>> "washington journal" starts now. >> we've got to say, yes, if you are african-american, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are high. yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood, you will face challenges that somebody in a wealthy suburb does not have to face. but that's not a reason to get bad grades. [applause] that's not a reason to cut class. that's not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school. no one has written your destiny for you. your destiny is in your hands. you cannot forget that. that is what we have to teach all of our children here no excuses. 2. this, we can't tell our kids to do well in school into parents,

we can't tell our kids to do well and -- in school and fail to support the when they get home. you cannot contract out parenting. we have to accept our responsibility to help them learn. that means, putting away the xbox, putting our kids to bed at a reasonable hour, it means attending those parent-teacher conferences and reading to our children and helping them with their homework. host: president obama last night at the naacp's centennial conference in new york city. if you have seen the speech or pieces of it or media reaction to it, we would like to get your reaction to president obama's speech last night. you can see the numbers on the screen.

you can also send us a tweet at c-spanwj. this is how it is written about. obama gives fiery address at naacp 100 anniversary. one part politician, one part black preacher as he spoke in lilting cadences, in unusually personally -- personal terms. at one point, when his audience shot back at him, repeating his words, he threw back his head and said i have an amen corner. he has only reluctantly embraced is unique place in history. six months into his presidency mr. obama has seemed more comfortable and raising its identity as the first black american president overseas than at home, as is the case on this trip to ghana last week when he declared i have the blood of

africa within me. the white house was low-key. when a reporter tried to cast the speech as mr. obama's first to the black community, the press secretary said, "i think the first speech to america was the inaugural address." this is the headline in " the new york post." too many barriers -- discrimination remains a problem. and here is "the new york daily news." bam's thank you to that naacp -- his story made possible by pioneers. a couple of other news articles before we get to your calls. last night or early this morning, the house ways and means committee passed legislation to revamp health care, approving tax increases on wealthy to help pay for the plan.

the committee voted 23-18 to approve the bill that nancy pelosi and the committee chairs introduced earlier. three democrats joined all committee republicans in voting against the bill. over the next decade, the bill would impose $544 billion in new taxes on families making more than $350,000. that is from the associated press. this is an " the new york times ," digest to close the loop on the sotomayor hearings. -- this is a "new york times," article closing the loop. senior republican staff aide said in interviews they expected that at least one and perhaps as many as three of the panel's seven republicans might vote to approve the sotomayor nomination and send it to the full senate. senator patrick leahy scheduled a committee vote next tuesday but republicans on the panel indicated they will ask the vote be delayed a week.

the aides said they expected senator lindsey graham of south carolina, whose questioning veered between full support and wariness to vote to approve the nomination. they said he can be joined by senators hatch, grassley, john corning, or tom coburn. hatch and grassley have generally supported democratic judicial nominees in the past and senator cohen said he was mighty impressed. in 2005, john roberts received three votes from among the eight democrats on the committee. that is an "the new york times." this is an "the washington examiner." house dmes muzzle gop on sensitive issues. -- housedems. to protect their members from politically hazardous boats, democrats running the house of representatives have taken extraordinary steps to muzzle

republicans inside krajina in this summer's debate on spending bills. on thursday, for example, republicans hoped to force a debate on abortion, school vouchers and medical marijuana as well as gay marriage and then control as part of house consideration of the federal government's contribution to the district of columbia's city budget. no way, democrats said that -- said it. at issue are 12 bills totaling more than 12 -- $1.20 trillion in annual appropriation bills for funding most of government programs, usually low-profile legislation that typically dominate the work of the house in june and july. for decades, those bills have come to the floor under an open process that allows any member to try to amend them. it was a right democrats zealously defended when they were in the minority. house appropriations committee chair david obey insist the clampdown is to prevent debate from dragging but republicans, however, agreed to limit the time is debating the bills. that is a "the washington

general -- "the watts engined examiner." here is a little bit more from president obama's speech. >> there is a reason the story of the civil-rights movement was written in our schools. there is a reason thurgood marshall took up the cause of linda brown. there is a reason why the little rock nine defied a governor and a mob. it is because there is no stronger weapon against an equality and no better path to opportunity than an education that can on locked a child's god-given potential. [applause] and yet, more than half a century after brown vs. board, the dream of a world-class vacation is still being deferred

all across the country. african-americans tenants are lagging behind white classmates in reading and math. an achievement gap growing in states that once led the way in the civil rights movement. over half of all african american students are dropping out of school, in some places. there are overcrowded classrooms and crumbling schools and corridors of shame in america, filled with poor children -- not just black children, brown, white children as well. the state of our schools is not an african american problem, it is an american problem. because if black and brown children cannot compete, america cannot compete. host: north carolina. lindy, a democrat. are you with us? caller: i have heard president obama makes similar speeches, and as an educator, this is the

strongest message american needs. what he is saying to parents, i think, is foremost. there has been researching don criticizing teachers in the past 20 years but not much has been said about the responsibility of parents. if we look at other cultures, children and adults who come from india and china and some of these other countries that we are competing with, and you talk to those now adults, professional adults, about how education was treated in their homes and in their societies, their parents emphasized over and over and over again exactly the message that president obama is emphasizing, that education is the most important thing to a strong future and harping on

this. and parents being willing to literally fell up their homes and new -- fill up their homes and use the money -- sell their homes and use the money to bring their children for america because they realize the importance for their children and for their family's future. host: what do you teach? caller: i am at a university and i teach teacher education for special education. but my mother was an educator for 40 years. i live around teachers at all times and worry about the dropout rates in our schools. somehow parents have to work harder in drilling into our children how important this is. we are going through a situation in education today that maybe we don't have the best and

brightest in every classroom in america. we do have some wonderful, excellent teachers, but you're never going to go through 12 years of school with every teacher along the way being the best. host: robert, milwaukee. good morning. what did you think of the president's speech? caller: well, basically i thought it was a very good speech but there are a few things i would like to stress. what i would like to have heard him say is that some of the young black men who are running round these towns with their pants hanging down, standing around and smoking blunts and not trying to achieve anything, that they are going to have to choose a different path. that is the main reason for the drop out -- making babies and

they are not taking responsibility for that. and i would like to see some of them joined the military just like i did in the 1960's. i'm a vietnam veteran. and they can get some sort of a guidance. and get out of jail. that is basically what i have to say. host: veronica, pomona, california. the president's speech. caller: i thought it was extremely encouraging, and i really enjoyed it and i thought it goes across all ethnic -- not just black children. aren't nate -- our native american, poor white children, hispanic. i thought it was encouraging and i like most the part about the community and the parents. i know when i was growing up, it had actually happened to me, and

they really do think all the parents need to watch children. i thought i was getting away being a smart girl, cussing in the street and the next thing i knew about the time i got home i mother knew everything i said. also for the past week, the past month, that all of our children going through seeing white people behaving very badly, even against the president. the things that are being said. the rules of the game have been changed. even though you get that great education -- are estimated to get a good education -- somehow they are going to change the rules, so, children, whatever color you are, get that education. host: and, by the way, if you would like to watch the full speech you can go to c-span.org, and you can see it. just below the three pictures you see on the screen. if you go below it it shows what was covered and you consider the president's speech and you could watch the whole thing on line. and you can watch anything you

covered on c-span on my neck c- span.org. paul in dhahran, north carolina. independent line. of a cut thank you for taking my call. -- caller: of thank you for taking my call. ironically i'd read about this on my blog. i enjoyed the speech but i think what president obama does -- and that think it caught the attention of many in african- american community -- is that he comes off a little bit conservative when he talks before an african-american audience as opposed to a bleeding heart liberal. in front of white audiences. i think it was good, he set up a speech talking about discrimination and racism and prejudice. racism is economic. personally i care less what rush limbaugh and sean hannity -- i could not care less if they like me or not, so you have to talk

about the economic conditions which produce the lack of education of black children in this country. i have to say this as well. when we are talking about the educational system, we are talking about for african- american children it is a mis educational system. people like obama who rose to gretna's did not do it because of the educational system rose in spite of the system. a good book for president obama to read is the mis-education of the negro, written by dr. carter woodson in the 1930's. nowarningshotsfired.com. that is my passion. it is a pop-centric and afro-

centre expense accounts of the right-wing nonsense. host: what you do for a living? caller: i am a minister. african nation ministry. a lot of people got upset about black liberation theology of dr. jeremiah wright. we also teach black liberation theology, but we make it more relevant to the hip-hop generation. host: thank you for calling in. from the politico, exclusive story. a conservative group offers to sell endorsement for $2 million. the american conservative union asked that export a two million- dollar check and return for the group's endorsement in a bitter legislative dispute, then flipped and sided with ups after fedex refuse to pay. in return for the $2 million, acu offered a range of services that included -- producing out ads and articles written by the

chairman david keene and/or other members of a acu board of directors. the conservative groups remarkable demand -- black-and- white probe of the longtime washington practice known as pay for play -- which contains the in a private letter to fed ex that was provided to politico. you could go to politico.com if you would like to read the whole article. this is from reuters, about age 1 and 1 virus appeared the world health organization said thursday the h1n1 flu pandemic was the fastest moving pandemic ever and it was now pointless to count every case. the u.n. agency that declared an influenza pandemic revised its requirements so that national health authorities need only report clusters of severe cases or deaths caused by the new virus or unusual climate patterns -- clinical patterns. the front page of "the guardian ," swine flu could kill 65,000

in uk, warns of the health chief. and the front page out of toronto, canada will have enough flu vaccine to share, is what they say. back to your calls. a republican from silver spring, md., here in the suburbs of washington. what did you think of the president's speech last night? ok, we will put that call on hold. you've got to turn down your volume otherwise you get the delay. we will move to upper marlboro, md., william, please go with it. caller: yes. it was a good speech. it was conservative. however, as it relates to the recent ruling in the supreme court by judge roberts concerning the firemen, i believe it is relevant because i

believe that roberts' decision was wrong, and the reason why i believe it was wrong is because they are not looking at this. -- not looking at the spirit of the amendments and just the letter. the 13th, 14th amendment and the voting rights and equal opportunity in clauses in a constitution have a spirit to them. it is to make up for the past in human treatment of black people. therefore it is not going to be even. you can't have two elements occupied the same space at the same time.

host: all right. a tweet -- if obama is for education, why stop the clearly successful d.c. school shoes -- school choice program. he is sending the children in the abyss. dewine on independent line. caller: i think obama's speech was very good. i think the part about education is definitely on us. we need to do something about 50% dropout rate. however, i think the rest of america needs to know that there is institutionalized racism. you cannot have statistics such as white high-school dropout having a lower unemployment rate than black high-school graduates. people with similar resumes, when a white person has a criminal background and a black person doesn't, they get a higher callback rate.

you can have 13% of the society with a 41% people on death row. the facts and figures are there. america needs to realize that. but i do think over all the president's speech was very good. host: the head of the naacp said yesterday in " the new york times" that they have one black man in the white house and 1 million black men in prison. this is from "the hill." b and c wasting its money on ads, says reid. senate majority leader slammed the democratic national committee on thursday running ads to pressure centrist democrats for the health-care plan calling it "a waste of money." his comments sent the staff in damage control mode but also reflect a growing frustration among centrists who have been reluctant to back a government- run self -- health insurance

plan. liberals have been urging centrists to support it from of using various television and radio campaigns. this week a wing of dnc said it will run ads in states represented by centrist senators. he slammed the of dnc for starting democrats as the republicans or special-interest groups. new york. dale on the republican line. what did you think of the speech? caller: very good -- i was listening to some of the minorities calling of and all i can think is double talk. they can hardly articulate themselves. the thing to do if i were them is go to school and forget about

all of the racism -- and i mean some of the egregious racism, you can't overlook. but some of the stuff they are talking about is just baloney. go to school. thanks a lot, pete. host: this is from "the new york daily news." on your screen is major jennifer -- she is sitting in a capt. spot on air force one. all female staff on chopper is a first. the first time an all-female staff flew the president on marine 1. she was appointed marine 1 capt. during president bush's tenure. she flew president bush and she flew president obama and now for the first time and all-female staff flew marine 1. arkansas, darla, a democrat.

caller: how are you? i am calling because i was pushed through school. they didn't know how to handle me. i had adhd, and i was just pushed through school up until fifth grade. my daughter is wanting to quit school at 17. host: how does that fit into the speech last night? caller: i just feel that children should be in school until they are 18 or they graduate. host: of milwaukee, john -- milwaukee, john, independent. caller: i particularly wanted to address robert and your caller from a minute ago. an education is generally thought of as a way to get a job. it should be much more than

that. and educations -- and education to keep you learning the rest of your life, then you go to the next level, and the next level, and the next level. in robert's case, he wanted to blame young black men wearing pants off their hips as the cause of this, and that is so ridiculous. it is not even close to the truth. the problem with black children in milwaukee, which in many instances, the worst city in the country for black children to grow up in the, is that have no value any more, they are not cherished because the factory jobs, the agricultural jobs, have gone away. we were sold out to china, for one, at great benefit to the cellars, which was congress and if we ever restore ourselves to that agriculture -- or to the industrial leaders of the world,

the technology leaders of the world, we can employ everybody, and this is the answer. but i don't like to hear anybody tell me to blame the victims. thank you. host: this is from "the washington times." x-cia director defense al qaeda initiative. defending the initiative to assassinate al qaeda leaders and the decision to keep the idea top-secret. "it doesn't appear as if it actually did anything with respect to this project at all possible assassinations of al qaeda leaders said tiered said james wolsey, cia director from 1993 to 1995. it looks like a talk about. i think the way the statute generally works is when you engage in planning or aren't the verge of taking action you really ought to be reading your congressional committees, where the so-called gang of eight, not one thing suggest that a talking stage. annapolis, tom, republican. caller: how were you this morning?

i think obama is concentrating on the wrong thing. blaming racism for the problems of the black community. i think it is the black community themselves. they are not working to try to get their own ship in order, their own house in order. we've got murdering each other and drugs are all over the place. until they wake up and stop having children when they are 14, what in hell do they expect their lives to be? i am of irish descent. we were discriminated against and we overcame a lot and you have to just get on with your future and stop morning about what happened to hundred years ago. bye-bye. caller: from "the wall street journal," it charter schools gain in stimulus scramble. some cash strapped states and school districts are signaling a major expansion of charter schools to tapped federal stimulus funds despite strong a position from some teachers

unions. charter schools are typically non-unionized, public funded alternative schools that have been widely promoted by conservatives as a needed dose of competition and public education. charter schools receive public moneys but are free from many of the rules and restrictions that govern traditional public schools. again, this is an "the wall street journal" this morning. the next call comes from florida, democrat. caller: the reason i'm calling is because i think this speech was great last night at the naacp and the president was talking over all about the white and black and brown. and what he really said for me is that a lot of ethnicity -- you have asian and you have

cuban, mexican, people from all over the world. most of the people when they come here -- some of them do the right thing, some of them follow the rules and get an education and some of the black people and even white, they take for granted. take for granted, i was in china two weeks ago, a month ago, and i see how the kids go to school. before they come out of school, they had their own profession, and they do all kinds of work in the government and the factory. they do something, they have something to do when they get out. that is what they should do, to train the kids while they are in high school.

essentially the charter school -- a center like we have in palm beach county. i send my congratulations to what they were trying to do, trying to work with all the charter schools and in the community -- those who cannot pass fcat, it says they can work on so they can go to school, it is the same way. that is what the president was talking about. he doesn't want to see the african-american and white americans -- leading education

and go into jobs but some people interpret it the one way. host: thank you for calling in. tweet -- success and education as mainly cultural. the larger culture and family and community culture. family is the most significant. here on your screen is a picture of larry speakes, you might remember him as spokesman for president ronald reagan. he is now suffering from alzheimer's disease, he is 69 years old. there is a court fight going on in mississippi between his third wife and his kids about custody and custodial ship. an article from a reliable source in "the washington post." the next call comes from augusta, majority -- augusta, georgia. caller: i just want to say that the president should always give great -- always gives great speeches, which commendable that. but it is about what he does. he is against school choice and

school vouchers, and to me, when you take the options off the table for some people, that can hinder them because if they are in a community where the schools are not great, they should have the option to go where they choose to go. i know many should said the government should not be funding that, but the government at this point is trying to fund health care and many other things that are going on. someone called in an earlier, a democrat -- and i normally don't agree with democrats anymore -- but only time the present a speech like a conservative is when he is speaking to african- american groups, and i do believe that. when he gives the speech, he should have given it to everybody, and not just to the naacp. host: who did you vote for? caller: john mccain. host: thank you for calling in. this is an article in "the washington post," and it is in all papers, something similar. about defense secretary robert gates. sharpens rhetoric in dispute on f-22 funds. we have been talking about this all week.

some people in congress want to build more f-22's and the obama administration says enough. we want to talk about that and defense spending now for 20 or 25 minutes here on "washington journal." but first, secretary gates spoke of the economic club in chicago yesterday. here is a little bit of his speech. >> in some, the security challenges we now face and will in the feature will change, and are thinking must likewise change. the old paradigm of looking at potential conflict as either regular or regular war, conventional or unconventional, high end oreo and, it is no longer relevant. and as a result, the defense department needs to think about it and prepare for war in a profoundly different way. what they need is a portfolio of military capabilities with

maximum versatility across the wide list -- why this spectrum possible. as a result, we must change the way we think of the way we plan and fundamentally reform the way we do business and buy weapons. it simply will not do to base our strategy solely on the continuing to design and by, as we have for the last 60 years, only the most technologically advanced weapons to keep up with or stay ahead of another -- of another superpower adversary, especially one that it imploded nearly a generation ago. host: joining us on the phone is johnny capaccio bloomberg news. hellebore is this fight -- how significant is this fight between the obama administration and congress? guest: i think it is quite significant in terms of obama's

prestige -- obama's prestige on defense issues because he had a very strong bidault put a personal letter to senator john mccain and carl levin, and the office of management and budget followed up a couple of days later with a reiteration that they would veto a bill that contained f-22 money. host: there are significant members of congress champing -- championing the building. caller: this adds -- has been going on for several years but late 2007, kennedy, john kerry, dianne feinstein, and others, urged then secretary gates under the bush administration to continue line. what is happening as lockheed is coming to the end of a three- year contract. it is coming at a time the nation is in recession, unemployment is at record highs

and members are scared. unions are coming together working with other defense companies to lobby and one wonders whether that bipartisan members may not steamroll obama and mr. gates and a matter how strong his veteran is -- host: where it built? caller: marietta, ga., assembled there. but chicago-based boeing builds parts of the fuselage in washington state. the radar is partially built up in massachusetts and by northrop grumman in los angeles and maryland. so there are pieces all over the country. 25,000 direct jobs and some 5000 indirect jobs in 40 states supporting this airplane. host: how much money are we talking about as opposed to the

entire defense budget? caller: it is hard to say. the scheme is 1.75 billion is in play in the united states senate. part of $640 billion budget. long-term funding -- if it is seven or 20 airplanes, it makes a difference. but we think the intent is to get something in the budget now and then hope -- the airforce wanted at least 20 more. they say that would cost about $13 billion in the long run. host: is it fair to say that this is a fight over the future of the u.s. military? caller: i think it is too much of a rhetorical sweep. gates is packaging seems that even the rumsfeld administration pushed in terms of transformation of the military and planning for the future more efficiently. he's got more support than

rumsfeld had, but a lot of these were started by bill cohen in the clinton administration show i would not painted too high in that relief, almost overnight. host: we want to talk about the future of the u.s. military with our viewers now and whether or not -- what they think the future of the military should be. for the pentagon, congress. go ahead and start dialing in. and if you are in the military or formal military, we want to hear from you. >> c-spanwj is in the @ twitter address. here is a little bit more from secretary gates last night in chicago. >> if we can't bring ourselves to make this tough but straightforward decision,

reflecting the judgment of two very different president, two secretary of defense's and two chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and. therefore secretary and chief of staff, where we draw the line? and does not now, when? if we can get this right, what on earth can we get right? host: senator jim inhoffe from oklahoma rights -- nation needs more f-22's. opponents said the fighter is too costly and requires too much me it's not measured up to mission requirements. therefore has successfully rebutted these arguments, while requirements continue to document the need for additional at 22's. -- f 22's. new jersey. independent line. what do you think? caller: the rafter is a new aircraft and a force multiplier so it can replace 1000 f-16's -- with 200.

host: what do you mean by force or multiplied? caller: there can take out four outf-16 -- this is why we spend so much money on these planes and less manpower to take out a larger force, a force multiplier. very cost-effective. of course, with the military industrial complex and the unions and people need jobs. these things come into play in washington and we know it is hard to change. but if the american people want to know where the money is going and whether research is, they can go into daar web site -- buy weapons, air superiority and how to make a cost effective. if gates is going to talk about advanced technology, he really has to talk about predator jones -- predator drones, not just raptors. this just seems like a dog and

pony show -- the future of the american pony for -- military is our technology. it is about force multipliers. host: what about the argument that this airplane was designed to fight soviet era air wars. caller: i think at first during the cold war when we were still advancing in jet fighters, we were designed to defend against other foreign military, but russians being the biggest exporter as well as us in other kinds of technology. russia, the export their military technology to other countries, iran, in particular. other countries may just be neutral, but who knows? but we still have to be more advance even though the cold war between russia, the old soviet union, is over, but it does not stop technology from advancing and that is what a lot of bleeding hearts have to understand. this technology is out there already. pandora's box is not just an

american pandora's box, but the russians have nukes. al qaeda with predator drums now. the technology will emerge regardless. host: where are you getting your knowledge? caller: i'm just a self-educated person. but this is just common sense. if you look at technology and computer science, it doubles regardless come in the private sector as in the military as well. and nec -- the rest of the world does not lagging behind. china has a predator program, russia. it is cost-effective. so we really have to it -- still have to research and spend money and no matter what happens in america, our congress, are disputes with the military industrial complex, it doesn't matter, other countries will do it. host: bob in seymour, conn.

republican. what do you think? caller: i agree with the gentleman. the last two iraqi wars showed we saved american lives by having air superiority and being able to win so readily. without that, we would have lost a lot of troops. when you get a china that is right now a very aggressive country, always threatening to attack taiwan, it is pretty scary out there. we have a lot of important things we have to protect and we need to maintain air superiority more than anything else. host: of the politico, gates businesses claims that budget cuts are risky. the bigger flashpoint could be done vh-71 presidential helicopter program where john murtha, on the appropriation committee, chairman of the subcommittee on military, is

consistent the government can't afford to simply walk away from the billions invested without getting some operational aircraft. "we can't just cancel programs without getting something out of the." secretary gates was merciless in a speech, describing the program as military procurement run amok with standards such as allowing the president to cook dinner while in flight of the nuclear attack. the cost estimates of solving even a handful -- john murtha would provide $485 million or $400 million more than requested to try to salvage five to seven of the costly helicopters. but the current crop -- contract estimated another $1.5 billion could be needed, reflecting in part the navy's tough testing standards for helicopters. this would fortified gates' argument that taxpayers would be better off if the program were terminated out right. in his speech in chicago, gates went back to what has been a consistent theme -- that all

defense weapon choices have to be weighed in the context of the new "zero sum game." my frustration has been with people who argue for a specific weapon system, and they are all people don't have to make decisions between competing priorities, gates said. he dismissed those is adjusted his cuts are risky. those three words -- requirements, risk from an analysis, are commonly evoked in defense matters. if applied correctly, the help was make sound decisions. i've found, however, that more often they have become the holy trinity of business as usual. ken in cincinnati, ohio. independent. caller: i would like to preface my comments saying i have a degree in computer science, second-generation, and have two brothers who have business and computer science. one spent 18 months in the lease. look, when we structure our economy are around defense and the military, it encourages wars

that to not have to happen, and it is a larger question about how we will structure of our economy. nafta has exported manufacturing. now has 40,000 people in this f- 22 industry. we have to think about new ways to build our country. yes, it is true about china and taiwan. but china stops coming to our bond rallies and -- we are not going to war with china any time soon. this is a false hearing to create an industry and expand an industry. we have to think about restructuring our economy and get it out of wars and out of the military ithat only burst or budget. host: maryland, a democrat. caller: i believe we need to slash our defense budget.

we spend more than the rest of the world on our defense combined. we need to use that money to combat the insurance companies that are killing more americans than al qaeda or any enemy that we could ever faced. killing us by denying us the service that we face. we need national health care for all americans, not just those who are fortunate enough to have the employers pay for it because 750 million -- 50 million americans cannot have any insurance and many of those are working. that is where the money needs to go. people running the insurance companies are killing us by denying us the service that we are paying for, and we need to

battle them from within, and the national defence will take care of itself. host: kathleen -- i will say it again, my sons are pratte -- fighting for war profiteers. maybe if it would be more noble if they were incorporated. the next call comes from margaret in knoxville, tennessee. republican. caller: hello. i have enjoyed a lot of your booknote programs and i have always been a republican and wondered what president eisenhower would think about our spending. i know he warned about the military industrial complex. but i did listen to mr. gates, and i was very impressed with his presentation and the fact that he worked for many other presidents. so it sounds like he has a good perspective.

and the other thing i had in some of your booknotes that your offers have commented on the military, and they say in this day and age that we can't afford civilian deaths, that the newspapers are all over them, just how many people were killed, so that a lot of those drones would be very helpful but it always kill a lot of people. i heard someone say that whenever somebody goes in to tell the president that you are going to be able to kill osama bin laden, they say, well, sir, what is the chance? they give him a percentage, and then they say what is the chance of civilian deaths, and they say, sir, it is 100%. he says, then we can't take the

shot. i think it would take someone very versed in the military to weigh all of these things. i think we just need to watch what we are spending -- i am sure there are a lot of cuts that can be made in hardware, but i would like to see a lot of money spent on the men themselves and those who served our country so valiantly. host: prior to going to chicago, secretary gates spoke to fort drum in new york. more troops than expected may be sent to afghanistan. he told troops at fort drum in new york that there may be some increase but not a lot they not -- beyond the 60,000 service members of the obama administration approved. that includes 21,000 that obama ordered added this spring. the next call, valerie, odenton,

maryland. talking about the future of the military. caller: i am in the military. i am about to retire. technology is the way to go. a lot of our youngsters are getting into the eye to field, realizing -- i.t. field, realizing smarter the technical capability, the more likely -- i would like the administration focusing more on ground troops, protecting. there are lots of technologies out here, professors who work with the government's. my thing is they really need to come together and find out -- go out into the field, go out in these areas of afghanistan and iraq and seeing. coming back into this technology as needed. as far as the different army,

navy, air force, they will buy for the weaponry they want and it comes to dollars and cents. but if they don't put their soldiers, airmen, marines first, it is a no starter. host: could you quickly tell us about your military service? caller: i have been a personal sergeant for over 27 years, so it is my job to mobilized soldiers all across the country. it is interesting because you are taking the soldiers out of their homes, they are away from their families for six months to a year, sometimes upward of two years. it is a difficult task they do. they lay their lives on the line. but don't undercut our lives. host: from "the financial times" this morning, rafsanjani's speech set to energize reformers. former president rafsanjani, supporter of mousavi, is expected to use the same platform at tehran university to

express sympathy for those who say the election was fraudulent. many believe his appearance offers a chance for a mass show of opposition strength on the streets of tehran. it according to " the associated press," he has made this week. the opposition packed the prayer hall -- with budget which broadcast live on radio and one of iran's most the poor and symbolic political platforms. from "the new york times" this morning, you may recall harry and louise from the health-care debate in the 1990's. they are back. this time the i standing here with some democrats, the same actors who played harry and louise in the 1990's are back and now in a new campaign, this time to support a government overhaul of the medical system promoted by a democratic president. the ad sponsors come a trade group representing drugmakers and families usa, a nonprofit group advocating affordable

medical care, reflect the strange bedfellows lining up behind the latest reform effort. a little more cooperation, a little less politics, louise says to harry in a new spot, scheduled to appear on cable and network stations this weekend -- and we can get the job done this time. ross and montgomery, alabama. republican, you are on. caller: of before i go into anything, i want to correct one mistake you have. you showed a picture of an aircraft that was not the f-22, it was f-35, those are two different aircraft and the form two different jobs. host: how do you know that? caller: if you are around enough military people and look at the pictures -- vertical stabilizers as well as the intakes on the f- 35 are significantly different. they are similar looking due to the fact that they are both the same color, but they are not the

same aircraft. host: thank you for that. are you in the air force base? caller: as a matter of fact, i am. i want to go into the fact that we need to eat -- the need to procure more f-22's here. i cannot go on to a whole history, because that would take a long time, but we have 700 plus f-15 eagles and they were originally built in the 1970's to replace all of these. though we do not need the exact same number, but we need to at least replace them with 300 or 300 plus aircraft appeared around 2-1 ratio or three-one ratio. as one german said before, the armed force multiplier, -- as

one gentleman said before, the armed force multiplier, fighting more enemies with a smaller amount of aircraft and technology. here is one issue -- and this is what secretary gates is saying -- we need to, instead of buying f-22's, but they f-45's, designed to replace f-16 and a- 10. host: do you agree? caller: i do not. on the whole scale, f-45 should replace the 16, but not replace f-22, because that is an air superiority aircraft, the multi- role, which means you would be replacing aircraft like me f-15, with an aircraft not designed to do that job. to answer another question --

host: very quickly. caller: f-22 was designed to combat major russian aircraft, however, it can still be applied today. anyone can see that iran, china, all of those countries have large air forces that would take more than just 187 f-22's to knock out. host: are you a pilot? caller: not currently, going in that direction. host: white beard jason in cincinnati. go ahead. caller: first of all, war is murder. no way to get around that. that is just a fact it does not matter what reason, what right you think you have to tell another person, it is against moral rules. it you have no right to kill anybody for any reason whatsoever. now what happens is you get in there and get those poor young men like the man who was just

calling before and you get these thoughts well, we've got all these enemies and you got all the stuff and you need to protect the world from all of these other enemies, but maybe if you just calm down, just try this example one time for once in our lives, calm down and see if anything happens and, you know what, i guarantee nothing will. nothing will. ok. host: finally, a twist -- we will always need the ability to -- for r&d and to build and events weapons. the people we are fighting now will not be the ones next time there thank you for everybody who called in during that segment. or tweeted. in just a few minutes we will be talking to congressman tim murphy, republican of pennsylvania, on the energy and commerce committee and we will be talking about health care markup. the energy and commerce committee is taking up the

legislation that the ways and means committee marked up yesterday, they also have a piece of that pike, so they will be marking that up, and alex moss from the labor department, chief economist, with -- will talk about unemployment and some of things the obama administration is going to combat that. that is in the last hour. the house of representatives is coming in at 9:00 a.m., so only a two-hour " washington journal." but something the been around on youtube. you might have heard of the gregory brothers. they are known for political parity is using a little bit of digital manipulation. we want to show you a little bit and we will talk to one of them. the amount gentlewoman from minnesota's recognize. >> congress, climate change bill, let us get our beats on. >> it is time to stand up and

say, we get to choose -- liberty or tierney. >> could be something in between, manioc ready? >> the underlying -- tyranny of the government. what will we choose today? will we choose liberty, or tehrani? >> it all depends on who gets to be the tyrant -- >> remember these four words for what this legislation means. jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs -- let's look for jobs. >> don't forget about jobs. .

paris hilton could have a recording contract, why shouldn't nancy pelosi and others have pop careers. host: how do you do it? how do you manipulate the video? caller: c-span has been a key resource for us. our process is about four or five steps. one element of who do we suspect

is going to be the best unintentional singer and we go through a musical process where we use some audio processing tools. for those that list tone pop music or top 40 or urban radio, you've heard this kind of robot yik effect on their voices. there's software used to correct pitch in singer's voices to fix error. in recent years that has been used as an effect. if you crank it up really high, you get this robot effect. when we see nancy pelosi in your

video talking. is that her voice you are hearing singing? guest: you are right. if you took time to look at the footage, you'd recognize her voice. we have other episodes that include well-known media figures from the network. you can certainly recognize their voices although they have been tuned to a mellow deof our choosing. host: why did you pick politics to auto tune? guest: originally, we started making videos after an idea that my brother michael had during the presidential campaign season. he started writing songs about the presidential debates. and made videos to release

those. it evolved into not just songs about the debate but ' ek"é(jju. then we took their spoken voices and turned them into singing voices. and we took this idea and wanted to keep it current. we want it something we could do once every couple of weeks. you have an album civer at gregory brothers domenici. there's a woman, who is that? >> that's erin gregory. that's my wife. technically, we have three gregory brothers and one sister

in-law there. host: thank you. an hour left to washington journal. good morning. voting late yet, early this morning to approve the tax provisions to approve $544 billion new taxes on families making over $300,000 a year. what's ahead for the energy and commerce committee? guest: we'll go through a number of issues on amendments and review a wide range of things. commissions to volunteer at community health centers. should we have a government run

plan or other ways of doing this? the key is the basic difference is reforming or paige the system. host: you were kind enough to bring by the bill itself. energy and commerce and hr 3200. i want to move it to get a look at the spien and the thickness of the reading that you and your staff have to do to understand this. guest: think of most phone books. there was a previous version and this. if you go to see your doctor. the doctor says your medical history is too big, i'm not going to have time to read it and do tests, here is your precipitation and what i advise you. you think that's strange. you say, dock, rpt you really going to take time to review

this, you would be pretty horrified. something this important, i want to make sure we are not seeing this as a precedents. i want to make sure we are ñ reform. host: do you think this is taking more time? guest: i think we should be taking more time. it's extremely important. that was on an earlier version. we are not going to have a score on this bill. it's like buying things without looking at the price tag and analyzing it. i want to make sure we are doing the best for people's health in america. your hearing will be on c-span.org beginning at 10.

you gave el in with headline this is morning it carries significant weight used in determining the cost of the impact. what sort of impact will his words have? >> a very big impact. the president said he was not interested in signing a bill that would not interested in reducing the spending. that's a big concern for members across the aisles. we'll take some calls. tim murphy here until at least 8:30 this morning.

ulys, texas. caller: thank you. i would preface this by the fact that republicans are operating from a memo giving them talking points about government mandate yrs healthcare. in pennsylvania, you had a rise in healthcare premiums. it went from $6, 647 to $513. the con krae congressional incr. in terms of raising the question about healthcare, i think that

you have to start talking about having all the congressmen go into the new healthcare plan. guest: let me respond to some of these. yes, healthcare plans are going up. this is about fixing the problems, not financing the problem. the new england healthcare institute said about 700 billion of that waist is the wrong medications at the wrong times, inappropriate use. we need to go as medicare and medicaid and clean it up.

>> what happens is that by saying the government is going to pick up the tab, it doesn't get. i'll give you an example in pittsburgh. introducing rehospitalization. you can reduce it by 70% by managing diabetes differently. we have to approach healthcare in terms of real reform. one of the reasons health insurance costs so much is brauz there is so much unmandated.

that's another reform we need to look at and shop around. host: palm springs, texas on the independent line. caller: good morning. i don't have a lot of questions to ask about the healthcare but i do have a question. i want to know when you holdup a big stack of paper like you've got there right now, does the house printing office actually print that much paper and put it on every senator or congressman's desk. guest: we received this on our desk yesterday. . you can get pieces on the internet. my website has information on that. i understand there's a lot of

reference in here. host: we'll have this linked as well later on. daniel, a republican caller. caller: i think when it comes down to it. if we would just stay healthier in the long term, that would help out in the united states. the healthcare reform is something that needs to be done. why do we feel like we have to

if it's something you do on line, your healthcare goes up 20%. host: is any of that addressed in the bill? guest: no. there are some elements of prevention. that's not clear. it will be developed overtime. he's bringing up a point of vol untarry healthcare. the question is if you smoke, should you pay a higher premium? should we have more transparent si host: tell us more about health

insurance exchanges guest: i wish i knew more about that. it's something where you can go to a yet to be determined site. that's good if you are comparing apples to apples. but the government plan will have 10 different thing it's will civer. private plans would be stuck in their state. my daughter in college, it's an unfair advantage. we ought to open up this marketplace and get information like a consumer report. you ought to get that oven healthcare and return it in that situation. >> welcome karen.

caller: i listened to a lot of debate last night. guest: god bless you for doing that. caller: it's pretty trying. i don't know why we are consulting with republicans on any of this. you all sound like you just fell off the turn ip truck. i'm 58. my entire lifetime, we ought to know by now if we are going to sa save any money. my mother is on medicare, we go to any doctor she wants and she has a supplemental. my sister has lived in many countries. she said the best system was in

france. i don't know why we are trying to reinvent the whole here. my question for you would be. you are talking about how we are going to pay for this. isn't that decided by the finance committee? guest: we all have a responsibility to pay for it. one of the great benefits in a country like ours is the diverse opinions. france has some good things but also a lot of problems. medicare and med i credit came up, there's been no fundamental reform to get those things to work better. out of those 450 bills, only 12

passed. we recognize that we need to have a system that continues to improve. i worked in healthcare all my professional life. i bring that expert he's to congress. i don't think it is a matter of i don't agree with you, shut up to the republicans. we all have an opinion. one side of the aisle doesn't have eamon oply on truth and examples. host: two different headlines this more host: what are you hearing in terms of those two different poles of issues? what are they concerned about?

guest: they still want their sdr r doctors to make the decisions, not the bureaucrats. part is looking at what the cost will be. especially for small business that will be facing a charge if they do not have medical. host: our next call from pensacola, florida. on the independent line. thank you for calling. caller: good morning.

my question is, they are saying it is going to to be a tax you may have healthcare insurance by the person or by the government. how is it justified to tax people with certain of money or are the people with insurance going to be required to pay for it? . guest: they are paying an individual rate and paying employees. they come back and say, they cannot suddenly have a jump what

they are paige employees is not host: the state is trying to eliminate the costly fee for service. the "new york times" massachuset massachusetts. what is that and is the house learning any lessons? guest: we need to learn from massachusetts and the negative side is that people don't have a doctorháo handle the ore he

energy and commerce will spend a long time discussing those cost increases and make it better healthcare and not just pay for what is there. host: you come of the practice, is it any different from that of a heart disease has downhilled the risk of depression. that doubles the cost of healthcare. improving the healthcare is making sure there is an integration of healthcare. their information exchanges hands. when that doesn't happen,

healthcare costs good up. host: from florida, good morning. caller: i've been on. i've had three operations. a hernia, hemorrhoid and tonsils out. i have paid all my bids. i added them all up divided by 12 months, it comes out to $91 a month. i don't have a supplement program. of course the republican's definition of socialized

medicine. rather than write a you going to add it as some kind of -- all it's going to gets is straight republican votes. you know that. guest: one of the things that happens with medicare is that you are allowed to shop around. the government pays the bill and tries to negotiate prices. this new plan will not have that same access. some are loushing changing to lower your income level, it gives you more flaechl ikt

host: to new york city we go next. this is a democratic caller, john. caller: i'd like to make a sure they pay high taxes, drive small cars. i pay for my health insurance out of pocket to my employer each month. it's expensive. i can't get any n. the private plan in new york city would cost me double. through aarp, i can 0 new york

city has a plan called healthy new york. it's clear, straight forward and simple.  make a little too much money. i would advise insurance claims, you put people back to work. i think that's an idea that should be floated about. guest: i like that idea and it is one i support in terms of letting you shop around. could you imagine if you are making another. the same thing happens to news

pennsylvania. we have two major insurance plans. there are other small ones but the two major ones and that's it. you should be able to shop around. make sure the information out there is clear. host: this is a republican interpretation of the plan. another one from the chamber of commerce. one last plan as we pull this off. this may be the most confusing. this is from where? guest: the insurance companies. we haven't gotten there to make it simpler.

host: this morning. d. q. says they won't support the bill. mike ross of naeshg leagued the boou booufr. what sort of political challenges does that present? guest: it's important. it sends spending out of control. if we allowed people to shop around and get support. we want to help those who cannot get insurance. that's where we'll have more debate. host: we'll remind our viewers. rep tent. host: good morning. calling from georgia on the

independent line. caller: i have a short question. i had insurance. i do not have insurance now i am a teacher. i was diagnosed with post poli everyonei;é 0 they have clinics where you could go and get all the diagnostic tests-v because the insurance companies, they are no longer ability to do that.

in essence the companies are the ones controlling what test you can get and how you get them and whether they are accepted or not. . the xhounity health centers i bloeb we should be investing more in. they are able to deliver good, solid karat a lower price. one thing i have been working with is to allow doctors to volunteer there. the other could be a medical home for many people to continue to get their care. in all of this, we have to make sure we are taking care of

people. host: question for you on twitter. guest: it is not let's say you were a car penter and iment that's when you begin to have purchasing power. that's where you have it's not an election. host: one more quick call. this is marie in bald >> high there. >> ni my question is, what is the rush?

it's a big, long form you have to read host: snoo this plan doesn't really take effect in eye few years and by about 20125, there's a mandate that no motor what but by 2016, people will have to participate. we have time to support the people who have need of assistant. i hope ke 0 come mes. thank you for beg with us. in just a moment, we'll focus our attention on unemployment and job ready training with allen moss.

first, a news update. >> showing a nine people have been quilled and more wounded the the the senator being accused of racism. can you watch that video. a couple of art kets from the newspaper you new presidential helicopters being assembled before the obama administration.

this month, you'll hear more about that vote toblly. . i vote to approve the sotomayor nomination and send it to the full senate. that vote is expected to happen in the next week. the republicans have asked that it be put off until july 28th. a vote expected in the first week of august. this is the front age of the guardian newspaper. swine flu could kill 65,000 in

the uk. >> from the "washington post" this morning. nine family members of victims killed in the attacks say they are fur your.

host: that's in the wash time this is morning.  and in politico, conservative group offers to sell endorsement for $2 million.

>> the so called card check provision which senators decided to scrap, would require voters to recognize the union as soon as the majority of workers signed cards saying they wanted a union. the a bapd onment of card check was another example of the power of moderate democrats. though the democrats have a strong performance in the senate, several oppose the card check provision as undemocratic. a few news updates. >> alism moss with the labor department chief economist.

preparing the workers of today for tomorrow. what does this report find as the biggest challenge of doing that. guest: we have to understand what the job market is going to look like in the future. what the report find sthaz -- it is very interesting. in many respects, the picture is similar. many industries around today will be around in the future. twoft findings that are interesting, there will be a lot more jobs in healthcare. many more jobs in renewable energy. green jobs, pollution clean up, weatherization.

that will grow considerably. host: the last couple of months. guest: this is some pretty complicated forecasts. i should say that there is a pure owe -- projegs. it's important to be able to do this. we need to design our training program in such a way that we are targeting such areas that we are putting work into those j s

jobs. guest: in this report, there are some assumptions to how the stimulus is going to work through the system. what we are going to see is stopping construction. the stimulus will have an impact on the recovery in construction. we can see that now. right now, we have 20,000 infrastructures under way. that represents thousands of jobs that we not be there other

wise. host: does your report take that into account? guest: i believe it does. we are seeing some growth in government jobs but we have to understand that this is -- these additional workers are there to help create jobs and to help workers adapt in the economy. it's really fundamental. host: president obama in his

campaign and inaugural address talked about the important answer of high sc4%ñ and beyond. what do we do differently in terms of job training and clenl etd r et indication. guest: this is fundamental. one of the key findings in the record, occupations with more educated workers are going to grow faster. what that means is that for a worker to succeed, they are going to be in a better position if they have some of these skills. on monday, the president announced the initiative. what that does is reform and strengthen our community college. our goal is to get this nation

to be the leading nation in the number of college graduates. this will increase the number of students and community college seven fold. this will be through facilities, increased financial aid. this is how we are laying the foundation for this recovery. we are not -- we are tapping into the potential of the american work force to come out of this more competitive and productive. host: let's hear from our viewers. on the democrat line. caller: the last two years, the first time i have ever been in a lot of nursing facilities. besides realizing thousand

they've cornered the market on our healthcare and that not getting well is not necessarily the focus. besides that, being in three or four different nursing homes an several assisted living facilities, i have become aware how poorly the nurse's aids get paid. i have noticed being in quite a few facilities. the pay starts at like $9 an hour. the pay sdrim nation is insane. i swar the profit margin is off the back of these nursing aids who do the bulk of the work. how can we not only raise the pay legislatively of these aids?

how can we have a standard more consistent. i see from one aid to the next that the strategies are different. host: great. we'll get a response from our guest. guest: you raise a lot of great points. this íguadministration, they ar committed not just to insure that we are going to get out of here with sustaining the jobs but that the wages in the middle class come to an end. they will receive pay substantial for a family. we are committed not just to getting people into work but getting good jobs for everybody.

these occupations are expected to grow considerably. as this population ages, there will be more need for physical therapists. it's crucial that these occupations because we have so many have good standards and good pay. host: back to the unemployment issue, a viewer writes in a tweet guest: i am less concerned with how we are doing from one month to the next. i'm more concerned about the longer, more steady train.

go back in backward. we were checking on. host: i can see there's being some stablization. when i tell you this, when we took on had mess, it didn't hp overnight. we are not going to get out of it overnight. we are going to see a sustain of progress and a shift towards recovery. host: are those not being

counted as much? guest: the labor statistics computes different. guest: it's important that the number of workers that -- who are working at part-time who want more hours are given more time and those not real attached be considered. you think about the kind of service. host: does the department of labor have any idea how unemployment would rate on the stimulus money? guest: i topt know.

there are jobs there. certainly have jobs this would not be there otherwise. i'll point out that there are jobs that were saved as a result of the recovery act. in florida talking about all the teachers in florida that lost their jobs. in new york tshgsz like 14,000 teachers. host: back to calls in north carolina. good morning to susan on the republican line. caller: why haven't they done anything about jobs for illegals. we are suppose to have more work. illegals are getting all the

jobs. why since nooim, since we had an invasion of people from all over. host: you take into affect the impact of immigration. guest: there's certainly -- rouk at this, i win, you lies. you lies, i win. we are focusing on improving everybody's lives. that's what we are doing.

we are laying the foundations for sustained recovery. that's really what he we are looking at here. host: a few more minutes with mr. ross. taking a look inside to a specfic yik area of job growth. the procorrect growth of labor operations. what sort of jobs are we talking about here twoen now and 2016? guest: we'll seeqa health and t hemming sector. if we have investors in electronic health records, that

itself might kree create jobs. going to the early 1980s, we would not have predicted how important the internet would have been. we'll see what will occur to create jobs. that isn't necessarily in this report. we know when people have skills, they are able to adapt to the economy. host: from california on the independent line. caller: i am in santa cruz, california. i pick you up on the radio. i understand we need to create

jobs. california has gotten so big as a state, so rich that now the wig businesses and corporations, they are the ones supplying the jobs. we the public are not. i am disabled. i don't want to be a sponge like a lot of people here. i want to try to get retrained. guest: people talk about manufacturing jobs host: what this report shows is that a decline in manufacturing is expected to method rate. some irstants, it's a correct

portion. to give you some idea. people who can seek with training. host: what's hipped that road in aerospace? guest: there's projections that the market for aerospace. we have importers here. host: keeping in mind what corporations want to do with things like smart grid.

guest: we don't want to assume. certainly in areas that has grown. in the green area more broadly, we have seen since 2000-2006, that industry is growing faster than average. what is safe to say is that with this legislation, it will be more promising areas. host: from arizona, a republican caller. go ahead. caller: are people in denial with regard to healthcare insurance. if anything, it is going to loose a lot of jobs. do they think the big businesses are going to trickle down to the small businesses?

people are in denial. thank you. host: here is the issue -- we know the system needs reform. the quality is not necessarily that high. what we know is to make the hard choices and tackle this as the core, which is something that has not happened in the past. we really have to get at this. what the president said is that we have deficiencies in the system. the system is designed in a way to drive up the costs. that is what we are trying to get at here. this is really not helping familiaritilies and bidses

succeed. the costs, if they are not restrained will hamper growth. host: is there a point of gain. we are thinking about taking the necessary steps to promote growth in this economy and sustain job growth, widespread job growth. i think no one wants to see this economy more healthy than this administration. i.x we are doing everything we can

right now. we are pushing funds through states to report jobs. host: the democrat line from georgia. good morning. caller: question, there was a two hour show a few weeks ago. there is an immediate need, we have dams giving way around the country, the same thing is true with bridges. in missouri and those areas. with these machines that have gas coming out of yards up and down entire streets. there's water ways. my point is, with $2.5 industrialon worth of infrastructure need that's have to be taken care of, why aren't

these on the top of the list at it very second. with "alabamaa -- you can't trust the republicans for much more than the military -- when are we going to come to our senses? we need these jobs? why are they being show cases as potential jobs? host: thank you. guest: i think we are doing that. the recovery act is making important recovery projects under way including more than 5000 in infrastructure. this is in all 50 states. coming out of this, we'll have improved infrastructure in this

karnt. joor from mississippi, james. an independent caller. caller: good morning. i was wondering in the next package if people could consider raising the minimum wage and working through where the people who spend that spending package can work through the companies and businesses to raise the minimum wages and help the business side of it. host: james we'll get a response. the house is coming in. guest: as we know, the minimum wage is go pg to be increasing on 7 clsh -- 7/24.

host: the jobs you are talking about if this report are much broader than minimum wage jobs. . .

be led by the gentleman from

utah, congressman chaffetz. mr. chaffetz: please join me in the pledge. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches on each side. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. maloney: madam speaker,

this week after consultation with leaders in the business community, organized labor, health care providers, patient groups, insurers, pharmaceutical makers and small business owners, democratic leaders introduced america's affordable health choice act, which will expand access to health care, protect consumer choices, provide a public option and enable over 500 billion in medicare savings. and what is the republicans' answer to the health care crisis in america? a color coded chart of the democratic plan. here is the chart of their plan. absolutely nothing. our bill addresses the needs of all americans, including the nearly 46 million without health insurance. by maintaining the freedom to choose individual health providers, improving care and

increasing choice and competition with a new public option. it's time for our republican colleagues to join us in getting serious about health care coverage. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does -- the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from utah rise? mr. chaffetz: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. chaffetz: say it ain't so, joe. the president said we have to spend money to keep from going bankrupt. amazing, amazing philosophy that gives you great pause. it's no wonder why this country is nearly $12 trillion in debt. we are now spending nearly $600 million per day just in interest payments . this credit card congress can no longer continue. we cannot spend our way out of our challenges. we have to be fiscally responsible in this country. we cannot spend our way out of

these challenges. you don't do it in your family. but this congress is. every time we hear a challenge all we hear about is the need for more spending. today we will consider a bill, a horse and burrow bill that will be nearly -- burro bill that will be nearly $700 million in new spending, $700 million in new spending to tackle horse and burros that are exploding in their population in the west. please, madam speaker, i implore my colleagues, we have to stop, we have to cut our spending. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. klein: madam speaker, this past week my office held a seminar to help our nation's veterans access the full range of benefits they have earned, including a four-year college education. we invited local education and work force experts to help our veterans determine their eligibility, fill out paperwork and receive benefits under the new g.i. bill for the 21st century. along with many others in the

house, i was proud to co-sponsor this new g.i. bill when it passed last year. this critical bill will ensure that our returning service members are part of our economic recovery. this bill covers everything from tuition to housing to books and is available to military veterans who have served since september 11, 2001. in just a few weeks, the very first veterans to enroll in college under the new g.i. bill will begin their first classes. this is truly a landmark moment and i wish the best of luck to all our veterans who through this program will become scholars as well as heroes. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. poe: madam speaker, the nationalized health care bill will continue to allow illegals to get free medical services. foreigners who are not authorized to be in the united states flood over our wide open borders by the millions to get free universal health care. that bankrupts federal and

state health care safety nets set up for americans. it's very simple to understand to most people. our citizens are forced to pay medical bills for citizens of countries all around the world. these people in our country are here illegally, use our emergency rooms like it's their primary care and it doesn't cost them anything. and what our government doesn't pay, our hospitals have to pay. that drives up the cost of medical care and health insurance for legal people. the nationalized health care bill will force our citizens who cannot even pay for their own health care to pay billions of dollars a year for health care for millions of illegals. that's just wrong. citizens and legal immigrants shouldn't be forced to pay for the health care for people illegally in the united states, and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new mexico rise? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

mr. heinrich: madam speaker, i tried to learn firsthand how the health care crisis is impacting working families in my district. i talked to chris davis, a single father who makes too much as an electrician to qualify for assistance but too little to afford coverage for his 7-year-old son. i listened to bernice romero, a fixed income retiree who can't afford the rise in premiums and out-of-pocket expenses to treat her debilitating carm tunnel and knee -- carpel tunnel and knee problems. we need to contain costs in our health care system. that means preventing fraud, waste and abuse in the system, using wellness and prevention programs and have all regions of the country, rich, poor, urban and rural are on an even

playing field. we must address this issue head on, and the time to act is now. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: yes, madam speaker. may i address the house for one minute? the speaker pro tempore: without objection. so recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. during the worse recession in a generation, democrats propose a government takeover of health care that will lead to fewer jobs, higher taxes and less health coverage. since the recession began, six million jobs have been lost, yet the democrats' health care

plan includes hundreds of billions of dollars in new tax hikes on small businesses, the engine of job creation in this country. democrats propose more than 800 billion in new tax hikes. according to economic modeling by the preside's own economic advisor, the business tax hikes alone would destroy up to 4.7 million jobs. despite their claims of reform, it will reduce -- it will reduce health care costs, c.b.o. director told congress that the democrats' proposed reform will only increase future federal spending on health care. house republicans will oppose any plan that puts washington bureaucrats between patients and the care they need. house republicans have a plan for reform that expands access to affordable health care and gives families the freedom to choose the health care that fits their needs without imposing a job killing tax hike on small businesses and working families. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? mr. pallone: to address the house for one minute, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pallone: thank you, madam speaker. i'm glad to report that two of our committees have already reported out the health care reform bill. c.b.o. indicated that 97% of the nonelderly, in other words, those who are not on medicare now, would be covered by the health reform plan that our committees are now considering. small businesses would benefit greatly. there's a 50% tax credit for premiums that are paid by employers of small businesses. so this legislation has the opportunity to allow small businesses to benefit significantly, to cover their employees, to cover 97% of americans who are not covered currently by medicare. and it is moving. we expect it will be out of committee by next week and on the house floor by the end of this month. and finally, americans will know that their guarantee health coverage reduces costs

and 97% of those who do not have coverage now or 97% of americans not in medicare will achieve health care coverage. very happy about the fact that we're proceeding with this along the promise of president obama. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? mr. mcgovern: madaspeaker, by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up, i call up house resolution 653 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 91, house resolution 965. resolved, that upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill h.r. 1018, to amend the wild free-roaming horses and burros act to improve the management and long-term health of wild free-roaming horses and burros, and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 21.

the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on natural resources now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. the bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions of the bill, as amended, are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage without intervening motion except, one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources. two, the amendment printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules, if offered by representative rahall of west virginia or his designee, which shall be considered as read, shall be separately debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the question. three, the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part b of the report of the

committee on rules, if offered by representative hastings of washington or his designee, which shall be considered as read and shall be separately debatable for 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent. and four, one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section 2, all points of order against amendments specified in the first section of this resolution are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule 21. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one hour. mr. mcgovern: thank you. madam speaker, for the purpose of debate home, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlelady from north carolina, dr. foxx. all time yielded during consideration of the rule is to for debate only. i yield myself such time as i may consume and i also ask unanimous consent that all members be given five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on resolution 653.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, house resolution 653 provides for consideration of h.r. 1018, the restore our american mustang act, and you structured rule. the rule provides one hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources. the rule makes in order a manager's amendment and a substitute amendment for the ranking member, my former rules colleague, mr. hastings of washington. the manager's amendment is debatable for 10 minutes and the substitute is debatable for 30 minutes. the rule also provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. madam speaker, h.r. 1018 is a bill that restores important protections for wild horses and burros. the bill received full consideration in the subcommittee and the full committee, markups were held, republican and democratic amendments were offered and accepted through the regular order. madam speaker, this bill will

reverse a misguided and controversial writer that was adopted as part of the f.y. 2005 omnibus appropriations bill. the provision was slipped into the bill in the dead of night when the republicans were in control, reversing longstanding federal policy to protect wild horses from being sold at auctions and subsequently shipped to slaughter plants. last summer the bureau of land management announced that it would consider killing as many as 30,000 healthy wild horses and burros in b.l.m. holding centers across the united states. the act introduced by chairman rahall will restore longstanding protections by prohibiting the sale and wholesale killing of wild horses and burros. prioritized cost effective on the range management over roundups, saving millions of tax dollars, facilitate the creation of sanction wears for wild

horses and bureau -- sanctuaries for wild horses and burros, strengthen the adoption program and protect wildlife by requiring a thriving national ecological balance on the range. madam speaker, these wild animals are rounded up in huge numbers by b.l.m. only to languish in holding pence. threatened with sale or slaughter -- pens threatened with sale or slaughter. this will promote adoption for those horses and burros who are taken off the range, banning the sale of wild horses and burros by the b.l.m. as well as the transfer of these animals for the purpose of processing into commercial products. legislation similar to h.r. 1018 passed the house in 2007 by a landslide bipartisan vote of 277-137. unfortunately, this measure has never been signed into law. it is time we end this inhumane practice once and for all. this bill is important for the protection of our nation's wild horses and burros. .

i urge adoption of the rule on the bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: to debate the rule, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. and i thank my colleague from massachusetts for yielding the customary time and i'm looking forward to our having fun here this morning as he promised yesterday. i am intrigued by my colleague saying that this is being done to correct something slipped into a bill in the middle of the night when the republicans were in charge. it sounds like something very nefarious was done. this is sort of news to us. we didn't hear it in lules -- rules yesterday. and i need to point out that there was something put in an appropriations bill in 2005, as

my colleague says, but certainly wasn't nefarious and it's my understanding that our colleagues on the other side have modified that provision several times. so, i don't think this is really trying to correct something that republicans did some time ago in the dead of the night. but, be that as it may, i think i need to point out that we're bringing this legislation at a time when more than two million americans who've lost their jobs since the democrats' $1 trillion stimulus bill became law and it's somewhat of an insult to those people. we have a 9.5% unemployment rate and a budget deficit of more than $1 trillion, which is predicted to go to $2 trillion before the end of the fiscal year. given those facts, it's a little

unclear to know what exactly are the priorities of the democrats in charge of this congress. small business and middle class families are struggling all across this country, yet the democrats in charge of congress are poised to ask them to bank roll a $700 million welfare program for wild horses. this is just another example of how out of touch washington democrats are. if democrats want to join republicans in focusing on job creation, then we should be dealing with our american energy act, which will create new jobs, bring down energy costs and pave the way for a cleaner environment. and we should scrap this job killing health care bill speaker pelosi is seeking to rush to a vote before the end of the month. now, what this bill is going to do that's underlying this rule,

which i'm going to urge my colleagues to vote against, it will establish a horse census every two years. it provides for enhanced contraception and birth control for horses. it makes available an additional $19 -- 19 million acres of public and private land for wild horses. it covers a $5 million tab to repair damage done by horses to other property and mandates that government bureaucrats perform home inspections before americans can adopt horses. i hardly think this is what the american people expect us to be doing these days as they face the many challenges that they're facing. and with that, madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: just in brief response to the gentlewoman's comments, as she knows, when the manager's bill is adopted, this bill will have no cost. and in response to her question about what the democratic priorities are, they are to create jobs, they are to pass an energy bill, to create more jobs, to deal with climate change, our priorities include passing a health care bill that will lower the cost of health care for average americans. i don't know about in north carolina, but i can tell that you in my district, and everywhere i go around the country, people claim, with great justification, that they are paying too much for health care. she may represent a bunch of millionaires but i think most of us don't. the fact of the matter is health care costs are too high, we need to make it more affordable for the average family, for small businesses, and so that's what our priorities are. i should say to the gentlelady as well that according to recovery.gov in her state jobs were created or saved in north

carolina are 105,000 jobs. you i'd also like to ask unanimous consent to submit into the record, madam speaker, an editorial from the knox news in support of this stimulus package as it relates to the great smoky mountains national park which -- smoky mountains national park which includes part of the gentlewoman's district. our priorities are pretty clear and what we're trying to do right now is dig ourselves out of a ditch that her party and the republican president george bush dug our economy into. the ditch is much deeper than anybody had thought. and it's going to take as you little time to get out of it. but through the stimulus package, through passing health care reform to lower health care costs on families and small businesses, through our climate change bill to create thousands and thousands of more green

jobs, i think we've got to turn the corner and i think that the president of the united states is leading us on the right track and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. my friend is engaged in revisionist history again. we did have a good -- the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady yield herself -- ms. foxx: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: we did have a good economy under president bush after he inherited a recession and after 9/11 -- president bush. after he inherited a recession and after 9/11 things went down in the economy. he asked the congress to cut taxes. we had 54 straight months of job creation. then the democrats took over the congress in january of 2007 and

we have charts to show it, all of a sudden the economy really went south. things started going downhill when democrats took control of the congress and have been going downhill ever since. now we have a democrat-controlled congress and a democrat in the white house and things are really going badly. so i think that we can prove with historical facts, not revisionist history, that under the republicans in the house and senate and a republican president that the economy was in pretty good shape. i'd like to recognize my friend from utah, mr. chaffetz. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for how long? ms. foxx: for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. chaffetz: thank you, madam

speaker. i appreciate this opportunity. i'm from utah and out west we actually deal with the horses and burros that we'll be talking about and debating in this rule. now, for whatever reason, a variety of reasons, this emergency meeting had to happen yesterday. somehow this legislation, which had passed out of committee in april, was suddenly a -- at 2:20 yesterday called up in an emergency meeting that the rules committee had to meet at 3:30 in the afternoon. now, i know it's normal and customary and regular that the rules vote generally goes down partisan lines. but i would urge my colleagues to reconsider this. there is no reason to rush this legislation through. i tried to offer an amendment. that amendment was not heard in the rules committee. despite it being delivered and given on time. a minor, minor amendment. i still have underlying concerns about the overall bill.

i would still vote against it. but i've got to be candid that i think there are some adjustments that could be made. i'd like to take this moment here and just talk a little bit about the amendment he was trying to make and i would hope that my -- amendment that i was trying to make and i would hope that my colleagues would at least allow it to be heard. i think that's the american way and there's a pattern of here of terrible frustration of not being able to be heard on this floor about amendments that we the people are here to do. the amendment i was simply tryinging to offer is that this board that's going to oversee the horse and burros is consisting of 12 people. we're trying to add a few more people to that board. two representatives from state grazing boards are equivalent to state agencies who are not state employees. and we were trying to add two representatives of indian tribes who manage wild horse and burros. now if you're out west in a state like utah and several of the other western states, you have indian tribes who have a

vested interest in the management of the horse and burros. for the democrats to actually deny us an opportunity to allow native american he weres to be represented on the board -- americans to be represented on the board is absolutely ridiculous. it shows the heavy-handedness of this congress. time after time we have offered amendments to appropriations that never get heard on this floor. i too was elected. i am a freshman. i did not create this mess but i am here to help clean it up. they tell us a lot in meetings that, you know, when we talk about rules and we talk about process, it's not that sexy and, you know, we're not going to win elections based on that sort of thing. you know what, if we don't get the process right, we're not going to get the end result right. so take a bill that as introduced has a $700 million

price tag to it, rush it through rules in just over an hour, offer an amendment on time, then not being allowed to hear it where we're trying to get, for instance, members of native americans to participate in the horse and burro bill is just systematic of what is wrong and what is broken here in this process. i have deep concerns about this bill overall. i know there is a manager's amendment. i know there's a substitute amendment, but let's also understand in this bill that we're dealing with overpopulation here. there are some over 30,000 horse and burros that are incarcerated or being held, however you want to term it, out in the western states predominantly. you know, they talk about save our mustangs and if it's some endangered species. it's not an endangered species. they are rampant everywhere

destroying the lands, going on to private land and destroying their crops. and now we're offering this $700 million program, and you know what, to suggest that there's no cost to the manager's amendment i don't think is accurate. we're dealing with an overpopulation here with huge, huge price tags to it and a huge burden upon the rural americans who live out west and have to deal with these horses. i would encourage my colleagues to look deeply at this rule. please, just because it's offered doesn't mean that it has to be approved. i appreciate the opportunity to stand here and share this with you today. i thank you for the time and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i just want to say to my colleague that i appreciate his commends, especially after our previous conversation. he's complaining about the process, but if i'm understanding this correctly, the resources committee held a hearing on this bill. there was a full committee markup. the gentleman offered a similar amendment, i understand, that was rejected. he sent an amendment up to the rules committee which i -- he did not testify on behalf of, which he's not required to. but if it was so important i would have thought he would have been up before the committee -- mr. chaffetz: will the gentleman yield? mr. mcgovern: if i could finish a statement i'd be happy to yield. and i'd also say to my colleague that to the best of my understanding none of his republican colleagues on the rules committee offered his amendment. so i would just suggest in the future if there is an important issue like that that there be some more groundwork in advance to it. i'm happy to yield to the gentleman. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i think it's very interesting to observe that there was

virtually no notice whatsoever that while we are in the midst of this crucial appropriations process that this bill was going to come forward. one hour's notice was provided to the full membership of this institution. mr. chaffetz had an amendment. he hurriedly put this together, submitted the amendment. of course he didn't come to testify because there was virtually no notice. i thank my friend for yielding. mr. mcgovern: i appreciate my friend's observation. not only did mr. chaffetz not appear before the rules committee but none of the republicans offered his amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: to speak on the rule, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: as my colleague from california, mr. dreier, was saying, we are supposedly in the midst of an appropriations process which is so time consuming and has to be so tightly controlled that we've not been allowed to offer

amendments in an open process on the floor on the appropriations bills. and yet here we are today handling a bill that obviously is not an emergency, obviously doesn't need to be dealt with now, and is only being put forward because the majority didn't have an excuse to keep us in town today when people could be at home in the real world meeting with their constituents, hearing what they have to say and being able to learn more about the problems that are out there. the democrats in this house believe all the wisdom of the world is in washington, d.c. we republicans believe the wisdom of the world is out in our districts. and that's where we ought to be spending more time instead of here creating problems for the american people. and with that i yield such time as he may consume to my very distinguished colleague from california, the former attorney

general, mr. lungren. mr. lungren: i thank the gentlelady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lungren: i rise in opposition to the rule. you know, there's an expression around here, when we need filler on this floor to keep members here for whatever reason we bring up the dogs and the cats. well, i guess we couldn't find one so we bring up the horses and the bore rose today. and somehow -- bore rows today. and somehow -- burros today. and somehow those who may never have seen a muss standing, who never has ridden a horse that has mustang heritage are the experts on the floor that tell us what to do. they say when government does something it's not going to cost us anything. i'm sort of reminded of bidennomics. that's the word from the vice president about economics. he told the aarp that we have to spend more money, the

federal government has to spend more money, the vice president said, or elswe're going to go bankrupt. now, let's understand what he said. unless we spend more federal money we're going to go bankrupt. we've got news for the vice president. we're already bankrupt. bankrupt means you're taking in less than you're putting out. and we just had a magnificent accomplishment in administration this week. for the first time in any administration we have a deficit of $1 trillion. not a billion with a b but a trillion with a t. this is extraordinary, and yet we have the gentleman from massachusetts, my friend, coming up and telling us once again, don't worry. this bill we're bringing up here won't cost us any money. we heard just a couple months ago or maybe it was a month ago the president of the united states said, pass my stimulus package and i guarantee you we

won't have unemployment above 8% or 8.5%. 8%, he said. i want to make sure we're accurate here about what the president said. he assured the american people that this stimulus package would stimulate the economy, and the gentleman from massachusetts has just cited some statistics about all the jobs being created in north carolina. i'm sure he's looking at the list now so he can get up and tell me how many jobs are being created in my home state of california. i'd be happy to debate that toe to toe anytime. they're losing jobs in my state. if the gentleman -- i don't want to refer to the gentleman. let me put it this way. we have funny math here. the official statistics show we're losing jobs at an alarming rate. we have an unemployment rate the highest in 26 years and yet we hear from the other side, hooray for the stimulus package. they will cite you state by

state by state. this is the only place i know where you can add up -- well, you have a total number of losses of jobs, but they come to the floor and they will tell you how many jobs they're creating in each state. it's the only place i know where i guess you add up all those additions but the net result is a subtraction. mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. lungren: i'd be happy to yield to the gentleman. mr. dreier: since my friend began speaking about state by state, he alluded to our state of california. the unemployment rate in california is today 11.5%. i'd like him to underscore -- i'd like to underscore a statement he made earlier about a prom that was -- about a promise that was made. it was $787 billion. we all know with interest accrued it will exceed $1 trillion. and we were assured that if we passed that stimulus bill, the unemployment rate across this country would not exceed 8%. and right now tragically on a

nationwide basis it is 9.5%. and yesterday a report came forward from a wide range of economists indicating the unemployment rate within the next few months exceed 10%. the projection is 10.1%. and as i said in our state of california, which is suffering like it has not in modern history, we have faced an 11.5% unemployment rate. and this notion of the vice president indicating that if we don't spend more we're going to go bankrupt is prepostruss. last night at the encouragement of my friend from sacramento i had a telephone town hall meeting with literally thousands of my constituents. and the resounding message that came through from my constituents with whom i spoke is that we need to bring about a reduction rather than increase in the size and scope and reach of the federal government. i thank my friend for yielding. mr. lungren: if i might just respond to that. perhaps that's the reason why

they're keeping us here. the democratic leadership doesn't want us to go home and hear from the folks at home because somehow they want us to continue with that notion that we know best. because we know best here. we realize that in this difficult issue of dealing with wild horses, mustangs and burros, in our greater wisdom we've decided that there's no reason to have representation on the board that's going to control this by the native americans. mr. dreier: will the gentleman further yield? mr. lungren: why would we think that the native americans have any interest in this or knowledge of this when those of us in washington inside the beltway have superior knowledge? mr. dreier: i thank my friend for yielding and thank him for his contribution. madam speaker, one of the things that's important to look to is at the beginning of the appropriations process about which my friend from grandfather community, north

carolina, was speaking when she began her remarks. we were told by the chairman of the appropriations committee that we had critical legislation that had to be addressed before we complete our work by the first of august. we needed to get the appropriations process done. and there's a bipartisan consensus that article 1, section 9 places on us the responsibility of getting that work done, and we did not in any way want to stand in the way of completing the appropriations process. and so today having been told that we did not have time for an open amendment process, which has existed for only 220 years in this country throughout the entire history of the nation, the pattern of having an open amendment process, ensuring that democrats and republicans alike would have the opportunity to offer germane amendments to appropriations bills so they could in fact if they chose, try and do what our constituents on these town hall meetings -- at these town hall meetings continue to say and that is to reduce the size and scope and reach of government,

we've been denied those in the open process. we were told there was not enough time. yesterday, we had the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake, point to the fact that the day before we finished voting at 4:00 p.m., and yet here we are trying to responsibly legislate, and on friday we are being kept here so they can continue to work on the appropriations process in a closed way. i thank my friend for yielding. mr. lungren: let me just underscore this. the gentleman mentioned the constitution. the constitution gives to the house of representatives and the united states senate the single greatest power that we have which is the power of the purse. the power of the purse means the spending policy, the spending authority of the federal government resides in this body and that across the rotunda. and when we're denied the opportunity to offer amendments we're denied the opportunity to be able to represent our

constituents as to how their money ought to be spent or how their money ought not to be spent. and that is the essential thing we need to talk about here. we've been sent here by our constituents to represent them, and the most powerful tool we've been given under the constitution, the power of the purse, is being denied individual members. and this goes against a tradition that's over 200 years in this house, and we're doing it for the purposes of expediency which is the very argument undercut by the fact that we're taking time here to deal with the question of horses and burros in the west. now, horses and burros in the west is important. i want to tell you that. i'm from the west. we understand that it's important, but it's certainly is not as important as the appropriations process and the essential question in a democracy of, what right do we have to take money involuntarily from people, that is the tax, if we then are not going to exercise our

responsibility to represent them and the decisions as to how those tax dollars will be spent? and i thank the gentlelady for the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. that was an interesting exchange. unfortunately it didn't represent or reflect reality. the fact of the matter is, madam speaker, when bill clinton left the white house he left george bush with an enormous surplus. george bush took that surplus and fritted it away, wars that were not paid for, tax cuts, $1.6 trillion in tax cuts that drove us deeper into debt, the economy spiraled down. my friends on the other side basically turned their backs on what was happening to average

people all across this country and on november -- and in november of 2008 the american people spoke and what they made clear is this, that my friends on the other side of the aisle, my republican friends, do not know best. at every level of government they were rejected. they were turned out of office because people were sick and tired of their policies that they believed drove this economy into a deep ditch. what people want are answers. they don't want the same old, same old. they don't want more tax cuts for the rich. they don't want more indifference toward middle class working families or total indifference to those who are struggling in poverty. they want to us try to fix this economy. and, you know, my friends take delight in, you know, in trying to poke holes in the policies of president obama saying, well, you know, he promised we would create x amount of jobs, we're falling short of that. well, turns out this ditch that

they dug is deeper than any of us thought. but by most standards, most economists are actually seeing that things are beginning to turn, maybe slower than we would like, but they're beginning to turn and we need to continue these policies, we need to help working families in this country, we need to fix health care, we need to lower costs for families. people are paying too much for health care in this country. they're tired of the past congresses that were more interested in pleasing insurance companies than they were in helping average families. they want us to deal with global climate change and to try to help pave the way for new jobs in the area of green technologies. so we're going to move forward and, you know, i should also tell my friends and as they know, as we debate this bill, there are committees meeting, there are briefings going on on a whole number of issues from health care to the economic recovery and i'm sorry they don't want to stay around and do that work, but that's what they were elected to do and we're going to stay here and do the people's work until it is done

and with that, madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: to speak again on the rule, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: madam speaker, i just would like to say again to my colleague from massachusetts that he keeps saying that the republicans dug a deeper ditch than they expected to have. i just want to point out again, at the end of the republicans being in the majority in the congress, at the end of 2006, the economy was growing. we'd had 54 straight months of job growth. the democrats took over in january of 2007 and that's when the economy started getting in

trouble. they dug the ditch. we didn't dig the ditch. and, madam speaker, i would like to recognize my colleague from oregon, but it appears that he's tied up, so i will reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, before i yield to the gentleman from west virginia, i'd just like to point out to the gentlelady from north carolina who has been a constant critic of the package, that some $8 billion that have total is earmarked specifically for north carolina. and, you know, some of the money that has already been spent, madam speaker, has been used to be able to prevent the firing of teachers. without receiving that money, states and communities would end up firing hundreds and hundreds of teachers which would mean that class sizes would increase and that some cases even double,

denying our kids the kind of quality education that we want them to have. some of that money, madam speaker, went to help shore up our law enforcement, our police officers, our firefighters. so, you know, i mean, to the best of my knowledge the people of north carolina haven't said, you know, don't give us the relief, don't give us the aid. we need help. because quite frankly this economy's in such bad shape and i will repeat, because of the policies of the republican administration that held the white house for eight years, that basically turned its back on average working people in this country. we are trying to fix the mess that they created and we're going to do that. i would like to yield five minutes to the gentleman from west virginia, the chairman of the natural resources committee, mr. rahall. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rahall: thank you, madam speaker, i thank thank the

gentleman for yielding. i do have the honor and responsible of chairing our house committee on natural resources. the gentleman from washington, doc hastings, is my ranking member he. his amendment was made in order under this rule. some illusions have been made on the minority side this morning about the important issues facing our country and here we are debating horses and burros because we couldn't find a cats and dogs bill. well, we take seriously our responsibility on the house natural resources committee as stewards of our public lands. we take seriously our responsibility to all createures of this great land of ours -- creatures of this great land of ours, whether they be cats, dogs, wild burros, sea turtles, bees, birds, you name it, they appropriately come under our jurisdiction and they are important responsibilities that our american people value. these are creatures that god has

endowed our great country with, that have no vast lobbyists here in washington representing them. but they represent good old american family values. they represent recreational pursuits, they represent a quality of time that our families can spend enjoying with these creatures that god has so richly bestowed this country with. and so for the other side to say that with all these important issues before our country, and they are important issues and this congress is addressing them because we on the majority side as well as this administration can indeed walk and chew gum at the same time, we are addressing those issues. and as the minority knows, they were once in a position of leadership, that we are supposed to be here five days a week, working on behalf of our constituents. our constituents are the -- for the most part, they work at least five days a week, if not

seven days a week. they also happen, at least in my district, many of them go to work before the sun comes up, they don't go home and see their families until the sun has gone down. they work a full eight if not 12 hour day and yet the minority side has noted for their offering motions to adjourn after we come in at 10:00 in the morning, they want to go home at 10:10 a.m. the american people, i know this is inside beltway, inside baseball talk, but the american people want to see congress do its job and they recognize the many issues that face our country and they recognize that congress should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time, just like this administration is doing in a very appropriate way. and so we are addressing the issues that affect the american people at the same time that we're addressing the issues that affect their daily lives. and i think that's what they want us to do and they want us to do it in a bipartisan way and so we should not be up here

trying to make fun of the matter that we're addressing wild horses and burros legislation on a friday. because we know that work is being done while we are still discussing this legislation. the committees are meeting, they're appropriations committees, the other committees are marking up health care reform, a very important issue. and we know, we know here among ourselves, that if it were not for us having votes here on the floor of the house today, where would members of congress be? some would be in their congressional districters, some would be out around the country doing things that members do when we have weekends off. so this is an appropriate use of congress' time and i yield back the balance of my time to the rules committee member. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. there's so much to say and so little time. i don't think that republicans need a lecture on how we should be spending our time and whether

we should be in washington five days a week. there's an old saying that nobody's safe as long as the congress or the legislature's in session and i think most americans believe that. being here in washington is not necessarily meaning that congress is being productive. and i think that is the point that we have made over and over again. again, i'll say, the wisdom of the world is not here in washington and i think what's been happening, particularly in the last six months, the american people have found that out. and i'm going to be very interested to see how long our colleagues on the other side continue to defend their actions and the actions of this administration as the year goes by. in terms of looking after all god's creatures, i am a person, and my husband is, who we're both owned by a dog and a cat. they live in our house. we have farmed all our lives. we have raised horses.

we are very, very fond of animals. we give a lot of money to organizations that look after animals. in fact, there's one organization out west that keeps animals until they die a natural death. we feel very strongly about that. so questioning my feeling about how we should treat all of god's creatures is not going to go very far with me. this is also a group of people that wants it to provide government-funded abortions and kill unborn babies at the same time you're talking about saving horses and spending money on that. that argument doesn't go very far with me. the difference between our colleagues on the other side and we are that we don't believe in growing government. these are not the things the federal government should be

about. the federal government should confine itself to a very he narrow set of issues -- very narrow set of issues laid out for us in the institution -- constitution. we should adhere to the 10th amendment which says if it isn't mentioned in the constitution then it's a province of the states and that's what we should be doing. so, i thought my colleague promised me fun today but you've brought up some issues where you've got gone to meddling. now i'd like to recognize my colleague from oregon, mr. walden. mr. walden: i thank -- the speaker pro tempore: for how much time? ms. foxx: two minutes. mr. walden: i thank the gentlelady for recognizing -- recognizing me -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. walden: may i go now, madam speaker? thank you. the speaker pro tempore: you're recognized. mr. walden: i thank the speaker. i thank the gentlelady from north carolina. i represent a district that's 70,000 square miles. over half of it is already under federal ownership and control.

i won't necessarily say good management, because it's also home to lots of issues involving poor forest management, catastrophic fires, lots of degradation of the habitat, lack of management over the years. one of the things that troubles me about this legislation is that we're going to spend $700 million overall potentially, i've heard figures as high as that, to apparently buy 19 million acres of land, perhaps. and if it is indeed those levels, all that land when the government buys it comes off the tax rolls. i've got communities with 20% unemployment where the government owns 70% of the counties. they've shut down activity on the forests and the federal government's trying to shut down activity out on the range land and destroy things like cattle ranching and some of their great economic ways of the west. this legislation comes along and

apparently is going to have us borrow another $700 million, madam speaker, from somebody, problem the -- probably the chinese or whatever government decides they want to buy more of our debt, $700 million, almost $1 billion, so we can go acquire more land as a government, take it off the tax rolls to deal with this issue. i just find it really disturbing. you're going to put a lot of people out of work in the rural west. this is not well thought out legislation. but speaking to the rule, we seem in this congress under speaker pelosi and the democrat leadership to have gone into not just tax and spend but gag and spend. i'll be asking soon to bring up a privileged resolution i brought to this floor yesterday to allow us the opportunity to offer up amendments. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. ms. foxx: 30 seconds.