is that no one that makes $250,000 per year would see their taxes go up. there is a clause in the bill to address the uninsured people. they are blowing up the entire system to address that, and they even admit that with their bill billions of people will still be an insurer. they have a 2.5% tax on individuals, americans that do not have health insurance after this bill passes. you are an uninsured person today, millions americans will still be uninsured if there bill were to pass. they tax those americans. cbo confirmed this when i ask the question. clearly, most of those people would be people that make less than $250,000 per year. there are over $800,000 in new

taxes. this would allow them to ration care and centrally interfere with the relationship between you and your doctor. their approach is the wrong approach. we are as willing to stay as late as the chairman would allow us to bring these alternatives up. i think we need to have a healthy discussion with all of the american people see the details of the bill, instead of there are parts of ramming this bill through anyone read it through before anyone gets a chance to see it. -- instead of ramming this bill through before anyone gets a chance to read it. >> we have progressed from chairman waxman telling the democrats to defeat our amendments to not even being able to offer them. as chairman barton mentionned,

seems likely it will come to the floor and eliminate our committee. if anyone thinks that we're to have an open rule that allows cease to be introduced, they are crazy. we do not expect that. america is not going to see these amendments. that is their agenda. what are these amendments that america will never see? one that is that we drafted that all members and white house have to participate in the health care option. i think that is bercow. that will never be debated. we have hospitals that are run by religious organizations that are very concerned about the conscience clause. that is one of the amendments drafted that i wrote with the support of several others.

we will not be able to debate this clause and protect hospitals rights not to perform abortions. banning taxpayer money and of abortions through these policies and the exchange is not one to be debated. and not going to be voted on now. the opportunity for taxpayers to be protective of their tax dollars depending on what the commissioner what route would have to be used for abortions, there are many people in america that oppose that. we will not have that debate or vote. that is what is being left behind. that is the atrocities of these decisions made by chairman waxman and speaker policy. t-- speaker nancy pelosi. did i and downright angry we

will not have that opportunity. >> the only people that do not need a hair cut are these two. everyone else needs to get a haircut. [laughter] we may offer an amendment. we will take your questions now. >> could you elaborate about the chances -- [unintelligible] >> i do not think she is going to do that, but if she were to do that every member of the committee -- it would be a direct slap to all members of the committee. including mr. waxman. they would be predisposed and i also think that the blue dogs

would vote no because they would not be allowed to continue negotiations. i think a number of the progressive democrats that have concerns about the timing of the bill would also be predisposed to vote no. it is much easier to dispute a rule and to have to vote no and i flawed bill -- than having to vote no on a flawed bill. i do not see the votes being there to get this on the floor. we have 86 more amendments to offer. they are not going to adopt a rule that allows 86 republican amendments on the floor. >> you talk a lot about cost and health care system. [unintelligible] >> it would depend on the use

of the research itself. i think republicans would support. for what use, we have questions. we do not want it to be used for a rationing of health care. we had and the mets on that. i will let him address that. -- we had and then it's on that. -- ammendments. >> this discuss how much power they could have. the amendments that i submitted, i think one was it rejected. i think we may have gone one democratic vote. they could not make the final decision because -- between a doctor and patient. we are for comparative effectiveness research on a scientific basis that shows the

best practices four different diseases and what works best and to suggest and make sure that all positions rigid positions are well informed about that. -- physicians are informed about that. i am very surprised that the democrats voted that down. the second amendment was to say that the same comparative effectiveness council could not make decisions that rationed care, particularly in regard to our senior citizens. when they reach a certain age, they cannot get any replacement that they desperately need. it changed her life under the provisions of this bill. >> is this the bill?

>> we have a lot of amendments. we also have a subcommittee that would be a comprehensive substitute for the democratic bill. it would encompass -- not everything is in the substitute. but it would substantially in compass. >> many of us have offered publicly republican bills. i introduce not long ago with a number of members, the improving health care for all americans act. i believe it covers all 12 of those points. we have been working on a comprehensive bill. we would write -- we would offer that at the right point in time.

>> thank you for being here. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> and now, democratic leaders pulled a briefing on the current status of the health care reform bill. during this briefing, rep -- the representative from maryland said it might not be possible to finish this until the fall. >> i have said many times, every member of the democratic caucus has expressed to me and to all of our leaders, all of them want to vote for health care reform. we believe that we went to pass a very good health care reform bill. last night we made very significant progress. mr. havier, the chairmen ever

democratic caucus and the chairman of the ways and means committee moderated and at times of refereed, that at all times elicited the opinions of members on the very critical issue of wromedicare reimbursement rates. members are very adamant about that. there have been a real difference is, as you would expect on an issue of this magnitude. i am very pleased to report to you that last night they reached a consensus. this morning they met with leadership and we went over the language. we now have full agreement on that issue. i want to congratulate mr. pasara on that very important step forward. we are continuing to work towards consensus. we believe the commerce will

continue its work in a regular order. we're looking forward to marking up the bill in energy and commerce. that will proceed next week. we're absolutely committed. we are absolutely committed to passing a health care reform bill, and we are energized by the progress we made last night in the progress we're making today. the leadership is committed to that end. i believe the members are committed to that end. we have every intention of passing health care reform bill and sending to president obama for his signature by the fall. >> you had expressed a doubt as to whether this could happen next week. can you elaborate on that. will you require that this bill gets out of energy and commerce? >> we expect the committee to be

able to work its will. that is the speaker's expectations, expectations, the hope of leadership, said that we're looking forward to the energy and commerce doing it in reporting a bill. what i said on the floor is that i had pledged and the speaker had pledged to give sufficient time for members to review the products of the committee and the product of the rules committee. what i said on the floor was because the committee process has taken longer than originally anticipated, as i said we made real progress last night, but the members are committed to working on it and it would be difficult to meet the time requirements by this coming friday, so i do not believe that we will be able to meet this time constraints by this friday.

i said we might be meeting on saturday and may be the third or the fourth. we will see how it progresses. i will tell you this, whatever we do, we intend to keep working on this very hard between now çówe have three bills. the ways and means committee has a bill, in which three of the members are on the committee. energy and commerce committee will be the third leg. then they need to be put together and we will certainly work on that as we move forward. >> do you agree that you should delay recess? so that you can pass this on the house before you moved to august recess? >> the whip can honestly speak

for himself, but we met in the leadership and i think what we want to see happen is make progress. i want to stress how optimistic and encouraged we are by the fact that we had such progress last night. obviously in the consideration of the bill -- of a bill in this magnitude, you have different opinions. we are making progress. we had a great victory last night and this morning, for which i congratulate all of the people who worked on that. it is my expectation that we will continue to move forward. i have been in discussions with the white house. they want to see us move forward and i am sure they will join with us when we have the committee product out of the three committees. until then, they will work with us. that may take some time. we may be working on that

through the august break. >> do you think the tension between the blue dogs that has become so and plants has made this harder -- do you think the tension between the blue dogs and henry waxman has made this harder? >> they are close friend of mine. in the course of legislative process, sometimes people get animated up their positions. you would expect that. this is a critical bill for the american public. we are committed to passing a bill, which will get affordable and quality health care to every american and make sure they all have access. i am confident that the blue dogs, to have all said they want to vote for a health care reform bill. they have certain opinions as to

what the bill should look like. mr. waxman clearly wants a health reform bill. i am confident in that context that everyone is wanting to achieve the objective. >> i know you are confident, but mike ross says he does not see -- [unintelligible] to >> mr. pasara is to be congratulated. he doesn't excellent job as a member of congress, but as well because there were very strong feelings in that room, believe me. you saw those expressed to you from time to time in terms of

very strong feelings about the rates that medicare paid. very strong feelings. animated feelings. they were results. -- they were resolved. i am confident we can't get to a position where we have a bill out of committee and three bills ready to be put together and brought to the floor. i want to also say that i think your premise is incorrect. i think the agreement that was reached is healthy to the blue dogs. is it what they were seeking? and no, they have other issues they are interested in as well. i think the work and the agreement that was reached is certainly helping and and i think they felt it was a positive step. >> thank you.

>> will you work until the bill is done? i am not clear on that. >> it does not mean we're went to work in session. we woill work and tell it is done. -- until it is done. >> more on the health-care bill with house debate between republican whip iraq concert -- eric cantor. cantor: i thank you, mr. speaker. i did not hear the gentleman speak of the prospects of the house considering the health care bill, an i would ask the gentleman the status of that discussion and whether this house will be delivering on the speaker's commitment that this house was going to vote on her

health care bill, and i yield. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. the status of the health bill as i think the gentleman knows is it's still in the energy and commerce committee. the energy and commerce committee has not reported out that bill. i don't know the speaker's commitment, but certainly the speaker and i both had the hope that we would be able to pass the health care bill by the time we left here on the 31st of july. my view is that this point in time that may not be possible. however, that does not mean necessarily that we won't be here perhaps longer. i hope that's not the case, but if it proves to be necessary, we may be here a either longer, either on a saturday or the third or the fourth. i don't want anybody to be planning on that at this point in time, but currently the status of the bill is it's still in the energy and commerce committee.

mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman. mr. speaker, i'd ask the gentleman again for some clarification. did i just hear the gentleman say that we will not be considering the health care bill this week? and i yield. mr. hoyer: i didn't say it in so many words, but i have indicated and the speaker's indicated that we will do 48 hours' notice, as required, or at least we would hope to do. this is a very important bill. it is a bill that has great consequence to all americans. and we -- we're going to meet that -- those targets of notice. so in that context in light of the fact the bill is still in the committee, it may be impossible to meet that commitment and get the bill on the floor on the 31st. as a result, my view is the probability of doing that bill by the 31st is very small. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman. so to reiterate, i will say that i heard the gentleman say

the probability of doing taking up the health care bill by the 31st is very small, and i suspect that is due to what we have read in the news reports for successive days now about the difficulty that your side is having in gaining a majority in support of the bill. and we have said all along, mr. speaker, there is a reason that there's a bipartisan majority against the health care bill being proposed by the speaker. . people are unsure about the direction a government health care program would take them. we stand ready and willing to work together to try and effect reform for the american people. we on the republican side of the aisle do not accept the status quo. we want to see a health care

reform bill that works for the american people, mapets choice and quality, reduces costs so more folks can have access to coverage. and that's not the bill before us, at least that which is being reported. and so i would ask the gentleman if there is a very little probability that this bill would come up prior to the 31 and given that he and i have had discussion about the schedule, how long will we be in session beyond the 31? and i yield to the gentleman. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding and we think the bill that is pending, we're not sure that your premise correct. we think your premise not correct. we think the majority people on this floor want to vote for a health care reform bill and they will vote on the bill as it becomes more perfected. i don't accept your premise that

there aren't majority of votes for the bill that is being considered in this house. having said that, however, my point was that we want to give appropriate notice. if we can't give appropriate notice by the 31 of july, it is possible -- i'm not saying we will be doing this -- but it is possible that we would move onto it they are saturday the 1 or monday and tuesday the 3 and 4 if need be. and if that was appropriate. it may or may not be. i don't want to say at this point in time, but i do want to give members some notice that that is a possibility. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman. gentleman. and obviousl >> if we were allowed to put forward the kind of proposals that we are attempting to do and there was a sensitivity on their

side to allow for the free market principles and cost control suggestions that have been made, according to a member on your side a few days ago, maybe we would be on a better course. in the same way, i think a gentleman from the gentleman state said the bill is not even have all of the committees and we are already talking about voting on all of this. we feel the same way. there has been very little willingness to work together to try to get a health care plan right. mr. speaker, the way that we believe we did it right is to tell the people of this country exactly what would be in store for them by the insistence that there be a government plan involved in their health care. i would tell the gentleman we obviously stand ready to work with him and the speaker to

perfect a plan that could get much larger than probably the small majority that he will be able to produce, given the news reports that we are to ring. with that, mr. speaker, i would like to ask the gentlemen about his anticipation of next week's appropriations bill. he and i have had a longstanding discussion of the rules on this side of audio. we have been extremely upset, as he knows, about the change in the president of this house. somehow it is ok for this congress to leave the open rules, to insist that we not be able to hold open discussions on issues surrounding the constitutional obligation of this body to spend taxpayer

funds. i would ask to open up rules and have been rebuffed at each turn. is it his intention that perhaps on the dod bill on whether we could see that happen? >> we will certainly have good faith as we have had all along. it is my understanding that well over 100 amendments have been filed. clearly if we did that under an open rule or loud all 100 of them it's, like the way are all but one member -- are all by one member, we would never finish the bill. having said that, i talk to the chairwoman and it is my belief that mr. flake when will be giving -- given ample

opportunity. i do not know the other is an immense and notices that have been filed. i do not know what the rules committee will do. i will tell the gentleman that the bill will come under a rule. we believe your side of the aisle has had most of the amendments that have been offered clear the. mr. flake and others were given the opportunity to offer a number of there and then it's on earmarks, which i know is a great concern to both sides of the ideal. we do expect to take the defense bill under a rule similar to those under which we've operated. >> all 11 bills have passed. while i was not sure what was coined to happen on health care bill, which will achieve our

objective in a timely fashion. i yield back. >> we're trying to get things right here. spending billions of dollars for spending sake is not the goal here. i know he agrees with me on that. we're trying to affect the most prudent taxpayer dollars in these very difficult economic times. we voted on a pay go bill this week. frankly, the spirit behind the bill was to attend to restrain the type of spending that we see this congress conducts. in fact, this week in which one of the reports, one of the author said that frankly, we're spending -- the pay go ill was

full of loopholes. we know that the bill was that. it was not a holistic pay go bill. it will not do much to address the runaway spending. we still sit here and want to have an open process so we can contribute to holding back the runaway spending in this town. i would say to the gentleman, just as he has said to me, we should look to try to open up this process again we were not allowed to do so on the pay go debate and address the number one concern of the government, which is runaway spending. we have not done so in any of the appropriations bill. if we're going to be here through the weekend, why is that we couldn't take the time -- why

isn't we couldn't debate the bill in a fall, transparent manner? >> we will have a rule. >> i did not hear the gentleman. >> as i said, i believe we will be considering the defense bill under rules similar to those which have led to the passage of the other 11 bills. i yield back. >> i would say to the judgment, obviously with much disappointment and i think -- reflecting the disappointment of the american people, that we should be having a much more robust debate on these issues, certainly if we are going to be addressing the issue of health care. the gentleman said that his time is insisted on addressing that to the floor. insisting on some political deadline.

i do not understand why it is we could not have an open debate on some of the other issues if we're all in to be waiting around here until next monday or tuesday. . body and in the other body. colleagues are aware of this, i have been put in the position of being the active chairman of the senate health, education, labor and pension committee which is chaired by our dear colleague, senator kennedy, wrestling with his own health care crisis at this hour and has been unable to

be with us as we have begun the process of making up, that is, considering the legislation dealing with health care. as the person sitting next to him i was asked to consider the responsibility of chairing the committee as we considered the health care legislation. we have finished our work, finished it a week ago on wednesday, after numerous hours, i point this out to our colleagues. many of them may be aware of this already, mr. president. we spent, on the "help" committee consideration of our bill, close to 60 hours. i am told that is the longest time in memory of memorial my of many that we have spent on any single bill with 23 sessions over 13 days with 800 amendments before the committee and we considered just shy of 300 and we accepted 161 amendments from

our republican friends on the committee. many of these amendments were technical amendments, they were not all substantive but worthwhile and positive but a number of very important amendments offered by our republican colleagues that i think strengthened and made the bill better bill, making it a bipartisan bill, substantively bipartisan. at the end of the day after all of the hours and work, we didn't have the votes of our republica friends on the committee but their contribution to the product was significant. as i mentioned, senator gregg and a number of our republican colleagues on the committee were concerned of the long-term fiscal impact on the insurance program for long-term care and we agreed with that amendment. and senator isakson of georgia raised the issue of end-of-life care drawing on his own family experiences and we accommodated his ideas in that area. and senators enzi, gregg and

alexander sought workplace wellness programs with incentives for employees, a very sound proposal that was recommended to us by others. it was added to the bill. and senator harkin did a very good job in reaching that accommodation. and senator hatch's amendment dealing with follow on biologics, the full hatch proposal was adopted by the committee. our friend, tom coburn, of oklahoma proposed an amendment to. pour individuals to make healthy decisions by having the c.d.c. establish a web-based prevention tool for personalized prevention plans for individuals which was accepted, as well. we accepted senator hatch's proposal to establish a coordinated environment health tracking net at the centers for disease control. and senator murkowski offered an amendment allowing insurers to rate base on tobacco use specifically, allowing insurers

to vary premiums by one to five for use of tobacco. several amendments offered by senator burr and accepted by unanimous consent to ensure the community health insurance option operates on a level playing field with all the insurers and provided a clarification that federal and state laws relating to rating preexisting conditions and fraud and abuse and quality improvement and other provisions providing to these openings, as well. several hatch and senator coburn offered amendments allowing independent insurance agents and brokers be eligible to enough gate within the american health benefit gateways. my point, mr. president, is that in addition to these technical amendments there were many substantive amendments that were adopted at part of the committee effort and i iite our colleagues' attention. we have offered to brief any single member or others interested in this. this bill has now been on the web site where the public can

read it, make comments and get ideas and respond to questions regarding provisions of the bill. while we are waiting, obviously, to see the outcome in the finance committee, the second half of the equation, it is worthwhile to note in the united states senate of the two committees with jurisdiction over health care the health, education, labor and pensions committee has completed its committee work and we invite our colleagues' attention, ideas and thoughts on how we might improve or add to provisions dealing with quality, prevention, dealing with workforce issues and with the fraud and abuse issues critically important as well as coverage questions which are essential, as well. so, mr. president, obviously i hoped we might stay here in august to deal with this issue and we will continue the process but the decision has been made to delay consideration of the health care issues until the fall and i understand how this works and things haven't moved as quickly as we would like and some say we would need to slow down a little bit and we're

going too fast on this issue. i remind my colleagues it has been seven decades and as many administrations that is served our country in that time as well as the numbers of congresses that have convened have grandparendealtwith this issue. every single congress, every single administration has failed in reaching the kind of concepts us necessarconsensus necessary t national measures. we have been challenged by the american people to defy the odds, to do what no other congress and no other administration has ever been able to achieve. i understand that we're going a little too fast for some but those out there beyond the halls of congress, an issue of how fast we're going may seem rather perplexing. i'm stating the obvious here and i know my colleagues know this, and i presume many citizens do:

every one of us who serve in this chamber, every congressman who serves down the 458, every employee you see here have a very good comprehensive health care program of insurance coverage. we are blessed as part of the fell employees benefit health package. we never have to worry, lord forbid something happens to one of us tonight, tomorrow, or our children or spouses, we are well covered with insurance. so taking a break-in august and rolling along poses no real threat to any of us or the fell employees who have this health care program. but for millions of other americans who do not have the privilege of the coverage we do, had is unsettling time, very unsettling time, mr. president. this country of ours, millions of our fellow citizens don't get to sleep with that sense of security and assurance that lord forbid something happens to their family and they will wake up with the inability to take care of the health care problem

or, maybe at the same time, go through the physical crisi the s that destroys their future. of all the bankruptcies that occur in the united states, 62% of them occur because of a health care cruise in that -- he crisis in that family and of the 62%, 75% of those people have a health insurance program. they are not the uninsured. these are people with health insurance. so if you are out there today saying you have health insurance and you could not end up in financial ruin, the fact of the matter is the overwhelming majority of people who is gone into bankruptcy because of health care crisis have been covered with insurance. 50% of all foreclosures are occurring as a result of health care crisis in that family. today, mr. president, before the sunsets, in the united states of america, 14,000 of our fellow citizens will lose their health

care coverage; 14,000 people today and every single day in america that many people lose their health care coverage. so while we sit here and say, we're just going too fast, slow down, slow down, that's easy for us to say because none of us have to ever worry about what most americans have to worry about. and that is, god forbid, they have a health care crisis and end up being destroyed economically or sitting there with the anger and frustration that i can't provide for my child, i can't provide for my spouse, and they need the kind of medical care they deserve. this is the united states of america and we rank 37th in the world in medical outcomes and we spend more money than any other nation, way beyond any other country in the world on health care. we pay the most and we rank like a third world country for outcomes. i don't think most americans like to think of our country as being incapable of taking care of our nation in such a way.

so it occurred to me that some people in this town seem to think that this process of health care is about them. did i get appropriately consulted or invited to enough meetings? did i get a headlines? what do the consultants think i should say? what are the right wores to uset words to use or hear. let me ask my colleagues, is anyone here worried they will lose their health care insurance over the august break? is anyone here unable to afford the care they thing they may need for them or their families? is any member of ts body or the other body that is staying up late at night recently with a sick child for whom they cannot afford treatment? has anyone i served here spending three hours bouncing from voice mail to voice mail to

voice mail finding out why the insurance company refuses to pay for your spouse's cancer treatment? does any member of congress as they get through the august break in their states and districts, are they stuck in a job that pays too little because they have a preexisting condition and cannot get coverage anywhere else? has anyone here lost a home as 10,000 will today when they get a notice on foreclosure because of a medical bill the insurance company would not cover? does anyone in this chamber or anyone in the other chamber, a small business owner, had to choose between cutting coverage or putting your employees you car about who have been loyal to you and helped you sell your products, talk about laying them off because of the health care coverage? i suspect, no, mr. president. why are so many in washington asking about whether or not you are a

blue dog or red dog or republican or conservative, moderate, a liberal, as if somehow that was the most important issue in the country, rather than the people out there who send us here to grapple with an issue they wrestle with every single hour of every day? and we're in danger of losing this once again, falling, as has every other congress and every other administration for 70 years, because this was always about us and not about the people who sent us here asking us to try and come up with some answers that would relieve them of the fear and the frustration that confronts thep an confronts a result of our unwillingness to confront national health care reform. this is not bus. it is about the 47 million people who are uninsured, the 14,000 who lose their insurance and the millions who will lose it if we don't act.

about the people who pay our salaries and our great health insurance companies as well, the people who sent us here to fight on their behalf, and will we pretend that this is about us when we treat health care reform like it's some kind of a game, a political contest, who's going to face their waterloo, who's going to lose? who can defeat someone, put them into trouble, maybe they'll lose an election over this. if that becomes the game -- as it appears to be in the minds of some -- then you wonder why some people get so angry when they hear us talk about ourselves. you better believe thth if any of us had to go through some of the things that i suspect everyone of us have heard from our constituents, every one of us -- you can go to any state in our country at any hour and you can repeat some of these stories that i'll share with you this

morning, as i've heard from my own state of connecticut. there wouldn't be anybody calling if you listened to some of these people. we mentioned 47 million and it sort of glazes over the eyes in a way. it seems to be sort of, is there anybody involved in these numbers? any stories in these? this legislation would be done by now if we paid more attention to some of these individual stories. in 2005, mr. president, a young woman in connecticut canadian mari oovment was dyin diagnosedh nonhodgkin's lymphoma. the insurance company found out that maria had once gone to a doctor for what she thought was a pinched nerve o. the insurance company decided that the denied her claim. maria died from that illness. a young man in connecticut disclosed on his insurance application that he sometimes

got headaches. several months after he got his policy, he went in for a routine eye exam. his eye doctor saw something he didn't like, sent frank to a neurologist who told him that he had multiple sclerosis. frank's insurance company decided that frank should have known that his occasional headaches were a sign of m.s. and they took away his coverage. frank's doctor wrote them a letter saying there was no way anyone could have suspected that an ordinary headache was related to m.s. frank was stuck with a $30,000 medical bill he couldn't afford. frank's condition got worse, he left his job and went on public assistance. people like kevin galvin -- i have held a series of town hall meetings in my state, four our five of them over the last couple of months to invite people to come and share their stories about health care.

the first one i held i held outside of hartford, connecticut, 8:30 on a monday morning. what in the world are we having a town hall meeting at 8:30 monday morning? 750 people showed up at that small community college on the banks of the connecticut river in hartford to come out and be heard and listen and talk about what was going on in their lives. kevin has shown up at a lot of my hearings to talk about these issues. i met kevin at a number of these gatherings that we've held around the state. kevin owns a small business, mr. presiden in connecticut, a maintenance company. he employees 17 people in that firm of his, some older, some younger and can't afford insurance. his older employees use the emergency room as their home doctor. if one has a child with an infection, they'll spend all day in the e.r. waiting for them to

get basic treatment, costing the employees a day's work and kevin a day's work from the employee. by the way, we can't afford any additional costs. think of this. if you have an insurance policy, on average, your family is paying $1,100 a year on your insurance policy to cover people like kevin's employees, the uninsured. that's how much the average cost is per family. that's a tax on every insurance policy to pick up the cost of kevin's employees, the one who shows up in that emergency room. you don't get free medical care there. they're charging for it. how do they charge for it? the premium costs go up for everyone else, on average $1,100 per family in the united states. kevin has three employees in their 20's and 30's. they've never had a physical, dental, cleaning by a high jeanist. one is 28, was out of work for

three weeks from a staph infection. kevin stepped in and paid that mans salary and also all of his medical bills. that's the kind of person that individual is even though he doesn't have the kind of business that allows him to pick up that insurance tab for all of his employees. but kevin stepped in to make a difference in that family, and i know many do that. he is newt loan in that regard. that's awfully difficult to make a business work when you've got to turn around and pick up the lost wages or pick up the wages, rather, for someone not at work, not to mention their medical bills and expenses. another one of kevin's employees recently left for a job with health insurance, even though the new job gives him far few hours. it pays him one-third less than he got from kevin. another employee that's been with kevin for 24 years, relying on his wife's -- the employee's wife's job for their health insurance. she got laid off recently, mr. president. they'll be able to get cobra insurance for a short period of

time. kevin's employee has a preexisting condition and his wife is a breast cancer survivor. you tell me whether or not you think they're going to get health care coverage. under press conditions being a breast cancer survivor and kevin's employee has his own preexisting cfnlt don't need to be a ph.d. to know what's going to happen. under the present circumstances, if we do nothing around here, that guy and his wife get nothing. they'll be looking for any kind of help they can get. they, like many of our fell lee citizens, are looking to us, those of us gathered here. i don't know what kevin's politics are. i don't know whether he is a d-cialtioa"d," an "r." i think all he thinks about is he is trying to take care of his family.

i don't think any american -- all they know is that we're sitting around here deciding we are going to drift off for a few more weeks or months because we can't seem to come together or we'll attack each other politically and here this country and problem grows by the hour. and because all of us don't have to worry about that. i say it respectfully, but nonetheless it does impact the decision-making process. when you don't have an ounce of concern about your insurance and your ability to take care of yourself or your family, you lose some of that motivation. it seems to me that we ought to be having here when it comes to addressing these issues. so, mr. president, i am going to be talking about this every day, every day that we're in session, and every day until we get to the point of coming together and addressing this issue. it's what i tried to do for 60 hours replacing my dear friend, senator kennedy, in that committee. and i want to thank my 22 other colleagues who stayed there day after day to work on this.

i particularly want to thank tom harkin of iowa, who spent hours working on the prevention side of this bill, doing everything he could to come up with ideas to encourage behaviors that reduce costs and improve the quality of health. barbara mikulski, who herself right now is going through her own medical issues, having broken her angle in four different places, i'm told, and is being treated but did a magnificent job, is working on quality issues that are critically important. and jeff bingaman did the work on coverage issues as well, an important issue of how do we pay for this and come up with ideas that will reduce costs to make health coverage more affordable. and then of course there was patty murray as well who did a great job in working on workforce issues. i see my good friend, jack reed of rhode island who is on the floor, a member of our committee, and did a great job on a number of issues a. effecting the bill. and on down the line. kay hagan, jeff merkley, sheldon whitehouse, bob casey, shared

brown of -- sherrod brown as well. i mentioned the ideas that they brought to our bill and made it a better bill. mike enzi, lamar alexander, john mccain, lisa murkowski, pat roberts, orrin hatch, many a going to miss somebody when you start that list. but the idea is we came together and worked and we have a product now and we need one out of the finance committee. but we need to get on the business of working at this in my view. you cannot sustain the present situation, and the american people deserve a lot better. they need the same kind of security, in my view, that we provided for ourselves as members of thenited states congress. i don't think the american people are going to accept the notion that they should have to live with the kind of fear and frustration that is associated with having the kind of health care system in our nation, knowing we could do better. and so, mr. president, i thank my colleagues for the work we've

done already and urge us over this break, if we're not going to be back hear working, to listen to our constituents, here their voices and nen come back to the chamber in september with a determination to do what no other counsel and administration has been able to acheervetion approaching one century -- and that is to come up with a national health care plan for >> this weekend, watch an extended eveninterview with frak accord. -- with frank midcourfrank mcco. >> the president talked about the education department in washington.

this runs about 20 minutes. >> thank you for the outstanding introduction from matthew. matsu's teacher, york have obviously doing an outstanding -- matthews teacher, you are obviously doing an outstanding job. we are very proud of him. obviously, i want to thank our wonderful secretary of education. [applause] i want to thank all the members

of congress who were here and the governors who were in attendance and want to give a special shot out to reverend dortch miller of the education committee -- rev. george miller of the education committee. [applause] from the moment i entered office, my administration has worked to beat back the recession by creating jobs, extending unemployment insurance and health benefits for people who are out of work. even as we have worked to this end, we have also taken some historic measures to build a new foundation for growth and prosperity that can help secure our future for generations to come one pillar of this new foundation is a health insurance reform that can reduce costs for

families and small businesses and provide quality health care for all americans. another reform is energy reform. it will free america from the grip of foreign oil. even if we do all those things, america will lead succeed in the 21st century unless we do a better job at educating our sons and daughters, unless every child is performing the way matthew has performed. the best jobs will go to the best educated, whether they live in the united states or india or china. in a world where countries that

out-educate us and will out-beat us tomorrow, we know that their education has fallen short. -- we know that our education has fallen short. the united states, a country that has always led the way in innovation, is now being outpaced in math and science education. asked -- latin-american and latino -- african-american and latino students are falling behind. there will be hundreds of billions of dollars in wages that will then be earned, jobs that will not be done, and purchases that will not be made.

of course, as i said before, we have talked about this problem for years. we have talked about bad statistics and an achievement gap in. we have talked about overcrowded classrooms. we talk these problems to death, year after year, decade after decade, while doing all too little to solve them thank you to our knees leadership commensurate -- to solve them. thanks to arnie's leadership and the reverence relationship, there can be changed. we are beginning to move past the sale debate of either more money or more reform. the fact is that we need both. we're beginning to offer every single american the best indication that the world has to offer, from the cradle to the classroom, from college to

carriers. we have spoken about the different parts of the strategy. i have spoken about what we're doing to prepare community colleges to find a job when they graduate, to make college and advanced training more affordable, and to raise the bar in early part -- early in learning programs. i want to talk about what we can do to raise the quality of education from kindergarten to senior year. improving education is central to rebuilding our economy a. we set aside about $4 billion in the recovery act to promote improvements in schools. this is one of the largest investments in education reform in american history. rather than divvying get up and handing it out, we want states and school districts to compete for it. that is how we can incentivized excellence and launch a race to the top in american public schools. that race starts today. i am issuing a challenge to our

nation's governors, to school boards and principals and teachers, two businesses and nonprofit, to parents and two students. if you set and enforce rigorous and challenging standards, if you put outstanding features in front of a classroom, if you turn around failing schools, your state can win the race to the stock grant that will not only help students outperform workers around the world, but will help them fulfill their god-given profession. it will be based on a simple principle, whether a state is ready to do what works. we will use the best evidence available to determine whether a state can make a few key benchmarks for reform. states that outperform the arrestrest will receive the gra.

not all states will wintered at all of them will be happy with the results. but america's children and america's economy and that america itself will be better for it. we will be enforcing higher standards to prepare students to graduate from college and to succeed in life. right now, some states like massachusetts, are setting state -- are setting high standards. but many others are not. many are globally expectations for students, telling our kids that they're prepared to move on for the next break even though they're not, awarding diplomas even though they do not have the knowledge and skills to thrive in our economy. that is a recipe for economic decline. and it has to stop. with this fun, we will reward states that come together and adopt a common set of standards and assessments. let me be clear pick this is not about -- let me be clear.

this is not about more tests and not about teaching to the test and not judging the teacher about the results of the test. it is about finally getting testing right, about developing a thoughtful assessment that lead to better results, assessments that do not simply a measure whether students can use a pencil to fill in a bubble, but whether they possess basic knowledge and essential skills, like problem-solving and creative thinking, creativity and entrepreneurship. already, 46 states are working to develop such standards. i urge them to finish the job. i urge the other for to get on board. [laughter] -- i urge the other four to get on board. [laughter] the question is whether outstanding teachers are being placed in our questions. the single most important factor

in their success is the person in front of the classroom. everyone of us can point to a teacher who inspired us iand some will ship the course of our lives. teachers should be values and they should be honored -- teachers should be valued and they should be honored. we have to union leaders that are here -- we have two union leaders here and i am very pleased that they are here with us today. [applause] into many places, we have no good way of -- in too many places, we have no good way of distinguishing the good teachers. they have treated thousand teachers in california. the top 10% or 30,000 of the best that are out there. the bottom 10% are the 30,000 of

the worst hitter up there. we have no way of telling which are which. that is where data coming. some places are keeping electronic records of how student does from when you to the next and how class does in any given year. this helps students, parents, teachers, principals, and school boards to know what is working and what is not. basketball coaches have a game tape for their team to see what they did right and what they did in the wrong -- what they did wrong in a rough series. i recognize there is a concern among some that the teacher will not be judged fairly when we start leaking student's performance to the performance of their teachers. that is why we need to bring teachers and to the process and make sure that their voices are heard. [applause] that is why we need to make sure that we use tests as just one

part of a broader evaluation. let me be clear. success should be judged by results and the data is a powerful tool to determine results. we cannot ignore facts. we cannot ignore data. that is why any state that makes it unlawful to link student progress to teacher evaluation will have to change its ways if it was to compete for a grant. that is why the race to the top grant will go to the estate values did it effectively to reward effective teachers, to support teachers who are struggling, and not necessarily to replace teachers. we also need to reward states for replacing a standing teachers in subjects like math and science where they're needed most. by the way, everyone has a role to play in training these teachers. universities and nonprofit

organizations can launch programs, like huge, that allow them to get a math and science degree at the same time. businesses can follow the example of intel and microsoft by developing the software tools and cutting edge technologies that prepared to his students to be tomorrow's teachers. we know we need better standards. we know we need excellent teachers. we also know that chronically and a performing students will require extra effort to get back on their feet. roughly 5000 schools across this country, the bottom 5%, fall into this category. in fact, 2000 high schools produce over 50% of america's dropouts. there is no silver bullet when it comes to turning the schools around. we know that many of the schools are in tough neighborhoods and kids are coming to school already with significant problems. the most effective and

innovative approaches will be developed outside of washington and in committees across the country. the best ideas will come from educators. change will come from the bottom up. what we can do, all of us in federal government, is reward those to exercise effective approaches on the race to the top. one strategy involves replacing the principal, replacing much of the staff, and giving the school a second chance. another showed a deep includes including a great nonprofit to help manage the school. a third strategy involves turning a drop but factory into

a charter school. -- a drop out factory in to enter school. we cannot hold charter schools to a lower standard of traditional public schools. if we are holding charter schools accountable and we are holding them to a high standard of excellence, then i believe they can be a force for innovation in our public schools. that is why i have encouraged states to lift caps on the number of charter schools that are being allowed. it is being done in indiana and louisiana and across the country. that is why we will reward states that will promote rigorous schools with race to the top brands. -- raced to the top grants. as i have said before, fixing the problem in our schools is not a task for washington alone pick it will take school administrators, union leaders

making collective bargaining a catalyst and not an impediment to reform. they need to mess with they can do to make an investment in their communities for their better schools. it will take parents asking questions. it will take students -- i am not worried about matthew -- but others, including my daughter, showing up at school and paying attention in class. ultimately, their education is up to them picked it is up to their parents, other teachers, and all of us. i will never forgets a school that i visited when i was an organizer in chicago. i remember saying to the principle how wonderful it was to see these kids with some much energy and hope and spark in their eyes. when i ask them what they were going to be when they grow, they said doctors and lawyers and

they all had these big dreams for the future. and remember the principal saying that, soon that will all change. that in a year or two, something would shut off in them and they would realize that their hopes and dreams would not be realized. they would not see a path to success. that is true of too many children in this country. maybe they do not have a great future. maybe they do not find the classroom exciting. maybe they are not being charged in school. maybe their parents are not pushing them the way they need to. maybe no one is sitting high enough expectations for them. maybe they cannot afford a college education. maybe they do not know anyone who has ever gone to college. the reason you are here and why i am here is to make sure that we're giving all of those children, all of our children, the pathways that they need to make the most of their

abilities, to make the most of their opportunities, to make the most of their lives. i am absolutely confident that, if i do my part , myarnit, if as his part, it teachers do their part, if you do yours, and if the american people do theirs, will not only strengthen our economy in the long run and make america's entire education the envy of the world, but we will launch a race to the top that will prepare every child in america for the challenges of the 21st century. i am convinced we can do that. but it is likely to come easy. it is not one to come quick. we're going to have to have staying power. we're going to have to have persistence. redacted put the interests of our children ahead of our program interests. -- ahead of our parochial interests. thank you very much, everybody. god bless you.

[applause] >> at the white house, today, president obama son the proclamations commemorating the anniversary of the americans with disabilities act. he also said that the u.s. will join other nations on a treaty that helps disabled people worldwide. this portion of the event is 15 minutes. [applause] >> first of all, how about a

four-secretary of state. [applause] she is doing an unbelievable job. she is traveling around the world delivering a message that america is back and ready to lead. everywhere she goes, she is representing u.sus with grace ad strength and we are fortunate to have her. i am also looking to have an outstanding attorney general in eric colder. [applause] -- shareheric holder. [applause] >> we have a couple of governors in the house. i see one over here, the governor of new york. [applause]

and i think that christine grew morgregoire is here from washinn state. [applause] i want to thank the upstanding members of congress who were on stage. stanley hoyer, robert andrews, jason burner, jen langvin. give them a round of applause. [applause] and not on the stage, but extraordinarily important, or three key figures who helped to get the original 88 past. i want to acknowledge them. first of all, this guy is a fierce warrior on behalf of the disabilities community, tom harkin.

give him a round of applause. [applause] another person who could not be here, but was instrumental in getting the passage of this landmark legislation is bob dole. but his wonderful partner, elizabeth dole, is here. [applause] and attorney general and some legal work very hard on this issue, richard thornburgh. -- and someone who worked very hard on this issue, richard thornburgh. [applause] welcome to the white house. [laughter] we are thrilled to have you all here for a historic announcement involving our global commitment for fundamental human rights for persons with disabilities. i am also honored to marking the anniversary of the historic piece of civil rights legislation for so many people

who helped make it possible. i would like to reflect on the for a few moments. i am reminded today of my father-in-law. you have heard this story. he was michele's hero. he was a vibrant and athletic man who provided for his family as a shift worker at a water treatment plant in chicago. in his early 30's, he was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. even as it progressed, even as he struggled to get dressed in the morning and used two canes to get himself to work every day, despite the fact of he had to wake up a little bit earlier and worked a little harder to overcome the barriers he faced every day, he never complained. he never asked for special treatment. he just wanted to be given the opportunity to do right by his

family. he never missed a day work. he had trouble putting his own shirts, but he made sure that he woke up with time to do it. by the time i met him, he would struggle with those two canes. but even if he had to go over a bumpy patch of grass to watch his son the ball games or go up a flight of stairs so that he could see his daughter dance, he would do it. this was before the 88 past. -- passed. i think about him when i think about these issues. it is a reminder of the very premise of the upbeat. 19 years ago, this weekend, democrats and republicans, advocates and ordinary americans came to the white house to what president george h.w. bush signed the 88 into law.

folks traveled across america to travel people opportunity for us. like all great movements, this one did not begin or end in washington d.c.. it began in small towns and big cities across this country. it began with people like frazier washington, showing that they can be full contributors to society, regardless of the lack of awareness of others. it began when people refused to accept a second-class status in america. the began when they refused to except the way that people saw them, but the way they saw themselves. when quiet acts of persistence and perseverance were coupled with local acts of advocacy, a movement group and people marched. parents of children with disabilities asked why they were

left behind. wounded veterans came home from war only to find that, despite their sacrifice for america, they now felt excluded from america's promise. we had a little meeting before we came out and tony couillo spoke about what it was like for him to be an epileptic and the fact that discrimination was right. he was rejected from the priesthood -- discrimination was ripe. he was rejected from the priesthood because that was unacceptable. he was rejected from the army because that was considered an acceptable. he could have held down, but it became a source of strength. americans with disabilities were finally guaranteed the right to

vote, a right that only carries real meaning when you can enter the voting booth to cast that vote. even though we still have a long way to go with regard to education, a children's with disabilities were no longer excluded, no longer kept separate, and no longer denied the ability to learn the same skills and in the same question as other children. even two decades ago, there were too many barriers that still stood. to many americans suffered under segregation discrimination. employers often assumed disabled meant unable. many americans with disabilities were eager to work, but cannot find a job. an employer could have told a person with a disability, no, we cannot hire your kind.

the person could find records of the courthouse, only to find as you cannot enter the building. -- the person confined recourse at the courthouse, only to find out she could not enter the building. they're entitled to the same rights and freedoms as everybody else, a right to belong and participate fully in the american experience, a right to dignity and respect in the workplace and beyond, the freedom to make of our lives would we will. at a time when so many doubted that people with disabilities could produce it in our society come up and dissipate their economy, or provide for their families, the ada so that they could. they did not wanted -- the did not want to be isolated. they did not want to be dependent, but independent.

we all have a part to play to building a foundation for americans. the ada show at our world our full commitment to the right to people with disabilities. we now have it right to live up to that commitment. 10% of the world's population lives with a disability. in developing countries, 90% of children with disabilities cannot attend school school. women and girls with disabilities are too often subjected deep discrimination. disability rights are not just civil rights to be in force to your town, but universal rights to be recognized and promoted around the world. that is why i am proud to announce that, next week, the united states of america will join 140 other nations in the signing of the united nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities.

[applause] >> the new human rights convention of the 21st century, this extraordinary treaty calls on all nations to guarantee the rights like all those afforded under the ada. it offers equal protection and equal benefits under the law for all people. it returns dignity and human worth and independence to all persons of disabilities worldwide. i have [unintelligible] i hope that the senate can give swift consideration and approval

to the convention once i submit it for their advice and consent. even as we extend our commitment to persons with disabilities around the world, we are working to deepen their commitment here at home. we have looked at the ban on stem cell research, we have authorized the children's health insurance program, if continuing coverage for 7 million children and covering another 4 million children in need, including children with disabilities. i was proud to sign the landmark christopher and dairy paralysis fact, the first piece -- the landmark christopher and dana reeves paralysis act. [applause] we are strengthening its anti- discrimination enforcement of the justice department.

we will focus on accessible transportation. [applause] we have launched a year of community living to affirm the fundamental right of people with disabilities to live with dignity and respect wherever they choose. [applause] i am proud of the progress we have made. but i am not satisfied and i know you are not either. we will not be. at every american with a disability can apply for a job without fear of discrimination and a live and work independently in their communities, if that is what they choose as long a. we still have more work to do. as we continue that work, just remember just to it was that the ada was all about.

it was about the young girl with cerebral palsy who just wanted to see a movie at her local theater and was turned array. -- turned away. it was about the thousands of people with disabilities who showed up at public hearings across the country to share their stories of included of -- of seclusion and discrimination. we live in a country where all children can learn and compete, where returning veterans [unintelligible] what we have learned, but they have taught us, is that it is far more noble and worthwhile in value to make it possible for these americans to live up to their full potential. when we do, it makes all of us more full, our union more

perfect, the united states of america strong. every morning, i walk along the promenade that connects his office to the oval office. there is something that you will notice unless you're not paying attention and will be honest. when i take the law, i often have a lot on my mind. but there is a gentle slope along that colonnade. when they restore the west wing 75 years ago, it made it much easier for one of my predecessors to get to work. back then, fear and prejudice for americans toward disabilities was the norm. but they did not know that president roosevelt had a disability. but they also did not know was that his disability made no difference to his ability to renew our confidence or rescue our economy and mobilize our

greatest generation to save our way of life. let me correct that. i think it did make a difference in the positive when he told us was that further progress, of necessity, depended on a deeper understanding on the part of every man and woman in the united states. i believe we're getting there. today, because more than one in five americans live with a disability and the chances are that the rest of us love someone with one, we work to preserve their chance to live fully in the united states. we recommit ourselves to building the world free of unnecessary barriers, full of the deeper understanding. thank you all for being here. [applause] >> tonight, we have comments from president obama on the arrest of harvard professor

henry louis gates. after that, we will take your calls. then we will look at the status of health care legislation with remarks from house republicans in house debate between erick kanter and stanley hoyer of maryland. .

>> i need to help gibbs out a little bit. if you have to do job, do yourself. i wanted to address you guys directly, because over the last day and a half, obviously there has been all sorts of controversy around the incident that happened in cambridge with professor gates and the police department. i just had a conversation with sergeant jim crowley, the officer involved. i have to tell you that, as i said yesterday, my impression of him was that he was an outstanding police officer and a good man, and that was confirmed in a phone conversation. and i told him that. because this has been ratcheting up, and obviously helped to contribute ratcheting it up, i

want to make clear that in my choice of words, i think i unfortunately gave an impression that i was maligning the cambridge police department or a sword and crawly specifically. i could have calibrated those words differently -- or a soccer -- or sgt crawley. i continued to believe that there was an overreaction in pulling professor gates out of his home to the station. i also continue to believe, based on what i heard, that professor gates probably overreacted as well. my sense is, you have got to good people -- you have two good people in a circumstance in which neither of them were able

to resolve the incident in the way it should have been resolved and the way they would have liked it to be resolved. the fact that it has garnered so much attention i think is a testimony to the fact that these are issues that are still very sensitive here in america. to the extent that my choice of words did not eliminate but rather contributed to more media frenzy, i think that was unfortunate. what i would like to do is make sure that everybody steps back for a moment, recognizes that these are two decent people, not extrapolate too much from the backs, but as i said at a press conference, be mindful of the fact that because of our history, because of the difficulties of the past, african-americans are sensitive to these issues.

even when you have got a police officer who has a fine track record on racial sensitivity, interactions between police officers and the african- american community can sometimes lead to misunderstanding. i hope is that as a consequence of this event, this ends up being what is called a teachable moment, where all of us, instead of pumping up the volume, spend a little more time listening to each other and try to focus on how we can generally improve relations between police officers and minority communities, and instead of a flinging accusations we can all be a little more reflective in terms of what we can do to contribute to more unity. lord knows, we needed right now, because over the last two days,

as we discussed this issue, nobody has been paying much attention to health care. [laughter] i will not use this time to spend more words on healthcare, although i cannot guarantee that will be true next week. i just wanted to emphasize -- one last point i would make. there are some who say that as president, i should not have stepped into this at all because it is a local issue. i have to tell you that that part of it i disagree with. the fact that this has become such a big issue i think is indicative of the fact that race is still a troubling aspect of our society. whether i were black or white, i think that me commenting on this and hopefully contributing

to constructive as well as -- as opposed to-understandings about the issue is part of my portfolio. at the end of the conversation, there was a discussion about sergeant crawly and i and professor gates having a beer here in the white house. we do not know of that is scheduled debtyet, but we may pt that together. he also wanted to say if there was a wake we could get the press of his lawn. i informed him that i cannot get the press off my lawn. [laughter] he pointed out that my lawn is bigger than his lawn, but if anybody has any connections to

the boston press as well as the national press, he will be happy for you to stop trampling his grass. >> president obama's surprise appearance in one house briefing room today. we would like to hear from you now, and get your reaction to his comments. president obama spoke at the briefing room shortly after a news conference where group of police officers demanded that he apologize for the remarks he made about the rest of henry louis gates. the washington post coats -- says that the cambridge police deeply resent the implication

that race was a factor in the decision to take dates into custody. he said the president used the right adjective but directed to the wrong party. getting to your phone calls now, first jerry from new york. what is your comment? >> i feel that i respect the president for revealing the situation. i would have felt better if he had said i am sorry, i made a mistake, but he went most of the way there. if you remember, all presidents, going back to president nixon, made off the cuff comments that they did not mean. to say that this was a racial incident kind of bothers me. if america was such a racist country, how did he get elected president of the united states? that is a comment i want him to think about and do some serious soul-searching tonight. i have also worked with the police in brooklyn, new york and community on patrol.

you have no idea the kind of harassment they have to put up with. it was a teachable moment, and i am glad it ended in a positive manner for everybody. >> a call now from tennessee. what did you think about the president's comments? >> i think that he was right on target. it baffles me that anybody could expect an incident to happen and not think of race. unless you are minority person, you could not possibly know what it feels like. naturally, and the president is the first black president, so naturally he would be -- i feel like he would have been totally dishonest had he not said that

it crossed its mining -- crossed his mind. race plays a part, and we need to be honest about that. >> do you think it was a teachable moment like the last caller thought? >> a teachable moment? >> where people would learn something. >> yes, absolutely. i think it is. i think that sensitivity -- black people have experienced so much harsh racism, and to expect every time that it comes up that the black person may be off the mark, and they may be, but so much has gone on in this country until when a minority -- it is like a cat and mouse. all of a sudden the cat says i

will not try to eat you anymore. i do not think the mouse will believe that right away. it will take some years of the cat not trying to eat that mouse before the mouse will believe he is safe. >> from georgia, go ahead. >> i agree with the previous caller. it is going to take time. it takes years, given our history, but i think we have to get past paranoia also. just with the remarks that prof. bates supposedly made, it sounds like maybe he was being a little bit paranoid. we have to get past that and just take each situation as it comes. >> next up is janet. >> i appreciate the president coming forward and realizing that he did probably overstepped

his comments the other day, saying the police department acted stupidly. it is tough enough out here for the law enforcement officers to try to keep law. i would have liked to have seen him make this a teachable moment in the sense that we do need law and order, as opposed to make it teachable moment with racism. i am sure president obama has never been in a position where he was ever targeted for race, so they are calling this on their grandparents or previous. the only way we will stop this, whether you are irish, german, or whatever, is to forgive. you cannot forgive you keep on bringing it up. one aspect is yes, it could have

been a teachable moment if the president would not have even brought that up. he may have mentioned it, but said we have law and order here in the united states, and the police did their job, no matter what race was involved. >> margaret from texas is next. >> i agree with some points of the previous caller, but as much as she says with the president should not have said, sometimes we forget that he is only human. none of us are perfect. a lot of times we are told as black people we should get over it, but when you are faced with some form of discrimination, sometimes on a daily basis, you cannot get over it. so no, everyone is not prejudiced, but i think there is still prejudice in this world. in order for us to get over it,

we all have to get over it, not just us, but the people directing the discrimination also. it is in our police department, as much as we may want not to believe that, but it exists. >> you heard president obama say that he invited harvard professor gates and also the police officer for a beer at the white house. ago politico" writes that it marks an abrupt shift from the suggestion that the backlash could be destructive to the white house. >> i am glad that president obama came out and discussed this issue in public, because this is a very big problem. in new york, there is a lot of racial profiling with the cops.

you see it everyday. this is something that needs to be addressed. that is all i had to say. >> you are seeing an article from "the washington post" about that. now we will take a call from california. >> i agree with the president coming out and saying is a teachable moment. there is racial discrimination that exists out there in america, and especially black people in high position, when they run into positions with the law. they are already dealing on a daily basis with how did you get your job? some of them carriey a stigma. cops are not the smartest people in the world. they are human. the problem with law enforcement in america is they are human beings.

they drink just like other human beings. they do drugs just like other human beings do. they get upset and hit and her people and wrecked a lot just like other people do. as a whole, we like to try to protect them. i come from a family of good guys. people who work right beside them are not good guys. i like the fact that he wants to invite them both to the white house. the officer can give his side of the story. i am glad it is not totally one- sided. you cannot escape the fact that there is racial profiling out there when it comes to law enforcement. it is just a way of life. these instances are going to happen. part of them says i will deal with this officer, but not like i just got out of high school. the problem is, the officer does

not know who they are. the bottom line is, police overstep their boundaries. i know black cops, white cops, and hispanic, to do it. the president did the right thing, coming out and saying that was stupid. i love the fact that he used the word stupid. that is the exact word that he should use. if he does not, we are watching it under the rug. >> a call from texas. >> i agree with the last caller. being black in the united states of america, there are certain things we are not supposed to say, are white people get offended by certain things we say pertaining to them, like the word stupid. it was not that the police or the people were stupid, the

actions were stupid. and people are so sensitive when it comes to race that they just automatically put up blinders and are blind to it. in this part of texas, i have friends who would not even come to visit me because they will be stopped and harassed by the police just because they are black. we get stopped for no reason. that is happening all over the world. >> in march of this year, the president gave a speech on race. here is part of that speech. this is where we are right now. it is a racial stalemate we have been stuck in four years. contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, i have never been so night as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions and a single election cycle or with a single candidacy, particularly one as imperfect as my own, but i have asserted a firm conviction rooted in my faith in god and the american people that working together, we can move beyond some of the old racial

woes, and we have no choice if we are to continue up on the path of a more per beginning. that from president obama, a speech he gave in march. there has been some congressional reaction to a harvard professor gates' arrest. representative james klavern talked about the rest in an interview for c-span is a good news makers" this week. >> you remember that we can be no more, no less than what our experience as allow us to be. i think that the police officer in this was responding to a call. the question to me was, if this was a neighbor calling, what was the neighbors role in all of this? did the police officer take into account that the neighbor may have overreacted? there are so many variables and all of this.

i think that nobody is indicting the police department in cambridge, and certainly the police officer has a record that seems to be admirable. i have certainly watched him on tv, and he seemed to me to be a good guy. i think i am a pretty good guy, but there have been times when i have overreacted. that is just human nature. >> back to your calls. what is your comment about the president's speech today? >> i think he is a class act. he is very intelligent. i am 66 years old and i am white. to the woman who called in and said i doubt if mr. obama has ever seen racism, well i saw plenty of that, just when he was running for the office of president. i have heard the "n" were more

in the last two years than the last 40. i went to high school in indianapolis. we had a black cafeteria and a white cafeteria. no one said or did a thing about it, and i just thought they wanted to eat over there with their friends. in my lifetime, i have seen plenty of racism, and i am a professional jazz singer. i have been treated better in black venues than i have ever seen whites treated -- then i have seen blacks treated and white been used. i don't think the caller has been paying attention the last two years. i am sure people are still using that word. i know i saw it on the internet. racism is there, because we are basically a nation of an educated people.

>> "wall street journal" writing that even though he said he used an unfortunate choice of words, the president did not back away from his other words on the racial profiling in america. our next call is from tennessee. >> but just want to say, i am sorry that black people are treated the way they are, but they are not the only people who are discriminated against. people that do not have high intelligence, people that are not the nicest looking in the world are discriminated against. where i work, black and white along just fine. sometimes we just overdo this discrimination. i do appreciate the president coming on and saying that he thought he had added to this,

and that maybe we should -- anyway, i just thank him for coming on. >> i want to remind you to turn down your television sets when you call so we do not get feedback on the air. next, a democratic color. >> i would like to say that president obama is really a good example, and i hold the media partly responsible for when other presidents in my lifetime have made errors and used curse words. i must ask the media what is their motive. the second thing, not only does racial profiling exist, we saw firsthand how many death threats and the negative comments that were made during the past election which justifies and solidifies that there is a large group of people in america who still feel that god made a mistake when he

created people of color. period that have not changed their perception that we are to be servants and they are to be masters. as long as you have that type of attitude, which also crosses over into the police department, education, medicine, we are going to have this type of friction. my question is, the nadir must not have known dr. gates very well. i know my neighbors by face and by name. i wonder what happened to the backpack story. certain things are getting lost in all this burbidge that are important. once the police knew that professor gates lived in that home, what did he not leave? if prof. bates does not have the right of freedom of speech, that policeman was very much out of line.

i know he appeared to be a good guy, but good guys make mistakes, and we can turn this off and on very well. i do not appreciate the media's role in escalating little things about obama that they failed to do for clinton, bush, reagan, johnson, eisenhower, and all of the others. it is just not fair. >> let's take a call from florida. what is your comment today? >> i think he handled it very well. i think we should move forward and focus on the things that are important right now, which is to reform the economy. i think he handled a really well. >> that is our last call for the evening. you can see president obama's remarks again and the entire white house briefing just

before 11:00 eastern time here tonight on c-span. >> sunday, a harvard law professor henry louis gates, jr. from a 2006 discussion on the african-american experience. >> now look at health care legislation from house republicans. they say it will not pass as speaker nancy pelosi bypasses the commerce committee and brings it to the floor. the group, including joe barton, talks about the republican proposals. this is 40 minutes. >> welcome. i am congressman joe barton from texas, the ranking member on the primary committee for healthcare jurisdiction in the house. we sure that jurisdiction with the ways and means committee and the education and work force committee. i think everybody knows that this was the week that the energy and commerce committee was supposed to mark up the

president's health care bill. i think everybody knows that this is the week that was at. that did not happen. there are rumors that is not going to happen next week, that the speaker is going to take the bill away from chairman waxman and bring in directly to the floor. i predict that if that happens, that the bill will fail on a rule vote. i do not believe the democrats on the energy and commerce committee and the blue dog democrats and the institutional democrats in the house would vote to bypass the committee of primary jurisdiction. in the chance that there is a markup next week, we wanted to hold this press conference to talk about our republican prescription for a healthy america. if you look down beside me here,

you will seat two boxes. there are 15 other boxes. there 17 boxes of republican amendments that are at the desk over in the main committee room of republican amendments to help put together a healthy america in terms of the health care plan. when the democrats say that we do not have a plan, where is their plan? if they cannot get a plan out of committee, where is their plan? among these amendments, and i will go through them briefly, first and foremost we agree with president obama that if you have insurance that you like, you should be able to keep it. the current plan in the energy committee does not allow that. it requires mandates that many

current plans will not be able to meet, so most americans within five to eight years, if they have an insurance plan the like, they will not be able to keep it under the president's plan. we have an amendment that does that. any system based on a free market needs transparency. i think it is telling that as soon as the president and mr. waxman of the blue dogs announced this medical review board, people went crazy opposing it, because they are afraid that that board, in addition to taking power from congress, that board is going to insist on transparency. people that have information about health care choices, outcomes, and cost, are usually going to make a better decision about where to put their health care dollars. we believe that senior citizens should be able to have choice in the kind of medicare package and have.

we believe that low income families that are eligible for s-chip the premium assistance. and then the no. 5 on our list, probably one of the more important ones, if access to health insurance is really the issue, i think there is an access issue and a cost issue. if access is the issue, we do not need all these bureaucracies and mandates. we need a straightforward national plan that covers pre- existing conditions for those who cannot get insurance. we need to create a plan, a national pool. we have an amendment that does that, and mr. shattuck has a number of amendments on pooling arrangements. there is a bipartisan amendment being worked on on a co-op basis that solves that need.

there are seven or eight more. i will not go through them all. suffice it to say that republicans on the energy and commerce committee are prepared to work every day next week if necessary from 10 in the morning until 12 at night or however long it chairman waxman wants. we think there should be a marker and the energy and commerce committee, and we think we should adopt some of these amendments. the only true negotiations that have been held between republicans and democrats in the house on the health care package have been done in the open markup process. the ways and means committee for a day, the education committee for a day, and last week about a day in the energy and commerce committee. the only committee still in play is the energy and commerce committee. we think there should be transparency in legislation, not just in the bills that go into effect. we hope chairman waxman and speaker pelosi will let there be a markup.

if there is, we stand prepared to offer these amendments plus many more to try to improve the package. with that, i would like to introduce the deputy ranking member of the committee and chairman of the healthcare solutions working group appointed by the leader. >> let me just make a couple of points to follow up on the ranking member had to say. first of all, we want to reform the system. republicans have been working hard for six months. the solutions group has been working hard for six months. we put principles out long ago. those principles are outlined in the amendments that we hoped to be able to offer in these various committees. the principles are what are really important here. our principles really reform the system, and we are convinced that have the right impact on cost instead of the wrong impact on cost.

one of those principles is a more competitive marketplace. we had a hearing yesterday that included people from canada and the united kingdom, and particularly a doctor from the united kingdom repeatedly said competition plus choice equal quality. he could have also said competition plus choice equals overprices. we want to have a system where there is more opportunity for people to make choices. the idea that if you like what you have, you should keep at is fine. we would like to add to that, even if you like what you have, you should have more choices than you have now. there are easy ways to put more marketplace dynamics into the system. you might want to look at the "wall street journal" editorial today that references the daschle-dole observations about how to get more choices in

competition into the system. they mentioned are advance of refundable tax credit in our concept of robbing and marketplace are not too far out of line with what the daschle- dole concept on the marketplace was. we might not agree with tom daschle or bob dole on every issue, but on the marketplace extension we do agree. how do you get cost savings in health care system itself? that is something that the president's plan -- everybody agrees it save no money. what can we do within the system to save money? we would first look at medical liability reform. we would look at more help information technology and more transparency. what do people charge and what kind of results did they get? none of those things are in the plan that the democrats are offering, if there is a plan. there are about three different

bills and house right now, but every time you see the bill, it is 100 pages bigger than the last time you saw it. if anybody here believes there is a bill that any single democrat knows what is in it, we will have a debate on that, because i am sure that is not true. if you watch the president the last two days as he was asked questions about his plan, he clearly did not have answers. our plan, more competition, more choice, let market forces work in a way that drives prices down. do not defend the current system, but make the current system work better for consumers, and then also make the current system work better at the point of health care itself. those to the principles over and over again are reiterated in the 17 boxes of amendment sitting in the commerce committee, waiting to be offered if they will ever

have a hearing. you cannot offer your ideas if there is not a legislative forum to offer them. it also cannot combat their ideas if they change by 100 pages every time you walk into the room. we are eager to have this discussion. we have been right up to the edge of pounding on the door for six months. our pounding on the door has been calling the white house chief of staff, talking to the president, sending letters saying we want to work with you on this. we want to make the current system better, and no one is responding to that. obviously they are not responding because they do not have an idea that meet any standard or the goals we ought to be working toward in health care. of our committee, the member that over the last decade really has been more engaged in this than anybody else day in and day out has been an integral part of the solution, is the ranking member on health care

subcommittee, nathan deal. >> let me put our circumstances in terms of schedule and perspective. most of us believe that the decision as to major reform of how americans get their health care in this country deserves at least as much time and deliberation as it would take to select a puppy to reside in the white house. it took the president six months to decide how long and which puppy he was going to have, and to expect congress to do something on major health care reform in six days is totally irresponsible. let me talk about a couple of areas we are concerned about. as you have heard, we believe the current system needs some reform. we believe the current free enterprise system of delivering health care through private insurance companies has some things that need to be fixed.

for example, we believe that exclusions for pre-existing conditions must be addressed, that the portability of insurance must be involved in any plan that is adopted, because people should not have to worry about losing their health insurance just because they might lose their job. we believe that people should not have to worry about having their health insurance denied at a point in time when they file a claim, simply because somebody in the insurance company goes back through their original application and decides that did not put everything down exactly right. we blew -- we believe those are the kinds of substantial reforms. they mention another area, that of illegal immigrants being a part of a publicly financed health system. we have been through this debate before. we have a number of amendments that would assure the taxpayers of this country that they are not going to be using their hard-earned tax dollars to pay

for people who are illegally in this country. those are things that i think resonate with my constituents and certainly with most people across this country. i am afraid we will not have the opportunity to offer those kinds of progressive reforms, not only to the current system, but also to the proposal that the democrats have on the table. >> that meet echo what they have indicated. the president obviously has not read the bill himself. i will have a very simple amendment. nothing in this division shall prevent or limit individuals from keeping their current health benefit plan. that sounds pretty simple, doesn't? the president said, if you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. if you like your healthcare plan, it will be able to keep that health care plan. that is the president's

statement. you saw my amendment. what does the bill say? i have a copy here for anyone who's interested. on page 17 it says after five years, the commission, with the exchange, mandates that all health-care plans in america must meet a qualified health benefit plan under section 101, including the essential benefit plan under section 121. that means that all the plans that the patients have it will have to conform and be mandated to change or they will be eliminated, terminated. so the president says he wants everybody to have their own choice of doctor and health care plan. they will not have the right to choose. simply put on page 17 of this plan, it outlined specifically after five years, all plans will be mandated to comply to the government health care position

, or be eliminated are terminated. possibly the president needs to talk to mr. waxman or revised page 17. what he says does not comply, and i do not think he has read this section. >> we do want people to know what is in this bill. that is the reason for bringing all of our amendments to you today, so that you will see what we are offering for the committee to consider. we certainly want to make certain that health care works for americans. this morning we had a great press conference with some female business owners that came to capitol hill to express their concerns. i will recap just a couple of those for you. they are concerned about costs, because they know that costs need to be addressed. they are concerned about accountability for insurance companies. they agree with us, as you have heard ranking member deal mentioned this morning, that

some of those issues of portability with insurance, some of the issues of accountability do need to be addressed. pre-existing conditions -- and we have amendments that will do that. we look forward to the opportunity to present that to the committee, to congress, and to the american people. we certainly want to make certain that people have transparency and the options that are there, that people on their health insurance and their health records. these are some of the highlights from the conference we had this morning with the female business owners. they are going to work are with us as we continue to push through the next few weeks to look at what happens here before we go out on recess, to look at the opportunities that exist in august, as we talked to constituents and business owners, big and small, as we talked to health care consumers, to make certain they understand

our commitment to stand with them to preserve their access to affordable health care in their own communities. >> i am from the third district of arizona. health care reform has been a passion of mine since i got here. a work on reforms with, current back in 19951997. i have written a comprehensive health care reform bill every year i have been here. i have written legislation to enable people to buy health insurance across state lines. let me make it clear there are things we agree upon. i want to make sure you understand them. republicans believe in and support legislation to fix the problem for people with pre- existing conditions and chronic conditions. we believe those people ought to be able to buy health care through a high risk pulled mechanism or reinsurance program at the same cost as every single one of us.

this is not just talk. passed legislation to encourage states to do that at least four years ago. i know because i wrote the bill. there is agreement on that issue. we would like to go further now and make that a national high- risk pool so it covers everybody. covering all americans -- many of us have offered legislation that covers every single american. we would give every single american a refundable tax credit to cover it every single one of them. those are the two biggest issues. let's talk about where we do not agree. we believe that the tax code has to be fixed. it is an outrage to say to american businesses, you can buy health insurance with pretax dollars, but we want everyone else who does not have an employer sponsored plan to be responsible and buy it, are we will smack you down by making it

cost you one third more. that is the law in america today. if anyone of you people do not have employer based health insurance, you have to buy it with after-tax dollars. that is unfair and an outrage. i have been trying to fix it since i got here. everyone of these republicans wants to fix that problem and empower people. the fundamental difference is the democrats want a top down bureaucracy driven, punishment driven, command people around, mandate coverage by businesses and individuals and punish them if they do not comply. republicans want to empower you. i am talking about you right there. i want to empower you to be able to buy your own health insurance plan. the democrats talk about abuse, plans that canceled people. your employer buys the plan, and

he has a motive not to look out for you as carefully as you would. you cannot fire that plan. you could pick out the plan, you would not accept the terms your employer picks. you would pick a plan and read to be sure they could not cancel you. if they threaten to cancel you, you fire that plan and you go by a plan that can not cancel you. we want to empower people. >> i would just pick up on that point. a year ago, you would not ask the government to pick out what car you can dibuy, but now may e he would. we had a good amendment drawing

on the experience in texas for liability reform that has done a lot toward lowering malpractice rates in texas and also bringing doctors back into practice in that state. i offered that last friday. it was the first amendment that was offered in committee, and it was struck down on a technicality. we have been recessed since monday night. on the issue of being denied by one of these boards, if the democrats' bill passes and they have these boards that will decide, shouldn't the patient have the opportunity to come back and at least have a hearing in protest that denial of care? we asked our insurance companies to do that several years ago. should we ask the public plan to do the same thing? there will be a vast expansion of medicaid under the democrat'' plan. if that is going to happen, should we not insure that those patients have access to a doctor? we can ensure that every state will reimburse physicians at no

less than 75% of the state plan rates. those are simple, common-sense things. we were not allowed to offer those amendments because the committee has been in recess all week. let's open the doors and get down to the business of writing legislation that actually works for the american people. >> i am a member of the energy and commerce committee. my colleague from georgia spoke just a second ago about what kind of dog the white house would have ended up with if they had to rush that through instead of taking months to selectively come up with that portuguese water dog. they would have ended up with a junkyard dog if they had rusted through, just like on this health care situation. we want affordable, accessible, and affordable it is universal health care for everybody. instead, we rush it through an

end up with a universal nightmare. we can do this right. you heard represented shattuck talk about republican legislation, so much for all of visible about republicans having no bill. we definitely do. all these amendments -- let me just mention one i have submitted that would say, if this public plan is so good, let's sign up immediately the president and vice president and every member of congress. they should be on the public auction. put your money where your mouth is. if you are going to talk the talk, let's walk the walk. that would be a great message to the american people, to say that this plan is good. we will not be in this plan if

we are want to end up getting denied coverage. let's put up or shut up. i think we have some great plans. i am proud to be here with my fellow members of energy and commerce, and i will yield the podium. >> this is my 17th year in congress. i have experience dealing with private health system as well as a military nba. i look back over the years. we have worked on -- address and portability issues, and we try to maintain that which is right within the private system and work on that which is wrong. the advocates today of the government option of health care, calling it reform, or the individuals that voted against things that we tried to do in successive congresses when

republicans controlled. that was associated health plans, being able to allow businesses to pull together to spread the risk and lower those premiums. we love john shattuck's initiatives. look at what you did with automobile insurance. you are able to buy that insurance across state lines, and we ought to be able to do that with health care. taking another step forward, if you are a good driver, you get a discount. what if you are responsible in how you take care of your body? you exercise, you watch your cholesterol level, you do not smoke or drink. should you get a premium discount? we believe you should. it is called wellness programs, and trying to encourage people to keep -- take a greater incentive in their personal wellness. i tried to work with some

democrats. i have an amendment coming to do that. the white house advised one of the democrats on the other side not to work with republicans on that amendment. that was pretty bizarre to me. it is the president himself to talk about some of these companies that are doing these wellness programs, and now they are saying they do not want to do that. it is clear that the government option is their plan. they are calling in health reform, but is all about government control. it is all very disturbing. >> last week i was pleased to offer a simple, common-sense of government and then and aimed at stopping wasteful spending, and passed by a vote of 29-27. my men and gave the blue dogs the ability to show their teeth and show that they are willing to work in a bipartisan way to eliminate additional levels of

government inefficiency and red tape in our healthcare plans. shortly after my amendment was adopted, chairman waxman shutdown the committee process before it led to even more common sense reforms. to many families are struggling with rising cost of health care. we stand ready to reform the system, control costs, make coverage more affordable, regardless of pre-existing conditions. our healthcare system is in need of reform, but it should not come at the expense of our nation's small business and straining the doctor-patient relationship. since then, barack obama has been on tv a lot. he is stressing that he wants to eliminate wasteful spending. if his plan or so good for america, why is the biggest majority of the energy and commerce committee, the largest

majority in 50 years, why cannot they pass this bill? i have not found one man or anyone out there who thinks this is a good idea in my district and outside my district. people tell me, do not support that government run plan. we are happy with our healthcare system. >> all of us up here agreed that our health care system needs to be reformed, but you do not blow up the best medical care system in the world to fix the problems that exist. we strongly oppose a government takeover of health care, with the rising costs and massive increases in taxes that go along with it. you can see your from the large number of alternatives that we are offering to chairman waxman, many of which he may not let see the light of day, that we have a lot of really good, common sense

ideas that share bipartisan support. we hope these ideas get brought forward. if you judge by the last two weeks, we had the congressional budget office in committee about two weeks ago. unfortunately, you did not know about it because chairman waxman through the public out of that meeting. while they talk about transparency, they literally shut down the meeting to the public, through the media out, and what we heard was think they probably do not want the public to hear. they talked about all the savings we hear about -- one of the president's pledges was that nobody that makes less than $250,000 a year would see their taxes go up. the problem is, the president breaks his own pledge in the bill that they fall. there is a clause in the bill. when you write down the numbers, you have about 7 million uninsured people, but they are

blowing up the entire system to address that. they admit that millions of people will still be uninsured. they have a 2.5% tax on individuals that do not have health insurance after this bill passes. if you are uninsured today, by their own admission, millions of americans will still be uninsured if their bill were to pass. they actually tax those americans to the tune of $29 billion. cbo confirmed that when i asked the question. clearly, most of those people would be people who make less than $250,000 a year. there are over $800 billion in new taxes in this bill in addition to a government takeover that allows a health care czar to ration care and literally interfere with the relationship between you and your doctor. their approach is the wrong approach. we have lots of alternatives and we are willing to stay as late as ranking member barton said,

as late as the chairman would allow us to bring these alternatives up. we need to have a healthy discussion with all the american people seen the details of the bill instead of their approach of ramming this reckless proposal through before anybody gets a chance to see it. >> i think america deserves the opportunity to have these amendments debated and voted on. we have progressed from chairman waxman telling the democrats in committee to defeat our amendments to not even being able to offer them now. as chairman barton mentioned, it seems pretty strong that it will come straight to the floor, whether it is next week or in september, bypassing our committee and eliminating the opportunity. if any of us think we will have an open rule that allows these to be introduced, they are crazy. we do not expect that. america is not going to see these amendments, and that is

their agenda. what are some of the amendments in this box that america will never see? the one that we drafted that says all white house and members of congress have to participate in the public option plan. i think that is fair. i have had lots of constituents suggest that to me, but that will never be debated. we have hospitals that are run by religious organizations that are very concerned about the conscience clause. that is more of the minister after that i wrote. we will not be able to debate that and protect hospitals' rights not to perform abortions, banning taxpayer money of abortions through these policies in the exchange is not going to be debated.

it will not be voted on now. so the opportunity for the taxpayers to be protected, that their tax dollars now, depending on what the commissioner would rule, would have to be used for abortions. there are many people in america that oppose that. we will not have that debate or vote. that is what is being left behind. that is the atrocity of these decisions made by chairman waxman and speaker pelosi. those are just three ideas that i co-authored. i am downright angry that we will not have that opportunity. >> before we take questions, i stood here and watched all our members. the only to receive only two of them do not need a hair cut. everybody else, myself included, needs to get a haircut.

we may offer an amendment. we will take questions now. >> could you elaborate about the chances the bill would be defeated -- why that might be what you are hearing? >> i do not think speaker pelosi is really going to do that. if she were to do that, every democrat on the committee -- it would be a direct slap on all the democrats, including chairman waxman and others. they would be predisposed to vote no on a rule. . .

>> i did not see the votes being there to get a rule to get the bill on the floor. as was pointed out by mr. terry, we have 86 more amendments to offer. they are not going to adopt a rule that allows 86 republican amendments on the floor. >> he talked a lot about the health care system, do support comparative effectiveness research -- do you support comparative effectiveness research? >> it would depend on what the use of the research -- the research itself the republicans would support. for what use we have some question. we do not wanted to be used for a rationing of health care. dr. gingrey had some amendments

on that, and i will let him address it. >> in the little bit of markup, the one day that we marked up and had several amendments -- it addressed just that issue. and what decision making they can have and how much power they can have. the two amendments i submitted were rejected. i think we got one democratic vote. they could not make that final decision between a doctor and patient. we are for comparative effectiveness research on a scientific basis that shows best practices for different diseases and what works best. and to suggest and make sure that all physicians are well informed about that. theocratic oath -- and physicians know that they have

that 6 cents where -- that 6 cents -- sixth sense. the comparative council could not make decisions that ration care, particularly in regard to our precious senior citizens. maybe they reach a certain age, up 85, 90, and they cannot get things like knee replacements. >> other questions? >> mr. gang green said that there is a republican bill. -- mr. gingrey said that there is a republican bill. >> would be a comprehensive substitute for the democratic bill.

it would encompass -- not everything is in the substitute. it would substantially encompass it. >> can i just that -- and many of us have offered, publicly, republican bills. we have the improving health care for all americans act that covers all 12 of those points. mr. kemp has already been working out a comprehensive bill, working with the group that mr. bond has. at the right time, we would offer that legislation. >> anybody else? thank you for being here. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> now more of the health-care bill with house debate between republican whip eric cantor and

steny hoyer. >> i did not help -- i did not hear the gentleman speak of the prospects of the house considering the health care bill. i would ask the gentleman the status of that discussion and whether this house will be delivering on the speaker's commitment that this house was going to vote on her health care bill. i yield. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. as the gentleman probably knows, is still in the energy commerce committee. they have not reported out that bill. i did not know the speaker's commitment, but the speaker and i both have the hope that we would be able to pass the health care bill by the time we left here on the thirty first of

july. my view is, at this point in time, it may not be possible. that does not necessarily mean that we won't be here longer. i hope that is not the case, but if it proves to be necessary, we will be here a little bit longer like this saturday the third or the fourth. do not be planning on that, but currently, the status of the bill is that it is still at the energy and commerce committee. >> i would ask the gentleman for some clarification. then i just hear them saying we will not be considering the health care bill this week? >> i did not say that and some in words, -- in so many words. we would have 48 hours notice. this is a very important bill. it is a bill that is of great consequence to all americans.

and we are going to meet that -- those targets. in light of the fact that the bill is still in committee, it may be impossible to meet that commitment and to get the bill on the floor on the thirty first. as a result, the probability of doing that bill by the thirty first is very small. >> i think the gentlemen. to reiterate, i would say that i heard the gentleman say that the probability of taking up the health-care bill by the thirty first is very small. i suspected that is due to what we have read in the news reports of four successive days now about the difficulty that your side is having in gain a majority support for the bill. >> we have said all along that there is a bipartisan majority against the health care bill being proposed by the speaker.

that is because people are unsure about the direction a government health care plan would take them. mr. speaker, the gentleman knows that we stand ready and willing to work together to try to affect reform for the american people. we on the republican side of the aisle did not accept the status quo. we want to see a health care reform bill that works for the american people, maintains joyce and quality, reduce its cost some more folks can have access to coverage -- maintains choice and quality, and reduces costs so more folks can have access to coverage. given that he and i have had some discussion about the schedule, how long will we be in session beyond the thirty first?

i yielded to the gentleman. >> we think that the bill that is pending at -- we're not sure that your premise is correct. we think your premise is probably not correct. the people on this floor want to vote for a gulf -- it for a health care reform bill. -- want to vote for a health care reform bill. i did not accept your premise that there are not majority votes for the bill that is being considered in this house. having said that, my point was that we want to give appropriate notice. if we can't give appropriate notice by the thirty first of july, it is possible -- i am not saying we're going to be doing this, but it is possible that we would move on to either saturday the first or monday and tuesday the third and fourth. if need be, and if that was

appropriate. it may or may not be. i do not want to say at this point and time -- this point in time. but i do want to give members notice that it is a possibility. >> i think the gentlemen. if the process had worked differently, if i suggested to the gentleman that we were allowed to try and put forward the kinds of proposals that we are attempting to do and there was a receptivity on your side to allow for some of the free market principles and cost controls suggestions that have been made, according to a member on your side a few days ago, maybe we would be on a better course. in the same way, i think -- and a colleague from the gentlemen's state said that the bill is not out of committees and we are already talking about voting on

this. we feel the same way that there has been very little willingness to work together to try and get a health care plan right. mr. speaker, the way i believe we get it right is to tell the people of this country exactly what would be in store for them by the insistence that there be a government plan involved in their health care. i would tell the gentleman, we obviously stand ready to work with him and the speaker to perfect a plan that could get much larger than just probably be small majority that he will be able to produce given the news reports that we are hearing. and with that, mr. speaker, i would like to ask the gentlemen about his anticipation of next week's appropriations bill. he and i have had a longstanding

discussion on rules. we on this side of the aisle have been extremely accept -- extremely upset about the change in president of this house. -- precedent of this house. that it was ok to insist that we not be able to hold open discussions on issues surrounding constitutional obligations of this body. even after the good faith attempt that we have made to open up rules, is that his hope for his intention that perhaps, on the d.o.d. bill that we could see that happen? >> we're going to have good faith on our side as we have had all along all the defense appropriation bill. there are well over a hundred amendments that have been filed.

if we allowed all 100 men mints -- all 100 amendments by one member, we would never finish the bill if we stay through august. having said that, i have talked to the chairwoman. it is my belief that mr. flake will be given ample opportunity to choose which amendments he wants to offer at the time that we consider the bill. i do not know the other amendments. i do not know what the rules committee is going to do. i would tell the gentleman as i am sure he knows, the bill will come under a rule. we believe your side of the aisle has had most of the amendments offered, and mr. flake and others will be given the opportunity to offer a

number of their amendments on earmarks which i know are of great concern to both sides of the aisle. i would say that we expect to take the defense build up under a rule similar to those under which we have operated. which i have facilitated 11 of the 12 appropriation bills having passed. while i was not sure what was going to happen on the health care bill, we will achieve our objective in a timely fashion. i yield back. >> we are trying to get things right here. spending billions of dollars is not the goal here. i know he agrees with me on that. that we are trying to affect the most prudent expenditure of taxpayer dollars, and it is very difficult during economic times. we voted on a paygo bill this

week, and frankly, the spirit behind the bill was to attempt to restrain the type of spending that we have seen this congress conduct. in fact, this week, and one of the reports, one of the authors of an opinion column said, frankly, the spending paygo bill that was passed this week is full of loopholes. we know that the bill that was passed was that, it wasn't a holistic pay go -- paygo bill that will do much to address the runaway spending. we still sit here, mr. speaker, wanting to have an open process so we can contribute to a holding back the runaway spending in this town.

i would say to the gentlemen, just as he has said to me, we ought to be looking to try to open up this process again. we were not allowed to do so on the paygo debate and address the number one concern of this government right now which is a runaway spending. if we are going to be here through the weekend as the gentleman may suggest, why is it we couldn't take that time to debate the d.o.d. bill in an open and transparent manner? >> as i said, we will have a rule similar to the one we have considered the previous 11 bills under. >> i did not hear the gentleman, mr. speaker. >> we will be considering the defense bill under rules similar to those which have led to the passage of the other 11 bills.

i yield back. >> i say with much disappointment, and really reflecting the disappointment on the part of the american people, we should be having a much more robust debate on these issues. certainly of we're going to be addressing the issue of health care, the gentleman says that his side is insistent on rushing back to the floor and insisting on some political that line -- deadline, why is it we could not have a debate on some other issues if we are going to be waiting around here until next monday or tuesday? i thank the gentleman, and i yield back. >> now democratic leaders told a briefing on the status of the health care reform bill. rep steny hoyer told reporters that it might not be possible to finish health care legislation until the fall.

this is 10 minutes. >> as i have said many times, every member of the democratic caucus has expressed to me and to all of our leaders -- our whip counts them. all of them want to vote for health care reform. we believe we are going to pass a very good health care reform bill. last night, we made very significant progress. in number of the ways and means committee moderated -- a member of the ways and means committee moderated, but at all times elicited the opinions of members on the very critical issue of medicare reimbursement. there are regional differences. it members have been very concerned and animated about it.

there have been real differences as you would expect with an issue of this magnitude. i am pleased to report to you that last night, they reached a consensus. this morning, they met with the leadership and went over the language. they indicate that we have a full agreement on that issue. i want to congratulate them on that very significant step forward and the process of reaching a consensus. we are continuing to work towards consensus. we believe that the energy and commerce will continue its work. we're looking forward to marking out -- marking up the bill next week. we are absolutely committed to passing a health care reform bill. we are energized by the progress we made last night at the progress we're making today.

the leadership is committed to that end. i believe our members are committed to that end. we have every intention of passing a health care reform bill and sending it to president obama for his signature by the fall. >> on the floor and hour or so ago, you expressed -- can you elaborate on that? the require that this bill come out of energy and commerce, or will you reserve the option to bypass it? >> we expect the committee to be able to work its will. that is the speaker's expectations, my expectations, we're looking forward to the energy and commerce committee doing its work. the colloquy to which you refer, the speaker and i had a pledged

time to review the product of the committee and the product of the rules committee. what i said on the floor was -- and the process has taken longer than it initially anticipated, as i said, we made real progress last night. these are difficult issues. it would be difficult to meet the time requirements by this coming friday. i do not believe we will be able to meet those time constraints. we might be meeting on saturday or the third or fourth. we will see how we progress. i will tell you this. whenever we do, we intend to keep working on this very hard between now and when we come back. we expect the bill to pass out of committee. as you know, we have three bills in the ways and means committee of which three of the leaders

are members of the education and labor committee. the energy and commerce committee will be the third leg of that school -- of that stool. >> if i could clarify, do agree that this -- we should delay recess? are you committed to passing this before the august recess? >> the whip can obviously speak for himself. what we think we want to see happen, and we think we're making progress -- i want to stress how optimistic and encouraged we are at the fact that we had such progress last night. obviously in consideration of a bill of this magnitude, you have different opinions. you have opinions that differ pretty substantially, and you

write about it. we're making progress on a great victory last night and this morning for which i congratulate all of the people who worked on that. it is my expectation that we will continue to move forward. i have been in discussions with the white house. they want to see us make progress, and i am sure they will join with us when we have a committee product out of the three committees. and we will bring those bills together. it may take some sign -- some time, so we may be working on that during the august break. >> the blue dogs have become so inflamed over the last week. you are very optimistic, but it seems it has become quite hot. >> i am pretty close to the blue dogs and henry waxman. i have known him for 45 years,

and i have known a lot of the blue dogs. their close friends of mine. in a legislative process, sometimes people get animated about their positions. these are very important issues, and this is a critical bill for the american public. we are absolutely committed to passing a bill that will give the quality, affordable health care to every american. i am confident that the blue dogs it who want to vote for health care reform bills -- they have certain opinions as to what that bill ought to look like. mr. waxman clearly wants a health reform bill. with everybody wanting to accomplish the objective, i am confident we can do that. >> i know you're confident and talking about the blue dogs, but mike ross said he does not see how we can do anything.

this whole thing when you were up your -- when you were appeared -- obviously, none of that happened. >> why is he to be congratulated? number one, he does an excellent job as our vice chair of the caucus. but as well, there were very strong feelings in that room, believe me. he saw those expressed to you from time to time in terms of very strong feelings about the rates that medicare pay and the regional discrepancies that exist. they were resolved. i am confident that based upon that, we can resolve these other differences and bring us to a position where we have a bill out of committee and ready to be put together and brought to the floor.

i want to also say that i think your premise is incorrect. i think others would say that as well. the agreements reached is helpful to the blue dogs. it is it what they were seeking per se? no, they have other issues they were interested in as well. it was certainly of help, and i think the blue dogs felt it was a positive step. it was not the step for them, but it was a positive step. >> will you work until the bill is done? >> we are going to work until the bill is done. we are not going to stop working.

>> now, an event with congressman john conyers who talked about health care legislation, investigations of the bush administration. this is 45 seconds. -- 45 minutes. >> good afternoon, welcome to the national press club. i am president of the national press club. where the world's leading the organization for journalists. we are committed to the future of journalism by providing informative programming and fostering a free press worldwide.

for more information about the national press club, please visit our web site. on behalf of our 3500 members worldwide, i would like to welcome our speaker and our guests in the audience today. i would also like to welcome those of you watching on c-span. we look forward to today's speech and afterwards, i will ask as many questions as time permits. please hold your applause during the speech so we have time for as many questions as possible. for the broadcast audience, the applause maybe from the guests and members of the general public to attend our luncheons, and not necessarily from the working press. i like to introduce our table desk and ask that the stand briefly. john peterson, senior vice president of atco world wide and washington correspondent of the detroit news.

larry bivens, also a member of the board of governors. dr. patricia berg, a professor at george washington university medical school. dick bryan, a retired reporter and past president of the national press club. gayle dickson, a guest of congressmen conniers. chief counsel of the house judiciary committee. skipping over myself. angela from bloomberg news. skipping over our guest, the speaker committee member who recognized today's luncheon.

marcia dyson, a guest of congressman. deborah price of the detroit news. [applause] "washington post" journalist once called our guest a junkyard dog investigator watching out for taxpayer's wallets by rooting out fraud, waste, and abuse. there has been no shortage of that and the over 40 years that john has served in the house of representatives as a democrat from michigan. the congressman is the second longest serving house member, and before winning his own seat, he served as an aide to the longest serving congressman

john dingell from michigan. he has been reelected 22 times. [applause] and along the way, there have been great achievements and some great controversies. among his claims to fame, he is a founding member of the congressional black caucus. he is an original enemy on president nixon's enemies list. [applause] and he introduced the first bill in congress to make martin luther king jr. day a national holiday. the congressmen now chairs the powerful house judiciary committee where he has been an outspoken critic of president bush's policies regarding interrogation of terrorism suspects and warrantless wiretapping. he has not hesitated to use his committee's power to pursue

investigations into those policies. he is also front and center and the national health insurance debate as a longtime advocate of the single payer system in which the government would provide health care for every american. we look forward to hearing his take on the stalled health care bill. [applause] >> thank you, donna for well- prepared introduction. you delivered it remarkably well. to everyone here, the head table, and all of you, i am

happy to see you appear today -- to see you up here today. dick ryan, from way back. john peterson, april ryan, barbara reynolds, dave mcconnell, and the few friends i have invited. this is a great time to have a discussion for a few minutes as to where i think we are. i have always asked my staff to over prepare me. they did not let me down today. [laughter] we have 29 pages and some books and things that i asked about.

and then i always go off on my own anyway. this is a great help. but nothing like it. there are five things that i wanted to squeeze into 50 or 20 minutes. eric holder must appoint a special counsel to review the bush administration's abuses of power and misconduct. a criminal probe has got to do that. that is why i love being at the press club. i did not have to call them. he knows how i feel anyway. eric and i go back a long ways.

number two, i have a bill that calls for a blue-ribbon panel about the same thing. why do you need both? because a special counsel is not going to work in the public. they have to work confidentially. we need in 9/11 type panel. no congressmen on it. i wouldn't even put x members on it. so we can publicly go into what we have talked about and been doing. by the way, i was surprised. as i was looking over my notes, they said we have had 55

hearings about that subject matter. the administration, the abuse of power, the misconduct. i said, 55? may i see the titles? they went back to 2007 and started off with all of these. i have them available for anybody who would like to get a copy of them. we would be happy to make it available to you. we need, also, to enforce the subpoena is that i have issued to my friends in the other administration for declining to

join us in the hearing room for a few dozen friendly questions under oath, at risk of perjury. we have to keep the process working congress's role has been diminished as the president's executive role has increased. when you get around to saying, i can't come because it is executive privilege. i work in the white house, i can't tell you -- i can't answer these questions. we tried to counter with, wait a minute, you don't know what questions we're going asked. if we ask one that you think deserves to be challenged, we

will set it aside and see if we can work something out. but the blanket -- anybody near the white house doesn't have to come to a hearing, that would not wash in my son's freshman class in atlanta, much less with me. and we're in the process of enforcing the sabena's against. meyer's former chief of staff, joshua bolton -- and forcing the subpoenas against harriet meyer's former chief of staff, joshua bolton. it is not hard to figure out.

the firings of the u.s. attorneys politicizing the one branch that should be as free from politics as possible, the department of justice. we're trying to get hate crimes through. oh boy. somebody wanted to end the -- equate the death penalty with a hate crime act. nothing like cooperation. the subject that has commanded so much of my time is the universal health care bill. i started with this so long ago, not as the leader of it, but when hillary clinton called

us into the white house, we had 100, and we have 85 co-sponsors now. it is the most popular health care bill and the congress -- in the congress. and yet, there is this effort to lock it in the drawer and talk about it as little as possible. the one that most americans have been called to want. this reaches everybody. a universal health care bill, from the moment you're born to the time you go to heaven is

what we need in this country. most industrial countries have some form of it already. i spent an enormous amount of time with other organizations, over 500 labor organizations alone. progressive democrats of america, churches, community groups. i will be speaking sunday night with the national medical association of african american box -- docs. their organization was supporting this when i first started out. that is the general drift of where i am coming from.

we want to lay down some guideposts. one of the problems in this democratic process of ours is, if you don't, it is assumed that it is ok. you did it under the past administration, there are the usual liberal critics. forget them. it has been done. there is precedence. we're saying no, not even to our dear friend, the forty fourth. we are laying down guidelines. yes, when we have honest disagreements, we want to talk about them. that is what is all about.

i told president obama when we were in the white house of all the important things you said, the one that i think is the one i want to thank you for right now is that you said you wanted all the people that supported you to keep advising you. he has asked for these groups to being around. i said, you did not have to tell me that. i was going to keep devising new even if you hadn't said it. what made me proud it was the fact that you did say it. no president has ever done that before. you get elected, you got your staff, you got your counsel, stay in touch.

he said, keep me advised. and i think that is what we have to do. so in the spirit of keeping him advise, -- keeping him advised and not just congratulate him all the things he overwhelmingly worked on, i want to take a moment and describe to you the circumstances that i think we find ourselves then on this twenty fourth day of july. in terms of health care and the political system itself, where are we? first, the health care bill is unfortunately in trouble.

i heard the president driving this morning -- being quoted on npr from chicago. he said, first of all we have to do it right, and that we have to get it done. yes, but i did not think it is being done right. -- i do not think that it is being done right. he could not have been a single pair before me, but he was a single pair and a good one -- single payer, and a good one. he made some good speeches about it. if we were starting all over again, we would start with

single payer. we are not starting all over again. please, as they say, give me a break. of course we're not starting out all over -- but we should scrap the system. somewhere along the line, people in congress inside the beltway are going to do what most people already want. they want a system where it doesn't turn on which of 1200 insurance policies you have, not that anybody has ever read the fine print. number two, did you understand it after you read it? i love these members and get up and say, read the bill. what good is reading the bill if it is 1000 pages and you don't have to days and two

lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill? what i am saying is that too much is the same. we are not making enough changes. we are not covering everybody. it is not really universal. creating to class's, that failed in massachusetts. -- two classes, that failed in massachusetts. asked barney frank. we need a serious bill. the fundamental question is, is health care a constitutional right? do you have a right to health care in the american system? we believe that people do.

and introducing a constitutional amendment just to make it really clear so that you do not have to and for it or -- infer it or assume it is a given. how many minutes have i got left? >> about 9. >> good. [laughter] look at the other body. well, don't look at the other body. [laughter] how can you have it -- i keep thinking that if this business that i am in wasn't so serious, it would make a great comedy if you took out the names, not to embarrass the people that speak.

here we are, climate change is something we caused and -- we finally admitted it. the science is a mile long on the subject. we're finally agreeing to it. and this is a phrase that draws cheers or a smile to my face. we want to provide everybody in america with affordable insurance. what an oxymoron. he can't pay his rent, lost his job, how can he get affordable insurance? we will buy it for him, chairman. you will,? -- you will, huh?

and of course, to make it really difficult to, we have the question of a public auction. -- a public option. i am so proud of dennis q. senate -- dennis kucinich that would allow for any state who wanted to try universal, single payer health care, they would be able to do it. he got that through. we are trying to keep it in. do not hold your breath on how long this can stay and. at least he got it in and we're not going to find out who doesn't want it in and so forth at least give us a public

auction that is -- a public auction -- option. many senators have said, a public option is out. we're not giving them the option for a public plan. profit would be down 3% or 4% overhead for medicare. 15% for private insurance is depending on which one. we don't even want it. we don't even want a weak one. we don't want any at all. so we've got a problem.

the president -- what a guy. what presence, what intellectual force, what courage, what ability. mr. nice guy. there are so many people even in my group that say, look, let's stop being so nice. these guys are no on everything, and we have the votes, let's take them out. he doesn't do that. he keeps saying, please come to the table. have a drink with me on friday evenings and the white house. let's talk, negotiate. that is smart. once he starts swinging back, the media like you guys will be saying, there they go again.

the d's and r's are fighting and fighting. obama is all about making it not all the same. that is why he is doing that. that is why i take exception to some of my friends that want him to punch back and that sort of thing. i close with my observations about the political situation we find ourselves in. it is funny. here is an old american respected political party self- destruct in right in front of our eyes. in every way.

every day, they call 18 or two dozen votes, roll call votes on everything they can think of. motions to adjourn all over the place. the minority leader had a fund- raiser, so he made them read the whole bill, 55 pages for two or three hours. that was yesterday. what will they do today that will make you either laugh or cry? it goes on and on. as a supporter of sarah palin for taking over the republican party, i am one of her great advocates. [laughter] what an attractive, young neoconservative. reactionary.

[laughter] there had never been one like her. she attracts crowds. she is so busy she doesn't have time to govern alaska. let's get ready for the big one when we go back and to take on obama. i want to encourage her on. [laughter] and there is my four colleagues, newt gingrich. he has remade himself at least three times. there are three editions of gingrich. he has a book coming out. and of course, with the vice president, there groups in the democratic party that have been

accused of helping him get time to get on because as a guy that could not get above 15% popularity when he wasn't hiding somewhere and claiming he is not in the administration, this is our kind of guy. and don't forget to the chairman of the republican party. he has not gotten off one consistent speech ever since he became the chairman. the whole thing -- i do not know who is left, but with an organization going down the drain and with these kind of leaders coming forward to regain control, we have a couple of family values men who got

caught. i want to mention their names or what they did. you know already. they were going to become presidential candidates. and now they want them to take a hike out of the senate. we live in exciting, important times. what you do in the media is so important. it is not always easy. but many of you do it. are you giving me the hook? all right. many of you have been the ones that cause many of the things we are investigating to happen. i commend you for it. i think you for your patient

attention to my remarks this afternoon. [applause] >> not that we don't like hearing all this a nice stuff about the media, but can you explain to us a little bit more about the politics of the health care bill? what will it take to bring the democrats together, and what will it take to get republican buy-in. >> if i knew the answer to that, i would leave this luncheon and go straight to the speaker's office and to make her the beneficiary of this wisdom that i do not possess. here are some of the problems, and we can expound on them.

we have got majorities, but in some sense, they are paper majorities. we have 60 in the senate. i would not want to bet your house on that. we have 60 in name, but we have 50 something blue dogs in the house that vote republican half the time. then we have a number of men and women who are freshmen from districts that are normally republican and they don't want any of -- they think a strong breeze will blow them away. these are the problems you are confronted with. we want a strong public auction -- option in the house.

some do, some don't. when you have max baucus helping us make decisions on reformed health care bills, you are in trouble. if you do not know it, you're going to find out over the next few weeks. so it is not an easy lift at all. the president says now is the time. he called us and to the summits and said, everybody get busy. if he is waiting for us to serve him with a health care reform bill, he knows now he has got to get into it. .

this is a business. it the way you may profit in the health-care business is do not insure the people that are likely to be sick, and the ones that are not, get rid of it if you can by any means necessary. that is how you make a profit. ask the insurance people. they will tell you. >> why do you want to scrap the

health care system when it is reported that 70% of americans are generally satisfied with the health care plan. >> because it is not an accurate statement. that is why. the majority of americans want single payer. i have two polls to back me up. if they want -- they are willing, many of them, to pay more for it. now the medical community has come over. when i first started out, i mean, i was invited to an ama conference. now more doctors support our plan than any other plan. you know the nurses are over this plan. they support it. the people support it.

the union supported. community groups supported. -- support it. 50 million people do not even have a plan. they do not have any insurance at all. >> how influential are the big insurance lobbyists? should your congressional colleagues send back their campaign contributions from those groups? >> how could anybody have gotten the notion that farma and the health insurance companies were giving campaign contributions to influence the independent minded members of the house and the senate? [laughter] where did anyone even get that notion? if you were in a group and the chief executive was making millions of dollars a year and was not even a doctor and you

have -- the question is on the bottom line. how much money did you make? how're the stocks in doing? of course of their the ones blocking list. why would they want a single pair when they have 1200 other insurance companies to fool around with right now? go down my street in my town and what do i see? billboards. i have come to this hospital -- come to this hospital. we are the best in the country in baby care. come to this hospital, another billboard five blocks away. come to this hospital, we are hired specialists. something else. something else. they are competing. until we take that incredible cost of advertising

administration overhead, it is driving some doctors out to the business. they cannot afford all the ministry of help they need to fill out this growing -- administrative help they need to fill out this growing cost. >> where you oppose a plan without a public option? >> no. i should say, heck no. i could say something else. [laughter] of course not. it is all i can do to support a health plan without universal single payer health care. i mean, that is what i have been working on. that movement will hopefully help a lot of people in the legislature realize that a public option -- the men and

women on k street can write public options that are not worth the napkin they are written on. i am talking about a real public auction, not something a guy dreams of between martinis -- dreams up between martinis. was he was single payer. president obama does not. id wanted? why does he not wanted? >> i wanted because it is the best plan. i can remember when obama agreed with me. he -- i am discussing now because we have not talked about it -- he wanted because -- wants it because of the rahm emanuel factor.

i am glad you asked me. [laughter] the rahm emanuel factor, too quote him is "we want success and we are willing to make a deal about anything." does that make you feel comfortable about healthcare? that is the whole idea. he once a bill -- wants a bill. he wants to win in the off-year elections. he wants our president reelected the next time he comes up. and so do i.. but i do not want anything just stamp reform and let it go at that. this will not hold down costs. it will not cover everybody.

it will not take away the misery of hundreds of thousands of people who have been caught. we have so many horror stories about people having to go into bankruptcy. we are having a hearing on the next week in judiciary about the major cause of personal bankruptcy. it is healthcare bills. doctor bills. hospital bills. the tragedy people not being able to eat or pay rent or even get their pharmaceutical prescriptions. >> the vote is on the floor. can you hold on a few more minutes? >> told minutes left on the first vote. four more votes followed. many apologies for congressman.

i thank you very much. >> can we take a couple more questions? >> no. [applause] i got to go. [unintelligible] [laughter] thank you all very much. forgive me for doing this. maybe i will come on again and have more time. [applause] >> my apologies. we are ending early. i will make a few announcements about our future speakers. on july 27, monday, barney frank, the chairman of the house

financial services committee will join us. on july 29, senator john kerry of massachusetts and chairman of the senate committee on foreign relations will join us. coming up in the fall, september 29, ken burns, the filmmaker will talk about his news documentary. on the timber 12, the national press club will host its 5k run and auction benefiting the scholarship fund for diversity in journalism. for more reformation, please go to our website at www.press.org. i would like to thank you all for joining today. i would like to thank the national press club staff members for organizing this lunch. thank you to the national press club's library for the research. the video archives is provided by the national press club

broadcast operation center. our events are available for download on itunes as well as on their website. non-members may purchase transcripts, audio, and video by calling 202-662-7598 or archives@press.org. please go to our website at www.press.org. thank you very much. we are adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

>> more on the health care bill now from chris dodd of connecticut. this is 20 minutes. the other body. >> as some may know, i have been put in position of being the acting chairman of the senate health education and pension committee. it is chaired ted kennedy. senator kennedy, wrestling with his own health care crisis at this hour and has been unable to be with us as we have beg we are dealing with legislation with healthcare. i was asked the similar responsibility of chairing the committee as we considered the health care legislation.

we have finished our work for the week and issued a week ago wednesday after numerous hours. i know many colleagues may be aware of this already. we spend on the health committee consideration of our bill close to 60 hours. that is the longest time -- at least in the memory of many -- spent in the consideration of any bill. we had 13 sessions. there were a hundred amendments filed before our committee. we considered just shy three of -- just shy of 300 of them. many of these amendments were technical amendments. they were worthwhile and positive amendment. there were a number of important amendments by the republican colleagues. it strengthened and made the

bill a better bill. it made it bipartisan. at the end of the day, after all these hours, we did not have the boats of our republican friends and the committee. their contribution was significant. senator gregg and another of our republican colleagues were concerned about the long-term fiscal impact of the voluntary program for long-term care. we agree to that amendment. it was a tremendous help. there is the issue and double life care. he was going on his own family experiences. we were able to accommodate his ideas. centers of greg and alexander wanted workplace wellness programs. that was a very sound proposal. it was added to the bill. senator harkin did a good job of reaching an accommodation. senator hatch followed on

biologics. the full hatch proposal was adopted by the committee. our friend tom colbert of oklahoma wanted to empower individuals to make help the individual -- help the decisions by having a web based prevention tool. that was accepted as well. we accepted center have's proposal -- senator patch's proposal. -- senate term hatch'or hatch's. several amendments offered by senator burr. they want to make sure they work on a level playing field.

the amendment calls for help for clarification on federal and state laws and due to pre -- pre-existing conditions. many other provisions apply as well. senator hatch and colbern what to make sure individual agents and brokers will be eligible to be negative in the american health benefits in the way. in addition to these technical amendments, and there minisub positive amendments that were -- there were many amendments that were adopted. this bill has now been on the website where the public can read this and make comments and ideas. they can respond to questions. while we are waiting to see the outcome in the finance committee, the second half of the equation is worthwhile to note that in the united states senate, of the two commitments,

they have completed the committee work. we invite our colleagues' attention and ideas on how we might improve or add to the provisions of the quality and provision, workforce issues, fraud and abuse issues after critically important. -- that are critically important. i had hoped we might stay here and deal with this issue. but the decision has been made to delay consideration of the health-care issue until the fall. i understand how this works. things have not moved as quickly as they liked. something -- some think that we need to slow down too f, that we going to faso fast. many have grappled with this issue.

while we have dealt with various aspects of health care, every single congress and every single administration had failed in reaching the kind of consensus necessary to adopt a national healthcare reform measure. we have been challenged by the american people now to try to define those odds and due in no other congress or administration has ever -- to defy those odds and do what no other congress or administration has ever done. it has been perplexing. i am stating the obvious. i presume to many of our fellow citizens do. every single one of us in this chamber, every congressman down the hall, every employee you see here, have a very good comprehensive health care program insurance coverage. we are blessed. it is part of a federal employe

benefit health package. we never have to worry, the board for big -- lord forbid something happened -- we are well covered with insurance. taking a break in august poses no real threat to any of us. for millions of others american who do not have the privilege, this is an unsettling time. in this country of ours, millions of our fellow citizens and i get to sleep with that sense of security. lord forbid something happens to their family and they will wake up with the inability to fix the problem or go to the financial crisis that destroys their economic future. i said this many times. of all the bankruptcies that occur in united states, 62% of them occur because of a health care crisis in that family.

a 62%. of the 62%, 75% of those people have a health insurance program. they are not the uninsured. these are people with health insurance. if you are out there today in saying that i have held insurance and cannot be in financial ruin, the overwhelming majority of people that have gone into bankruptcy have been covered with insurance. 50% of all foreclosures are occurring as a result of a health care crisis in that family. before the sun sets, 14,000 of our fellow citizens will lose their health care coverage. 14,000 people today and every single day in america, that many people lose their health care coverage. while we sit here and say we are going to pass on the subject matter, slow down, slow down. that is easy for us to stay. none of us have to ever go

through what most americans have to worry about. that is god forbid they be destroyed economically. i'm sitting here in anger and frustration but i cannot provide for my child and they need the kind of medical care they deserve. this is the united states of america. we rank 37 in the world. we spend more money than any other nation, way beyond any other country. we pay the most and we rank like a third world country when it comes down to it. i do not think most americans like to think of our country as being incapable of taking care of our nation. it occurred to me that some people seem to think that this process of health care is about to them. they think i get a properly consulted. did i get a headline? what do people think i should

say? what is the right words? they hire people to describe others. let me ask my colleagues, has anybody here worried that there will deliver their health care through the august break? is anybody here and able to -- unable to afford care? as any member of this body been staying up late and i've recently with a sick child for whom they cannot afford to get treatment that has and when i served with here spent the last three hours going from voice mail to voicemail as you try to find out why the insurance company suddenly refuses to pay for your spouse's cancer treatment? is any member of congress stuck at a job that pays too little because they have a pre-existing

condition and will not be able to get coverage anywhere else? has anybody here been driven into bankruptcy or lost a home like to and bill is impeccably -- like 10,000 people will today -- because the health insurance company would not cover it? is anyone in this chamber a small-business owner that has to choose between cutting coverage are putting the employe issue here about -- employee did you care about into a laid-off situation? i suspect no. why are so many in washington after the district about whether you are a blue dog or a red dog or a moderate or liberal? as if that was the most important issue in the country.

we are in danger. we are in danger of losing this once again, falling as has every other congress, because this was always about us and not about the people who sent us here, asking us to come up with answers that would relieve them of the fear and frustration that confront them every day and grows as a result of our inability. it is not about us. it is about the 47 million people who are uninsured and the 87 million people who are under injured. the $14,000 a day who lose their -- 14,000 who lose their insurance every day. it is about the people who pay our salaries and our health insurance companies as well. we can pretend this is about us and treat this like a political

contest, who is going to lose, who's going to go to the killed and someone, maybe they will lose an election over this -- that because the game. you wonder why the american people get so angry and so frustrated when they watch us talk about ourselves as if we are the only people on the face of this plan is. you better believe that if any of us had to go through some of the things that i suspect everyone of us has heard, there is nothing unique about what i'm about to say. you can go to any state at any hour and you could repeat some of the stores that i will share with you briefly. sometimes you get involved with these numbers and we mentioned 14,087,000,047 million and glazes over the odds.

are there any stories involved here? this legislation would be done by now if we paid attention to some of these individual stories. in 2005, a young woman in connecticut named maria was diagnosed with non hodgkin's lymphoma and as her insurance company to cover treatment. the insurance company found up the maria had once thought to a doctor for what she thought was a pinched nerve even though no test having them for cancer. if they decided that the doctor visit meant maria's condition was pre-existing, denied her claim and maria died from that illness. a young man in connecticut named frank was told that he is a times got headaches. several months after he got his policy, he went in for a routine eye exam. his eye doctor saw something he did not like. he said frank to a neurologist. he told me had multiple sclerosis. francs insurance co. said that

he should of known and that the -- frank's insurance company said that he should have known about that in the toy of interns. the doctor said that there is no way he could known that a headache was small -- connected to it. frank was stuck with a $30,000 medical bill and the condition that wars, he lost a job, he went on public assistance. people like kevin -- i held a series of town hall meetings in my state. i invited people to come and hear their concerns and stories of health care. the first one held -- when i held in connecticut. it was monday morning. my first reaction was, why are we having a town hall meeting at 830 on a monday morning? no one could possibly be there. 750 people showed up.

they came out to be heard and be listened and to talk about what was going on. kevin has shown up at a lot of hearings to talk about these issues. i put up his picture here today. i met him at the number of these gatherings. he owns a small business. it is a maintenance company. he employs seven people. summer older and summary of. he cannot -- some are older and some are younger. he cannot afford to insure them. some use the emergency room. if one has a child with an infection, and they will spend all day in the er waiting for them to get basic treatment. it costs the employees a work in kevin a day work. we cannot afford to have any additional costs. if you have an insurance policy, on average your family is paying

$1,100 a year on your insurance policy to cover people like kevin's employees, the uninsured. that is how much the average cost is per family. that is a tax on every insurance company. you do not give free medical care of the emergency care, they charge for it. how do they charge it? the premiums go up for everyone else. kevin has three employees in their 20's that never had a dental cleaning. one of them was out of work for 12-weeks. he nearly died there and affection he got from an unheated cavity. kevin stepped in and pay the man's salary during those weeks and also all of his medical bills. that is the kind of person this man is, even though he does that have the kind of business that

allows him to pick up that insurance. i know many do that. he is not alone. it is awfully difficult to make a business work we have to turn around and pick up the lost wages for someone who's not there at work, not to mention the medical bills. another one of kevin's employees recently left her job to help -- to get health insurance even though the job has few hours and pays less. another employee is doing the company for 24-years. they rely on his wife's a doctor enters. she got laid off recently. they will able -- they will able to the cobra for a short time. she is a pre-existing condition. his wife is a breast cancer survivor. you tell me whether not to think your point is health care coverage?

kevin has owned pre-existing condition. you do not need to need a ph.d. to know what is one to happen. under the present circumstance, that guy and his wife get nothing. they will be looking for any kind of help they can get. are looking to us. -- they are looking to us. i do not know what can impose a politics are. and none of the democrat or republican, i do not think he would think that way. he is trying to take care of its employees and family. maria -- the family wondered what politics they needed to be to get help. we are sitting around here deciding we will drift off because the cannot seem to come together or we will sit here and attacked each other politically. the problem grows by the hour.

it does impact the decision making process. when you do not have an ounce of concern about your insurance and ability to take care of yourself, you lose some of that motivation. it seems to be that we ought to be having motivation in these issues. i'm going to be talking about this every day and that we are in session and every day until we get to the time of coming together and addressing this issue. it is what i tried to do for 60 hours, replacing my dear friend senator kennedy in that committee. i want to thank my 22 other colleagues who stay here day after day to work on this. i want to thank tom harkin of iowa he spent hours working on the prevention side of this bill, doing everything he could to get ideas to encourage behavior's. barbara mikulski is going to her own medical issues, having

broken her ankle in four different places. she is being treated. to is the working on quality issues. jeff bingaman from mexico -- coverage issue. how do we pay for this? will it reduce costs? then there was patty murray did a great job of working with these issues. my good friend jack reed did a great job a number of things. and on down the line. bob casey, sherrod brown of ohio. i want to thank my republicans, even though they did not vote for the idea. i mentioned the ideas they brought it to make it a better bill. john mccain, lisa mikulski,

orrin hatch -- i'm really going to miss someone here. the ideas that they came together to work. we have a product now. we need to get on the business of working on this. you cannot sustain the present situation. the american people deserve a lot better. the need the same kind of security that we provided for ourselves as members of the united states congress. i do not think the american people are going to upset the notion that they should have to live with the kind of fear and frustration that is associated with having the kind of health care system and our nation, knowing we can do better. i'm thank my colleagues for the work we have done already and urge us over this break to listen to our constituents, hear their voices, and come back to the chamber in early september with a series determination to do and no other congress and no other administration has been able to achieve.

that is to come up with a national healthcare plan for our nation. i yield the floor. >> now more on the health care bill. another topic with former house speaker, newt gingrich. this is a little over 20 minutes. booktv.org. host: we want to welcome back new gingrich, former speaker of the house and author of his latest book, "wiehl change." that began with what was said in the washington examiner. a fraud and abuse cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars a year, more than enough to pay for high-quality insurance for every uninsured in america, but you say, for whatever reason, congress ignores this mass of pot of money, powerful help and insurance commerce committee henry waxman in particular. why so? guest: congressman waxman has been involved in these issues since the 1970's. all that time, there has never

been a serious, methodical effort to approve -- and improve the amount of fraud we have with medicaid and medicare. the "new york times" has estimated -- i am not talking about waste -- people who are thieves have stolen about 10% of new york medicaid. it is about $4 billion a year in new york alone, in medicaid alone. i will give you two examples. in new york state, there was a dentist who was following -- filing 982 procedures per day. nobody disputes that is theft. there was a dental office in brooklyn where somebody stood up front and said, if you will loan us your medicaid card for 30 seconds so we can do an imprint, we will give you a free dvd player. that is plain theft. in south florida, they found five pizza parlors which had applied to the federal government to be hiv aids transfusion centers and we're getting paid for hiv/aids

transfusions even though they were a pizza parlor. terry williams, the head of the center for medicaid and medicare services, told me in december about a case that he does run a cross -- ran across where a patient -- a doctor filed four colonoscopy is on vacation in the same day. i hope that is fraud. there is a new book out of the product and out and in hard cover in late august called "stopped paying the crooks" and it has 13, authors and it outlined systematically how we can save money on fraud and basically theft in medicare and medicaid. host: let me go back to that specifically because you take aim at congressman waxman in the together. -- in particular.

guest: start with a simple fact, when you hear someone telling you that the government is a very low-cost administrator, had been the cost of that, and in fact the government is the most administrator of health care in the united states. but what they do is they pay anyone who sends a claim inaccurate -- a claim in. the billions of dollars in fraud and they do not count that as costs. they say, we are really inexpensive because we write checks very well. that is true, but they don't find out whether the check ought to be written.

second, we have outlined this at the center for health transformation. we are at the middle of a dramatic revolution in our ability to deliver high-quality health care. this is why the mayo clinic came out against the plan that was in the house. that is where three former heads of the american medical association wrote an article yesterday opposing the plan in the house. we need a focus on best practices where we know if you can migrate the country to best practices, you will save billions, maybe hundreds of billions of dollars because the very best places in america deliver better care at a lower cost with better outcomes so people live longer lives more independently. that should be what we want to do. and at the center for health transformation, go to healthtransformation.net and there is an entire set of proposals. we would love to work with the president and get a positive bill through. and i think by going to a very

liberal government tax model, they have made it very hard to pass a bill. host: wayne is on the phone from connecticut. good morning, wayne. go ahead. caller: good morning, mr. gingrich. i do not know how you can lower costs and give 9 million people coverage. and the gentleman who was just on, i wanted to talk to him and asked him if his wife did not take a raise, congress voted themselves a raise. we're losing 14,000 jobs a day, supposedly. is that because the stimulus bill is not working? and in this bill that is going through, there is a billion dollars worth of earmarks supposedly in it -- there is $8 billion worth of earmarks supposedly in it. i have insurance through my work and it is 11 under dollars per person with insurance,

paying for this -- $1,100 per person with interest, paying for this, why can't we get health insurance for other people? guest: let me say first, i think the economy is in connection -- in continuing trouble. the federal reserve reported last week that they expect unemployment to be higher than the rich -- originally estimated, above 10%. they even more sobering lee reported that we could have a jobless recovery, which would not be a recovery in my mind, in which you could have basically no net new jobs for the next four or five years. they are projecting a% and 9% unemployment for four years. for us, passing a giant energy tax and health care -- and giant health tax is going to be very destructive behavior. it will make unemployment worse and poverty for employment and slower and lumber and weaker. i agree with you, the bill

coming from the house is designed by the. and frankly, the reason you're getting these set-asides and your art is in an effort to buy votes. -- and earmarks is in an effort to buy votes. this is a 600 page bill. they wrote a 300 page amendment that they filed at 3:00 a.m. to get just enough votes to pass it and they voted on at the next afternoon. virtually no one had not read the amendment before they voted on it. i suspect something like 1000 pages. maybe we will not get 500 pages of 5:00 a.m. to get enough votes, but that is a terrible way to legislate. this is not a game, this is not canned speaker nanci glos the ramp something true? these are laws that changed all of our lives over a very long time friend. we ought to be negotiating them and legislating them out in the open and carefully and with a lot of opportunities for people to have better ideas and to have amendments and to try to approve

it before it becomes law. host: our guest is professor gingrich. çhe earned his doctorate from tulane university and author of 18 books? guest: yeah, so far. host: [laughter] so far. we would go to maryland, good morning. caller: good morning, i'm very nervous. i had a kidney transplant last year at johns hopkins. i have insurance through my husband's job, plus i'm 67 years old, so i do have medicaid, medicare. my question is this, i feel the republicans, that is you, too -- do not care about the people out here. the poor people, that i consider myself poor and i was a nurse for 47 years. my husband is a teacher.

but my point is this, you have your insurance, you are getting a good salary, and you do not care about the average person out here. what did you do when you were in there? we have been talking about health care for over 40 something years and we cannot get this problem solved. guest: look, i think this is probably one of the most complicated problems we have faced as a country. when i was speaker, i chaired the medicare reform task force and we worked on making sure that everybody could continue to get medicare and it would not go broke within 10 or 12 years. when i was speaker, we also passed a bill to insure that -- to ensure that you could continue to get health insurance after you gave up your job during a time of unemployment. we also agreed held savings account to enable people to have a low-cost, high savings rate product that would allow rate product that would allow small

we would have passed the bill more reforms. when i step down, -- i step down, i found out we are a membership organization that has people from all different parts of the health system. we have a number of tremendous breakthrough ideas that we are developing, including an alzheimer's solution project that will save millions of lives of the next generation. we agree with you. we think there ought to be a health system in which all americans have the opportunity to buy health care. we like to be a 300 million pairs system, in which every american is in charge of their own health care and the right to work with their own doctor and hospital. not a government-run system that does to you can see and where you can go. you will see that we have a lot of good ideas. they are designed to help people like you live longer and live better. i code-shared with bob kerrey --

co-chaired with bob carried brita we came back a second time and we lead the alzheimer's study group. alzheimer's -- wheat led the all-time citigroup that develops some very big proposals with halts -- we led the break there is the developed some very big proposals with alzheimer's. i was with governor pawlenty in minnesota about a week ago and we went to the university of minnesota, which has a world- class stem cells center, and we met with them -- this particular facility focus on diabetes and trying to find solutioa solutioo violent development. their exit taking cells from -- they're actually taking cells

and they are finding that they can get cells from newborn babies and no one is hurt. you take a small number of cells and it has become a very useful system. in addition, they took some cells from the skin of an 83- year-old woman. the reason is, they would like to be able to take a cell from you and grow into a stem cell. if they transplant-- this lady had trouble with her kidneys. if they could grow a kidney from yourself from your skin, that would lower the likelihood of your body rejecting it. it is an amazing breakthrough in research. i give governor pawlenty and a lot of credit for having supported the development of very reece -- barry and research facilities in minnesota. host: greg is on the phone from amherst, new york. caller: good morning, how are

you? i have three things for you. one at a time? caller: i have never bought one of your books, but give me quickly the reason you bought this particular book at that particular time? and i have one or two other quick ones. host: we will come back to you. guest: i wanted to outline the kind of changes we need to get us back on the right track and get as growing economically to solve our major problems. the new edition that just came out in paperback has an entire section describing the obama administration and bringing it right of today. host: and a list of books and some of the web addresses that he has been talking available -- talking about are available through newt.org. and your follow-up? caller: my name is greg laughlin, and from the beginning when he was senator obama rahman

in the primaries -- running in the primaries, i wanted to call c-span. senator obama, if he became president, i wanted to know what his attitude would be towards reparations, either pay -- payments or other programs or whatever. i was called a racist on television whenever i brought that up. and now, this issue with the president answer in cambridge, i want a fuller discussion of the president's attitude were, what he could do for the black community with the history of this country. we had very little discussion about that, and now, this president i'm afraid might have some problems with 1000 cuts. guest: this morning, there is a story about the president posey,

i think, best initiative to help african-americans and that is a very aggressive school reform program that he is working on and i have agreed to help it secretary arne duncan and working with revenue of sharpton because education ought to be the number-one civil rights in the 21st century. -- with the rev. al sharpton because education ought to be the number one civil right in the 21st century. we need to demand to know the quality of the teacher, the amount of students and the quality of this tthe school. r e duncan, i will tell you, he is a very aggressive secretary of education. nothing would do more to help african-americans that are currently trapped in poverty than to have the right kind of education system so they can go out productively, get good jobs, create their own businesses and have a better future. reparations is never going to happen and it is an impossible idea. it would make no sense at all.

frankly, having a president who's ties to africa -- from a first generation kenyan, who has zero relationship with slavery, there is no historical basis for hard you try to go about doing it. what i was speaker, i wrote a book about lessons learned the hard way, some of the things i wish i had not done looking backwards. the president the other night should have not said anything. he admitted he did not know the facts and then he went on to make a general comment. i learned painfully when i was speaker, that when you are a national leader, unilever has interesting ideas. everything you say becomes policy -- you know lager have interesting ideas. everything you say becomes policy. i think the president would do all of us a benefit if he would just relax and say, you know, i

probably should not have said anything. and we have learned a painful lesson and the move on. he is a young president, a new president, and it would be nice for him to be humble enough to admit that this is just one that he blew. let's get on with business. but it would be nice to know that he is comfortable enough that he could admit that this is something he should not have talked about. host: rich larry has pieces in the "york post" saying, how dumb for sticking his nose in this. guest: this is a guy who has come from being a state senator to be in hillary clinton for the nomination to being president in four years. and he is going to make some mistakes. in this case, it is just a boubou. in football, we like throwing an interception. in baseball, making an error. if he would just relax and say, you know, i should not have gotten involved, that is all he has got to say, and move on.

everyone makes mistakes. let's get on to the new topic. host: you tweet, don't you? guest: regulate. host: they're coming in regularly. guest: no, i think the democrats in the house have a liberal problem. it is not speaker nancy pelosi exactly. she has some weaknesses and is easy to caricature as a very strong personality, but strong speakers -- tip o'neill was that i, i was that way. if you are strong, you have people like you and people who want to be you. the real challenge is that the leadership is overwhelmingly on the left in a country that is a center-right country. the gallup -- gallup reported that the country is 40% moderate. in the democratic party it is

30% moderate and 22% conservative. even among democrats by about 60 to 40, they are moderate and conservative, not liberal. but in the leadership of the democratic party of the house, it is about 100% liberal and that causes a problem when they are trying to write legislation that is compatible with the country at large. host: bonnie is on the phone from mississippi. caller: i have three comments. one, the fellow just before you that was talking about tort reform, the national commerce came out about two years ago and said, anyone wanting to start a plant or a job -- whatever -- in mississippi, do not do it because their lawsuit happy. which i thought was out of character. number two, i found that in the

stimulus bill, there is -- i can remember the man's name, but his brother is the one that brought our alzheimer's -- brought out alzheimer's patients. i'm 72. he was basically telling us, well, at your age, this is too expensive, that's too expensive. host: we should point out charles krofft amarah, -- charles krauthammer is saying that what obama is saying in part is sinking. guest: dr. john gill of texas is a great part of some legislation. in texas, they have passed some malpractice reform very decisively and they have had thousands of doctors move into the state. they have lower malpractice insurance costs and have much

less defensive medicine. in the rio grande valley, they have doctors that were underserved for 20 or more years. you see a dramatic change. oklahoma has just adopted that kind of reform based on pressure from texas. missouri has adopted not practice reform. if the president would put significant safe harbor malpractice reform in the bill, i think they could save probably $10 billion to $20 billion per year, has tremendous support from medical doctors and in a way that would improve health practices and get us to better practices. host: with about one minute left, and tweak on help -- on education -- guest: i personally favor vouchers. the president does not. but to his credit, the president and secretary duncan absolutely favor on limited charter schools where parents could pick where their child needs to go. if you have unlimited charter

schools, and senator alexander of ohio who used to be secretary of education, if you had universal tour schools and anyone who wanted to could get to a charter school had open information about what the students are learning, i think you would find it very dramatic performance. i still want to be fair. i think the president and secretary duncan are taking a huge gamble into the democratic party critic for them to >> on tomorrows "washington journal close could we will talk to richard more about his use of the health-care system. a correspondent discusses his

article about president bush and vice president jaime's last days in the white house. we will discuss the prison system with ryan king of the sentencing project. a bill that illegal immigration with emigration works, usa. "washington journal" is live 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> america and the courts, saturday on c-span. >> now the white house briefing. first, you will hear from president obama on the recent arrest of harvard professor gate. robert gibbs follows the president and also talks about this and other issues, including health care legislation. this is a little over 40 minutes.

>> i need to help gibbs out a little bit here. if you have to do a job, do it yourself. i wanted to address you guys directly, because over the last day and a half, obviously, there has been all sorts of controversy around professor gates and the police department. i actually does have a conversation with sergeant jim crowley, the officer involved. i have to tell you that as a said yesterday, my impression of him was that he was an outstanding police officer and a good man t