live coverage from the senate health committee begins at 10:00 eastern. >> now president obama announces a $80 billion deal with u.s. drug companies to help cover costs of medicare recipients. from the white house, this is about 10 minutes. >> i want to thank you for having us here, mr. president. we certainly appreciate it. and aarp is proud to stand with you, chairman bauccus, senator dodd, to announce that gap in medicare, the drug coverage ban known as the doughnut hole to all of you will be substantially filled for millions of middle income americans as part of health reform. i want to applaud chairman

bauccus and senator dodd who continue to be champions for this issue and have always fought for people who are struggling to make ends meet. and we stand with both of you. senator bauccus as your strong leadership of the senate finance committee and creativity which led to the development of this very unique solution. we also support your finance committee's process and look forward with optimism to its next steps. but bottom line, without you, chairman bauccus, we certainly would not be here today and we offer all of our thanks for that. >> when the president issued his clarion call for all parties to come together to address the issues of healthcare reform, aarp representing over 40 million members was proud to be one of the first to step forward. today's announcement means that struggling americans who have

been looking for help in their pocketbooks just to stay healthy, who say that one of their single largest drivers of their healthcare costs is prescription drugs. well, today americans and medicare doughnut hole, that gap in coverage, will have their brand name drug costs cut in half. a 50% reduction in drug costs, a 50% reduction in their drug costs. now, too many americans fall into this coverage gap. and they stop taking their medication. because they really simply can't afford it. but today now they will have a new opportunity to lead a healthier life. mr. president, every american who its burdened by the high costs of healthcare or has inadequate access to healthcare, every business who is fighting

for their life, fighting to be competitive, to stay competitive, and to save american jobs, they all know that healthcare reform cannot wait. it simply cannot wait. this is an early win for reform. it's a major step forward. it is a signal that the process is working and will work. but aarp's work is also not done. we will continue to work with you, mr. president, and the house and the senate, to protect people who rely on medicare to further lower drug costs, to have guaranteed access, to coverage for all americans. and together, together we will complete the mission of comprehensive healthcare reform. and we want to thank you, mr. president, for your leadership on this issue. thank you. >> thank you so much. >> i have an opportunity to

introduce the leader of the free world, our president, our beloved president, president barack obama. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> first of all i want to thank barry rand for the introduce ducks but also -- for the introduction but also for aarp coming together with us on this issue. last week in my address to the american medical association i spoke about the urgent need for healthcare reform and what will be required to achieve it. one of the things that will be required, i said, was that everyone in our healthcare community is going to have to come together and do their part. in recent days, chairman max bauccus who has been doing an outstanding job leading the finance committee on this issue as well as members of my administration have been in

discussions with the pharmaceutical industry to find a way to bring down costs of prescription drugs for america's seniors. and i'm pleased to report that over the weekend we reached an understanding that will help close the notorious doughnut hole in medicare part b. this is a significant break through on the road to healthcare reform, one that will make the difference in the lives of many older americans. i think many of you in the press are familiar with the issue. the doughnut hole refers to a gap in prescription drug coverage that makes it harder for millions of medicare beneficiaries to pay for the medications they need. the way the program is structured, medicare covers up to $2,700 in yearly prescription costs, and then stops. and the coverage starts back up when the costs exceed 6100, which means between 2700 and 6100 folks are out of luck.

and this gap in coverage has been placing a crushing burden on many older americans who live on fixed incomes and who can't afford thousands of dollars in out of pocket expenses. chris dodd, who's been an outstanding leader, a whole host of healthcare issues through the his career and who is helping to lead the health committee while senator kennedy is undergoing his treatment for his illness, chris i think will tell you that as we travel around the country, seniors would constantly be coming up to us and saying, "how do we deal with this extraordinary burden?" and as a consequence you'd have seniors taking half their medications, even though the doctor has said that is not going to be as effective. you're putting your life at risk. they had no other choice. as part of the healthcare reform, i expect congress to enact this year, medicare

beneficiaries who is spending falls within this gap will now receive a discount on prescription drugs of at least 50% from the negotiated price their plan pays. it's a reform that will make prescription drugs more affordable for millions of seniors and restore a measure of fairness to medicare part b. that's a reflection of the importance of this single step for america's seniors that it has earned the support of aarp which has been fighting for years to address this anomaly in the system on behalf of older americans. aarp is committed as i am to achieving healthcare reform by the end of this year. and i'm committed to continuing to work with aarp to ensure that any reforms we pursue are carried out in a way that protects america's seniors who know as well as anyone what's wrong with our healthcare system and why it's badly in need of reform. our goal, our imperative, is to

reduce the punishing inflation in healthcare costs while improving patient care. and to do that we're going to have to work together to root out waste and inefficient says that may pad the bottom line of the insurance industry but add nothing to the health of our nation. to that end, the pharmaceutical industry that is committed to reduce its draw on the healthcare system by $80 billion over the next 10 years as part of overall healthcare reform. rehealthcare reform that reduces the spiraling costs of health services and extends quality, affordable health coverage to all americans will require these kind of commitments throughout the system. drug and insurance companies stand to benefit when tens of millions more americans have coverage. so we're asking them, in exchange, to make essential concessions to reform the system and help reduce costs. it's only fair. today marks a major step forward, but it will only be

meaningful if we complete the journey. so i want to commend the house for coming together last week to produce a healthcare reform bill. a bill i might note protects seniors and received the support of the aarp. i will continue to work closely with the relevant chairs in the house and senate and leaders like senator dodd and senator bauccus and with members of both parties who are willing to commit themselves to this critical task. our families, our businesses and our long-term fiscal health demands that we act and act now. today we are. i'm grateful to all those who helped make this day possible. and to those who here in washington who have grown accustomed to the sky is falling prognosis and the certainties that we cannot get this done, i have to repeat, revive an old saying we had from the campaign "yes, we can.

"we are going to get this done. thank you very much, everybody. >> sir, do you have anything to say about iran today? >> president obama will hold a news conference tomorrow afternoon. the president is expected to take questions on healthcare, iran's elections and north korea. coverage begins at 12:30 eastern. >> there's still time to get your copy of c-span's 2009 congressional directly with information on house and senate members, the cabinet, supreme court justices, and the nation's governors, plus district maps and how to contact commitees and caucuses. it's 16.95. online at c span.org/products or call 1-877 on c-span.

>> now senate republicans look at the economic effects of the deems' cap-and-trade energy proposals. they also discussed the rationale for building more nuclear power plants as they hear from industry representatives. it's about 90 minutes. >> the hearing will come to order. we welcome all of our witnesses here and others who are here. i'm senator bob bennett from utah. i'm joined by senator lamar alexander from tennessee and senator jim bunting from

kentucky. and we are expecting some other senators to join us in the time period we have. we're planning to run until 3:30. this is a hearing to investigate the effects that the proposed cap-and-trade national energy tax will have on job growth, and to probe the ways in which building 100 new nuclear plants over the next 20 years could help the economy and keep the american economy competitive while at the same time protecting our environment. we're obviously going to talk a little about climate change. when people ask me about climate change and should we pay attention to it, i always say, "yes, we should pay attention to it. climate change has been affecting the human condition for millenia." and the one major challenge we have that our ancestors didn't have is that there are now about 7 billion of us on the planet. and if jacob should take his

family to israel to escape the drought because of climate change, he would find about 90 million people already living there. and therefore, the adjustments that you might have been able to make to deal with climate change in past centuries are perhaps not available to us. so we have an outstanding panel of experts and witnesses available to us. i will withhold any kind of opening statement beyond that until we've heard from our witnesses. but recognize the senators in the order in which they've come. senator alexander from tennessee for whatever comments you might have that you want to make. >> thank you, senator bennett. i want to thank senator bennett and senator bunting for their leadership on nuclear power. this is a hearing of the republican conference. we actually unanimously agree that we want clean air and that the sensible way to deal with that is through 100 new nuclear

power plants, but we hope that a growing number of our democratic colleagues will agree with us and that the president will pick up the challenge as well. because the best way for us to be able to build 100 new nuclear power plants in 20 years is presidential leadership, is to ask the nuclear regulatory commission and to ask the department of energy to give him a plan, the president, and say, what would it take to do it, begin to knock the obstacles out of the way. it was encouraging that sext chou said something the other day about moving ahead with loan financing for four nuclear power plants. i'll be interested in what the panelists have to say about. that but that's just the beginning. we need a great deal more. one of the purposes of our hearing is to remind the american people that if we want pollution free, carbon free electricity that we know how to do that. 70% of our pollution-free, carbon-free electricity is already produced by nuclear power. only 6% of our pollution-free,

carbon-free electricity is produced by the sun, the wind and the earth. so if you really want to deal with climate change and you really want to deal with clean air, if you want to do it in a way that provides large amounts of low-cost, reliable electricity, nuclear power is the prove enway to do it. france produces 80% of its electricity that way. we are helping india, we are helping china produce clean electricity in that way. the president himself has said that iran has the right to make electricity from nuclear plants, so why in the world should we not in the united states begin to pick up this technology that we ourselves invented? the only other thing i'd like to say, and then i'll defer to senator bunting and to the witnesses, is that i attended an exciting announcement a week ago by a major american supplier which plans to build 125

megawatt small reactors. this is by a company that has built most of the small reactors in the world. and so it's perfectly capable of doing it. and that puts a whole new thrust to this. because that means that these reactors, if everything works out as proposed, could be made in an american plant, shipped on american railway to an american site, they could be put together like lego blocks to produce the amount of electricity that's needed, and all the splice and products would be made in the united states. that's a very exciting development. so here as members of the republican conference to say we have a real clean energy policy. it includes electric cars, it includes doubling research for r&d, it includes exploration for natural gas and oil, but it starts with the idea of building 100 new nuclear power plants in the next 20 years. >> senator bunting? >> thank you, chairman bennett. and thank you, senator

alexander, for your participation. i would also like to thank our witnesses for coming today. a cap-and-trade program would have a detrimental effect, i believe, on the american consumer and to our economy. like many of my colleagues i support efforts to reduce carbon emissions. i recognize that the future of energy is clean energy, including as senator alexander has said, building at least 100 new nuclear power plants in the next 20 to 25 years. i also believe that we can meet our growing needs of energy while fulfilling our obligation to the environment. nment. whether or not you believe in global warming, this should not be an excuse to enact a cab in trade system until we have an

international agreement on co2 emissions. advocates of cap in trade argue that to implement the system, american take a global leadership position on climate change. i agree with that. they have argued other nations will voluntarily adopt emissions standards in the future. well, what good is it if you are leading if you are not assured that others will follow? i do not believe we should impose mandatory requirements on co2 emissions until we have an assurance from china, russia, india, and other nations that they will work with us on this issue. a proposed cap in trade system would produce small effect on global warming while imposing

substantial costs on all american households. it will affect the price we pay to fill up our gas tanks. the price we pay to heat and cool our homes, and use electricity, as well as the cost of practically all goods and services. estimates show that if we have the cap in trade system, we would only lower global co2 output by less than 4%. using the small reduction in global co2 to justify a tax of $1,600 + per family is reckless and irresponsible. i believe instead we should sets voluntary goals for industry to meet while providing incentives for the growth of new emission reduction serve -- sources of energy including nuclear and clean coal. these types of pro-growth energy

policies are what we should be debating in congress instead of back door, regressive taxes on the american consumer. i look for to questioning our witnesses today and hearing their thoughts on this issue. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. we have an outstanding panel of witnesses today. i will introduce each one of you. i will shamelessly truncate or biographies in the interest of time. we have been the lieberman from the heritage foundation, ted rockwell from the american nuclear society, chris -- is that? from the chamber of commerce. mr. lieberman is a specialist in energy and environmental issues. he is a senior policy analyst at

the heritage foundation. he is trained as a lawyer and an accountant, and he has testified before congress as well as appeared on programs on nbc, cbs, fox, cnbc, and msnbc, commentaries have been published in a major newspaper including the "washington times," "beat san diego tribune," the american -- "the american standard." mr. rockwell has been involved directly with nuclear power for 20 years. he started in 1943. he was in the elite task force at the atomic bomb project in

tennessee. he became head of the radiation shield engineering group. then a navy captain hired him to work on the naval nuclear propulsion program, and he has a long list of accomplishments there. he is a fellow of the american nuclear society, recipient of the first lifetime contribution award, now known as the rockwell award, distinguished medals from the navy and u.s. atomic energy commission and a member of the national academy of engineers. he has written numerous books on technical papers, including the widely-used design manual -- how one man made a difference and created the new world. stories and images from the dawn of the atomic age. we are very glad to have you, sir. now, from the chamber of

commerce -- vice president of the 21st and she -- 21st century development institute. he has served as deputy assented -- deputy assistant secretary at the apartment energy where he developed the nuclear energy policy and coordinated directions with congress, stakeholders, and the media. early in his career, he served on the house side of staffers. our last panelist began his career as a legislative aide in the oil and gas industry, and his previous work experience includes running one of the nation's most heralded information technology groups as the senior director of technology. he led telamon -- tele-

communications teams and growth strategy for the advisory board. he, too, has appeared on television ads cnbc, bloomberg tv, and other media outlets. he has trained as a lawyer. he was previously senior adviser for energy policy at fbr capital markets. he left there to form a clearer view energy -- clearview energy partners with partners from nasa. the work on projections of what is next in washington, an analysis of how government policy affects energy fundamentals. we have a wide spectrum of age and experience. we are delighted to have you all here. now, senator wicker has joined

us. we will see what opening statements you have for us. >> i understand, mr. chairman, that you're being magnanimous and forgoing an opening statement? even so, i think if you'll give me a couple of minutes -- let me say about how pleased i am that we are doing best. we all remember this time last year. we were in the midst of an energy crisis, paying $4 for a gallon of gasoline. of course, americans were seeing their utility bills skyrocket. we have not made any policy changes since then. the energy problems have not gone away. the prices may have subsided, but undoubtably, unless we come

to grips with this problem we're going to see those problems arise again. we need to develop alternative energy, certainly. the cornerstone of any real solution to the american energy problem needs to involve offshore resources in nuclear power. environmental groups and the administration focus solely on the alternative energy, or green energy. again, i am willing to have any conversation with anybody about wind, solar. these sources can provide for only a fraction of our energy needs. that is why we cannot focus exclusively on developing alternative energy. we must have a balanced approach that expands our existing resources which have proven to be successful in the past. the first step is to build more nuclear power plants for our

country. nuclear energy generates electricity without reducing greenhouse gas emissions and has a minimal impact on the environment. you would think that all americans could come together on a plan like that. additionally, construction of nuclear power plants would provide tremendous economic stimulus. do not take my word for it. the nuclear energy institute estimates that building 45 new plants in america would generate up to 128,000 construction jobs and 22,000 permanent jobs once they are built. this would amount to an economic impact which would indeed move as a further along in getting out of this slump. i fully support the call for 100 nuclear reactors by the year 2013. the united states has not build a nuclear plant in 30 years. this seems a progressive goal. we need to join with the rest of the world.

japan is constructing one nuclear plant per year. of course, we know that china now has 24 nuclear plants under way. on the other hand, we are being asked to invest in a very risky tack in trade tax scheme which would increase taxes in a trickle-down way on every american. if implemented, this plan would raise energy prices for everyone, not hurt america's economic competitiveness, and hurt our economy for decades to come. for some people, this may seem like a reasonable plan. just make traditional energy sources more expensive and alternative plans would then look better. the reality is that cap in trade would be the most volatile to the 95% of taxpayers that president obama has promised would not have their taxes

increased. to quote the "wall street journal," putting a price on carbon is aggressive by definition because poor and middle income households spend more of their paychecks on things like gas to drive to work, groceries at home. we, as americans, should seriously consider whether an annual tax is justified, given the small resulting decline in global co2 which would result. perhaps our witnesses to talk about -- could talk about this. even if everything the administration says and even of the advocates of cap in trade and tax our correctional their assumptions, co2 output would be lowered by less than 4%, and almost