thank you, madam chair. >> senator, if i could milk a suggestion, we have had a little bit of blood pressure of what's mandatory and what isn't. more especially in several of the programs. more especially in ag research and other titles. i'm wondering under the circumstances if you would agree to work with the chairwoman and myself on this specific issue and your suggestion, and we're looking it over right now, and work with us and see if we can't maybe address this on the floor. >> absolutely. i'm very open it adjusting and all of these priorities that my colleagues share in both parties, absolutely. thank you, chairman roberts. >> certainly this is something that i support, but would appreciate it if we could do this on the floor and have a better sense of it.

senator conrad? >> i was wanting to inquire of the senator, is this mandatory money? >> this would be, yes. >> well, the concern i'd have is we just provided the entire offset for the energy title, $800 million, mandatory money, that was out of what was left. and what i don't know, is there this additional sum still remaining? you know, we -- we had a funding mechanism for energy that we altered in deference to senator chambliss so that all the mandatory funding came in the balance that we had remaining. and so i just don't want to have us find ourselves in a situation we've spent the money twice. and that would be a concern i have because i don't have a --

an up-to-date run. perhaps their economist does or other staff members do, but i do think we have to guard against creating an expectation that we've spent more money than we really have available. >> if i might just indicate in terms of we're looking at the numbers now. we do know that we've hit our $23 billion commitment and slightly over, but we don't know how much over. so i think it's reasonable for us to have a chance to take a look at this, make sure -- we made a commitment on $23 billion in deficit reduction. we need to make sure we've hit that point, and at the same time, i think you raised a really important issue. >> thank you. i concur with your comments, senator roberts and conrad. this is second in line. the energy dollars, we were told by staff that with no absolute specificity there was about a billion dollars as of last night scored extra above the $23

billion. the first 800 roughly goes to energy title, that's fine. i'm not disputing that. this would go after that. so if there's -- if there's $120 million, if there's $20 million left, we would go after that and then go after this. >> senator conrad? >> one other point that i think we have to remind ourselves of is with respect to rural development mandatory money, our appropriators often take the money and c.h.i.m.p. it, changes in mandatory programs, so we provide money we never get. i think we want to keep in mind what our friends in the appropriations do, especially in rural development funding. >> whoa -- [ laughter ]. >> not that there's anything wrong with what you appropriators do. [ laughter ] >> not that there's anything wrong with it.

[ inaudible ] >> senator cochran -- >> i'm not sure it's worth amplifying. what i was going to say is, you know, you need to take note of the fact that there's money in here for microentrepreneurs, and i was going to ask if that was geographically based or what -- seems to us that we're getting a little bit down home and some are getting a whole lot others. and they're called macro-entrepreneurships. it doesn't say that regions are different. as a practical matter, i would bet you that most of the micro-entrepreneurs, there are more in mississippi than there are in nebraska. >> there are, madam chair, a number -- six of us on this committee that are on appropriations including some powerful members. and while all of them more powerful than i since i said in the last appropriation. but we have -- i'm on that

subcommittee, and senator cochran's influence. and we will all -- micro-enterprise and others will be looking out for rural interests in that appropriations committee. >> thank you very much. senator roberts? >> madam chairman, the chairman has spoken. nothing much else needs to be said, but i'll say it anyway. in my opening statement, i -- i said we were over $24 billion. and i was pretty proud of that. very close to $25. we made adjustments that we think are proper under the issue of fairness. i understand that there are a lot of folks who don't think that that is the case, but we and i'm not casting any aspersions in their direction. but if we're over $24 billion and now we're 23, and we don't know exactly where but we're 23, i want to make doggone sure that we're not below the 23 which was offered to the supercommittee

sometime ago. so i think under the banner of caution and remarks by the distinguished chairman that we better -- and the senator from north dakota, you know, let's look at this. and let's work on it, but let's, you know, wait until the floor. >> debbie? >> senator? >> madam chairwoman, back here in the corner. i agree with that, i don't think there's anything wrong with being north of $23 billion in savings. i don't think we've got to spend it down to being 23. the score we have now or the score we got at $23.4 billion, i think speaks well for this committee that we went above what was actually sort of expected in terms of what we're going to save. so i appreciate the effort to find ways in which to cal interstate resources -- to allocate resources, but i think it's important as we head to the floor that we have a good, strong mark, and that we not

compromise that or putting it in jeopardy by adding amendments until we find out what final scores are, could take us in the opposite direction. i think right now a very big priority for this committee needs to be contributing to the deficit reduction that we all know is so important for the country. >> thank you. senator roberts? >> madam chairman -- pardon, chairwoman. second time i've done that, i apologize. senator lugar's not here, but i know our sugar policy is important to him, and he will continue to work on the floor on that particular program. >> thank you very much. we have closed all of our titles, so we are at a point now for final vote. and with the majority of the committee present, the question occurs on requiring the committee print to the full senate as amended. all those in favor indicate by saying aye -- >> aye -- >> senator chambliss has asked

for a recorded vote. the clerk will call the roll. >> senator roberts. >> aye. >> senator lugar. [ inaudible ] >> senator cochran? >> no. >> senator mcconnell? >> no by proxy. >> senator chambliss? >> no. >> senator johannes? >> aye. >> senator bozeman? >> no. >> senator grassley? >> aye. [ inaudible ] >> just in time. >> aye. >> senator hoven? >> aye. >> senator leahy? >> aye by proxy. >> senator harkin?

>> aye by proxy. >> senator conrad? >> aye. >> senator bachus? >> aye. >> senator nelson? >> aye. >> senator brown? >> aye. >> senator casey? >> aye by proxy. >> senator clobichar? >> aye. >> senator bennett? >> aye. >> senator gillibrand? >> no. >> chairwoman stabenow? >> aye. >> the total tally of senators present is 12 ayes, four nos. >> a majority of the committee being present and having voted in the affirmative, the committee print is ordered and reported to the senate as mae amended. without objection let me say the

committee counsel is authorized to make technical and conforming changes consistent with the actions of the committee, and i want to thank everyone again for -- >> madam chair, point of order -- >> yes? >> i think there were five nos. >> yeah. one was by -- >> will the clerk repeat the final tall? >> sure. the total tally -- >> four present. one by proxy. >> i'm sorry, thank you, madam chair. >> let me say in conclusion again, this is a very historic day to have not only the major reforms we have but over $23 billion in deficit reduction. i don't know another committee that's worked together in a bipartisan basis to provide something that works for our ranchers, our farmers, consumers, taxpayers. those all across america and at the same time provides the kind of deficit reduction that we have. so we're addressing the needs of american agriculture, and don't

forget it's 16 million jobs. thank you very much for all of your support and help getting to this point. the meeting's adjourned. with congress on break there week, we're featuring some of american history tv's weekend programs in primetime here on c-span3. tonight a look at the fight against slavery. starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern, a republican congressman and abolitionist owen lovejoy who used his home as a stop on the underground railroad. at 9:00, a history professor teaches a class on the early 19th century abolitionist and

women's suffrage movements at ohio state university. at 10:30 p.m., abolitionist john willis menard, elected to the u.s. congress in 1868. and although never seated, was the first african-american to address the house chamber. american history tv in primetime all this week on c-span3. and on our companion network, c-span2, book tv's weekend programs in primetime. tonight a look at some of the world's outstanding scientific minds. starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern, kitty ferguson on theoretical physicist and author steven hawking, an unfettered mind. at 9:00, george dyson talks about the realization of alan turing's theoretical universal machine in the 1940s and '50s. at 10:30, john girtner traces some of the 20th century's most important inventions. book tv in primetime all week on c-span2.

>> between 1971 and 1973, president richard nixon secretly recorded nearly 4,000 hours of phone calls and meetings. >> always agree on the little things and then you hold on the big one. hell, i've done this so often in conversations with people, i'll say we'll concede that and make them feel good, but then don't give them the big one. >> every month, hear more on the tapes including discussions are future presidents, key white house advisers, and intelligence agency heads. saturdays at 6:00 p.m. eastern. this week, hear conversations with gerald ford, ronald reagan, and george h.w. bush. in washington, d.c., listen at 90.1 f.m. on, x.m. channel 119, and at vspanradio.org. >> i have seemed to have earned a certain place where people will listen to me, and i've always cared about the country. and the greatest generation writing that book gave me a kind of a platform that was

completely unanticipated. so i thought i ought not to kwaunder that. so i ought to step up as -- not just a citizen and journalist but as a father and husband and grandfather, and as i see thing i ought to write them and try to start this dialogue, which i'm trying to do with this book, but what i'm about to do next. >> in his latest "the time of our lives," tom brokaw urges americans to redefine the american dream. and sunday live in depth, your questions for the former anchor and managing editor of "nbc nightly news." in his half dozen books, he's written about the greatest generation, the 1960s, and today. "in depth" sunday at noon eastern on c-span2's book tv. u.s. policy in the middle east was the topic of discussion at the anti-defamation league's leadership conference on monday. speakers included steven simon,

the national security council's middle east and north africa senior director, and a panel of experts. simon discussed a number of issues in the region, including the violence in syria, egypt's ongoing transition, and iran's nuclear program. this is just under two hours. >> good morning. a very good morning. welcome back to the national leadership conference of the anti-defamation league, one of the nation's premiere civil rights and human relations agencies. we are very proud of our 100-year record of fighting bigotry and hate and building bridges of understanding between all people. we'd like to welcome our honored guests from the diplomatic and

political community, from the embassies of egypt and israel and others. [ applause ] >> i would like to welcome the ambassador from norway. welcome, thank you for being here. [ applause ] >> before we start our session, i want to take a few moments to recognize a few of our leadership classes, and i recognize it's early, guys, but i hear the buzz. so i want to hear from you, all right? let's start with atlanta and the southeast. [ applause ] how about detroit? >> [ applause ] >> houston and the southwest? [ applause ] >> las vegas? [ cheers ] >> they're used to staying up all night. we have an interesting program this morning on u.s. policy in a dynamic and dangerous middle east. to introduce our first speaker, i'd like to call upon steve

adler, member of our national commission from austin, texas. [ applause ] >> good morning. this morning's session is focused on the dramatic upheavals in the middle east and the policy challenges that they pose for the united states. the obama administration and office are expecting to face a full plate of issues to manage while pursuing mideast policy goals. countering iran's march to nuclear weapons capability, promoting israeli/palestinian negotiations, reducing the u.s. military presence in iraq, and managing volatile situations in pakistan and afghanistan that makes for a full agenda. and then if you add to that the stunning political upheaval in the region that no one could have predicted.

as these events have shown, and as our next speaker is likely to remind us, the only thing predictable by this region is the inability to predict events and the repercussions. today we are fortunate to have with us, steve simon, special assistant to president obama and the senior director for middle east and north africa at the national security council. mr. simon has had a distinguished career as an author, scholar, and one of washington's most insightful analysts on middle eastern terrorism and the broader regional dynamics. adl first encountered him when he served in president clinton's national security council as director for global issues and senior director for transnational threats. and during that period he advised president clinton on counterterrorism policy issues

and operations, as well as security policy in the near east and south asia. during his service in the obama white house, his door has always been open to us, and he has been generous in sharing his time, his wealth of understanding, and his insights. please join me in becoming white house senior director for middle east and north africa, steve simon. [ applause ] >> thank you. steve's introduction reminds me of something i used to say before i came back into government when i was asked about the arab spring which was since i didn't see it coming, how do i know where it's going? i still feel like that a little bit. anyway, thank you all for being here and inviting me to join you this morning.

it's an honor. it's truly an honor to address such a distinguished group. let me start by thanking all of you here today for the work that you do every day through the anti-defamation league to advance and protect our most fundamental american freedoms and values. for nearly 100 years, you have been on the front lines of the freedoms that americans cherish whether by combating anti-semitism here and around the world, by standing up against hate crimes, or by speaking out against anti-muslim bigotry. your work is in the finest american tradition, and your voice is an important contribution to our discourse, our national discourse on all of these issues. yet all of your impressive achievements, of all of them, perhaps none is as important as the work that adl has done to protect the security of israel. in a world of changing threats

that work has never been more challenging. i would like to focus the obama administration's approach to israel's security. for more than 60 years since israel's founding, during periods of war and peace, calm and crisis, u.s. administrations of all stripes have worked to safeguard israel's security. republican and democrat. i would maintain that no administration and no president has done as much as president obama has done to protect -- to promote israel's security, and i say this having served in every american administration but one since ronald reagan was in office. so i bring a personal perspective to this, as well as an analytical and descriptive perspective. thus, prime minister benjamin netanyahu has rightly said that our security cooperation with israel is unprecedented.

that was his word for it. and if you have relatives or friends in southern israel, they can tell you what this has meant in practical terms in recent months. in addition to record levels of security assistance, the united states was already providing israel our administration secured an additional $205 million to help produce the short-range rocket defense system iron dome. the purpose of this money was to enable israel to accelerate production of iron dome batteries. well, during the recent attacks from gaza, iron dome intercepted nearly 80% of the rockets it tried to engage. and that's dozens of deadly explosions that might otherwise is taken place at hospitals, schools, or homes. it's been a godsend for besieged communities along israel's border with gaza, and the

department of defense i'd like to say has announced recently our intent to provide israel with additional support for this critical defensive system. in addition, we continue to work with israel on the weapons system to intercept medium range ballistic system and shorter range ballistics system. against these procurement programs we continue to collaborate on a powerful radar system linked to a u.s. early warning satellite system that could buy israel valuable time in the event of a missile crisis. but it's not just about material and technology, and i hasten to add this because it's also about relationships. it's a web of relationships of which i'm a part. so i can speak to it with some,

you know, familiarity, even intimacy. we have launched the most comprehensive and meaningful strategic and operational consultations across all levels of our government in the history of the u.s./israeli relationship. and bear in mind, i go back to the reagan administration. i do believe that this is true. later this year, for example, our nation's armed forces will conduct their largest ever joint military exercise with israel challenge. this will involve thousands of u.s. troops in and around israel working with israeli military personnel. in 2011, the last year that we have a complete count, nearly 200 senior defense officials visited israel and senior officials visited the u.s. just as often. this is a very thick network of ties and very intend

collaboration. and despite tough -- excuse me. i can't get the words out whenever i have to say the words fiscal times. it's my personal experience. but despite tough fiscal times, president obama has requested $3.1 billion in military assistance for 2013, which is the most ever. [ applause ] >> standing up for israel's securities also remains -- also remains an important issue in the area of israel's legitimacy because it's been a priority for this administration to stand up to attempts by anyone to delegitimatized israel in the international arena. as president obama has said, including in the speech he gave in cairo toward the beginning of

his administration, israel's legitimacy is not a matter for debate. that is why we were the only country -- the only country to vote in the human rights council this spring, that's a u.n. agency, against the establishment of a fact-finding mission on settlements and why we have opposed unilateral palestinian efforts to circumvent negotiations by purseeing statehood in multilateral organizations. and that is why we stood up strongly for israel's right to defend itself after the goldstone report was issued in -- about the 2009 gaza war. and that is why when israel was isolated in the aftermath of the flotilla incident, we supported them when no one else did, i might add. that is why we refuse to endorse

the conference on racism and will always, i repeat always reject attempts to equate zionism with racism. [ applause ] >> and that is why we are working literally around the clock and around the world to prevent steps taken at the u.n. or its agencies because as the president has said, there's no shortcut to peace. no shortcut. these issues can only be resolved through negotiations, not through action at the u.n. and that is why we've been so focused on doing everything we can to prevent this from happening. now we know that israel sees the threat posed by iran as existential. and make no mistake, an iran armed with nuclear weapons would pose a direct and serious threat to the security of the united

states, as well. this is about both allies, israel and the united states, not just about israel and not just about the united states. and that's why our policy is not to contain iran but to prevent it from acquiring a nuclear weapon. [ applause ] >> now you've heard a lot of loud talk about iran, and you will hear a lot more in the coming months. this "look talk" of war as president obama describes it has an unintended effect. it benefits the iranian government by driving up the price of oil which they depend upon to fund their nuclear program. it's ironical, but there it is. so for the sake of israel's security, america's security, and the peace and security of the world, our approach has been differe

different. we believe now is the time to speak softly but carry a big stick. to let our increased pressure sink in. to sustain the broad international coalition that we have built and to engage iran in good faith as the window for diplomacy shrinks. and it is shrinking. because the united states and israel both assess that iran does not yet have a nuclear program and let me assure you that we are exceedingly vigilant in monitoring their program, both we and the israelis, there remains time and space for diplomacy backed by pressure, obviously, to succeed. iran's leaders still have the opportunity to make the right decision and abandoned their current course. though as the president has clearly stated, time is running short. we have backed up that commitment by building an unprecedented coalition to