractor. the contract eror incinerated t and put them in a landfall.

that is referring to september 11th victims and do you know how extensive it was? >> i don't know how extensive it was. it was only the victims through the port mortuary. >> do you know how many victims? >> no, i don't know. >> is there a way to find out? >> i don't know there is a way to find out. what you need to understand the reason we put that comment in there is that there is a starting point for understanding how this happened. in other words, while i understand how sensational the notion is, there was a point where people considered going to the crematorium. in some states, that is the law. and so it goes from what many have considered the final disposition, which we don't agree with, by the way. we feel the final disposition needs to be the final resting

place. we believe in 9/11, you can trace back the origins for why what happened happened. we only have records that really go back that we know of that only go back -- this is anecdotal evidence that was told to us by people. >> in appendix e of your report. 25th, july, 2002. memo from acting director from the mortuary to dispose group f remains from the attack on the pentag pentagon. then august of 2002, there is a note about the remains. it seems like it is not just anecdotal. there is paper work that directed that these being incinerated. >> you can see where the paper work is and you can go and try to track it down. i am telling you that was not the focus of the panel. this focus of the panel was to

look forward to see what was wrong and to correct what was wrong or make a forward looking sort of recommendation about what needed to be fixed. we did not spend a great deal of time and effort and energy looking into what you are talking about. next question. >> sir, i'm sorry. >> i'm sorry. we're going to the next question. it's my report, but it is not the focus of the report. >> the comments of retired army general john abazaid. this after an investigation by the air force which runs the facility at dover air force base in delaware finding some remains of military personnel were not handled in accordance with procedures. the air force acknowledging it disposed of the incinerated remains of at least 274 service members in the landfall before it ended the practice back in 2008.

some say the practice dates back to 2001. jill lassiter is following the story. we talked with her in the last hour. >> really interesting because it is buried way back in the report. you will see in the appendix e. a whole list of the timeline of incidents that happened at dover port mortuary which we have been made aware of recently. the big one is the port mortuary lost portions of remains for seven victims killed in the 9/11 attacks in the pentagon and pennsylvania. some include a payout to a marine wife. two civilian cadavers being tested and the remains of a navy crew being disposed of as medical waste as opposed as a group burial. >> i realize they are not related, but a lot of attention

at arlington national cemetery with the fallen remains of soldiers and how this could happen and how it could happen in light of what we heard at arlington national cemetery a year ago. >> and honestly, i don't know if that has been addressed. the air force chief of staff and the air force secretary said tuesday this is the first time we're hearing about the 9/11 remains. in terms of the other incidents that have already been reported, i think they just said we acknowledge the mistake and we take the fall and we are fixing it. that is shown in the port mortuary review. >> jill laster, we spoke to her in last hour about the practices at dover air force base. indicated some of remains of the 9/11 attacks in september of 2001 were also sent to landfalls. you can read more by logging on

to the air force times web site and msnbc all posting stories at this hour on these developments. you are listening to c-span radio. this is washington today. >> congress is taking up an effort to allow cameras inside the u.s. supreme court. julian pakay is joining us. >> thank you. >> what is the status report of where congress is and as you point out in your story on the hill, regardless, nothing will be resolved before the health care hearing next month. >> that is right. the supreme court is supposed to hear oral arguments in the case of the century starting march 26th for three days. a lot of people are thinking this is the moment, the time, to get the bill passed. unfortunately, it is bogged down in the house.

in the senate, i'm hearing that, you know, there are efforts under way to try to get a senate vote. the sponsor of the legislation in the senate is dick durbin of illinois. he is the number two democrat on the senate. he has harry reid's ear. he may be able to get this on the floor. it will not pass before the supreme court hears arguments. >> as you point out in your story, this idea has been bouncing around between the house and senate for the last decade. led in part by former senator arlen spector and now senator chuck grassley and now jerry connelly. >> that is right. the proponents of the bill are careful to point out it is not a partisan issue or ideological issue. it boils down to whether or not you think the congress should

have the authority to, you know, mandate its will on the supreme court obviously under the separation of powers. there are some people who feel like that is not proper. diane feinstein, the democrat, is one of those people. she voted against the bill in the senate judiciary committee. the issue is making that statement of why are we telling them their business. if they don't want cameras, they shouldn't have cameras. why not let them make that decision? >> if this passes by the house and senate, it doesn't force the supreme court to place cameras inside the chamber. >> what it would do is allow the supreme court to decide. first of all, this would only be for proceedings that are open to the public. oral arguments where, you