we're concerned about the north korean provocation, that some point, they might do something intentionally or unintentionally that sparked a larger crisis. that is why we have actively condemned the actions that have taken as being irresponsible and dangerous. >> can you tell us anything about what their record has been on previous long-range missiles launchers -- launches in terms of the direction? >> they have succeeded in hitting water, but beyond that, i do not know. they have very little to brag about in terms of their missile launches thus far. >> do we have any other options to pressure north korea? >> i would flip that around.

i think we have achieved this very strong resolution. i'm sorry, i misunderstood. we continue to work that. the real option is for north korea to release them on humanitarian grounds. we communicate to north korea, we have our own means of communicating, and we will continue to do so. >> why is the former president jimmy carter -- >> i have nothing to announce on that. >> aside from putting north korea on a list of companies -- countries but support terrorism? >> is an option. there is this a criteria that road will acquire as -- that

will require us to do that. >> [unintelligible] >> we have various options at our disposal. there are very specific legal aspects that and company -- that accompany both of those. >> david, go ahead. >> there was an attack on members of the transitional government in somalia earlier today. i am wondering whether you think that it reflects a notion that this government is -- >> david, we are aware that the transitional government, the minister of national security was killed midday today. it was a vehicle suicide bomb as he exited the hotel in somalia.

he was in the region to rally support for the tfg. our ambassador to kenya has already passed condolences. we're aware that has been no claim of responsibility. we're monitoring the situation in somalia very closely. there is literally a battle being waged between the transitional government. we're doing what we can to support the tfg. >> one more on zimbabwe. amnesty international put out a statement today in which they said the new government is not doing enough to curb human rights abuses. you have any comment on the report in particular? and following the meetings, is there any indication at all that you might be reconsidering your

current stand on substantial aid packages to zimbabwe? >> we did provide some assistance during prime minister 's visit last week. there is must be done for the respect of human rights and human law. we're telling our assistance to the people of zimbabwe directly. we're fostering genuine change in zimbabwe. last one. >> [unintelligible] what will be the expectations for such a visit? >> i will defer to the secretary-general. hos[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

>> every weekend, but tv has the -- "book tv." from the garden of eden to today, eduardo galeano recounts the history of the world's recollection of 600 short stories. he talks with columbia university professor john dangerous. it airs sunday night at 9 eastern -- at 9:00 eastern. john talbot exposes the mess about the recession and what -- talbott exposes the myths about the recession, and what it will take to recover. former fda commissioner david kessler explains that americans can control their eating habits. there are a lot more books and authors -- there are lots more

books and authors this weekend on "tv." -- book tv. >> people to not want to think about roosevelt's conservation as a policy as much as a passion. he put aside almost 240 million acres of wild america. as people are talking about environmentalism and grain movements, roosevelt is becoming the key figure to understanding. he was the only politician who understood biology and understood birds, migratory patterns, mating habits of deer and elk, and actually did something. >> sunday, the first of two hours with douglas brinkley on "the wilderness a warrior."

you can download the pdcast, -- podcast, too. >> how is c-span funded? >> i have no clue. >> government grants? >> advertising for products. >> public money, i'm sure. >> my taxes? >> 30 years ago, america's cable companies created c-span as a public service. no government mandate, no government money. >> now senators durbin, gregg and talk about the measure that would provide rebates for consumers to trade in vehicles with low gas mileage for more fuel-efficient cars. from earlier today, this is about 20 minutes. mr. durbin: mr. president, i know there is controversy involved in the so called

i know there is controversy involved in this proposal. let's be honest about where we are in america today. we have seen the largest decline in automobile sales and 50 years. sales are down 29%. plummeting auto sales have reduced production and it has had a ripple effect across the economy, forcing dealerships and factories to close. we have lost 280,000 american jobs in the automobile industry. that is what this is about. 280,000 american jobs that are lost and more that will be lost if we do nothing. some would have us do nothing. while the automobile industry is reeling from job losses and declining production, many consumers in the market are holding back. the purpose of this legislation is to put movement into the purchasing of new automobiles.

it is a targeted way to give incentives to americans to buy cars, get them back in the showrooms, and start moving the inventory. start creating demand and create a more positive feeling. are there better ways to have written this? yes. i think we could have spent more time, but that is the case in almost every bill that comes before us. some have argued, wrote this just came up in the congress committee. -- in the conference committee. i will concede, i will wish that the bill had been debated and passed here. we did not have the opportunity to do it. this is an opportunity that can make a profound difference. has this con sept -- has as concept ever been tried? it was tried in germany where they offered $3,300 to concern is to replace old cars with new ones. at the end of the program's

first month, car sales dramatically increased by 21%. the bad news, the same month in the automobile sales went down by 41%. germany knew how to create a surge in purchasing by consumers with similar legislation to what is being brought to the floor. let's be honest about the automobile industry. it is at the base of our economic. along with the housing industry. we need to make sure that a strong auto industry is available so we can come out of this recession and start creating jobs. those who want to kill this provision are walking away from incentives to put people back to work. dealerships servicing cars, selling cars, and producing cars across america. i beg those that oppose this to understand that doing nothing is a terrible outcome. if we want to recover from this

recession and restore consumer confidence, if we want to move old cars off the road, and bring new cars on the road with higher gas mileage, this is our opportunity. let's not get caught up in some procedural tangle here. keep our eye on 200,000 americans. more follow if we do nothing. this is going to be important for us in the long run. we need to build on it, but first we need to pass it today. as senator reid said, this is an important provision in the house of representatives. without it, we're not sure we can pass the supplemental bill which can provide for our troops in the field. it is a delicate balance that brings this to the floor. i would hope that those who oppose it did not want to stand back and do nothing as this recession continues. understand the gravity of this automobile industry being flat on its back at this point in time. i realize that we owe president

obama the passage of the supplemental legislation. president obama did not want to ask for this bill to pay for the worse in iraq and afghanistan. the previous president made us on these words on an emergency basis. -- and made us fund these wars on an emergency basis. this is one of the last things we have to do to clear up the situation left by the president. this bill left by automobiles and has a broad cross-section -- it supports business and labor. the national association of manufacturers. the national automobile lawyers association, as well as more than a dozen governors. it is important that we defeat the objection to this program and put this money into our economy, give people a chance to buy a new car that is more fuel- efficient, put people back to work so we can start digging

ourselves out of this recession. i yield the floor. >> first off, i appreciate the majority leader clarify the situation. this issue is about the issue of cash for clunkers. a piece of legislation that has nothing to do with finding our troops in the field, and was airdropped into a conference. it adds $1 billion of new debt. that is what this waiver is about. they say that this has the ability to hurt the funding of the troops.

i believe that to be fundamentally inaccurate. this issue comes out of a piece of legislation that the majority leader and assistant majority leader offered. they wrote the bill. it is called "the honest leadership and open government act. that bill created this point of order specifically to address this type of situation. we're in a conference. one or more of the bodies sticks into a bill that is a must pass bill, language that has nothing to do with that bill and which is not paid for. in this case, it is $1 billion of spending that is not paid for. the reason they structured the rule this way was to -- was so that it would not harm the underlying bill. if this bill is successful, the bill goes back to the house.

they can send it to the president and fund the troops. is it the position of the assistant leader that this cash for clunkers bill is so important that the house of representatives would not fund the troops if the language was not in the bill. is he saying that the democratic leadership is holding the funding of the troops hostage to spend $1 billion on an extraneous program which creates virtually no environmental improvement in our fleet? it is simply part of the economic effort to revive the auto industry. we've already spent $183 billion on that by the way -- on its, by the way. are they saying they will not

fund the troops of the ticket -- if we take it out. it is designed specifically to address this type of situation. the conference is truly abused relative to finding and spending money which we do not have. that i find to be -- i do not believe that is realistic. i do not believe that the democratic membership in the house is going to vote against this bill if the cash for clunkers languages taking out -- language is taken out. in addition, of course, there is the fact that paygo is being

violated here. there is the great irony that the president of the united states, surrounded by democratic leadership of the senate and the house held a very dramatic press conference at the white house at 12:30 in the afternoon saying that they were going to reestablish the paygo rules for future spending. that new programs would have to be paid for. and the house leadership went back up to capitol hill, and on the same day, passed this cash for clunkers bill which was not paid for and violated the paygo rules. the hypocrisy of it is so extraordinary that it cannot even be described. that is what happened.

and then, in order to protect this bill which is an on pay for violation of the paygo rules, they stuck it in to the conference report to fund the troops. how outrageous is that? a paygo point of order which might take down this whole bill is inappropriate to make. but it is appropriate to make those very targeted point of order which will only eliminate the cash for clunkers language. the policy of cash for clunkers is debatable. maybe it doesn't make sense, maybe it makes sense. it certainly should not have been put into this defense bill which is necessary for funding our troops. if it is a strong idea, let it stand on its own 2 feet on the floor of the senate. let it be debated and paid for.

at least, let it be amended so that those of us to think it should be paid for and propose ideas for paying for it under the bill -- for paying for. under the bill as it is handled now, there are no amendments allowed. we have to take this billion dollars of new debt, like it or not, whether we support the program or not. we have to pass a bill that is going that at $1 billion in additional debt. pri is in them -- it is an inappropriate way to legislate. my effort is not to slow down or stop the funding for our troops. i voted for every for troop funding bill that has come to this contrast -- that has come through this congress. i do want to take up this language that is inappropriate. the assistant majority leader put in place rule 44, to live by the paygo rules.

to live not an aim of addressing a special-interest group, spend a billion dollars that we pass the bill onto our kids. why should our grandchildren have to pay for cars we're going to buy today from people? does that make any sense? for the next 20 years, we're going to end up paying these bills? of course it does not make sense. so we should take this language up. it is not going to slow this bill down. this bill will go back to the house and be sent to the president. it will be an act of fiscal responsibility, and will be limiting the amount of debt put on our children's backs. i reserve the balance of my time. >> 16 minutes on the republican side. 10 on the majority side. >>, is the senator from oklahoma?

>> 12 minutes. >> i reserve the balance of my time. >> the senator from michigan. >> mr. president, let me indicate that we are talking about a motion to waive less than 1% of this bill. it is an emergency bill. it is a supplemental. it is less than 1% in terms of the overall scope of what is before us. in small towns and cities across america, this is a big deal. we have up to 3 million people that in some way work with our automobile industry. we have small businesses all across the country that are looking at this vote.

we have had colleagues come to the floor. we have had hearings held, letters and press releases about helping dealers at this time. this is the moment. this is the moment and the vote as to whether or not we will do that. i am very grateful for the chairman of the committee and his graciousness in working with us on this, and to our leadership. we know that while this has not come to the regular process, it went through the committee. it is passed on the house floor. republicans and democrats, over 2/3 voted for this. the reason it has been -- is because it is an emergency. wheat here -- we are seeing

dealers all across america are seeing sales go down. how long they going to be able to hold on? the average dealer hires 53 people. these are small businesses. my grandfather had a car dealership. i know what this is about for a small town. from january to may, every automobile company, gm 41%. toyota 39% reduction. ford down. chrysler, honda, all across the board, these sales are down. i can tell you, mr. president, this is an emergency for families and small businesses. for an industry that has been the backbone of our economy for

a generation. up to 3 million people working for this industry. it is worth our time to put into this bill less than 1% of the emergency bill that is in front of us. every other country with an automobile presence has done something to help their industry. when they put another plan in place, they raise sales 21%. we have seen similar plants in china, japan, korea, brazil, great britain, spain, france, italy, austria, portugal, romania, and slovakia, mr. president. slovakia. but the united states has not yet acted on a program that has

been effective around the world when we have some many small businesses right now whose futures are hanging in the balance. this is something supported by business and labor. and of course, the auto dealers. i am also pleased that it is now supported by the sierra club. we know that from environmental standpoint, there is more they can do. in terms of the environment, this is a win. cars and trucks sold under this will be more fuel efficient and cleaner than a car or truck it replaces. that is a fact. this bill will save 133 gallons of gasoline per vehicle per year. it will reduce greenhouse gas

emissions by 1.4 5 million metric tons. models in 1998 or earlier will account for 25% of the cars driven, but 75% of the tailpipe emissions. if we can get vehicles that are worth $4,500 or less off the road, they can no longer pollutes, and people buy a vehicle that is 22 miles a gallon or more, or 10 miles a gallon better than the last car, that seems to me to be a step in the right direction. is it all it could be? no. it never is. we work hard. we take one step, two steps, three steps. this is certainly a step forward. this bill is about jobs, mr.

president. this is a bill about jobs. it is about small business. it is about the environment as well. we will see immediate reductions in fuel use, carbon emissions, and air pollution. our constituents from the major business organizations to labor, to the sierra club are supporting this effort. not only are carmakers' interested in this as i have said already, but the people who work in the offices, the engineers, designers, the clerks, the office managers, the salespeople, the mechanics, the car washers, the printers, the advertisers, local newspapers, television, and radio will depend on a local dealer -- who all depend on their local dealer. this is a program that has been

successful around the world. there has been a tremendous amount of effort that has gone into it. i want to thank you bill's sponsor, rep -- congress woman sutton. how to thank all those who work together on both sides of the aisle to put together something that passed overwhelmingly in the house. it comes to us now in a bill labeled "emergency spending." on behalf of the auto dealers large and small across this country, the people who depend upon these businesses, depend upon the making of these automobiles, the selling of these automobiles, i would ask my colleagues to please give us the opportunity for a short-term stimulus. this is a matter of a few months. it is less than 1% of this entire bill which is an

important bill for our country, our defense, our troops. this is a small piece of what is in front of us. for small business people and americans working hard every day across this country, it is a big deal. it is a chance to help. mr. president, i hope we will. thank you. >> tomorrow night is the annual radio and television correspondents dinner in washington. c-span will bring you live coverage, including president obama's speech, beginning at 8:25 eastern time. >> there is still time to get your copy of c-span's to thousand i congressional directory with information on house and senate members, the cabinet, supreme court justices, and the nation's governors. plus, how to contact committees and caucuses. it is $16.95 on c-span