based upon his, what they said he had a problem with my father from the beginning. he cleverly excused anyone that had voted for my father. there was a 25-year history of public service and blacks were 10 times more likely to know where we were then most whites. he expanded the jury pool outside of the district and consequently changed the complexion of the jury. the jury pool went to 65% wrote white when my father -- 65% rural white when my father led the fight. it actually changed georgia democratic rule after 135 years. they stated that walker was so

popular that government could not get a fair trial. . trial. the defense counsel came up with a stack of newspaper articles that came from the "augusta chronicle" that one of the judge's best friends, they grew up together, sat on the same pew, and was my father's fiercest political rival, and newspaper competitor. they used his articles to show that my father actually was too popular to be tried in the actual district where every article that they wrote was negative against my father. he didn't hold a hearing. he just said we're going to expand the venue to south georgia. now come on. now come on. if my father could not get a fair trial. i mean, if my father was too popular in that particular area, then how about we consider in

south georgia his popularity? that wasn't the plan. there was certainly no jury of his peers. i will tell you today that without a schad dp-- shadow of doubt the judge's decision was krit kl. he replaced four black jurors with four white jurors. one of the jurors that the defense counsel has stricken was a republican who had ran for office before. he said that we struck that juror was he was white. the law says it's a prima fascia case. we said it was because he was a republican. the judge said well, i just don't believe that. he doesn't have that right to do that, yet he still did. the appellate court found that it was quite disturbing the

judge's handling of the case. but still yet, they decided to defer to his discretion. i say today that the department of justice is deferring to someone's discretion, but whose discretion we do not know. but there is a different day, there's a different regime, and we are hopeful that things will turn around. but i will tell you that that stricken juror became the jury foreman and later we found out that he had received a check from governor perdue for $500,000, and we have it documented. still yet you can go to the appeals court, but once the poison is in the water, it is too late. in closing, the law of the lapp land is what we live by. but when that law is violated we encounter a lawless society.

there's a 1,600 pound gorilla at the department of justice. what will we do about it. the alliance for justice, revolution u.s. these are organizations that stepped forward today who have shown that they are courageous, that they are persistent and dedicated to the cause. we ask you all today to step up the fight. to direct your attention on one aim, one focus. and that is the department of justice. i ask you this question. what other extraordinary evidence must we provide. what other connection must we draw to show political tampering and influence? we even had congressmen to fly up to washington, d.c. based upon the atlanta journal reporter's summation, to ask the

disgraced u.s. attorney richard thompson to stay on the job, to finish his duty once opr recommended him. because they wanted him to finish dusting off my father. but if you can't get an audience with the judge to conduct a hearing it doesn't mean anything. this is a problem. people died fighting for their civil rights. people were hosed down. democrats have civil rights. moveon.org, democrats now, all the organizations out there, we need you. this is not just about my father. it is about justice for all. for more information, you can reach out to politi

politicalprosecution.org. go to info@politicalprosecution.org. i would give a phone number out. 706-951-2671. i offer myself [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> the house floor debate on energy and climate bill. remarks by president obama and angela merkel. after that, another chance to see a form on the go prosecutions by the justice department.

>> this weekend, "tv" shows books on the economy. how to deal with the economic crisis. pat robertson, barry riddle's on who's to blame for the recession. we also feature martin on why president reagan believed destroying nuclear weapons would bring an end to the soviet union. afterwards, we will talk about the two years in pakistan. he sits down with ralph peters. the entire "book tv"schedule is on line with great new features and easy to search our archives. booktv.org. >> the house approved legislation that would put limits on carbon dioxide and other gas emissions.

the final vote was 219-212. here is a portion of that debate. o revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. waxman: i yield myself such time as i might consume. the speaker pro tempore: the the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> it will drive our economic recovery and long term growth. this bill, when enacted into law will break our dependence on foreign oil, make our nation the world leader on clean energy jobs and technology and cut global warming. as a result of these policies that teams, we will create millions of clean energy jobs for america and restore our technological leadership in a clean energy. we are also protecting consumers. the bill tackles' big problems that have been ignored for far too long. it proposes solutions.

there is a remarkable coalition behind this bill. electric utilities supported the bill. manufacturers support the bill. farmers support the bill. so did the leading environmental organizations, labor unions, and faith based groups. there are many members responsible for this coalition. on the energy and commerce committee, john dingell forge compromises with the auto industry. mike doyle address the concerns of the steel industry and other trade vulnerable industries. the chairman of the ways and means committee worked with us to make sure the interests of low-income families are fully protected. the chairman of the agricultural committee made sure the legislation addresses the concerns of farmers and makes them part of our energy future. the need to act is clear and

urgent. there is a national security imperative to act. this legislation begins to break our addiction to imported foreign oil and put this on a path to true energy security. there is a scientific imperative to act. the evidence on global warming and the consequences of carbon emissions is overwhelming. we have based our bill on this science. there is a moral imperative to act. we have obligations to protect and preserve the environment and the generations that follow. there is an economic imperative to act. this legislation is an enormous bill for america. is to promote investment and growth for decades ahead, creating jobs for the new economy of the 21st century. people in industry have told us that as soon as this legislation becomes law, we will find billions of dollars invested in

infrastructure over the next five years. we can see an incredible loss opportunity if we do not act now. these are amazing technological centers around the u.s.. we can see those jobs going overseas. the technological superiority will go overseas as well. this bill is affordable. contrary to what you would hear from our fence on the republican side, the congressional budget office found that this legislation because house as an average of only $175. epa's analysis of the cost at 22-30 cents a day. it will lower utility bills by 7%. this bill is a tremendous opportunity to prevent a dangerous threat of creating

millions of new jobs and a driving economic growth. it will end our dependence on foreign oil and keep us more secure. this bill will drive to a new area of sustainable growth and innovation. i urge all members to support it. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> i ask unanimous consent that the ranking member of the agricultural committee controlled the first 15 minutes of the debate on the minority side. >> determine from oklahoma is recognized. >> thank you. i yield myself as much time as eye can consume. the bill promises to destroy our standard of living in the quality of life with higher energy costs, food prices, and lost jobs.

it is the single largest economic threat to our farmers and ranchers in decades. we have more than 115 agricultural and food groups that will oppose this bill as of today. i would ask the list be entered into record at the appropriate place. >> that is ordered. >> do know why the greatest threat to agricultural producers is ignored? costs will escalate as a direct result of the energy tax. meanwhile, the market will shrink. the foreign competitors whose governments will not place burdens on their farmers will be able to undersell us. what about the billions of dollars annually that farmers are supposed to garner selling offset credit? many farmers will not be able to participate. soyoil was going to be the way for farmers to generate credit. they started tillage practices

before 2001, they will be ineligible to participate. it does not extend agricultural from performance standards. that means the epa can tell our producers how to manage their farms. this bill will tax you. this bill will destroy the livelihood of those who live and work in rural america, those who work every day to provide our nation and the world with a safe, affordable, abundant food and fiber supply. whether it is the fuel for the tractor, fertilizer, or delivery of food, agricultural uses a great deal of energy throughout production and processing although usda has the devoted anytime resources to the analysis of how the bill will impact farmers, the heritage foundation has. a recent study revealed that by

the year 2035, the average net income for farms will be decreased by 57%. i 2035, gasoline and diesel cost will be 58% higher and a letter grade 90% higher. residents and oklahoma can expect their grids to increase by $300 million. why are we doing this bill? so the u.s. can lead on climate change in the world? we can lead when china and india have refused to participate? we can lead when europe is willing to do have a what this bill calls for? we can meet with the rest the developing world is unable to do anything at all? some of my idealistic colleagues will say we have to set a standard for the rest of the world. i say, i will not make my constituents for -- poorer so

others can get richer at our expense. this is the wrong bill. this is the wrong time and the wrong reasons. i reserve the balance of my time. >> gentleman far oklahoma reserves this time. >> at this time, i am delighted to yield to the gentle man from massachusetts. he is the chairman of the subcommittee on energy and the environment as well as the select committee on global warming. he has played the fundamental role of shepherding this bill to our committee in working to get it through the floor. >> he is recognized for three minutes. >> thank the gentleman from california. i thank him and his staff for the outstanding leadership and vision of which he has provided

on this legislation. this is the culmination of a career of work for the gentlemen from california. it is my honor to have been allowed to talk with him in order to construct this legislation that we bring to the floor here today. i want to thank the gentleman from california and the other members of work on this legislation. mr. dingell, mr. bowsher, mr. doyle, mr. kinsley, mr. green, mr. butterfield, mr. rush. so many members, including members of the committee like henry from the state of texas who worked with us on natural gas related issues. we would not be here unless we had the cooperation of so many members across the full spectrum of the house.

during this process, we have received a valuable input and expertise from other leaders in the house. this is like chairman rangel on trade issues comet chairman petersen on agricultural issues among others. the legislation we have before this is the most important energy and environment legislation to ever have been considered in the history of the united states. the consequences for our country in our great. -- are great unless we act to deal with these issues. this legislation sets a new course for our country, creating millions of new clean energy jobs while reducing our dependence upon imported oil. when it becomes law, and it will come for the first time in the history and the united states

congress, for the first time in the history of our country, we will put in forceable limits on global warming pollution. at its core, this is a job bill. it will create millions of new jobs that are clean energy. there are whole new industries with incentives to drive competition in the energy marketplace. it sets ambitious and achievable standards for energy efficiency and renewable energy from solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, so that 2020, 20% of america's energy will be clean. it saves consumers money by updating efficiency standards for new buildings, appliances, and lighting systems. it invests $10 billion a year in energy efficiency programs and states across this country.

i have one additional minute. >> i yield an additional minute. >> it starts the much needed process of making our electric grid a smart grit. this is so we can plug in the hybrid and a letter cars in the future into an advanced network that by the year 2013 will be raising a generation of children who not how to receive gasoline at a gas station, but rather by plugging their cars into a plug so that the electricity that we are generating ensures that those vehicles are being run for the benefit of our people. this is a revolution. this is a moment in history. this is what the american people were calling for in the election of 2008, a fundamental change that rates are dependent on oil,

create millions of new jobs, reduces the amount of pollution that we send out into the atmosphere, and points us in a new direction in our country that breaks this pattern of cyclical dependent upon imported oil coming from opec that holds our nation of. i urge and i vote for this bill. >> the demand from oklahoma. >> alike to recognize the man from virginia. >> [unintelligible] i rise in strong opposition. i agree with one thing he had to say. that is this bill has a very important consequences. those consequences are devastating for the future of the economy of this country. it is in pursuit of the fantasy of thinking that this legislation will cause us to be able to turn down the thermostat

of the world by reducing co2 gas emissions when china and india are pumping more and more into the atmosphere all the time. we would be far better served with legislation that devotes itself to developing new technologies before we slam the door on their traditional sources of energy like coal and oil and natural gas and nuclear power, the most severe to free a mission that we have. this bill does nothing to promote it. it stifles the ability to have the kind of compare this is -- competitiveness of the people in need. i strongly oppose this legislation. we republicans and democrats offered over 200 amendments to try to improve this bill. they made an order to one. the speaker has to ignore the voice of the american people.

the truth is that it raises taxes, and killed jobs, and will lead to more government intrusion. it will raise electricity rates in 90%. gasoline prices 74%. natural gas prices 55%. that is in addition to the expected rise in all of those sources of energy, because congress has refused to take of a real american energy plan to devote more to producing domestic sources of all our traditional sources of energy in developing new sources. we support the effort for energy efficiency. we support the effort to promote new forms of energy. we do not support this kind of suicide for the american economy. i urge my colleagues to oppose this. leagues to oppose this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. the gentleman from california. mr. waxman: i want to yield to

>> he was instrumental in getting the first draft of the information that we were dumb. as a knowledgeable individual in this area, from a constituency that has a special concern, he was able to negotiate with us so that we could reach some of the accommodations in this legislation that has made it a much better bill. i want to yield to him with great admiration five minutes. >> i in thank the gentleman from california and congratulate him on the tremendous leadership that he is shown in bringing this measure to the house floor this afternoon. i ask you and them is consent to revise my remarks. i'm a strong support to the bill. i urge its approval. it if she is a broad reductions in greenhouse gases, enhances

energy security, and by placing a price of carbon dioxide emissions, will unleash investment in clean energy technology that will create millions of new american jobs. these energy technologies will of all from america's laboratories. they will be deployed at home. they will be exported around the world. they will be the foundation for our next technology revolution. it all starts here with passage today of the clean energy security act. approximately 80% of the electricity in the district of i represent is coal generated. coal production is one of our regions a major industries and it is a major employer of our constituents. not surprisingly, my focus was to keep electricity rates affordable and to enable utilities to continue using

coal, which accounts for at 51% of america's electricity generation. both of these goals have been achieved in the bill that is before us today. electricity rates will be only modestly affected. the nonpartisan congressional budget office says that by 2020, the cost of the entire program for the cyclical -- typical american family will be $175 per year. the empire medal protection agency projects that the near term cost for the typical family from all elements of this legislation will be between $80.100 $10 per year. that is about 20 cents a day for the typical american family. the claims by the opponents that this legislation will impose enormous electricity price increases are wrong. the bar mental agency projects

that by 2020 the usage of coal in our economy will grow as compared to today's usage. that may seem counterintuitive in a bill that regulates greenhouse gas emissions. let me repeat that. the epa predicts that by 2020, call usage will actually grow by the terms in this bill. transportation electrifies in the demand for electricity increases and call, our abundant fuel, was still be the fuel of choice. the claims of opponents that the controls under the bill will force utilities to surrender coal use causing an over reliance on natural gas with harm to the nation are also is simply wrong this is a responsible measure. it is carefully balanced. it reduces greenhouse gases by

83% by the year 2015 as compared to 2005. it keeps electricity rates affordable. it enables call usage to grow as the demand for electricity increases nationwide. it opens the door to a more secure energy future and the creation of millions of new jobs, and evading and exporting to the world. these are reasons to approve the bill. for those who still harbor doubts, let me make a more practical argument. in march of 2007, the supreme court held that carbon dioxide is a pollutant. under that ruling and the terms of the clean air act, the environmental protection agency is now effectively required to regulate co2 emissions. federal regulations for greenhouse gases is now

inevitable. it is not a question of whether we are going to have regulation. the only question is whether the regulation will be carefully balanced, a congressionally adopted, economically sustainable regulations as contained within the bill before us today or whether we will have epa's regulation under the blunt information -- instrument of the clean act. given that choice and path of this bill charts for affordable electricity, for increased coal use in job creation, i would urge members to make the reasonable decision to approve today the clean energy act. i yield back the balance of my time and urged passage of the bill. >> time has expired. >> i yield to two minutes to the gentleman from kansas. >> thank you very much.