simpatico version that will hurt the conservative roots. how we deal with that? >> clearly have to stop it. anyone who is a defender of free speech, a defender of allowing dissent, the fairness doctrine -- fairness doctrine would be horrible and done for potter -- done for partisan points. . h congress. because it is so potent, there will likely be more efforts. anybody who loves and values freedom has to fight it tooth and nail. >> it might not come through congress. it is not as open and transparent as it would be transparent as it would be

i like the fcc diversity i czar. let me tell you, i did a c-span interview yesterday with apologies to those folks watching on c-span, but the only moral contented people in america then left-wing commager's on blogs or left wing collars -- are left wing coallers on washington journal. three weeks ago, nancy pelosi was blocking legislation would prohibit the fairness doctrine. who is the lead role in the senate, not barbara boxer, the other one feinstein did mention it.

they're blocking republican attempts to shut it down while pointing people t the fcc to throw it back in. we have to be vigilant >> thank you, i live in a snake pit called new jersey have the time. part of the problem is that in new jersey, we have three republican congressmen that voted for capt. trade. i, being a lifelong republican and conservative feel like it is time to pull the plug on these people. [applause] if they're going to be

supporting barack obama and the democrats, we do not need them. but when i talk to other republican people, they say that if we get rid of one, we will get another one so that i am in a dilemma about that. we have a man that is running for governor who, one week prior to announcing to governor, refused to say that he was a republican. he refused to say that he was a conservative. so i am in a dilemma on what to do about this. in any help? >> was he afraid of the cement shoes? >> he is also a man that you would ask a pointed question and he could not give you a direct answer. his name is chris krysticristi.

>> your draft to excuse me because i am going to get on my soapbox. at the heart and soul of the republican party is fought in the state of florida. if you have not paid attention to that senate race, the establishment republicans are backing a man that supports capt. trade and the stimulus package and universal health care. he supports drilling for oil off the florida coast. he is running against inarticulate hispanic whose parents fled castro, a guy that was elected speaker of the florida house. the establishment republicans are voting for a guy whose views are no different than the president of united states. the national republican senatorial committee has endorsed the guy. they endorsed him to stop going to the other guy. my general rule is that this is

a two-party country whether we like it or not. access laws across the country make it virtually impossible for a third party to succeed. and there the third most viable party in the country and cannot do it. ironically, the socialists can because they run under the democratic party. my rule is that you should vote conservative in the primary and fight to the bitter end in the primary, but at the end of the day, you are left 40 people. one will vote for a republican speaker of the house or a republican senator majority. those are two very critical votes and you know that regardless of how they vote on everything else, one guy will vote one way and the other guy will vote the other and who would you prefer they vote for?

it is not a game of purity anymore. it is the game of the evils of to loesseessers. >> ma'am? >> i am very concerned about what is corn to be happening with the census. there was -- apparently the census will be under the control of the white house and they are higher in all of these people from a corn to the census takers -- from acorn to the census takers. there is a question of them counting illegal immigrants in the census. i wonder how this will affect

elections and if there is anything we can do about it? i am sure it will not be in our favor. >> my understanding is that at the end of the day, there is actually some compelling laws that even the white house as to have to comply with on that. but board able to pull what from the commerce department. let's not kid ourselves. it will still control the process. today, there are three people in this room and next door in the into room, there are 5000. that is weight -- that is the way the game will be played. there will be fictitious numbers through hypothetical sampling could i think the republicans have a good argument that should have to count people and not make them up along the way. you're dealing with a white house and congress that are controlled by one party. if the republicans were in

charge of the white house, you would see them doing things to their vantage. that is the nature of the beast. what are they want to do that circumvents or flies under legal standards that they have to meet? that is why it is critically important to elect people who were born to make sure that the actual laws are followed and frankly, they need to be really careful because if the republicans take back the house next year, there is a long list of things to be investigated and we will tied them up in congress. >> this is the reason that judge greg step down from the administration and is now a u.s. senator. there is a good reason for you to be concerned about this. >> a couple of you mentioned the top tier candidates and you made the comment that if we have a

couple of wins, mabel they will -- maybe they will step in. maybe it's time we have states and that are not afraid to lose. [applause] if these people are top tier candidates, they ought to be running whether they are free to lose or not. otherwise, they're just professional politicians and that charlie crist is a prime example. he was supporting the stimulus package without even reading it. >> i agree with you in the sense that in a perfect world, i think you are right. let me go back to the initial point which was what haley barbour said. according to him, most of the people who won the were part of the american revolution in 1994 signed on after the '93

victories. that is late to get into the game. that is only one year out. whether it is right or wrong, these people -- if someone runs for office, they are putting their life on the line put. it is a very serious undertaking and some of these folks have a lot to lose. anything that can inspire them to think that this is a good year and that they are not wasting their time, i think is very important. there is only 640,000 people in north dakota, but they have to u.s. senators and both of them are democrats. even though there is a republican governor and republicans dominate the state legislature and the boy republican attorney general, everything is republican, but their entire federal delegation

are democrats. the governor of that state has toyed with the idea of running for u.s. senate and he could win if he gets in the race. i think that if he saw republicans winning in new jersey and virginia, that would go a long way towards easing his concerns. >> i have more patience for candidates now. you are asking them to give up their livelihood to run. you're taking them away from their family. i understand the point and i think of florida is a perfect example. you have two candidates in the race. the issue remains that people who want to give up their job and give up their family for a year and one need to see tangible signs of encouraging hope to want to get in. i am an elected republican

official and i am on a city council. even i know the candidates at a local level. they want to know they have a shot. what happens in november will be a flag of where there is something worth fighting for in 2010. >> let's put out some props, we have some from the in rcc -- the nrcc that are actually here among us lowly blotteggers. kudos to you guys. you all rock. >> good to have a question? >> i am with a blog. i find it hard to think that we should pick a republican as a

lesser of two evils. if i was here for the vote between a republican and democrat, i would have voted for a democrat, under the pretense that a cure to get it, when i get the real thing. candidates have to start thinking about sacrifice. a candid it may give up a career, but if you take the other side of that equation, but theoretically it save the job, how much of your job to be saved if your country goes to hell in a handbasket? [applause] as an alternative, i was on a call with a congressman recently. i question to him was, what is it a dead man's policy has that

has people vote for her. -- what is speaker nancy pelosi's the strength of the people elect her? what he missed was, how could you replace her in the house? can we not start to put pressure on democrats across the country by tying them so directly to the most unpopular politician in america? could we get them with that kind of pressure to choose a different speaker of the house? >> well, let me begin because i look at this from a policy perspective, whereas, eric and that have been looking more at a political perspective. with the heritage foundation, center mark babbidge, a democrat from alaska who replaced ted stevens, he came and spoke about missile defense and when he opened the speech he said he had just come from the democratic

luncheon and all of his democratic colleagues were shaking their heads and asking, why would you go talk to the conservative heritage foundation? and he said, they are right on the issue of missile defense. they get it right. on a policy issue, yes, there's no question that from my perspective you have to -- the party affiliation does not necessarily mean what if it should indicate. the other point i would like to make is on the issue of educating your member of congress, we have a tremendous amount of data collection and analysis on both cap and trade and analysis it with heritage and it is amazing on the raw numbers that you can take that are applicable to your spouse of a district and share with your member of congress about how cap and trade, for instance, will impact the job losses

or a middle-of-the-road republican, when you personalize it, you can have an impact. i encourage you to seek out some information like that that you can share, with the do that through a letter to the editor or a town hall meeting. that is what will sway people. >> let me add to that and say that i'm a lot more practical now than i used to be. i am only 34. make about what you will. i do not think that it works to run against manson pelosi. it sounds like a good idea. conservatives have been running against teddy kennedy four years and it has never done very good. people run. i live in georgia and we have a congressman that votes with the republicans 60 percent of the

top. he still voted for nancy pelosi for speaker because he understood that he was warned to get nothing for his district. on the first issue, i am really sympathetic. i would say that the answer to that is the primary system. throw them out of the primary. he will probably be wiped out of the senate as a result of that. i am talking about arlen specter. but we have to keep in mind that it boils down to practicality. we are not going to get anyone to the right of him in tt district. the district is + 7 democrat.

i think he won by a thousand votes. it almost went into a recount. there are some districts in the country where we have to second up where the someone will win because at the end of the day, if we do not have a majority in the congress, we may feel good about our intentions but we will not get any policy accomplished. at a minimum, i would rather slow to a crawl the advancement of government them keep it going full steam ahead. the goal is to retreat government, but if i cannot retreated, i am at least one to try to smother it. >> i think we have time for a couple more questions.

>> i have heard estimates that there is the issue with gerrymandering. is that an issue? >> i was an election lawyer for six years and the greatest thing this country could ever do, if it really wanted to make politics interesting, make it more representative and have a non partisan gerrymandering panels. right now, republicans in republican states draw lines to benefit republicans and democrats draw lines to benefit democrats it is really ridiculous farce. i ran a race in 2002. the democrats ran the the state

house the senate and the governor's mansion. it was barely democrat. the novelty of this district was that you could pole vault from one side of the district to the other side of the district over a different district. it was very bizarre. it was basically a circle with the top open just a little bit. they do this across the nation. >> there is something else that never gets talked about. if they were never gerrymandered -- let me talk about what happens now. there are safe republican districts and they win conservatives. if it is a safe democratic district, they do not elect the moderate democrat, it is safe, liberals' win.

people that have strong positions are the ones that turn out and vote on primaries, especially if it is raining or it is in may. when we have all of these districts where only republicans can win or only democrats can win, you end up neglecting hard- core conservatives and hard core liberals. there is a reason for that. one of the big reasons that no one even knows about is that we have gerrymandered districts this way. if congressional districts were more fair, you would find more centralism in politics. >> i would disagree slightly with that because i think that when the districts were originally drawn, you start out in districts having a strong

republicans. over time, state districts -- safe districts become the establishment. it will become the establishment guy who has worked his way up through city council to the state legislature to the party central committee delegates elected because everybody loves him because i remember when i was 10 yea old, he helped me raise money for the chicken dinner at the church and he gets elected, not the small business owner who really wants to get him because he is passionate. there is a danger there. -- really wants to get in because he is passionate. pat to he understood that you ay have to go out and talk to voters to get their vote rather than saying that you do not have

to work for it. >> there is a question in the back? >> i am a democrat that did not vote for barack obama. [applause] i was going to ask a question, but i thought i would reply to putting pressure on the democrats. i think now is the perfect time to not put pressure on them, but to put your hand out to was. coming here made me realize where my niche is. my niche is talking to other democrats that are upset because they voted for mobir bak obama, but this was not the change that they wanted.

we have heard such evil stories about the white all of our life, growing up. i realize that conservatives, the right is no different from the left because we all basically want the same thing. that is a free country and independence and to succeed or to fail. instead of pressuring, reach out to us. i think we are right for the picking. -- i think we are ripe for the picking. >> i have to share this one. >> we talked about this last night. >> i am headed here on thursday and i am in the little shuttle bus with another guy who is coming here. we are on the bus with these three guys that do not smell quite right. they are being dropped off at the westin. we are stopped because there is

this mass of people with black shirts with numbers and the three people on the van to know what these people are wearing these black shirts with the numbers on them. the bus driver just stopped and asked if they were talking about the steelers fans. one guy asked what the steelers were. the driver as what country he was from and the guy said that he was from portland, oregon. and the driver said "oh." then he kept driving. i know who the steelers are. >> the fact that you told them both those were the black shirt right wing that they'd been hearing about and that they were assigned numbers.

about what was murdere>> i apprg out. it has been a great two days. i would just leave you with one last piece of advice. a couple of weeks ago, i heard a congressman from utah talk about how he and eventually be a republican in the primary and won the general election. he is featured on the cnn peace -- piece. what he had was a network of people who he relied upon to get the message out among friends. he used the media to his

advantage. he set up a googled grou group. i hope you do these things when you leave here today. you are powerful. the fact that you are in this room shows or dedication. i encourage you to take the next step and do something about it. >> i will see you in october and. -- in october. >> god bless. thank you. [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] and he's don>> the communicatort

8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> this month, c-span2's book tv continues all week with more books on the economy, current events and politics. tonight, jillian tete, chris andersen, and senate majority leader harry reid. at 1:00 p.m. eastern, c-span2 live with a discussion of the massachusetts health care plan and how it might work nationally. iran corp. analyst has analyzed the plan. and pres. barack obama has explained his plan for military commitment in iraq and afghanistan. he will be in phoenix. we will have live coverage at 2:00 p.m. eastern. administration officials say he will also thank veterans for their service, but no word on whether he will mention health care after media reports today

that the administration may change exposition on the government health insurance program. "washington journal" looked at that issue this morning. guest now is jim martin, the founder of the 60 plus association here to talk to us about older americans that health care. when is your group's position on the bills that are out there right now? guest: the proposals that have been put forth, we say first, do no harm. let's not take a wrecking ball to a system that works very well for seniors. we say, do not throw the baby out with the bathwater. quite frankly, this bill is so large and so complicated and so misunderstood and misinterpreted, we have already seen improvements in the proposal, whether it is the public option, that the president has backed away from.

we think that is good. we do not think government run health care is the way to go there needs to be many things done to the current system. it is too expensive and too efficient -- too inefficient. host:4@@@ i the cuts in medicare are massive cuts that have been proposing all along to pay for the uninsured, the 40 million kaman of 46 million, the 38 million, the 33 million, there are a different set of numbers thrown out there from time to time. but clearly, this is a plan that hurt seniors. let me make one very important point here. the president keeps talking about medicare as a government- run program. program and it is run by the government, but it is paid for by currency nears and seniors to be.

they paid in for 44 years. it has been in effect since 1965. seniors have paid their dues. they do not want to see cuts -- let me just quote from a couple of articles and the los angeles times, "the new york times," "the washington post." one says, congress is extracting $500 billion in medicare cost savings. to pay for health care reform. health care bill has -- calls for $500 billion in medicare cuts. this story did not say this. to offset the costs of insurance to 45 million uninsured people. what is that going to do? there will be more and more doctors stopping taking medicare patients. the american health association said the cuts could cripple the hospitals possibility to care

for patients. people say, $500 billion? that is what the newspaper headlines say. i like to look at the news sometimes. the fact is, the congressional budget office said, perhaps my estimate is low. they estimated would be another one under $16 billion. maybe we're talking $616 billion in medicare and medicaid costs. that upsets seniors. it makes them angry. you are seeing it now in the town hall meetings. this is democracy in action. host: let me ask our callers to enter and on the conversation. jim martin of the 60 plus association. we will get to your calls in just a minute. we will take one minute to look at an advertisement put out by

this organization, 60 plus association, the health-care issue. >> seniors have sacrificed, surviving the great depression, landing at normandy, raising strong families, and protecting our freedom in a dangerous world. in the most vulnerable period, seniors are being asked to sacrifice again. this will mean long waits for care. cuts to mri's, cat scans, and other vital tests. seniors may lose their own doctors. the government, not doctors will decide if they're worth the cost. the cruel joke here is that many of our politicians are designing a health-care plan for the country that they do not want to apply to themselves. congress could get better health care than the rest of us. tell congress, do not pay for health care reform on the backs

of our seniors. they have sacrificed enough. host: tell us more about what you would like to see in health care bill. >> i do not think there can be any reform until congress addresses the problem with tort reform. by that, i made the lawsuits that are thrown out left and right. it at great expense to the system. you have heard the terminology. a lot of doctors practice defensive medicine, if you will. they do too many tests. we all acknowledge that. why? they are trying to protect themselves from these lawsuits. when a doctor has to come up with $200,000 for insurance before the opens is sort of business, has not hired his first employee, we think this is wrong. clearly, that is one place to go.

we also think that there should be other reforms. it is a matter of choice and competition. what scares seniors now -- let me just go back to the fact of medicare. clearly, these seniors have paid in for 44 years. that is long -- that is how long the system has been in place. they do not want to see a system in their twilight years to pay for more uninsured let me point out the other thing that people comment on. that is the federal employee health benefit plan 31.6 million federal workers are on that. so, we're saying -- let me point out, those who say that the republicans are for the status quo, i notice it is a lot of democrats -- the democrats control the house and the senate.

a lot of the democrats are blocking a lot of these proposed -- these proposals. a lot of republicans have come forward with a lot of plans. center mcconnell has said -- i think congressman heller of nevada, they offered a plan and said, our plan -- if this plan you are offering to the public now is so good, let's put ourselves on it. that plan was defeated on a party-line vote. host: jim martin of the 60 plus association, on our line for democrats. >caller: good morning. i am over 60. i'm retired.

i am on medicare. i therefore -- i pay for my medicare through a monthly deduction to my social security. i also pay for supplemental health care. my medicare deduction is $96 a month. i received $13,000 a year from medicare. i live on an additional $5,000. i am not a wealthy senior. i also happen to be retired. i am very familiar with the tragedy is that people go through by not receiving health care at all.

i am for a public auction. i see it as bringing down the cost of health care. i would like to ask mr. martin, who funds your organization? other than donations? guest: i am surprised to get that question this early, but i'm glad to answer it. we have over a quarter million concerned citizens around the country that have donated to us throughout the 17-year history of the 60 plus association association. i know that upsets some of the colors and some who send e-mail and phone calls. we're not funded by the insurance lobby or the pharmaceutical lobby. i think a lot of those who are now finding the obama health care plan. again, we are funded by individuals. we have had some business donations through the years, but

our funds come from concerned citizens. 270,000 individual donors fund us. these are voluntary donations, unlike the other large senior's group that receives about $1 billion of your tax dollars. we do not accept taxpayer dollars. host: you are on the air. hello. caller: i just wonder why we have not thought of something about emigration. if we resolve some of our immigration laws that are on the book, that would solve the health-care problem. guest: we have not taken a position on immigration. there are other issues to get involved in without getting into such a contentious issue.

i will point out that former president george bush when he was the governor of texas, he tried to touch that issue and of course, there was a great outcry from all over the country from mainly people on the right, the conservatives. it has been a very contentious issue. people now bring it up in context of health care. that is a legitimate reason to bring it up. again, we're talking 47 million. there are a number of issues out there. this one is very contentious. the illegal immigrants or the undocumented workers, 13 million -- nobody knows the number. let's use that for a second. if you take that out of the 46 million, you take out the 20 million young people who do not really care about insurance at

this point, they are not susceptible to injury -- when i was a young marine, i felt the same way growing up. there are clearly low-income people, not just senior citizens that i am always concerned about, but younger workers coming up, low-income people around the country that need some sort of help. that is 10 million. we're not talking 47 million. that is a more -- that is a number that can be dealt with, i think financially. let's have some sort of safety net. let's have some sort of tax credits for the low-income people to help out. how do you go about putting 47 million people onto a system that is already financially straining at the seams? but there is already a nursing shortage. we did a study in our magazine

over a year ago about a nurse shortage already here. there is a doctor shortage coming. somebody did the math the other day. if you had a 47 million people and if you have 100 doctors per -- 100 patients per doctor, you are going to need another 470,000 doctors to come into the system. a lot of doctors are leaving the medicare program because of the lower payments. if these cuts come about, even more doctors will leave the system. host: jim martin is the president of 60 plus association. richard, thank you for waiting. caller: i have a question that really applies to both parties. we can look of the patriot act and this current act that is

high pressure to be pushed through to the point where either party is using this high pressure tactic to get their issue across. the point being, congressman never see it until the last minute -- they did not see the patriot act. they had not read this one. this is one of the big arguing points. the question that comes out of this is, they have addressed to the bill. who wrote them? who buy individual name organization sat down and proposed these bills like the patriot act that appears within two days of 9/11? guest: a very good question. i would like an answer to that myself. senior citizens are saying one thing. read the bill. read the bill before you come forth and start outlining what is in it. it is a travesty, if you will. i came to washington in 1962 as

a newspaper reporter. i covered congress when john f. kennedy was in the white house. i covered congress for a couple of years and i worked on the hill. i have seen a lot of contentious issues come before the public and before congress. there was the civil rights bill back in the 1960's that finally got through. medicare in 1965. i remember very well, president lyndon baines johnson flying to independence missouri and giving the first medicare card to former president harry truman. the fact is, this is the most contentious issue i have seen in all of my 47 years in this town, including the civil rights bill, which was a major issue in the

1960's. clearly, the language has been so ambiguous in this proposal that that is why people ar or whether it is the public auction, which believe is now out of the bill -- we have been saying all along, if you want to cut seniors around this country, then take out that public option provision. why? because it is so ambiguous and causes concern on both sides, but clearly on the side of older americans. at least senator grassley said in iowa, democracy in action. he said that will not happen. i applaud seniors for that. a lot of people are getting credit for that being taken out.

the old saying by ronald reagan, if you do not care who gets the credit, you get a lot done. and i would like to think senior citizens. maureen dowd said, those people showed up our old and white. i have news for you. you are going to be old and we welcome you to our ranks. host: david sloan of aarp was on the program last week and he talked about some myths of the health-care reform. guest: there is a tremendous amount of mythology about what this health reform bills seem to do. we're trying to make clear to people that this bill, whether it is the house bill that is being worked on or the senate bills, are not going to result in socialized medicine.

they are not going to result in a government takeover. they are not going to result in euthanasia. all of these comments that have been made really twist and distort what this legislation seeks to do. host: he says that there are a lot of myths out there about all of this. guest: i was on the program right before david. quite frankly, that is very reassuring to have the aarp reassure us that these are not in the bill. i think the aarp is slipping and sliding because quite frankly, our phone lines have been melting down the past few days with callers calling and and saying how they can join the 60 plus association. i am not me to pick a fight with aarp, but they have been picking

a fight with me for about 16 years or 17 years. they get a lot of tax dollars. that is quite all right. they are a fortune 500 company that is hawking a lot of products. they clearly have a big government agenda. that is fine, but i do not think you should use tax dollars to promote your agenda. i think they got their comeuppance at a town hall meeting out in dallas where some lady from the aarp said, we do not have a political agenda, but a lot of people in that room ofbooing. clearly, they have an agenda. it is big government, more taxes -- that is why i started this organization to counter the big government, left-of-center -- people often say, you are part of the radical right. if that is the case, i do not

mind getting that, as long as my detractors admit that they are part of the left. host: let's hear from new york. caller: good morning. we need a public option. we need some competition. we already have many public auctions in place and people before have mentioned. i am very upset that there is any talk about taking out of the table. i have been a nurse for 12 years. i experienced a lot of situations where people who had health care are refused coverage by standards set up by the insurance companies. we already have that. we already have the things that people are talking about that we will have -- the terrible things. our insurance system has operated behind closed doors. people do not know what is behind those doors and how things actually run or what those costs are.

we need a public option. we need that public auction and competition to bring costs into line. guest: the lady should call up or start lobbying howard dean, head of his group. there are very upset, the liberal wing of the democratic party, because of the dropping of the public option. howard dean, i can almost hear him screaming out about it now. his group even jumped on senator ben nelson of nebraska, a moderate democrat. i'm pretty sure that ben nelson is from florida, do. we say, do not overheat your rhetoric. i have got to say this. while we are getting hundreds and thousands of folks wanting to join 60 plus association, i noticed a shift a few days ago when organizing for america,

david axelrod with his 13 million email list, let's start a changain letter of emails. cleay, the calls to our office -- when they call up and cuss you out, as a former marine, i can handle that. when they talk about, i hope you get cancer to some of our people in that office -- what goes to threats -- we have had death threats now. we got one in email form. we turned that over to police. that is not democracy in action. that is disruption, if you will.

i am being kind when i say that. we could go on and on who is right into is wrong. clearly, this is an issue that has gotten everybody's attention here in the summer months, especially in august. let me say this. having worked on capitol hill, i would like to tell congress, read the bill. i have news for congress. there is a senior tsunami headed toward capitol hill. politics can always be subject to changes. clearly, and less that subsides, there is going to be political pain to pay at the pump -- at the polling places next november, 2010. that is my message to congress.

host: bonnie is on the republican line. caller: i have a comment. the first thing our governor of maryland -- $23 million in medicare rates to nursing homes. $23 million to hospitals -- my question is, now the president blames the insurance companies. if we put the insurance companies out of business and we cannot pay for this medicaid -- we cannot afford it now. what happens when the insurance companies are out of business and the government cannot afford the medicaid and health care? what are we going to do? guest: that is a very good question. the governor of tennessee has

pointed out, this medicaid system is the mother of all unfunded mandates. cuts to that impact seniors, especially low-income seniors, who are on medicaid. i would like to add one other thing. the smokescreen put up by aarp and the pharmaceutical companies -- they are going to spend $150 million. $150 million is a huge chunk of change. we would like to know where some of that is coming from. mr. sloan said, we have the american medical association. i have news for you more than 80% of doctors do not belong to the ama. who are they speaking for?

so, it is a matter of whose [ analogy] is being used out there. >> as the health care conversation continues, go online and filed the latest week, video link and add, also keep up with a town hall meetings and house and senate debate, even apply your opinion about health care with a citizen video. the c-span health care hub at c- span.org/healthcare. >> president barack obama plans to thank veterans for their service today and also talk about plans for the worst in iraq and afghanistan. the president is in phoenix,

ariz. to address the veterans of foreign wars annual convention with live coverage of 1:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> lobbying, influence and money, ellen miller, co-founder and executive director of the sunlight foundation on how they use the internet to provide transparency in government. "the communicators" tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. this month, c-span2's "book tv" we can't continue as prime time. tonight, gillian ted, chris andersen, and senate majority leader harry reid. >> this morning, washington journal talked with the author of "dread" a book on the history of disease control and public policy -- public health policy. we will show you this before the president speaks live in phoenix.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] ." let's get right to it. early in the book, you write that epidemics fascinate us. te that epidemics fascinate us. host: give it your best shot. describing an epidemic for us. what is it? how should we look at? guest: bitan epidemic is always a story that a society tells itself about a disease outbreak or the threat of a disease outbreak. sometimes we talk about epidemics that do not qualify as diseases in the classical sense. for instance, we talk about an epidemic of obesity nowadays.

10 years ago, we were talking about an epidemic of road rage. those do not seem like diseases in the classical sense, if you think about the plague or colorists. it is a story we tell about a social crisis. maybe that is the best way to put its. host: you also say that epidemics create opportunities to convey messages. host: this is right at the front of the book. explain more. guest: it often seems to be true that when we face a social problem, when we do not know how to deal with it, we do not know what the best way is to make it go away. we handed over to the public health industry. the way we do that is by calling it an epidemic. i gave an example a minute ago about rage.

when people in the 1980's were concerned about what was happening with children in day care centers. you might remember the hysteria about the satanic ritual abuse. more seriously, there has been a continuing problem about domestic violence. domestic violence. that was conside that was considered italy's problem for a long time and later it became a public health problem. i think that we sometimes call things epidemics because we want to hand them over to the public health apparatus. on the other hand, there are real disease outbreaks like swine flu. host: the author is philip alcabes. the book is "dread." u.s. policy for disease control, the main topic here, and we have

separate lines for democrats and republicans and independents at the bottom of the screen. we want to welcome a call from a guest in new york city this morning. mr. alcabes, fear or fantasy, you talk about everything from the romans and the black death and then all the way up through recent history, what is most common about that history through all three epidemics? tellis about the reaction to that. guest: i think the most common thing is the reason for the title of the book. it is dried, the key thing. we bring our fears to the -- it is dread, the key thing. we bring our fears of the world around us. the innate dread of death and destruction and social disintegration is part of it, but there is more. there are anxieties that we have about the world we live in. . .

an epidemic coming, or someone tells us that one is coming, and we often imagine that this disease outbreak is telling us that we were right to be afraid. in the 19th century, cholera was in the 19th century, cholera was the emergenc infectious disease of the day. it had never been seen in western europe or the united states. in the second quarter of the 19th century, in 1831-1832, it caused a terrible outbreak. it came back a few times. the discussion about cholera was always a layered with the social issues of the day. part eagerly toward the irish, who were both in england and ireland.

if you read what people were writing about cholera in those days, it was often about the habits of the irish, or about immigration. cholera has nothing to do with speed irish or immigration. it is a waterborne disease caused by bacteria. but in all the discussion, there was a reflection of the social anxieties' of that day. host: more of the words of our author. the first call for philip alcabes, author of "dread" is from the list, minn.. caller: good morning.

this is a great guest. this ties in with the previous guest and the callers, but also in swine flu. in the top people were having about blaming the mexicans yes, all the fear in people. just afraid of didying. guest: and afraid of plenty of other things. we have our worries about modern life. swine flu is a great example. i wish i could have written this book a few months later. i could have included a lot more interesting information about how we have responded to an incipient epidemic. as the caller mentioned, at the beginning, there were lots of

concerns about mexicans. i heard in late april, a reporter from chicago told me that there have been soccer games between the mexican team and another team. people were boycotting the games because they did not want to go near mexicans. a typical response, alas, that some foreigner has done this to us. it is not mexicans that bros one flew to america. -- it is not that mexicans brought swine flu to america. as the caller suggested, those kind of anxiety ies come out. host: middletown, new york, republican caller. caller: they have proven that this swine flu outbreak was developed -- it does not have

the pedigree. it has traces of human, swine flu, and bird flu. they tested it on the ferrets and the ferrets died. they called back and said they never radiated it. they said they gave homeless people in poland the test vaccine and people died. i was in the army in 1976 in the first outbreak at a military base. it always happens in military bases. like the doctor that says they're going to reduce the world >> believe this recorded program as president obama is about to address the vfw in phoenix, arizona.

->> our next guest is no stranger to the veterans of foreign wars or the veterans. he was born in hawaii, braised with good midwestern values, and received and i believe -- received an ivy league education at columbia university and harvard law school. he served in the state senate for four years before becoming a senator from the state of illinois in 2004. he would go on to co-sponsor the market vfw supported legislation like the gi bill for the 21st century, and he has given us a historic increase in the v.a. health care budget. this is his third consecutive appearance before the vfw national convention, but the first where -- first wearing the mantle of commander-in-chief could colleagues, sisters, dismissing which guests, i am honored to present the 44th president -- sting which guests,

i am honored to present a party for the president of the united states, barack obama. -- present the 44th president of united states, barack obama. [applause] >> thank you. thank you so much. thank you very much. thank you. please be seated. thank you so much. commander, thank you for your introduction and for your lifetime of service. i was proud to welcome your executive director to the oval office just before the fourth of july, and i look forward to working with your next commander. i also want to acknowledge the gene and sharon and all the spouses and families of the ladies auxiliary. americana's your service as well.

-- america honors your service as well. the governor of arizona is here as well. and mayor phil gordon, our host in phoenix. i want to acknowledge the president of the navajo nation. this was not on my original card, but you may have already heard from our, but i want to publicly acknowledge and thank the secretary to eisenhower who typed up the orders for the normandy invasion and is here today, and what an extraordinary story that is. [applause] members of the veterans of foreign wars, i am honored and

humbled to stand before u.s. commander in chief of the finest military the world has ever known. [applause] we are joined by some of those who made it the finest force in the world. from the air force base, members of the 56th fighter wing. [applause] whether you wear the uniform today or war decades ago -- more expected to go, you are symbols of a fundamental truth is not powerful epidemic are military the strongest in the world, not the sophisticated systems that make us the most to danced. the true strength of our military lies in the spirit and skill of our men and women in uniform. and you know this.

[applause] you know this because it is the story of your lives. when fascism seemed unstoppable and our harbor was bombed, you that lacrosse rocki -- battled across rocky pacific islands and marched across europe. my grandfather and uncle are among their ranks, liberating millions interning enemies and allies. when communism cast its shadow across so much of the glove, you stood vigilant in a long, cold war -- in a long cold war. when that cold war ended, and all the hatreds are merged and new, you turn back aggression from kuwait to kosovo. long after you took off the uniform, you continue to serve, supporting our families and troops when they go to war and

welcoming them when they come home. working to give our veterans the care they deserve. when america's heroes are laid to rest, giving everyone of them that final fitting tribute of a grateful nation. we can never say it enough -- for your service in war and peace, thank you, vfw. thank you. [applause] today, the story of your service is carried on by a new generation, dedicated, courageous men and women who i have the privilege to meet and eat every day. they are the young sailors, midshipmen of the naval academy who raised their right hand and graduation and committed themselves to a life of service. they are the soldiers i met in baghdad who have done their duty year after year on a second, third, or fourth tour. they are the marines at camp

lejeune, preparing to deploy in serving in afghanistan to protect americans here at home. they are air men like those today who provide the close air support that saves lives of our troops on the ground. they are the wounded warriors at walter reed and bethesda and across america. for whom the battle is not to fight, but simply to speak, to stand, to walk once more. they are the families that my wife, michelle, has met at bases across the country. the spouses back, during the parenting of two, the children wondering when mom or dad may come on. the parents watched sons and daughters go off to war. the families who lay a loved one to rest, the pain that lasts a lifetime. to all those who have served america, our forces, and for families, our veterans, you have

done your duty. you have to fulfill the responsibilities -- you have a fulfill the responsibilities and how grateful nation must fulfill hours. -- now a grateful nation must fulfill ours. we have a solemn responsibility to always lead the men and women of uniform wisely. that starts with a vision of american leadership that recognizes that military power alone cannot be the first or only answer to the threats facing our nation. in recent years, our troops have succeeded in every mission america has given them, from toppling the taliban to deposing the dictator in iraq to battling rebel insurgencies. at the same time, forces trained for war and called upon to perform all those submissions. like many years, they've run local governments and delivered water and elections -- like mayors, they have run local governments and delivered water

and electricity. let us never forget that we are a country of more than 300 million americans. less than 1% wears a uniform. that 1% of soldiers and sailors and marines and coast guard and have borne the overwhelming burden of our security. perhaps never in american history have so few protected so many. the responsibility for a security must not be theirs alone. that is why i have made it a priority to invest all elements of our national power in defense of our national security. diplomacy, development, our economic might and our moral example. one of the best exit -- the best ways to meet our troops at wise is to prevent conflicts that cost american blood and treasure tomorrow. as president, by chris responsibility is the security and safety of the american people.

my great -- it's responsibility is the security and -- my greatest responsibility is the security and safety of the american people. it is the first thing i think of what i wake up morning in the last thing i think of when i go to sleep at night. as we protect america, our men and women in the four must always be treated as what they are, -- men and women in uniform must always be treated as what they are, america's most precious resource. i have a solemn responsibility for their safety. there is nothing more sobering than signing a letter of condolence to the families of servicemen and women who have given their lives to our country. that is why i have made this pledge to our armed forces -- i will only send you into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary, and when i do, it will be based on good intelligence and guided by sound strategy. i will give you a clear mission,

defined goals, and the equipment and support you need to get the job done. [applause] that is my commitment to you. " which brings me to our second responsibility to the armed forces, giving them the resources and equipment and strategies to meet their missions. we need to keep our military the best trained, the best lead, the best equipped fighting force in the world. that is why even with our current economic challenges, my budget increases defense spending. we will ensure that we have the force structure to meet today's missions, and that is why we have increased the size of the army and marine corps two years ahead of schedule, and have approved another temporary increase in the army. we have all the personnel reductions in the navy and air force. -- have halted personnel reductions in the navy and air

force. [applause] and it will help us put an end once and for all to stop loss for those who have done their duty. [applause] we will equip our forces with the assets and technologies they need to fight and win. my budget funds more of the army helicopters, crews, and pilots urgently needed in afghanistan. the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance that gives our troops did manage. the special operations forces that can apply on a moment's notice. and for all those serving in afghanistan and iraq, including our national guard and reserve, more of the protective gear and armored vehicles that save lives. [applause] as we fight two wars, we will plan responsibly, but it

honestly, and speak candidly about the costs and -- budget honestly come and speak candidly about the costs and consequences of our actions. my budget includes the costs of the wars in iraq and afghanistan. in iraq, after six years, we took an important step forward in june 3 we try to control all cities and towns to iraq's security forces. -- we transferred control of all cities and towns to iraq must do security forces. -- iraq's security forces. it is a testament to all those who have served in iraq, uniformed and civilian, and our nation owes these americans of all who have given their lives a profound debt of gratitude. [applause] as iraqis take control of their destiny, they will be tested and targeted. those who seek to sow sectarian

division will attempt more senseless bombings and more killing of innocents. this we know. but as we move forward, the iraqi people must know that the united states will keep its commitments, and the american people must know that we will move forward with our strategy. we will begin moving our combat brigades from iraq later this year could we will remove all the dates by the end of next august. we will move all our troops from iraq by the end of 2011. for iraq, the iraq war will end. -- for america, the iraq war will end. we will focus on the war against al qaeda and its extremist allies in afghanistan and pakistan. that is why i announced a new comprehensive strategy in march, a strategy that recognizes that al qaeda and its allies have moved their base from the remote tribal areas -- to the remote tribal areas of pakistan. this acknowledges that military power alone will not win this

war, that we also need diplomacy and development and good governance. our new strategy has a clear mission and defined goals -- to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al qaeda and its extremist allies. in the months since we have begun to put this comprehensive strategy in action, in recent weeks, we have seen our troops to their part. they have got into new areas, taking the fight to the taliban in villages and towns where residents have been terrorized for years. they are adapting new tactics, knowing that it is not enough to kill extremists and terrorists, but that we need to protect the afghan people and improve their daily lives. our troops are helping to secure places for this week's election so that afghans can choose the future that they want. these efforts have not been without a price. the fighting has been fierce. more americans have given their lives. as always, the thoughts and prayers of every american with

those who make the ultimate sacrifice in our defense. as i said when i announced the strategy, there would be more difficult days ahead. the insurgency in afghanistan did not just happen overnight, and we will not defeated overnight. this will not be quick nor easy. we must never forget that this is not aware of choice. this is a war of necessity. those who attacked america on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. if left unchecked, the taliban insurgency will have a larger safe haven from which allocate up will plot to kill more americans. -- from which al qaeda will plot to kill more americans. this is fundamental to the defense of our people. going forward, we will constantly adapt to new tactics to stay ahead enemy in the our troops the tools and equipment they need to succeed. at every step of the way, we will assess our efforts to

defeat al qaeda and its extremist allies and to help pakistan and afghanistan build the society they seek. we have a third responsibility to fulfill. we must prepare our forces for the missions of tomorrow. our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and coast guard men adapt to new challenges every day. but much of our defense establishment has yet to fully adapt to the post-cold war world, the doctrine and weapons better suited to fight the soviets on the plains of europe and insurgents in the rugged terrain of afghanistan. -- this and insurgents in the rugged terrain of afghanistan. 20 years after the cold war ended, this is irresponsible. our troops and our taxpayers deserve better. [applause] that is why our defense review is taking a top-to-bottom look

at our priorities and posture, questioning conventional wisdom, rethinking old dogmas, challenging the status quo. we are asking hard questions about the forces we need and the weapons we buy. when we're finished, we will have a new blueprint for the 21st century military that we need. in fact, we are already on our way. we are adopting new concept, because the full spectrum of challenges demands the full range of military capabilities. both conventional and unconventional. the ability to defeat both the armored division and the loan suicide bomber. the intercontinental ballistic missile and the improvised explosive device. 18th-century style piracy and 21st century cyber threats. no matter the mission, we must maintain america's military dominance. even as we modernize our conventional forces, we are investing in the abilities devilry aren't are forced to the future.

-- in the capabilities that will reorient our force to the future. and maybe that projects power across the oceans and operates nimbly -- and maybe then not only projects power across the oceans but i personally across coastal waters. -- operates nimbly across coastal waters. a marine corps that to move more rapidly across many places. in the 21st century, military strength of a measure not only by the weapons are too scary, but by the languages they speak and the cultures they -- weapons our troops carry, but by the language they speak and cultures they understand. we will not build the military meet and maintain the fiscal responsibility america demands unless we fundamentally reform the way our defense seligmann does business. it is a simple fact -- defense establishment does business. it is a simple fact. every dollar wasted is a dollar

weakened on spent to protect our troops or america or prepare for the future. the indefensible no bid contracts that cost taxpayers billions and make contractors which could be exotic products that are years behind schedule billions over budget intrenched lobbyists pushing buttons that even our military says it does not want. the impulse in washington to protect jobs back home building things we don't need as a cost. this waste would be unacceptable at any time, but at a time when we are fighting two wars and facing a serious deficit, it is inexcusable. it is an affront to the american people to our troops, and it is time for it to stop. this is not a democratic issue or republican issue. [applause] this is not a democratic issue or republican issue, it is about giving our troops the support that they need.

that is something that all americans should be able to agree to. i am glad as i -- i am glad i have as a partner in this effort, a great american, a great arizonan, a man who has shown courage in fighting his waist, senator john mccain. -- fighting this waste, senator john mccain. [applause] i am a proud to have searched for a defense robert gates -- secretary of defense robert gates. i have signed bipartisan legislation to reform defense procurements that weapons systems do not spin out of control. even as we increase spending on our equipment and weapons that our troops do need, we have proposed cutting tens of billions of dollars in waste we do not need. think about it. hundreds of millions of dollars for an alternate second engine for the to and strike fighter. one reliable engine would do just fine. nearly $2 billion to buy more f-

22 fighter jets when we could move ahead with a fleet of new and more affordable aircraft. tens of billions of dollars to put an anti-missile laser on the fleet vulnerable 747s. billions of dollars for a new presidential helicopter. maybe you have heard about this. among its other capabilities, it would that be cooked a meal while under nuclear attack. [laughter] if the united states of america is under nuclear attack, the last thing on my mind is whipping up a snack. [laughter] [applause] that is pretty straightforward. cut the waste, save taxpayer dollars, support the troops. [applause] that is what we should be doing. the special interests, contractors, entrenched lobbies, they are invested in the status quo, and they're putting the

bite. but make no mistake, so are we. if a project is not support our troops or make america safer, we will not funded. if the system does not perform, we will terminate it, and if congress sends me a defense bill loaded with pork, i will veto it. we will do right by our troops and taxpayers and build the 21st century military we need. [applause] finally, we will fulfill our responsibility to those who serve by keeping our promises to our people. we will fulfill our responsibility to our forces and our families. that is why we are increasing military pay, that is why we are building better family housing and funding more child care and counseling, to help families cope with the stresses of war. we have changed the rules of the military spouses can compete for better jobs and pursue their

careers. we will fulfill the responsibility to the wounded warriors. for those still in uniform, we are investing billions of dollars for more treatment centers so that our troops can recover and return where they want to be with their units. [applause] but as the vfw knows, for so many veterans, the war rages on. the flashbacks that will not go away, but the ones who now seem like strangers -- the loved ones who now seem exchanges, the heavy darkness of depression that has led to too many of our troops taking their lives. posttraumatic stress and brain injury are the defining injuries of today's wars. caring for those affected by them is a defining purpose of my budget. billions of dollars more for treatment of mental health screenings to reach our troops on the front lines and more mobile and rural clinics to

reach veterans back home. we are not going to abandon these american heroes. we are going to do right by them. [applause] we will fulfill our responsibility to our veterans as they return to civilian life. i was proud to co-sponsor the post-9/11 g.i. bill as a senator. thanks to vfw members across the country, and leaders like harry mitchell in congress, it is now the law of the land. [applause] as president, i am committed to seeing that it is successfully implemented. for some many, like my grandfather, the original g.i. bill changed your life, helping you to realize your dreams. but it also transformed america, helping to build the largest middle-class in history. we are seeing the same thing in today's post-9/11 veterans.

you pick the school, we will help pick up the bill. [applause] as the veterans start showing up on campuses, i am proud that we are making this opportunity available to all those who have sacrificed, including reservists and national guard members and spouses and children. including kids who have lost their mom or dad. [applause] in an era when so many people and institutions have acted irresponsibly, we choose to reward the responsible and service of our forces and their families. whether you have left the service in 2009 or 1949, we will fulfill our responsibility to deliver the benefits and care that you have earned. that is what i promise to build nothing less than a 21st century the head, and i picked a lifelong soldier -- 21st century va, and i picked a lifelong

soldier to be this fight, general rick shinseki. we are dramatically increasing funding for veterans health care. this includes hundreds of millions of dollars to serve veterans in rural areas, as well as the unique needs of our growing number of women veterans. we are restoring access to the health care for half a million veterans who lost their eligibility in recent years. since there has been so much misinformation out there about health insurance reform, let me say this -- one thing that reform will not change as veterans health care. no one is going to take away benefits. that is the plain and simple truth. [applause] we are expanding access to your health care. not reducing it. we are also keeping our promise

on concurrent receipt. my budget ensure is that are some really disabled veterans will receive their military retire pay and disability benefits. i look forward to signing legislation on advance preparations for the va to the medical care you need is never held by budget delays. [applause] i have also directed secretary shinseki to focus on a top priority, reducing homelessness among veterans. [applause] after serving their country, no veteran should be sleeping on the streets. no veteran. we should have zero tolerance for that. and we are keeping our promise to fulfill another top priority of the villa, cutting the red tape and inefficiencies that cause back blocks and delays in the claims process -- that cause

backlogs and delays in the claims process. this spring, i directed the department of defense and veterans affairs to create one unified, lifetime electronic health record for the members of the armed forces, a single electronic record with privacy guaranteed that will stay with them forever, because after fighting for america, you should not have to fight over paperwork to receive the benefits you have earned. [applause] today, i can announce that we are taking another step. i have directed my chief performance officer, my chief technology officer, by chief information officer, to join with secretary shinseki in any reform effort. we are watching and to competition -- in a new reform effort. we are launching a new competition to capture the best of the employees. we will use 57 of our regional va offices to come up with the

best ways of using information technologies, breaking red tape, breaking through the bureaucracy. we will find the best ideas and put them into action, with a submission, cut the backlogs, slash wait times, deliver benefits sooner but i know you love for this before, but the leadership we have this time -- i know you have heard this before, but the leadership we have this time will make it happen. [applause] taken together, these investments represent a historic increase in our commitment to america's veterans. a 15% increase over last year's funding levels, the largest increase in thae va budget in over 30 years. these are major investments. these are difficult times. fiscal discipline demands that

we make hard decisions. sacrificing certain things we cannot afford. let me be clear -- america's commitment to its veterans are not just lines and the budget. they are bonds that are sacred, a sacred trust that we honor bound to uphold. these are commitments that we make to the patriots to serve from the day they missed today that they are laid to rest. patriots like you. patriots like a man named jim noreen. his story is his own, but in it, we see the larger story of those who served. he is a child of the depression who grew up to join the greatest generation. a paratrooper in the 502nd parachute infantry regiment of the 101st airborne. jumping in a daring daylight raid in holland to the great captured people. rushing to pass down at the

battle of the bulge, where the commanding general, surrounded by the germans and asked to surrender, declared famously, "nuts." for his bravery, and jim was awarded bronze star. like some others, he rarely spoke about what he did and what he saw. he reminds us that true love of country is not a oysters or loud -- not boisterous or the outcome of the tribal and steady dedication of a lifetime. he went to school on the gi bill got married. year after year, he visited school children to speak about the meaning of service, and he did it all as a proud member of the veterans of foreign wars. [applause] then this spring, he made a decision that. he would return to your points more -- return to europe once

more, 84 years old, gravely ill, knowing he may not make it back home. but like a paratrooper he was, he was determined. he returned to the places he knew so well. the dutch town liberated by r g i's school children -- by our gi's, the schoolchildren lined the sidewalks singing sta "the star spangled banner." and then, back where he had served 65 years before, jim noreen passed away at night in his sleep, quietly, peacefully, the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. the next day, i was privileged to join the commemoration at normandy to mark the day when

the beaches were storm and a continent was freed. there were presidents and prime ministers and veterans from the far corners of the earth. but long after the band stopped playing and the crowd stopped sharing, it was the story of a departed in vfw member that echoed in our hearts. the veterans of foreign wars, their fallen comrades in your communities and country -- they always fulfilled its responsibilities to america, and as long as i'm president of the united states, america will always fulfill its responsibilities to you. god bless you, god bless all our veterans, and god bless the united states of america. thank you very much. [applause]

>> a reminder that the president's speech to the vfw annual convention in phoenix will reair tonight at 9:00/10:00 eastern on c-span. [applause] white house senior adviser valerie jarrett was a speaker at last week's convention of on-

line activists hosted by the group netroots nation preachy cover a range of issues, including detainee detention practices -- she cover a range of issues, including detainee detention practices and the don't ask, don't tell policy. >> lobbying, influence, and money. the co-founder and executive director of the sunlight foundation on how they use the internet to promote transparency in development. >> this month, c-span2's book tv weekends continue all week in prime time, with more books on the economy, current events, and politics. tonight, chris anderson, senate majority read -- senate majority leader harry reid. radio talk-show executive brian jennings on the new fairness doctrine, why it is a bad idea, an alternative to censorship.

he is interviewed by radio and television commentator on a crowley on "after words," part of book tv began. and now, supreme court justice clarence thomas on national identity and american citizenship. he speaks to the bill of rights institute in washington, d.c., for about 45 minutes. >> thank you all. [applause] thank you, doctor templeton, for reading all my words. [laughter] that gives me a past and that you for your kind introduction. i would like to thank each of you for being out in the middle of the week. this is a rare sighting for me to be out at this point in the week, and certainly during a sitting week. this is an important evening. i would like to thank my bright for being here -- bride for

being here, one great thing about -- [applause] we have been a team for a while, and kind of enjoy each other a lot. and i must admit, i admire my wife, because she has never lost sight of the principles that she can to the city to defend, and each day, with the she is working at home -- whether she is working at home or at her hillsdale office, she always has that spirit and energy to defend the principles of our country. is a wonderful spirit to emulate. i tend to be morose sometimes. she is always energetic. i would also like to take my hat off to my friend juasmnn

williams. i've known him a long time to read it is almost as if we grew up together. through all the agreements and disagreements, he has always been honest. in this town, that counts for a lot. [applause] during some very difficult times, he was also courageous. i admire honesty and courage. especially in this city. we should preserve and protect that rare commodity. what i would like to do this evening is to not go on too long and to not look to you. i told my wife before we came --

to not lecture you. i told my wife before we can that we ran out of things to say. before -- between the books and speeches and opinions and lectures, there is nothing else to say. i was kidding her as i was writing my book that i was tired of talking about me, and asked her to talk about me. [laughter] of course, that did not quite work, but it was worth the try. but i guess it is not so much that there is a limited supply of ideas, but i think that you have a sense -- at least i do -- that at some point, people should be tired of hearing from you. i'm fortunate to have been in this town for quite some time now, almost 30 years.

i am rounding the last term for the 18th term on the court. as i was thinking about these young people, i realize that many of them had not been born when i started there. that is a sobering recognition. [laughter] i would like to make a couple points and then a final point, and make a considerable amount of time available for these young people's questions, which i think are far more important than any of my musings. i think that the framers, and especially madison, who gave us our bill of rights, and jefferson, who give us a declaration of independence -- they understood that for liberty to exist, the populist needed to be educated -- populace needed

to be educated enough to understand liberty and be able to defend liberty. they also understood that liberty was not on automatic pilot. that liberty would not exist simply because it was once started, and that having done it, it was very delicate and had to be protected. the one thing that stood out to me about the bill of rights institute was that it understands that. it understands that to protect this purchase but the essential commodity -- precious but essential commodity, young people, the next generation, and the generation after that has to understand what they are protecting, or have to understand what they are

protecting and what it has to be protected. -- and why it has to be protected. i have been, as i said, on the court for quite some time. i have to remit that when i started this endeavor -- to admit that when i started this endeavor, or for some, and ordeal, that you have a level of understanding of our great document, our founding documents, that it is workable, it is functional, but after you work with that document for so many years, at your level of understanding and appreciation growers. -- grows. it becomes, as i say to my law clerks, through all the opinions and briefs and the back and forth, i am more of an idealist about this great

document today than i was the day i became a judge. that understanding and that passion about the constitution, about our declaration, about our country, about our founding, they represent and fuel the basis for wanting to do the job. they are people that we have set off towards. -- have sent off to wars. i had the opportunity that was a little bit on inspiring, at the same time -- awe-inspiring, at the same time a woma -- same time overwhelming, to meet young people who had returned from iraq with fresh and difficult to interpret as they were apologizing to me for taking up so much of -- difficult wounds.

as they were apologizing to me for taking so much of my time, i cannot help but say to them that it is i who should be apologizing to you for not giving as much as you have given to save our country, to stand up for us and our liberties. [applause] so it is the passion that they have got the commitment that they have, about our country, in a different way and not in harm's way, that fuels working at the court. it is not for george or self aggrandizement, but not for legacy -- for joy or self aggrandizement, not for legacy. it is the right thing to do. it is the right thing to try to preserve liberty. [applause]

i would also like to say that i'm not one of those who will criticize or beat on my colleagues or the institution. we have to preserve our institutions. i think there is a way to disagree, and these young people will learn it from us, that we can constructively say "i respectfully but firmly disagree," without acting out a disagreeable attitude and reaction to other people. that is the way it has been at the court. i sat between my two friends, justices ginsburg and souter, for about 15 years, and i was unable to persuade them, but always able to act in a civil and warm manner of people who

are in gauge in a common endeavor to try to find the right answers and decisions about our great document in this wonderful country. you know, sometimes, when i get a little down, i go on that, as i say to my wife, the internet, and i look a wonderful speeches, like speeches by douglas macarthur, to hear him give without a note that speech at west point, "duty, honor, country." how do you not hear those words and feel strongly about what we have, or how can you not reminisce about a childhood where you began each day with the pledge of allegiance as little kids, lined up in school yard, and then marching to buy 2, where the flag and a crucifix

in each classroom? i think that those things remind me of why it is important, and they fuel -- the view that energy to get up every day and look at cases, whether they are first amendment, where the first section, they are things that affect our country and things that affect the kind of society that we want, and things that affect the lives of these young people here. on with my few remarks about tonight, and hopefully i will be able to take quite a few questions. i should, again, repeat that i thank all of you who have been a part of this wonderful event, and all of you who have had the foresight and planning and implementing this essay contest on being an american.

what a wonderful idea. i congratulate each of the young people who are tonight's winners. i had an opportunity to chat with them and take pictures with them. that is always inspiring. it is one thing about this job, that you get a little tired, and you go and you are really energized produce cds and people and you say -- you are really energize pre you see these young people and you say, "this is what it is all about." each of these young people have demonstrated, to these essays and the mature death at the thought and disciplined it took to communicate ideas -- mature depth and the thought and is but it took to communicate these ideas -- i am sure they rethought and read edited, or

they would not be the ones that one out of 30,003. i assure them that i would be one of the 30,000-plus would be left home. [laughter] you have them destroyed one aspect of what it means to us to be and -- you have demonstrated one aspect of what it means to be an american. i grew up during a different time and under different circumstances. i will not be late for that. -- not belabor that. things were not as good as they are today, but they were good enough for me. as juan alluded to, there was enough to fuel changes that made possible to be here tonight. recently, a college student asked me what i would recommend for them as our country continues through these difficult economic and financial

times. i have to tell you, i was momentarily at a loss for words. i eventually asked the assembled a group of 20 or so young college students how many of them had cell phones, or rather, how many of them did not have cell phones. of course, no hands went up. they all had cell phones. none of them had known all life as a young adult without that convenes that is so new. you see today, without giving a litany, we have plenty. to some, perhaps, too much. in my travels, i have been surprised at how many people think that prosperity is a

constant, that things are never to be difficult again, that there are never to be great challenges. indeed, it seems that many have come to think and that each of us is a road -- each of us is owed prosperity and a certain standard of living. they are owed air-conditioning, cars, tatelephones, televisions. some of us, by contrast, thought that air conditioning was the ultimate luxury, that having a television was something that you save up and when they could get -- and one day could get, that the telephone was not essential, and that a car, at least a working one, was something to be happy about, not something that you were owed.

i have to commit that i am one of those people who still thinks -- i have to admit that i am one of those people who still thinks that the dishwasher is a miracle. [laughter] what the device. i have to admit that because i think that way, i like to load it. [laughter] i like to look in and see how those dishes were magically clean. but in this era that many of us grew into adulthood, we did expect life to be difficult. we expected there to be challenges. but we hoped that by living the virtuous lives, and by working hard, all would eventually work out. but there were no guarantees except the guarantee that we had the right to try. all around us, but the most part, are in the st. -- we are

in the same boat. there are of course many challenges. but with all the apparent and real problems, most around me, in savannah, liberty county, believed in the american dream, even though it had neither -- either eluded them or been denied them, for countless reasons. i found it perplexing as a young man that some money the people that i knew -- so many of the people that i knew never made it beyond being domestics and they libbers, clung tenaciously to the promises of this country, so no matter that they had been denied opportunities because of race or lack of vegetation -- education, or the difficult circumstances, they passed on the hopes and dreams that they

once had, or that they still have, and equally important, they passed on that sense of obligation that is necessary to see the dream become reality. . >> it seems that more and more people are celebrated for their literary of -- their litany of grievances for this or that. shouldn't there at least be equal time for our bill of

obligations and responsibilities? wh is requiredat of us? i think we have an idea. -- what is required of us? i watched my grandfather who is the greatest man i have ever known. i admit that i told my wife yesterday, that it was the 26th anniversary of his death. why is it that there are certain days when never forget? that still bring pangs of either pain or a smile to our face. he is the greatest man i have ever known. i remember watching him in the midst of a hurricane in savannah. going out of the house with wind wayne and rain driving down, he walked through about 1 foot of water to the corner to cleanout the sewer so that our house

would not flood. i remember when one of our cousins' house burned down. he began planning immediately how to build another for her before the ashes lost their warmth from the fire fromand we did. in his view that was required of him as a citizen, as a relative, as a man. when i begin to feel overburdened or put upon in washington or in my job i often like to think of those who have made it possible for us to be here tonight as a free people. people like my grandparents. people like the man who thought was important to clear the sewer so that houses would not flood. there are those close to us who

have helped us and made it possible. our parents, teachers, friends. and there are those who are in the not so distant past to make this country safe and free, or who changed it in so many ways for the better. those who fought and died and gave in the words of president lincoln, that last "full measure of devotion" -- i have many occasions when things were becoming particularly routine gone down to my basement to watch "saving private ryan." i cannot tell you what that particular movie except that we have it and it is about something important in our lives, world war ii.

after so many of his men had died in the movie -- and actually, i guess it all starts with the mother being informed that three of her sons died and watching the poor lady dropped to her knees. that she had lost three out of four children in a war for our country. but after many men had died to save private ryan and capt. miller himself was dying he turned to private ryan and he said "earn this, eraarn it." what a burden. it earned the deaths of so many so that you can live. and when he was an elderly man at the end of the movie, he turns to his wife for reassurance. we have heard this from some of

our elderly relatives. "tell me i have let a good life ." "tell me i'm a good man." that is a man who is saying let me know that it was worth it. those who signed our declaration of independence as dr. templeton so eloquently noted could well have been signing their obituary or their death warrant. they were taking on arguably the most powerful man in the world who was none too happy with them and all other shenanigans. but they were willing to commit all. to put it all on the line. the final sentence of the declaration of independence as dr. templeton red is severing, and yet so reassuring -- is a

sobering. "and for the sport of this declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor." there were willing to give all to obtain liberty. what are we willing to give to retain it? you young students have already demonstrated at your tender years that you have an idea of what is most important about being an american, and they are wonderful ideas. you know that it is bigger than us, but you also know that to build that great bulwark of liberty each of you, and indeed

each of us must live lives were the of the liberties that we have inherited and that others have made possible for us. in a sense, we each must hold ourselves as accountable for our lives as private ryan held himself accountable for. his for many died to save him. many, many more sacrificed and died for us and our liberties. will we one day be able to say that we have earned what they gave us? i congratulate each of these young s.a. winners -- and essay winners, and i think each of you for being here this evening to also congratulate them. i will take your questions.

thank you. [applause] >> justice thomas thank you for that speech. it was refreshing, personal, and insightful. now will go to the phase of the evening where some of the young riders will have their questions read to justice thomas. before that i have a question for you. i understand you were on the supreme court? >> yes.

>> can you handle parking tickets? >> yes, i pay them. [laughter] >> all right, ladies and gentlemen, tonight's winners -- as you have heard, the justice thomas has graciously agreed to enter some of the questions. i would like to have it two outstanding individuals, bryan jones from the u.s. the problem of education, and my friend, judge andrew nepal tunnel of fox news join me on the stage here. they will read the question from the young people -- and that is also andrew napolitano from fox news. [applause] >> you get in a lot of trouble

for fixing parking tickets. here is the first question in the justice thomas, since the civil war, what has changed the way americans view the constitution the most, and why? >> is that from one of the students? oh, goodness. i would have to say the 14th amendment for a lot of the obvious reasons. the equal protection clause and the fact that if assured -- it assured the rights to the freed slaves. it ensured the rights to all citizens. if you have the chance and you read plessy vs. ferguson, it is a fabulous short decision. not only does he show have to be

judged by separating your personal views from what the constitution says, he shows the intent that animated both the 13th and 14th amendments. it also is a board because you have the dual citizenship of the state and national government, and you have doctrines like the doctrine of incorporation. you get the bill of rights applied to the states and to the local governments through that. that is a big jump. textually if you look at the first amendment, it does not apply to the states, but through the doctrine of incorporation through the 14th amendment, selective, which was rather controversial, it is then

applied and the way that we know it today. it has had an enormous impact. i'm sure that there are other things. when you look at the big gains and the civil-rights era, much of that was to the 14th amendment. off the top of my head, i would say the 14th amendment. someone will hear that and say is something else with the commerce clause -- [laughter] >> you have given us a little insight already, but how have your experiences as a supreme court justice affected you as a person? >> not the whole lot. in has changed my hair. [laughter] >> at least you have some. >> i am thankful for that. and i have a bit more girth. but on a personal level and has not really changed me -- and has not changed me much.

i am who i am. i have been the same person for a long time, and i kind of like being me. i still take up the trash. you never lose touch with reality. i have an opportunity to do things with my bride. we go to football games, motor- homing. you try to be as normal as possible with all the security considerations. i like that. i missed that part of life more than anything else. that i cannot just walk around anonymously anymore. i really, truly miss that, but i think the way that it has truly changed me is that even talking tonight i am very, very reluctant to have a strong opinion on something without

having briefs or opinions to read and think through. it slows you down because -- you know, this job -- it is easy for people who have never done it. [laughter] [applause] what i have found is that they know more about it than i do. especially if they have the title law professor. it also is easy with people who know what they think before they have thought. they know how they will come out and which position is the right position. for the rest of us who have to decide and who want to live up to that oath to do the right way it is a lot harder.

and it requires that you not have these strong theseuncounciled stakes in issues that will come before you, so you are reluctant to dig in and these big things happening in our society until you have had the chance to think them through. and until you have a case before. that is a long way to say that it slows you down a little bit. >> how does someone who takes up the garbage and load the dishwasher balance people's freedom with their need for security? >> the balance is in the constitution. i do not have to make this policy decisions. and i think what happens is that you can get in these jobs and a thing suddenly that you have more authority than your given

under article 3 of the constitution. i do not think we are entitled to do that simply because we are judges. if anything the job requires you to take on a more humble approach to judging and to be willing to say "i have no authority to make those decisions." i remember when i first went on the court we had a couple of cases involving haitian refugees. my own views early on, and formed, and knew it judging at that level was that -- unformed -- was that i thought these people should have the opportunity to come into our country. but that was not a decision for me as a judge. it was enormously difficult to

balance that limitation with what i wanted to do. over time you learn how to do that properly. but is a discipline that even when you think strongly about something you have no authority to make some of those decisions. the balance is struck in the constitution. my job is to figure out as best i can with those balances are. i admit that is imprecise but it has the benefit of been legitimate, as opposed to say that because i am in a robe i can make up a new balance because i think that the world has changed. you do not assign their role to a new institution up at the supreme court. [applause]

>> the next question is how does your faith or world view mpeg your role as a supreme court judge? >> first of all, i do not even know what a world view is any more. you think that you have things figured out when you are young, then when you are older you realize all that is wrong. the more that you learn the more reluctant you are to say you have it all figured out. some of it is beyond me, realize. as far as your faith, it really gives content to the oath he took. you took an oath to do a job right. i hear people say, ask questions like, what do you want your legacy to be? what do i know? i will not be here anyway when i have a legacy. but the point is, we are not in the job to establish a legacy.

we are in the job to live up to enough and do a write. i think that faith gives content to that because you say "so help me god." the other thing is that there are some tough cases, cases that will drive you to your knees. in those moments you ask for strength and wisdom to have the right answer in the courage to stand up for it. but beyond that it would be a legitimate and a violation of my oath to incorporate my religious beliefs into the decision-making process. i do not think it is appropriate, so i do not do that. it just helps me to do the job the right way and to do it

properly. [applause] >> sticking with a personal, hell is your judicial philosophy changed from law school until the present? how is it changed? >> i was only trying to judge graduate, did not have one. in moscow you do not know whole lot. you learn substantive prices, try to figure out what numbers are. -- in law school you do not know a whole lot. you do your best. you grow up. you have been a judge. when you begin -- is one thing to learn the case, another thing to use that case to decide another case. to decide the fate of some one. those are two entirely different endeavors. this could be totally wrong, it

may be totally hypocritical. i will say it anyway. it makes the point. there are many people who think that because they know a theory about law that that is the same thing as actually judging. you have done both. you know the difference. it is much harder to do the judging parked van to talk about it. someone said to me that a great basketball player -- it is harder to judge than to talk about. michael jordan at his prime had been criticized by a sports writer who really knew basketball. someone went to michael jordan or some other great player and said to him, this reporter criticized you. what do you think of that? his response supposedly was, tell him to suit up. those are two entirely different

endeavors. playing the game and knowing about the game. so, i think that of the whole process of learning and judicial philosophy -- my judicial philosophy is to try to discern the intent of the framers in constitutional cases, and in statutory cases, the intent of the legislature. and to try to keep my personal views out of it completely, as best i can. does that make sense? to go. [applause] >> this one may require two inches. do you feel that the american people and government adequately uphold the constitution today? [laughter] >> we will move on.

that is what we do every day. let me move on from that. i know that trick, brian. you know, i do not know. i cannot judge -- i disagree with people about their perches, but my concern about our fellow citizens -- i disagree with people about their approach -- my concerns are more quantifiable or possible to observe. how do people take the time to know what is in the constitution. that is what is so admirable here. the opportunity to learn about the declaration, founding documents. it is all made available to teachers, too young students. it is reinvigorating that civic connection. whether or not i agree how

people come out -- it is not the point. it is the opportunity to learn more. you have tens of thousands of teachers who have gone through this program. you have access to this program probably on though web. you have 31,000 young people participating in this great essay. that is teaching them. once they have that tool they can make up their own minds but then we can respectfully disagree as people who are civil and also civic-minded. >> this will be the last question. we are running low on time. >> justice thomas where do our freedoms come from? from the government, the consent of the government, or from our humanity? >> jefferson is listening.

>> i think jefferson felt that our freedoms were transcendent and it that they were inherent rights, and the weak in order to be governed -- we in order to be governed, are willing to give up some of those rights. i tend to agree with ron reagan when he paraphrased jefferson -- our freedoms do not come from the government. the government comes from us. [applause] with that, though, i know we are trying to stay on time. judge napolitano, i have seen you quite a bit and you have always been pleasant, respectful, intelligent, and i appreciate that. i always enjoy your commentary. i would like to think brian, and

i met him as a student at georgetown. that was 19 years ago when i was on the court of appeals. i am proud of what you have them. as i have said, ron williams, i will admire until i drop my last breath, not because we always agree, but we do agree on what is important. -- until i draw my last breath. i want to thank you all for being here. we can get full of ourselves in the city. in the end we are human beings turn to do the right thing and to pass on something precious to the next generation and the best way we know how. that is these wonderful things in our country and our founding documents. thank you all for being out here. i appreciate your. . -- i appreciate you.

[applause] [no audi >> this fall into the home to america's highest court from the grand public places to those only accessible by the nine justices. the supreme court, coming the first sunday in october. >> white house senior adviser dollar -- it was the featured speaker at last week's convention hosted by the group netroots nation. she covers a range of issues. see her commons tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> president obama says that u.s. troops in afghanistan are working to secure polling places so that this week's elections can go forward and afghans can decide their future. he made those comments at the

veterans of foreign wars convention in phoenix, ariz. today. and tonight, the sun life foundation, co-founder and executive director come ellen miller will discuss how her organization uses the internet to provide transparency in government. >> this month, but tv we can continue all week long in prime- time with more books on the economy, current events and politics. tonight the following -- pennsylvania democrats senator arlen specter and rep joe sestak are running against each other for the u.s. senate. both said done recently at the convention in pittsburgh to talk about bloggers -- to bloggers

and why they deserve internet support. this is about one hour. >> people are still coming in. all right, welcome. i write for the nation magazine, joined by suzy, a logger in former reporter. and also our first guest, senator arlen specter. [applause] if you look up right now there is a new poll out from research 2000 that shows that the pennsylvania race is tightening. at the center is leading with 48 points, but rep sestak is coming. many people say that this race is tight.

it may or may not be why you're here. that is where we want to begin, with the existential questions. who are you? why are you here? and do you think you have anything that will win over some of the progressive democrats here today? >> may i begin by saying that i would like help in taking off my of reach program. please take a moment to text join arlen. who am i? i am a fellow who has a good job. he would like to keep it and it is running for reelection to the united states senate. i am here because i like to talk to people, generally. and especially if i'm in the campaign and would like support to be reelected.

do i think i have some messages to help me on the reelection? i think the answer to that is yes. if you look at my record i have been consistently pro-choice, supporting a woman's right to choose. [applause] i have been at the forefront of civil rights. objected to president bush's warrantless wiretapping. [applause] and his signing statements. voted against water boarding and pressed to have military permissions function with due process of law. was a the size of a good in defeating judge bork for the u.s. supreme court.

had he been there instead of justice anthony for roe v. wade -- that would not be history and equal protection would not have included women or the disabled. i have iteffectively joined the obama team when i voted for the stimulus package, provided a key vote. without olympia snowe and arlen specter the would not have been any stimulus package. out of the 10,000 votes i have cast that was the most decisive. i became a member of the team in that vote. i became a defective democrat and made the formalistic change player. i was invited by president obama to join his health care summit

and have been working hard to structure legislation with the robust public option. [applause] i have to spend the recess attending town meetings. maybe or maybe not you have heard of them. on tuesday end of the non i was astounded. and i have been in this work for a long time -- to find the three networks, cnn, msnbc, and fox covering the entire session. even though surfers could find no place else to go. while "the usa today" has on its front page members of congress unwilling to face hostile audiences that is all i have been doing all week. and i have carried the president's message. [applause]

>> i have to stop you there. we're not in the senate and we will not do filibusters'. but you have given us something to think about. >> senator specter, i was think of you as arlen. you're one of those one-word names. you have represented me individually for cannot i think, 40 years. i was a philadelphia resident when you ran for d.a. >> i am still tough and nobody owns me. >> that leads me to the first question. i thought it would condense what many people have submitted on- line. they were all variations on the theme. "why should we trust him the circe's here's my two-part question. to what republican ideology positions do you still feel such

loyalty that you could possibly see yourself at odds with the democratic leadership for president obama? and second, what if any progressive position can you tell us that you will absolutely go to that max all the way on? >> you should trust me because i have a record for being candid and honest and trustworthy. you should trust me because joe biden, a man i have known for three decades knows me very well, trusts me, and has urged me to become a democrat in countless train rides. you should trust me because ed rendell has 9445 years and gave me the first job out of law school. he called me 10 days ago when

the unemployment compensation was running out and he wanted money from the stimulus package. the republican pennsylvanian representative would not vote for and i called some of my friends there -- and i do still have friends there. >> what i see specifically as a blocker of the last six years through the bush administration is that you have kind of a track record of coming out to say "i'm very upset about this, do not support this, this is un- american, you get a lot of press coverage and then go for it anyway." [applause] that is what people are concerned about here. >> well, you can point to an isolated example or two, but they're good reason. one question which i was advised to enter was, why when i saw at habeas corpus was a constitutional mandate the the vote for the military commissions bill?

i did so -- this is one where people say you said one thing and another -- but the military commissions bill defined the status of the enemy combatants. it precluded use of coerced confessions. it outlawed torture. it provided for procedures and military commissions to provide the process. and i said at the time, the supreme court of the u.s. will reinstate habeas corpus. and the supreme court did. that is an illustration of where i have taken a strong stand for habeas corpus. but i voted for a bill which eliminated it because the balance of the bill was very important. when you have a question about the telephone companies that i fought to subpoena when i chaired the judiciary committee -- and to this day think you cannot take away jurisdiction of

the sentences go federal court when in the context of this bill i made an amendment to substitute the government for the telephone comice of the people could continue to sue 4 invasion of privacy on marlowes and wiretapping. but the balance of the bill had important provisions. if you take a look one at a time i'm very consistent on those matters. >> the center, the habeas corpus issue came up -- but senator, this issue came up. several readers said they were not left with the impression when you went to the senate floor and said it was unconstitutional and would set america back 900 years. there were not under the impression that you were for the bill. this has come up in the primary. when you look at that issue you are saying you were glad that the supreme court took legislation is supported and declared it unconstitutional? usually we hear the opposite reaction. >> at the time when i made the

motion to have habeas corpus is inserted at a loss of 51-48, at the time there are other provisions of the bill. i walked into a news conference from the chamber and said it is unconstitutional to exclude habeas corpus but the balance of the bill had very many important points. it had the right to counsel, a prohibition against using a chorus confession, defined enemy combatants, set up the rule for the defense lawyer -- against using coerced confession. it was strengthening what existed otherwise. it had one provision i was angry about and said so. i said even though this bill had an unconstitutional provision that would be correct because i had confidence that it was unconstitutional and the cordwood corrected, and that was correct. >> let's move to a few audience

questions. we had an open vote. we will not take a couple of questions. >> senator arlen specter, i am from massachusetts. the first question is, will you call on democratic senators to vote for closure on democratic bills so they can proceed to an up or down vote? >> that is a procedural vote and i would expect to support senator harry reid on a bill he wants to bring up. the issue could be taken up. that was illustrated with the reporting on republican senators a couple of years ago.

i was the sole republican who voted for cloture so that we could take up the bill. i am for the principles of the union certification of the first contract, but that is an illustration of how on a procedural issue a would vote to take up the bill. i think that legislation ought to be considered by the senate. i am not saying there might be some extreme case where there was a first amendment issue, or somebody wanted to cut back on the way i supported hate crimes legislation was senator kennedy, or the way i support fairness and equality for gays. but i might not if there is a constitutional issue. but i do expect to be able to support cloture. >> the next question -- it is somewhere out there.

>> hi. senator arlen specter in a constituent of yours and that would like to know, the house of representatives recently passed a comprehensive bill dealing with climate change, energy security, and bring jobs. the senate is expected to vote on similar legislation later this year. >> the question was on president obama's climate change legislation, where you stand on that, the house- senate version. would you support the stronger version? >> i support climate change. i think the global warming issue is long past due. in the last congress are supported bignghaman's bill whih

was cap and trade. i took an assignment on the environment and public works committee. i want to have a seat at the table with this important issue. i'm working with the chairman of the committee to have a strong bill. i support what president obama wants to do. [applause] >> we will go to the third question. bringing this together, it is it fair to say these are all areas where you would vote with the majority for cloture? >> yes, no doubt about those three issues at all. >> we will take a third question. >> center, i'm from boston and my question is, what is your position on d.c. residents' civil rights?

especially their right to have representation in congress? >> i favor that. the issue came up years ago when it was whether there ought to be two senators from the district of columbia. i favor that even though i was the only republican to do so because obviously two senators from washington, d.c. would be democrats. >> i just thought this was kind of interesting. you have always had friends on both sides of the aisle, both in washington, d.c. and pennsylvania. in philadelphia mayor nutter is talking about draconian budget cuts.

the republican senate majority leader insists on no new taxes. are you going to intercede in this? have you tried it? >> i have talked to mayor nutter and the governor rendell about the issue. i am available. this is slightly different, but close to the core of the issue. the stimulus bill which the mayor lobbied on hard, and so did the governor, although they did not have to, has broad $16 billion to pennsylvania and 143,000 potential jobs. without my vote on the stimulus package philadelphia would be, and this they would be in much worse shape. >> i agree. it must be kind of weird -- that all of a sudden you have to sort of flipped everything over when

you're talking to people you have known for years? >> c'mon, i have been talking to gov. ed rendell forever. i have been his finance chair. >> but you are lobbying on behalf of democrats which is different. >> well, i have not distinguished my career by party. yesterday in bedford, counted, and i was visiting with democrats and the minority commissioner was a democrat and he told me a story i had forgotten -- bedford county. i had been there for a republican meeting and he had come. he told me how cordial i was. i hired ed rendell, did not know he was a democrat and didn't care. when i hired lynne abraham, she was a democrat and i didn't care. i always talked to the other party. it has changed, but the other party. >> i do want to look at that with some data. in the blogosphere you can begin

-- have you heard of neat silver and the specterometer? ? no. he is a statistician, he built in endicott inspectorometer. he basically did a voting analysis of what he calls a contentious votes, the big floor votes with the parties have significant disagreements. andy found that basically what you were a republican going into april, you would vote with the democrats up to about 44% of the time. after the party switch, that spike up to 69% of the time. and then since may when it became clear that there would be a challenge from congressman sestak, 97% of the time. [laughter] that is one person analysis of the votes. but what he and a lot of people

have said, including conversations we had online prior to your parents -- many people in this community like that you are up to 97%, but, many are concerned that this of a product of this challenge, that the data suggested came with the primary challenge and if you were reelected you would go back to that prior record you have. what would you say to those people and to the specterometer? >> i say you have to take a look at the individual votes. i can tell you exactly why did each one of them. i will tell you that before i became -- before i vote on the stimulus package, which i said was crucial, that i voted for legislation to give women equality, overruled the supreme court. i would say i voted for schip, a big bill to provide child-care. that if you take the votes one at a time without the

generalizations -- but i will tell you also that as a democrat, i don't have to look over my right shoulder. and it is very comfortable. >> you say you don't have to look over your right shoulder, is the 97% -- is that your new natural place, is that is what you're saying? >> ieds respect congressman sestak, and i am not trimming my sales are concerned -- i respect congressman sestak. when president obama said he would support me and -- vice president joe biden, i did not ask that the field be cleared, it was not discussed. i am ready to take on all comers and i will stand behind my votes won by one. i don't believe in these statistical generalizations. s make about a vote, and i will tell you what i did what i did. >> i have a question that disorder related to that. you have been in office and

public service for a really long time. and i think that in the last administration, you kind of did have to look over your right shoulder. it so, what i wondered was, in a positive sense, what progress a position can we expect to see out of you that you kind of could not give in to your natural instincts previously? what can we see you taking a leadership position on? >> let me refer to the town hall meetings. i am out there fighting for president obama health care plan and nobody and the democratic caucus has been out there with four town meetings. nobody has done it. [applause] if i could to my own horn just for one minute, as an advocate, i can stand up and do things that are pretty effective. i will not compare them to

anybody else. i was before the international trade commission 13 times for the labor movement, united steelworkers. it is not only the fact that the price is right, 0 for the united steelworkers, but that i am effective. one item that i have taken, which is very progressive, pretty much a lone voice, is to televise the supreme court for accountability. bloggers would like transparency. well, the supreme court of the united states is the most opaque, and accountable constitution imaginable. and i have twice got legislation out of the judiciary committee. i have talked to senator read about it. i think this time we introduce more legislation and will get it

out. i question of the nominees. senator joe biden at the time, and i, wrote to chief justice rehnquist to televise bush vs. gore, president bush won the election by one vote, and i spoke out at the time, and i was a republican, and spoke out at the time about scalia's reference to rep alarm with the most ridiculous thing imaginable. and i wanted -- [applause] i wanted the supreme court televised and rehnquist wrote back and said, no, but they released and audio. on judge sotomayor -- i think i was more effective, more so probably than other democrats -- although i did not want to do my horn to much -- and a wise latino woman. , is there something that you've -- may be a legacy piece of

legislation, is there something you had in the back of your head that you did not have support from the republican party that you feel you might initiate now? >> take stem cell research. stem cell research, i have absolutely no support. i was in the back seat of the president's car one day -- there were three of us. bush, -- and made. we had a hell of an argument. the vote was 2-1 against me. and twice we passed stem cell legislation. first of the specter-harkin when i was chairman, and then harkin- schechter when he was chairman and both times it was vetoed. i took the lead again with tom harkin, harkinnih funding -- increasing nih funding. those are pretty progressive moves. >> you mentioned the town hall. let us return to health care. president clinton was on the stage last night saying he supports the public option, that

we got to get the conversation back about helping people that has been sidelined by a lot of misinformation. really the country's eyes was on your town hall meetings. what can you do, what are you doing to deal with allies better coming out of talk radio and coming out a lot of your former allies and colleagues in both the republican party and a larger conservative movement, and specifically, do you think you can help president obama get any of these republican senators that he says he needs to pass this legislation? who would they be and what would they do about it? am i think i would be helpful to him with senator grassley, very close, came in at the same time. " full with senator collins. you don't need any help would senator snowe. senator voinovich, quite a few of them. but what i can do this week, i have done. i have gone out and put my neck on the line. and little conversation overheard in the lancaster restaurant last saturday night

-- that is close to lebanon, where we had the meeting on tuesday -- a group of men were talking. we don't like what the congressmen are doing. we ought to go out to do them in. actual death threats. these were raucous meetings. you saw the guy on the front page of "the new york times." he was about ready to explode. >> do you blame anyone? a lot of people sang the rhetoric is out of control, people like muehlenbeck are being irresponsible. they have a right to speak but they are speaking irresponsibly and shot -- sowing hatred and that is the poison part of this debate. again, some of these people close to you. >> a muehlenbeck is not close to me. let us start there. >> but, senator. >> i don't know glenn back and i don't care to. >> but senator grassley was just seen the other day talking about how they want to pull the plug on granny. senator grassley was just seen

the other day talking about -- they should have something in there where they will pull the plug on but grandmother. >> he is in "the new york times" this morning, and he is wrong. the proposal to give counseling on advanced directives, living wills, is as pure as iris know. nobody should decide for anybody else what kind of medical care they will get in the last few days of their lives. but to have an opportunity to be counseled with your families before -- absolutely correct. the last line in the times today, he said, nobody should pull the plug on grandma. the next time i see chagres live -- i will tell you this. i will call him up today. i think his position -- i want

characterize it beyond saying that it is not correct. he is not correct on that. it is not a death squad. it is a sensible provision and one study showed 27% of health- care costs in medicare are in the last few days of a person's life. >> i want to give voice to a few people who said, call him now. but i don't want to give up any of our time. if you want, you can call and backstage and let us know what happened afterwards. >> whoever said that, join me backstage and watch me dial. [applause] >> you have a date. you said senator grassley is wrong. you still think he could still come out for obama's public option? a lot feel there should be less by partisanship. >> reconciliation -- i am

prepared to go that route of worst comes to worse -- but you cannot get it for the entire bill. we can get cloture on health care. there will be, i predict confidently -- which i don't ordinarily do -- there are 60 votes for cloture. i think there are 61 here i will put snowe in. >> one last thing. because i think this has got to be on everybody's mind, in the back of their head. at what point did the discourse in the republican party but, about winning at all costs rather than actually working together with democrats to make the country better -- you have a very unique perspective. i am wondering if you could share a little bit with us. >> the republicans made a decision not to work with the democrats before january 20 of this year. when we took up the stimulus

package, in the week of february 2, 13 days after the president was sworn in. already this mentality -- this mentality, like they were fighting a foreign power. we are going to break obama. i am not telling tales out of school from a confidential caucus, it is on the public record. no republican accept snowe, collins, and arlen specter would talk. that is why it is difficult to spot -- a bipartisan bill now. >> where does that come from? how'd we break through. these are people we pay a lot of money, give a lot of power, who are a lot more concerned with, i don't know, a school yard fight than actually caring about things that affect real people. >> you can show that -- and this is self serving -- you can show that by a person in my position

who faced down the republican caucus and in the face of a lot of pressure, took a lead in voting for the stimulus package and saying, if you became a member of the obama team by voting for the stimulus package -- and really, that package@@@@h . .

>> you are trapped in an elevator with a blocker curator tell me why i should support you? -- with a blogger. tell me why i should support you. >> because you need a spokesman with experience and when the president has to go out and speak to a hostile crowd, i can do it effectively. there are tough issues like nih funding and stem cell research. i have the stamina to go out and do it. on a subject that we have not touched that was very important to a progressive approach on foreign policy, i have long believed that you make peace with your enemies, not your friends. riends. and i personally talked to saddam hussein and to yasser arafat and to chavez and to castro and visited khadafi in his tent on the desert in libya.

and believe that an active foreign policy and diplomacy and wrote about it in " washington journal" it is the way to the future. i can help the country a lot of i am reelected. >> ok, thank you. [applause] >> thank you for being here. >> good to be here. >> now i would like to introduce the other person running in the senatorial primary, congressman joe sestak. [applause]

>> it feels so weird to be on a first name basis with so many politicians. i spoke to joe early on in his campaign and shared a lot of stuff about curt weldon, which i used to cover the seventh district as a reporter. you haven't been in office that long. i assume someone in your staff has pointed out -- nate silver did a statistical thing saying your votes were very similar to arlen specter's. i kind of wonder, why do you consider yourself a progressive? what are you absolutely willing to go to the mat on for us? >> first of all, thanks for having me. my experiences obviously based on 30 plus years in you the best military and i tend to tell

everybody that every military officer is a democrat, they just don't realize it. everybody in the military has health care. i was away 11 1/2 months at sea with the afghanistan war. my four-year-old, or at the time one-and-a-half year -- we all have health care and my mind was on the mission. when i had my battle group, we would not promote you to senior chief petty officer unless you earned an associate college degree in a technology, my money, your time, because we understood the value of education. and that wonderful army saying, come on in and be all you can be economically. so the principles of the democratic party, which i consider practical or progressive, whatever name you want, are ones i got in for. i got into pay you back because

when she was four, my daughter, and i came back from the war she had a brain tumor and you all gave me the best health care plan i think can exist, tricare in the military. i got into politics for one simple reason, everyone should have what i had. that is my commitment. those three areas is why i want to health subcommittee, fought to get out of the intelligence committee where steny hoyer wanted to put me, because i was in the anti-terrorism unit, to get in the education committee and labor and then went to small business to show you congress has a sense of humor, as a freshman, vice chairman, and i work hard because small businesses is what creates jobs. that is my commitment. then i would guess from the questions we got and the feedback we got in advance of this form, there are a lot of people in this community who actually would be more inclined

to support you and senator specter, who was just out of. but there are a lot of people and pennsylvania who have been saying that, that is nice, but you are just not positioned after only a couple of years to do what he is doing. the senator was out here saying that he was fighting for health care, public auction, working with people from across the aisle -- senator grassley, saying he disagrees with them about the pulling the plug on granma lies but also reaching out to him, calling him. he also has this close relationship with joe biden and barack obama. he said he respected you and touted the fact that president obama was also popular, is not supporting you. people and pennsylvania need now and power. part of the argument of course you are running into the next several months. how do you say that with a straight face when you don't have anything near senator spectrum's background and relationships? >> i can only measure myself against myself.

so, in the first two years i was in congress, steny hoyer put out a list that said joe sestak was the most productive member of the legislative package -- class. the first movement into of his and in 12 years in the u.s. government. 29 million last year, 50 million this year. i am a member of the artistic caucus. first bill in 17 years to pass the house of representatives -- elder abuse, because there was a senior beat with a belt buckle six times to have alzheimer's. we keep our constituency office opened seven days a week. not because we wanted, but we have to. we handled in the first two years, 10,000 cases. the normal congressional office does 3000. and so, this year i have more bills passed than either center in pennsylvania. so i intend to take joe sestak's application for working not for my job, but for their jobs.

second, if you are happy with how the stories of the u.s. government got us into this savage recession, how 10 million americans lost their health insurance as premiums went up 120% since the clinton health care reform bill was derailed, and if you like the fact that if you are sitting and pennsylvania and the cost of public tuition and the past eight years, health premiums of 86%, went up 100%, then i am not your guy. that is the spirit that is her. >> let me bring you back to the obama part because some people say that matters. >> i can't tell you how much i respect president obama. but he did not get as a first term senator, become president of the united states, and even more important, to be the first generation, a son of an immigrant from africa, to become president, because of political calculation, because the establishments -- establishment

blessed him. he did it because of audacity. if we democrats only one to have those who we anoint get up -- and i mean that for every individual. we come to america to be all we can be, then i believe the democratic party will not remain in power. he is there because he took on -- taking on the issues that were large. he tackled them. that is what i wanted it. i owe pennsylvania in spirit going around the 67 counties like i did in july, and you are not worried about established. you go to the vfw post at night, a man looks you and i and says, joe, not, who do you know, but who endorsed you, but what are you going to do for me and my daughter who lost her health care? that is all i care about. i want to earn your respect year. i want to earn their vote and

anybody else's doesn't matter. i mean that with great respect. [applause] >> my next question is -- a lot of people brought this up. you voted in favor of the fisa bill, one of our big issues, and you already explain your vote in great detail. you have gone on the record. my guests -- i guess my question is -- maybe not for you specifically what you are kind of a surrogate of all the people we supported and voted for the things they told us they wouldn't -- i accept your explanations for why he did it. it seems very reasoned and rational, and you talk about the safeguards in the bill. why didn't you look at all of those things and had of time before you told us that you would support it? we would like to hear a lot of that earlier on. the other thing is, usually when people have been part of the early support movement for a new

candidate, if they are going to go against something that was one of the key tenets of the people who supported you, i don't know that we heard from you about that before you were going to vote against it. >> if i could, town halls on health care. i have held two cents i have been out on recess and i have sounded more scheduled. but i held eight before those and 38 summits since two years. i agree with the proposition that you should not just all of a sudden this something and go out and explain it. on the fis of bill, i made it very clear that i did not want reversed part and to be done -- reversed targeting to be done. but i made it very clear that i was not in support of immunity and that the requirement was that it would have to end up at the district court for final deliberation of whether immunity should or should be done.

i stated that up front as a requirement. so, i agreed with president obama of voting for the bill, but for different reasons. i had clearly stated in a press release that i want immunity only if a district civilian judges -- i think his name was wagoner, calif. district judge -- who had consolidated all of the cases, if he was given the opportunity to determine yes or no. and in fact, that is what happened. in fact, as you know now, the case by the a.c. yellow -- aclu is going to appeal. >> that is not exactly what happened. >> true, what did happen is that the attorney general, the real misstep, if there is one, giving permission to make the first judgment upon whether he fell they had done it by the law or not. then it was given to the judge.

the law did read some of the legislation, that the judge could on his own anybody before him, and the cases may be for him and over will that decision. >> there may not be enough coffee and a room for us to spend some much time -- >> it is an intricate issue. >> but many but at netroots were upset that many people in congress, including barack obama, said they would have accountability and ultimately, as you know, the legislation that emerges clearly tilted toward immunity and had other certifications the people called window dressing, which is what happened. now to take it to today and the campaign you are running, is there any reform you would do for surveillance? any accountability? president obama has been silent. we actually didn't get to it for senator specter. he touted about things that he did in committee. anything to change the architecture given what you know? >> there is one major one. but again, my answer was to hers, saying i did make it clear that as long as it got through

district court i would be supportive of it. supportive of it. now, on that, -- i think these letters that were signed during the bush administration almost by an agent to say, i need to go ahead in. i think they were called -- >> [unintelligible] [unintelligible] >> i think they should not be permitted to go in. if you want to see anything it must be permitted by the court. that is where we have a third branch. that is what i strongly believe. >> i will say briefly, as i told senator specter, these were some of the most popular questions in anticipation of today. >> i am janet edwards from pittsburgh, pennsylvania. i am a pennsylvania voter. the house of representatives recently passed a comprehensive deal dealing with climate

change, energy security, and green jobs. the senate is expected to vote on similar legislation later this year. what is your position on the house bill and climate change legislation in general? >> i co-sponsored last year the waxman bill and co-sponsored the beginning of this bill. i was disappointed in this bill because i thought it was illustrated during the process too much. [applause] i did vote for it, however, because it is better than not having it done. i speak to that because i waited until the day before to say -- and to get whipped with how you are going to vote and they were shocked that i was not going to say yes because i had a dozen çamendments before the rules committee and i had faxed a letter to nancy pelosi asking for things to be changed, for example, the renewable energy standard. instead of a been 20% by 2020 to

and then 8% by governor's choice could be efficiency, i think it should be mandated 20% and 10% additional should be done by efficiency. but is this bill still necessary? without question. is it going to cost us? about $82 per year per household beginning in 2012. by 2020 we salvage $750 per household in efficiency. in addition, you are sitting in allegheny county. you all are sitting in a county that is in violation of ozone and air particles. we can't grow up our children in such pollution geared besides that, we need the president to go to renegotiation for kyoto treaty with something of a moral standards saying i have some cap-and-trade and now i need to bring the international community together because over the last eight years when lost our ability to lead the world, and he needs to do that, not just of how we approach afghanistan or how we approach

human-rights but also clean energy. finally, green jobs. i have in my district the largest company in the world, creating wind power, it is spanish-owned. where is g.e., those young entrepreneurs? extending the investment tax credits for geothermal, wind power, etc., so we create jobs, is exact way another reason i'm for this bill. i just wish it was stronger. [applause] >> i'm mark anderson from san francisco. congressman sestak, the question is, what is your position on the health care reform bill, and you support a public auction? >> i am 150% behind it. we were the first committee, actually ways and means beat us by a couple of hours, to get it out of our committee. i purposely went to the

employment labor and pension subcommittee so it would have to go through my committee. i am 150% behind a public auction. and here's why. republican option. here's what -- behind what -- option, and here's what it is right to cover uninsured. also it makes economic sense. it does not even count 82 million who lose their health care in one or two months of the year. but the public health care plan option is a necessity. you sit in pennsylvania. two insurance companies have 70% of all health insurance plans. that is a duopoly. it is a cartel. the public health care plan option says, there is a big market, private industry, 47 unemployed -- 47 million uninsured. we are not just on to give them

to you. we will make it competitive because we will have a public health care plan option where we are not paying $23 million to a ceo or a severance pay like we just a bit here. and we will make it a competitive field. so, this public health care plan option, this choice is an economic necessity. there are so many other good things, minimum benefits, that woman will have a mammogram at 40 every year, colorectal exams, why? we are going to let you have free copays for those. why? not only are you more healthy, but we pay less in society as we bend the cost curve. this is an absolute necessity to get this through. >> the thing, though, when the senator was out here he would leave every one the impression there's not any difference between you two. he says he was fighting for the public option all week. is this not an area of distinction for you? >> i can't speak for him except for what he said publicly.

i know on "meet the press" i know he said he was opposed to the public health care option, and i gather here and elsewhere he says he is for it. look, i respect arlen -- you can't be in public service and not respect someone. but he hangs in his office a trophy, the poster board that he and bob dole took around this nation where it said, president clinton's big government health care plan reform. and because that failed -- which congressional public -- congressional budget office said would increase premiums 3% and would reduce the budget slightly, we have had 10 million americans lose their health insurance since that time. i just know that i accept what he says, but leadership is out

there doing it at a moment, not of crisis, but preventing crises. we are in a health care crisis. we are in an economic crisis, we are in an educational crisis. go around these cities and what you have seen is that promise of the american dream broken. your children would have an opportunity based on their god- given talents -- talents to better than you probably get here? it is not just leadership. it should be accountable leadership. i take him at his word. the point is, we ended up here. and the navy when a ship goes of ground, we believe the stories, the captains. this future takes a new energy and ideas, someone in it for others, and i want to be in it every day for pennsylvanian spiriti owe it for my daughter. [applause] >> congressman sestak --

>> sorry. >> my name is michael j. wilson from washington, d.c. what is your position on d.c. residents' civil rights, in particular, d.c. residents being denied the right to have voting representation in congress. for example, you are running for senate in pennsylvania and hundreds of thousands of d.c. residents did not have senate representation. >> i voted for the bill, as you know, to give you representation, that passed the house and not the senate. .

>> i believe he is for it now. he says he is. i'd taken at his word. i just think the future -- and this thing with washington, d.c., as a whole, in the past decade, is where prince of matters and * over politics. you had a wonderful question for me. do want to burn your respect and support? yes, but i want to let you know where i stand early. i still want to listen, but when i went into politics, i put on my website the exact plan i am supporting in congress today, the alpine and the massachusetts health care plan. i fought to get on the education committee. i want you to know where i am going and be consistent on it

unless you can show me a fact that says that i need to change. >> this is an odd question but i think is something that comes up a lot at this conference, and is what i will call the netroots, will you still love me tomorrow centrum? -- syndrome? [laughter] we go out with candidates come monday by us all the right things and tell us we are pretty. [laughter] and then, they do everything they can to get as far away from us as possible. we are like the girl that we had under the bleacher, but will not take to the prom. [laughter] i took a look at your campaign contributions from the first race, and netroots was her biggest supporter. [applause]

and this is not a gripe, per say, because i believe leadership goes beyond support, but there is no way in hell we can refer to you our candidate the way that boeing could refer to curt weldon as theirs. i will ask you for some feedback for us -- how do we, as a group, get to a level where we get back courtesy call when someone says, i know i supported this, but there has been some changes. how do we get that kind of respect? >> just call, literally. if you call my office at 9:00 tonight, someone will enter -- answer. we tried to get back to everyone.

>> in general, the candidates that woo us when the money is important early on, then it is, i am an incumbent and i do not need you. >> what i am here from you is a constituent services, which is important, but i think she is also talking about the power dynamic. this is a relatively new political community trying to find its place, so what makes a difference to you as an elected official? >> to me in make a difference when you do call. first of all, if you have an incident where we have not been responsive, i need to know, but you are talking bigger picture? >> yes, if you are going to vote on something that has become

more nuanced than how you said you would support it, why is there no proactive out rich? it is not just you. >> you have a point in that i have approximately 23 advisory groups, a small business advisor group, higher education, in your office -- a nurses and the eyes of the group. i do not want peopl>> part of tr to develop a strategy whereby we look at national races around the country that were not in our own districts, and we said, we can make it a strategic difference and get a progressive candidate. we pulled our resources and that that person the early backing they were looking for, but

because we are so diffuse, we are not seen as a legitimate constituency. >> i think you are right. i have called to ask to come to this convention. i spoke to some people at a harvard forum, and my whole speech was about the blogosphere, and how this is such a wonderful thing. parents want to be able to communicate when they want to, and this is it. but i have not reached out to you consciously as i do to labor, for example. here is this issue coming up, let's discuss this. i will commit to talking with anyone. >> is it geographic that you know exactly who to call if you were meat -- reaching out to

them? >> i have a couple of people on my staff that do nothing but this. in the last year, a navy captain that i know said that we had not been communicating well in the new era. so we finally hired two youths higher -- help me to go up there. i never go not anywhere without someone on a wireless twittering or what ever. but i think you are right. i have not thought this through. i would love to have a point of contact. it does not mean that i accept everything when i talk to labor or business, but there needs to be a more determined in discussion. >> let's go back to in policy.

president clinton when he was here was asked about don't ask, don't tell, and evolution of his position. we have several questions for you on that. given the opportunity to vote on repeal of the defense of marriage act, how would you vote, and why? how would these issues, if they change in congress, affect your vote in congress? >> i said the day i announced what i thought about don't ask, don't tell. i have been to war with men and women, which we know by public surveys were day. how can i come home and say that they should not have equal rights? i am the co-sponsor of the bill that gives equal rights to

everyone. [applause] 12 weeks of medical leave. they should all have the scores of benefits. i have co-sponsored everyone of those bills. on the discrimination bill, we should have had the t in it as it passed the house, not just glb. to me, it is simple. the military is a great leveling experience. you live in a small room with 20 people and you find out that everyone is equal. they used to kill me when i was a commander of a ship and someone said to me, please don't, you are too good to lose. a navy captain asked me what i thought about don't ask, don't

tell, and i said that a few months the supreme court will be overturning it. i do not know what i have not i wrote an op-ed a few weeks ago saying i understand we have to salvage our economy initially. getting health reform bill through, but this year, before we break in december, we must get don't ask, don't tell repealed. [applause] >> it has been delightful having you. thank you for coming in speaking to us. if you come up with any ideas on how to get to the prom, let us know. [laughter] >> i got turned down a lot in high school. i will let you know. i believe the imf representative first, who has to listen and then explain why he does things.

i love these town halls. second, i make congressperson who legislates. you cannot do that unless you communicate with everyone. >> now it is your turn for the elevator pitch. you are trapped in an elevator with a blogger, and you have two minutes to explain why they should support you in the primary. >> i have been very fortunate. i have done everything i have wanted to do in life, commanded a ship. i got married late in life. 47. i could not get a prom date, could not get someone to marry me. then my daughter had her tumor. and not in this to pay back. you go throughout this state, this wonderful place, where it is the birthplace of freedom,

and people are hurt, and we've begun -- we forgot. when i see a man in the county and ask him how is the recession hurting you? he says not that bad because we were hurting so much anyways. something happened to the united states. i believe this president has it right. i wish we were more bold and more aggressive, but i believe he is on the right path. this is the most tragic moment we have had in the history of america, since the great depression and world war ii, and i want to be part of the team of leadership, accountable leadership leadership that says, these are the facts, and that is how you have to see it. but i want our children to be all they can be in their educational opportunity, because we need them to lead america

again. health care reform is an absolute requirement. the dividend we get from it in the navy is what you see in how we accomplished our jobs. america has to have that. in our economy, it is what it is about. entrepreneurialship should be the norm, not the exception. to have all the answers? absolutely not. experience? yes, i dealt with sailors on a nuclear ship, but the average age was 19. i just want pennsylvania to have leadership in the future that is working for them, and i promised to do that every day. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. >> i would love to follow up, thank you. [applause]

>> a thank you. thank you to both candidates, to everyone who put this together. ç>> white house senior advisor bowery jaret talk to on the and activists last week about the health care debate, detaining practices and the military's don't ask, don't tell policy. you can see her comments at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. president barack obama says no one is talking about taking away medical benefits for veterans. the president told a convention of the veterans of foreign wars in phoenix that a proposed health-care overall is not going to change our veterans get their medical services. you can see his entire speech tonight at 9:00 p.m. -- at 9:10 p.m. eastern.

>> ellyn moeller, co-founder and director of the sunlight foundation on how they use the internet to provide transparency in government. "the communicators" tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> this weekend, but tv continues all week with prime time. tonight, jillian ted, chris andersen, and senate majority leader harry reid. >> house c-span funded? >> the u.s. government. >> private benefactors. >> i do not know. i think some of it is government raised. >> it is not public funding. >> probably donations. >> i want to say from me, my tax dollars. >> house c-span funded? america's cable companies created c-span as a public service. a private business initiative. no government mandate, no

government money. >> a few moments ago you heard pennsylvania democrats talking to bloggers who call themselves progressive. now political brock -- political blockers at the right on line talked to former republican congressman patrick toomey. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> i look at where we stand right now. we did a rally few moments ago and some of you were there the usa today gallup poll came out yesterday. did any of you see that? just a show of hands. only a few of you did.

if you ever wonder, the number one question i get is, how did it -- how do i make a difference? can i as an individual make a difference for our country? and if you ever wanted to know, can you make a difference, they actually asked the question in a gallup poll yesterday -- and i will paraphrase it a bit -- but the town hall meetings, the rallies, the events, all that is happening right now across the country, does it make you more sympathetic to the protesters, to the americans out there doing these events and the town hall meetings and rallies and what they stand for, or does it make you more said that to the health care plan that is coming out of washington. it was a pretty fair question, i thought. they're asking not where you stand on the issue, but in reaction to these town hall meetings and the protest and the rallies that you are seen, how

does it make you feel about the protesters verses what is coming out of washington. i was encouraged to seek that by a wide margin, americans said, i like -- it makes you pay attention to what the folks in the town hall meetings are doing. [applause] and that should encourage you, i encourage all of us. -- and encourage all of us. that is what everyone looks at. they asked independents this question and by a two to one margin, 35% to 16%, they said those protests makes me sympathetic to the protesters then to the washington elite. i will tell you something. take heart. when you see us being vilified as a un-american or evil-mongers

which harry reid said a few days ago. when you hear all the attacks and demeaning you and me the activities we are undertaking on behalf of freedom, take heart because the american public is looking at the other side's attacks on us and they are looking at their preposterous stands on this issue. their statements on the issue. they are siding with us. americans are about common sense and they get when their freedoms are its stake and they stand up and fight when -- for those freedoms and your in the vanguard. i am encouraged by the poll numbers. i want to take a moment and tell you about americans for prosperity and americans for prosperity foundation. it started four and a half years ago. it was an idea that asked a question. we know that whenever there is a budget fight or tax battle, whether in washington or state capital, we know there are going

to be people on the big government side. you always see that. maybe that is the public employee union standing up and saying we need the money for this government service. maybe it is for the radical environmentalists saying we need that money to save the environment and so -- safe polar bears and everything else they are for. they have their groups out there standing up. they are organized usually around getting something from government as garver norquist pointed out. he is here tonight. he pointed this out. they want something from government. our side simply wants to be left alone. it is harder to explain to our people that you have to get involved. afp answer the question, can you go out and build a grass-roots organization locally, city by city and state by state to fight on free-market issues?

are there enough people who will get involved and defend their economic freedoms to build an organization? we did not know the answer to that question. there were a couple of business guys who said let's try this and we will put a little bit of money behind this. we started in three states. kansas, north carolina, and texas. those three states in 2004 and we started having our own town hall meetings before it became the thing to do. we started holding events on the issues. we started talking about tax issues and spending. we found something that was incredibly -- encouraging and exciting. this was during the bush years. it was a difficult time out there. we found that people would get involved. they would go to rallies and events. they would call an e-mail their legislators demanding it.

we had our first battle in the state of kansas. we have our steed directors. we work together along with a number of kansans across the state. there was a democratic government and a republican legislator -- legislature and we [unintelligible] we did not have it. what we did was to go back into the districts of the house and senate members in kansas and we went to work. we got people to call and go to their office hours to write letters and e-mails to them. you know what? we found that among the half later when the boats to place, we had beaten the tax increase that was a done deal in kansas. we thought maybe we have got something here. [applause] we brought on mark block.

we brought on mark block. the wisconsin table. mark became the fourth -- we started growing and taking this thing across the country and before long we had nine states, and in 16 states, and then 21 states. this year, two of our newest states have just launched, nebraska and arkansas. there's too -- their directors are here tonight and we are here tonight with chapters and half the state in this great country, 25 of the states with an organization built up from the grassroots committed to defending the economic freedoms. we are trying to win and we're starting to see the result of that. i to want to give one admonition, if i could. what pat did before the united

states congress is inspiring, isn't it? i am an older guy.ar from i have been in politics often done for 25 years. i know that in campaigns for my own experience and in public policy and the life of public policy, there are moments in time that come along once a generation if even then. i am telling you as fellow freedom fighters, we are in one of those moments right now. a great deal is at stake. i am not going to tell you, you know what is at stake with health care. you know what is at stake with cap and trade. in know what is at stake with card check and with stimulus 2.0 and you know what is at stake. we all do. i am telling you, beyond the immediate threats that we face, which i believe we are going to win on, we will be them on. america has woken up and we will win but beyond those threats that we face in the short term,

i am telling you as fellow activists in the free market movement, we have a moment in time where we can literally turn this country around for the long haul. i hope we seize it and i urge all of you to seize this moment. we have three more weeks left before congress goes in on september 8. when they go back in, it will be the speed race. it will be a drag race to the finish line on these issues. we need to fight as hard as we can. learn all you can this weekend. i am glad you have come. i was talking to someone from west texas earlier this afternoon. thank you for coming. now this, we have an opportunity that may not come along again in our lifetime. think about that. in the next three weeks, before the go back in from some timber eight to congress and the session, we have a chance we may never have again to influence

americans for cause. americans are listening. have you noticed that? have you noticed that when you go around, people normally do not talk politics, they are interested in talking politics right now. a lot of americans are concerned who normally are not the least bit concerned about what is happening in a public policy world. you have an opportunity, we have an opportunity right now to win this and not just when the short-term battles. as a movement, a lot of times, we look at the immediate threat. we hopefully win but we either win or lose and what do we do? we retreat, right? we go back to our lives and say that threat is over. that is our desire, i know. i am telling you right now, we have a chance to not just when the short-term victories on health care, cap and trade, and card check but we have an opportunity to change the attitudes and the very political fabric of this country. i know you care because you are

here. there are a lot of things you could be doing tonight. i was telling someone once, we are not normal, right? you're not normal. i am just being candid. you are here on a friday night. it is beautiful outside. you could be doing a lot of great things but you chose to be here defending your freedoms under country. i appreciate that. it is not enough. it is not enough. in the next three weeks of this recess before congress goes in but especially when congress goes back in, we have a chance to literally turn this country to our side for the long haul. and to make a difference. that is my admonition to you is to go out and to make that happen. moveon.org, i signed for their e-mail list a year ago. i was immediately stunned at what opportunities i was given to get involved by being a part of that. i was being invited to meet ups

within a mile or two of my house. i was invited to have coffee with folks. around election time, amazingly, i had two neighbors through this list offer to take me to the polls if i wanted to vote and they would drive me. two of my neighbors. that is the challenge we face. we're catching up. our movement is moving at lightening speed and we're catching up but we have a long way to go. i am excited tomorrow, what eric tellford and his team have in store for you. i mentioned a moment ago before dinner that talk radio is an amazing ally in this battle. whenever we do rallies or events around the country, the first thing we do after a mailing our list and saying, come out and we are coming to your town and so on, the first thing we do after the mail? we go on and advertise on what

ever talk radio that is conservative. we know where the passion and energy is and we know where people are going to for information. they call it destination programming and these guys on radio have destination folks to come because they want to learn and be inspired. we have one of those guys here tonight. when we came into pennsylvania earlier, our first tour was on a card and check tour. we went to pittsburgh and had a rally. we had some good union friends with us. it was a raucous time. we went to harrisburg and it was a generally raucous time and we had a friend through these battles on card check. he stayed with us during the cap and trade effort and during the health-care effort. we have a bus. have any of you seen the hands of my health care bus? we did 28 or 29 stops across pennsylvania. we got to go to a lot of great

communities. the speaker has been with us promoting it and talking about it and giving a forum and i am glad to have him with us. he is r.j. harris. please welcome him. [applause] >> good evening. how're you tonight? hello from whb 580. one of the highest-rated stations in the country. [applause] i am r.j. harris and i am running for office of president of the united states of america. that is what i get. i heard some laughing there. i get that because my job as the

morning host is to make people happy in the morning so usually, i am talking about hillary's with this new blue pants suit, larger than they had been or bill clinton gallivanting off to las vegas without hillary to celebrate his birthday. or even perhaps, the fact that we hear that president bush went soft on dick cheney which brought to mind that instead of waterboarding, the president wanted to give the people at guantanamo sponge baths. i get laughter when talking about running for the presidency because people are used to meet being a goofball. in 2007 i listed the five points i felt were the most important to straighn out the u.s. of -- united states of america. i started doing campaign speeches in january of 2009 this year. not only out of frustration over

the election results but the fact that neither candidate paid attention to the five points the way they should have going on. i only have 12 minutes to do what it should take me a half an hour to do with you. there are a couple of them, i will not spend a lot of time with. the first is, win the war deon terror at all costs. -- win t dhe wahe war on terrort all costs. we have the global contingency operation and all this other politically correct the job that needs to be stowed. number two, pass and energy policy based on reality now. drill for domestic oil immediately. onshore and offshore. build refineries immediately.

drill for natural gas immediately. build new nuclear power plants now. also push full speed ahead to develop new energy technologies for industry vehicles and homes. we need to do some of the simple things as well. every year, we interrupt the gasoline supply in the united states of america to go to blended gasoline for illinois and california. why can we come up with one blend of gasoline networks nationwide and stop this nonsense? that is something simple. . .

they leave an awful carbon for print and the environmentalists are down on them now. coal plants, no way. nuclear, no to nuclear. then we get to the environmentalists who are upset over windfarms, that are not going to contribute a a great deal anyway, because they kill birds. we have all heard that. now we get to solar panels, acres and acres of beautiful solar panels. i think that will wring their chines, too. i am at -- and environmentalists. i recycle before it was required in my area. we take care of things and i learned it as a boy scout, but you know, none of us get credit for that because the environmental extremists have hijacked that title. it is about time that we take it back. we have made progress in the u.s. and we get no credit for it. that has to end. [applause]

optimists in the energy field say that if we meet every goal set we can achieve 15% of our energy from wind. 15%. that is it. if we meet every goal we can achieve 5% of our energy from solar, 5%. here is what i asked the extremists and liberals, where is the other 80% coming from? they never want to answer that. they do their wishing and hoping and dreaming. that is what did this, and motions. real numbers seek the truth. we are a petroleum based society. we are never more than inches from plastic. all you have to look at is how much petroleum we have. this is not about gasoline only.

our nuclear navy aboard america the most resources that anybody has. we need to push forward immediately. this is the best thing that we can do. do nor the parts are coming from? france. 80% of their energy comes from nuclear power, to the point germinated against the law -- german-made it against the law. liberals would rather have us shy from chavez in cuba who want to drill offshore week of the drilling for oil. what is wrong with this picture? how many americans are going to

buy a $40,000 electric car? where is the power coming from? they block everything that generate power. we are putting little into the infrastructure of electricity of the united states. we are going to have elector cars at $40,000? numbers do not lie. electricity rates in the devaney are going of 40% -- in pennsylvania are going up to 40%. barack obama has admitted to cap and trade that electricity rates will skyrocket. they are going of 40% year as it is. how much more can we bear after that? global warming is suspect. i am a cellist. i am a cellist. -- geolo -- we know the record of the

earth changing. do we know that it happens continually and we ham operators know that the solar cycle has been messed up for some time. what is interesting is that obama's new chief of nasa while speaking on behalf of a robust budget for nasa was quick to point out that we learned of global warming on mars and saturn. it is a problem with the sun. well, i can explain saturn. they have all of those saturn vehicles, you know, the suv's. not sure about mars. if the sun is affecting global warming, how is it that we write it off here? i will tell you how. al gore and the elitist know much more than the face of the earth, don't they? follow the money, people. this energy policy is going to bring america to its knees, without question. . .

you do not get in to visit or become a citizen unless you are here legitimately. i do believe we need a guest worker program. balance the budget before it is too late. too late. implement zero based budgeting at the federal level. scrutinizing every penny spent and every program in a seven- year rotation. reduce the tax burden accordingly. i have had elected officials tell me this will not work. what they are telling me is that you cannot run the government based on practical business strategies and you are born to a great job with health care?

-- going to do a great job with health care? i think not. part of it is us. we are a greedy society. even our for our indian and when they do not have televisions and things they think -- our poor are indignant when did not have televisions and things like blu- ray players. which came first, the chicken or the egg? i know we used to many credit cards. we have too many cars. we have gone overboard. we have to take personal responsibility. it is time that we insist that our government do the same.

fix healthcare and keep the government out of running it. [applause] torot free -- tort reform is at the top of the list. you notice that the barack obama is doing nothing but nothing about tort reform. we know why that is, barack obama. allow plants to compete in 50 states. there is no reason that we should be able to buy a health care plan -- one not sure what calif. -- from another state if it works. pharmaceuticals have to be competitive as well. there is no reason that we should not be able to buy pharmaceuticals from other countries like canada. if it will drive the prices down for people in the united states of america. the pharmaceuticals the company is now on board with obama

because there is something in the health care bill that says the government will not be allowed to negotiate prices. follow the money. consumers also have to be more responsible about our health care costs. we expect everything to be paid for in this day and age. when anything goes up out of our pocket we know. the moment healthcare costs go up, we moan again. we used to pay the doctor went to see the doctor. now a junior $50 if i go to the emergency. -- now i paid $250 if i go to the emergency room. do you want to use the emergency rooms for colds? do it. it will cost $250. better yet, where 20 cents a packet -- we are going to send you a package. we are going to send you home and give you nothing.

i do want to commend all of you in a big way because the rallies that we have been doing and the things if you have been doing on the internet are very important. when i gave my speech in harrisburg, here is what i did. i took the will to call robert gleason, the head of the republican party and tell him that the candidates for president for the republican party is right here in harrisburg, pa.. he is going to laugh at you. he is going to dismiss you. this is not about rj harris. it is about the fact that the republican party has been ignoring grass-roots republican for many years. there for speeding as candidates

after candidates that we do not want. -- they are forced feeding us candidates after candidates that we do not want. they tried to do it again not too long ago when the state party tried to put everything they could think of because they said a conservative could not win the seat that we are going to win with pat tieooney. they finally listened. -- pat toomey. they find a listen. god bless the united states of america. thank you. >> i am michelle bachman. i have seen firsthand how important it is for

conservatives to be engaged on- line activists bit of they have done a tremendous job. their mastery of online activism helped prepare president obama for the white house. well they are making great strides online, it is vital that we pick up our case. on august 14 and 15 in pittsburgh, pa. americans for prosperity will be hosting their second annual write on-line conference to counter the actions of the left. the conference will bring together new media activists representatives of hundreds of citizen activists to provide important leadership and grassroots training. this will offer the tools and inspiration necessary for us to more effectively impact public

policy in favor of what we believe beta limited government. free enterprise. there'll be a slaughter program -- a solid program of workshops that can be used to mobilize free market policies but i only wish i was going to be able to be there with you to silken of the great ideas my schedule prohibits me -- be there with you to soak in all the great ideas. unfortunately, my schedule prohibits me. with the 200010 elections approaching, it is time we prepare ourselves to take our fight to the locals. computer to computer. house to house. neighbor to neighbor. it is time we returned to the tried and true part of grass- roots campaigning.

thakns so much for listening -- thanks so much for listening circle august 14 and 15. make sure you get yourself to pittsburgh. [applause] >> our next speaker is the founder of keystone conconservative.com please welcome him. >> i have been looking for this evening with great anticipation. like many of my double -- fellow citizens, i recognize the rare opportunity we have tonight to hear from a statement. he is knowledgeable, honest, and

eloquent about the issues facing our country. he comes from a blue-collar working class family. he worked his way through harvard. he worked here in pennsylvania as a small-business owner at the rookies restaurant. he served in congress as the leading advocate for limited government and for american values. recently, he worked to fight for free enterprise, lower taxes, and less wasteful government spending. he is a pilot and an author of the recent big "the road to prosperity" and continues to cast a vision for how to revise the american dream. please give a hearty welcome to have to me -- pat toomey.

>> thank you for that kind introduction. congratulations on the great work you do. we worked closely on many occasions because we share a common mission. if they use different tactics to advance that mission. both organizations are committed to the prosperity of america. both understand that prosperity

comes from freedom. i saluted the americans for prosperity for all that you do. i am convinced he will be a very important voice in the american debate going forward. i want to tip my hat to the folks who are here from the new media, the folks who of done a tremendous job in the blogging community in getting a message across. as some of you may have noticed, full media is not always on our side. you are doing an amazing job of leveling the playing build and helping us get a message out. i am very optimistic about their future. i have a few thoughts i want to share with you tonight. before i do, i want to give you fair warning about the

challenges i contend with when it comes to public speaking. i have a little story that will illustrate that very well. i am the father of two small children. the school they attend has a program would invite parents to come in and speak to the class about what they do for a living. being the dutiful father i am, i went to my second grade classroom and stood in front of 25 7 year olds and explained what i did --on my way to freedom. i thought i had done a pretty good job. a little girl looked up at me and said "i just want to tina

that is the worst speech i ever heard -- i want you to know that is the were speech i ever heard of my entire life." [laughter] my daughter heard her say this. my daughter said not to listen to a worrd she says, she just as with other children say. it was a humbling experience i still want to share with you in little bit of political context. i thought i was running against arlen specter. you guys pay attention. you probably thought of returning against arlen specter. arlen specter decided he was not running against me once he saw the poll. [applause] i had every intention of the game in the republican primary.

i did not know i would drive him clear out of the party. it is worth reflecting on how extraordinary it is for a long- term incumbent member of the united states senate to switch parties. it is a rare occasion. it is for dearlyaá@@@@@@wr@ @ @ 13 months before a primary when the incumbent has a $70 million start. you might wonder why this person would come to the conclusion that he would have to abandon the battlefield without a fight. it is because pennsylvania citizens, and i think, increasingly american citizens, are coming to the conclusion that washington is out of control and anybody who has been part of that problem, contributing to that problem, has a serious political problem. argue -- i think it is

almost indisputable -- the we have the most liberal elected government in the history of republicans. there is no balance in washington. there is a single party that is in complete control. the republican party is a bystander. the guys who are in control are attempting a really and president -- unprecedented march to the left. there tried to take america down a road we have never seen before. i think they are really trying to change the fundfundamental nature of society. they are trying to change the nature of the american policy. this manifest itself -- we seem to say any manifestation every day. the obvious ones include the serial bailouts, full nationalization of 2/3 of the domestic car industry, the nasa station a much of the banking

industry. -- nationalization of much of the banking industry. huge tax increases that are not guaranteed. huge new taxes and restrictions on energy use, expanding the power of organized labor and the dramatic expansion of government role in health care. these guys are just warming up. the punitive of that of all these proposals would profoundly change the nature of our society. a lot of people voted for a change fuzzball. this is not the change they had in mind -- last fall. this is not the change they had in mind. i think what is driving with this are folks who are not fond of the american experiment and

tradition of limited government personal responsibility, democratic capitalism. instead, there are some folks in washington who are a bit more bond of the european welfare state model. that is what they are trying to impose on us. i will acknowledge that i think france is probably a very lovely place to visit. i do not want to be french. [applause] increasingly across the country, i think candidates for public office who are associated with in contributing to advancing this swayed to the left will find themselves and political problems. this is appropriate. this is a healthy back lash that is developing. i think the 2010 cycle will be a

major push back on this out of control agenda. it is a very healthy thing that the american people are doing, pushing back on this. these policy initiatives have been tried before in other parts to the world. they have been tried in america in many cases and have failed. they will fail again in the are about to be implemented. let me suggest a very world the year low. -- worldly parallel. there is a great book called " the forgotten man." it came out in 2007. she talks about the flawed policies of the great depression. even in my book, i talk about

this parallel between the failed policies of the 1930's that took what might have been an ordinary recession and turned it into the greatest economic debacle of the 20th century. those same flawed policies are being threatened upon us again. i advocate the five areas that i think are the most egregious. the first when it comes to mind is protectionism. the restriction of freedom, a tree, and other countries. in 1929, over 1000 very well qualified people signed a petition urging congress not to pass the terrace. congress paid no attention. they passed in with. the result of putting these new taxes on products americans were buying was very predictable. it was massive retaliation.

when he retaliated against americans, american experts collapse. -- exports collapsed. virtually all economic historians agree that the trade war that was put in motion by the smoot-holley terrace increase the severity of the great depression. what did these guys in washington want to do now? they want to go back to protectionism. we have to trade agreements that have been negotiated, with south korea and with columbia. they are more beneficial to american exporters and to exporters from those countries. organized labor doesn't want to battle. nancy pelosi and harry reid will do the bidding of organized labor. there is no advancement of those agreements. even worse, and the cap and trade legislation there is an

admission that if we pass that and sign it into law it will put americans, businesses, and workers at such a huge disadvantage that our own domestic production will drop off enormously. the only way to offset that is to impose a huge tax on american to try to buy imported stuff. embedded in that legislation could be the beginning of a serious movement of protectionism that could lead to a trade war. it is about the last thing we ought to be doing in this economic environment. the second thing that they got wrong during the 1930's was the sheer magnitude of spending. fdr launch all kinds of spending programs, public works. some were justifiable and productive. they went way too far. you do not have to take my word for it. at the are's owned treasury secretary -- at the our's on

treasury secretary -- fdr's own treasury secretary said "we are spending more money and we have ever spent before and it does not work. we have just as much unemployment as when we started and enormous debt to boot." sound familiar? let's think about the spending they are doing now. the stimulus is one and one massive spending measures that have passed already this year. it is hard to wrap your brain around and $800 billion bill because the numbers are of such magnitude. imagine you went out and spend $1 million. most of us never spend a million dollars in a single day. imagine you did. imagine anyone spent out and spend $1 million tomorrow. and that he started to spend $1 million a day on the david jesus

christ was born and spent $1 million a day every day of every year since then until today. if he did that, we still love has spent as much as they spent in a single bill without bothering to read it first. the day after the president signed that bill, he hosted a fiscal responsibility summit at the white house. you cannot make this up. [laughter] how about taxes? during the 1930's, we had a series of tax increases that were staggering come increases on wages, income, capital. taxes went through the roof. investment was discouraged. work was discouraged. the depression just lingered on and on. what are we being promised now? tax increases on income,

capital, businesses. it makes no sense to impose huge new taxes especially when an economy is struggling. the fourth item, labor laws. in the 1930's there was the wagner act. as a result, it reduce the flexibility of business in the workplace. it was a time when businesses needed to innovate and find ways to struggle and to work their way through a very difficult economic environment. at that time, flexibility was lost. the power was expanded. what do we have now? a card tech. legislation that will allow unionization by intimidation. it makes no sense. then there is the fifth category and it is the excessive regulation. fdr, you have to give him credit

for creativity. the way in which the creatively decided to impose new restrictions and regulations on the way people did business was absolutely unprecedented. it was breathtaking. it was devastating. some of those regulations lasted for 50 years. what do we have? where proposals for whole new regulations on energy, financial services, the automobile industry. i would argue that the parallel between the failed policies that turned what might have been an ordinary recession into the great depression are being threatened upon us again. the good news is that the battle is not over yet. we have not lost it yet. most of what they are proposing is still in the proposal stage. most of it has not been enacted. the bill has been passed but of the money has not been sent yet.

i think this is where we come into the picture. this is where we have an incredibly important opportunity, and the obligation, to step up and make our voices heard and to use every legitimate means available to us to remind policymakers of the flaws in this approach. the blogger share play an important role. -- b. blockers -- the bloggers here play an important role. you have the ability to play public opinion. that can change the outcome of legislation. consider the health-care debate. it is very illustrative. in 1993, when the clintons tried to have the government take over healthcare in a variant of the current efforts, it was the

organize health care providers that fought back. insurance, pharmaceuticals, ama. there were various groups of health care providers in the industry that pushed back institutionally and able to defeat the legislation. the obama administration learned that lesson. what they did was they went and coopted those groups and got them on board. it'll be interesting to learn the history of exactly how. they pretty much peeled off those various groups and got them on board. they have the institutional support for their bill. they got a huge majority in congress but if they have not been able to pass the bill. why? ordinary americans like us have risen up and voice our opposition forcefully, vigorously come intelligently, and are to accurately predict the politicians are getting scared. -- articulately and the

politicians are getting scared. i think we are going to win that battle. mr. vayet today president clints speaking at the netroots gathering here in town. i am told that they have a somewhat larger numbers than we had. i would suggest they give their ideas compared to ours, it gets in times as many people as we have come is still not even close. -- is still not an even fight. former president clinton said something to the effect that regardless of how far down they deride the popularity of this health-care takeover, he did not call it a takeover, regardless of how unpopular it has become, we have to do it.

such is their content for the views of the american people. legitimate use by people who are voicing illegitimate concern. my prediction is that @@@@@@@@@ the voice of the american people is rising and it is too loud, the cumulative effect of all of these proposals as long as we continue to articulate why we are close to this. we all know there are things we could do to make health care better, more affordable to more americans. i have been saying for a long time that we need to fix the broken legal system. we tolerate abuse of a legal system that drives up the cost of the health care system. the forces doctors and health- care providers to practice defensive medicine in order to

test procedures that are not really necessary but they have to do it to diminish the risk of being sued. is an obvious opportunity to drive down costs. we ought to support legislation which will allow people to buy health insurance regulated by another state. why that forced the insurance companies to compete the same way everybody else does? question pennsylvania family is able to decide -- why shouldn't pennsylvania families be able to decide if they want help from another state? here are two things we can do better guarantee to lower-cost without curbing quality at all, lower-cost means health care is more visible to everyone. this is the kind of reform that makes sense. making common-sense reforms rather than turning the whole system turned upside down it

does not need to be turned upside down. the simple power of that logic is going to prevent them from getting this through. that'll be very much to the advantage of our society, health, and the economy. i want to close on this thought. i hope that everybody understands how important our own personal individual role is in the national debate. it really matters. i hope no one will tell you that economic difference. i saw how one man walking down to the house floor on principle, taking a politically courageous stand, could change the entire debate and outcome of legislation. interjection said one man with courage is a majority. -- andrew jackson said one man

with courage is a majority. i think we need someone to stand up for the people who pay all the bills in this country. i have a feeling sometimes in washington they forget that someone has to pay all these bills. i would like to tell you that if i'm fortunate enough to be elected to the senate, there several aspects of the world that i would like to pay. there are two that i want to be candid about. one is a taxable role. it is important republicans have a seat at the table and have a functioning two-party system. that means the ability to have a filibuster and put the brakes on an out of control freight train and to be able to force a second party had a seat at the table. i believe that is a role a complaint. there is a broader role that i

have. if i'm fortunate enough to be elected to the senate, i hope and intend to be the voice that walk down the senate floor and remind my fellow senators and american people watching what the real source of prosperity is in america. governments do not great wealth. governments can destroy wealth. wealth and prosperity and opportunity have always come from ordinary men and women who get of ago to work and make things that we volume -- get up and go to work and make things that we value. it is not that complicated. people make things that w value. they provide services we need. it is that exchange that is the source of all prosperity, all opportunity and well. if government honors the fundamental principles i talk

about an hour but -- in my book, keeping taxes and spending low, keeping regulation a light, prosperity is unavoidable. people voluntarily cooperate and innovate. on the brewers take risks. workers find new ways to be productive. it happened spontaneously. sony's remind those guys in washington. we went from being a third world colonial backward to the most benevolent and richest country in the world. we did not do that by expecting the government to provide for all our needs. we did that by believing in limited government and personal freedom and personal responsibility, respect for traditional western civilization and values. those are the core american

ideas. nothing has changed. if we embrace those ideas again, we can get out of this economic slowdown in the 21st century can be the best that we have ever had. i believe with all my heart that it is our birthright as americans to dream great dreams. it is the irresponsibility of elected officials to defend thank you very much. thank you. [applause] >> white house senior adviser was a featured speaker at last week's convention of on-line activists.

she covers a range of issues including the health care debate, detainee interrogation practices, gay marriage, in the military's the don't ask, don't tell policy. hear her comments tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. troops are working to secure polling places said this week's elections can go forward and afghan's can decide their future. the president made his remarks today in phoenix, arizona. you can see his speech tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern. tonight on c-span 2, ellen miller discusses how her organization uses the internet to provide transparency in government. this month, c-span to's book weekend continues during prime

time. >> this fall, and to the home of america's highest court. from the grand public places to those only accessible by the nine justices. coming the first sunday, october on c-span. >> this morning, washington journal talk with the author of a book on the history of disease control and its use in public health policy. it is about an hour. from new york city, philip alcabes, author of "dread." let's get right to it. early in the book, you write that epidemics fascinate us.

te that epidemics fascinate us. host: give it your best shot. describing an epidemic for us. what is it? how should we look at? guest: bitan epidemic is always a story that a society tells itself about a disease outbreak or the threat of a disease outbreak. sometimes we talk about epidemics that do not qualify as diseases in the classical sense. for instance, we talk about an epidemic of obesity nowadays. 10 years ago, we were talking about an epidemic of road rage. those do not seem like diseases in the classical sense, if you think about the plague or colorists. it is a story we tell about a social crisis. maybe that is the best way to put its. host: you also say that

epidemics create opportunities to convey messages. host: this is right at the front of the book. explain more. guest: it often seems to be true that when we face a social problem, when we do not know how to deal with it, we do not know what the best way is to make it go away. we handed over to the public health industry. the way we do that is by calling it an epidemic. i gave an example a minute ago about rage. when people in the 1980's were concerned about what was happening with children in day care centers. you might remember the hysteria about the satanic ritual abuse. more seriously, there has been a continuing problem about domestic violence.

that was considered a police problem for a long time. later, it became a public health problem. i think that we sometimes call things epidemics because we want to hand them over to the public health apparatus. on the other hand, there are real disease outbreaks, like swine flu. host: the author is philip alcabes. u.s. policy for disease control, the main topic here, and we have separate lines for democrats, republicans, and independents. fear and fantasy, you spent a long period of time. it is quite a span of history. what is most common in all of

that history about epidemics? tell us more about the reaction to them. guest: the most common thing is dread. we bring our fears to the way we look at the world around us. those fears are complex. there are lots of pieces to them. the innate dread of death, destruction, and social disintegration is part of it. there's more. there are anxieties that we have about the world. we see an epidemic coming, or someone tells us that one is coming, and we often imagine that this disease outbreak is telling us that we were rit to be afraid. in the 19th century, cholera was

the emergencing infectious disease of the day. it had never been seen in western europe or the united states. in the second quarter of the 19th century, in 1831-1832, it caused a terrible outbreak. it came back a few times. the discussion about cholera was always a layered with the social issues of the day. part eagerly toward the irish, who were both in england and ireland. if you read what people were writing about cholera in those days, it was often about the habits of the irish, or about immigration. cholera has nothing to do with speed irish or immigration. it is a waterborne disease caused by bacteria.

but in all the discussion, there was a reflection of the social anxieties' of that day. host: more of the words of our author. the first call for philip alcabes, author of "dread" is from the list, minn.. caller: good morning. this is a great guest. this ties in with the previous guest and the callers, but also in swine flu. in the top people were having about blaming the mexicans yes,

all the fear in people. just afraid of didying. guest: and afraid of plenty of other things. we have our worries about modern life. swine flu is a great example. i wish i could have written this book a few months later. i could have included a lot more interesting information about how we have responded to an incipient epidemic. as the caller mentioned, at the beginning, there were lots of concerns about mexicans. @@@@@@@ @ i heard on from a reporter from chicago told me that there were soccer games between the mexican team and another team, and people were boycotting the games because they did not want to get

close to mexicans. the typical response is that some foreigner has done this to us. the mexicans did not bring the swine flu to america, but as the caller suggests, those kind of anxieties come out when we see what looks like a crisis to us. middletown, new york, republican caller. caller: they have proven that this swine flu outbreak was developed -- it does not have the pedigree. it has traces of human, swine flu, and bird flu. they tested it on the ferrets and the ferrets died. they called back and said they never radiated it.

they said they gave homeless people in poland the test vaccine and people died. i was in the army in 1976 in the first outbreak at a military base. it always happens in military bases. like the doctor that says they're going to reduce the world population by 80% and we need another type of 1918 pandemic. they want to reduce the world population. it is all out there if anybody wants to read. thank you. host: thank you. philip alcabes, any reaction? guest: i have heard some, but not all of those rumors about swine flu and its origin. the investigation was done on where the strain of h1n1 came

from. it was conclusively determined that it did not come out of a laboratory. there's an article that was published about six weeks ago with the pedigree of the virus. i can neither recalled to the pedigree or the name exactly when the article came out, but it showed pretty clearly, as the caller suggested, this h1n1 virus has genetic pieces that come from viruses that have infected different species, including pigs and birds. we do not have to imagine some malevolent laboratory worker putting this together. this is what happens in nature. genes of flu viruses recombined. sometimes come across species.

this seems to have evolved in a complicated way, but not a naturunnatural. the caller brought up the 1976 outbreak. that is important and relevant. in 19676, there was concern based on a few cases of h1n1 that seemed to come from a pig virus that was isolated from recruits at fort dix in, new jersey. it became the basis for a nationwide vaccination campaign. in the end, there was no widespread outbreak. there were about 230 cases among recruits. there were 300 cases in greater new jersey. there was no big help break of swine flu. -- there was no big outbreak of swine flu. there was a nationwide vaccination campaign, which seems to have caused some cases

of a syndrome. 1976 is probably relevant to our experience now, although, we are not sure exactly how. the caller mentioned an allegation that eugenicists want to reduce the world's population. if so, a flu virus would not be a good way to do that. the very worst flu outbreak of all time was in 1918, sometimes erroneously called the spanish flu. that killed maybe 600,000 people in the u.s. that means that over 99% of the american population survived it. that, the worst pandemic of all time. something to keep in mind. even what seemed like a really

terrible outbreaks to do not to diminish the population by that much. host: our guest was educated at union college and also cal berkeley, colombia, johns hopkins. philip alcabes is also an associate professor at the colleges of school of health sciences in new york city. philip alcabes, author of "dread." as we look back in history, picking up with the black death itself, as far as the dread goes, how did that dread, how the communication, how did anxiety manifested self in those days? how did it change in the hundreds of years? guest: we are talking about black ducks, which was in the middle of the 14th century. it came to europe and the 13

forties. -- came to europe in the 1340s. in five years, it killed a quarter or more of the european population. they played was not brand new. it had happened before. it had even happen before in europe. at that time, it was well of the memory of anyone who was alive in your plan the 1340s the previous outbreak was over 600 years before. it had circulated in the area that would be central asia now. it had not come to europe for all the time. when it did come, as you might imagine, for a disease that was killing a quarter of the townspeople, it was terrifying. there's a really classic example of the way that a coming of a disease outbreak galvanized fears that people had about

society at the time. one of the horrible things that happened -- the countries that we know of them now did not exist. it would be the western part of germany and parts of france in part of belgium and the netherlands. the massacre of jews. it was a very christian time. christianity itself was changing. people had their anxieties about that. when the plague can, townspeople in dozens of towns massacred jews. they said it was a way of warding off the plague. for that time, the massacres stopped. every law the fears and -- there were a lot of fears and unrest

about the way society was changing. the end of feudalism, the growth of towns, and the changes in the church came out of this very dark picture. host: lexington, ky on the democrats' line. your honor with philip alcabes. good morning. caller: good morning. i'll understand that fleas from rats cause black dust. what do we have to fear about fleas from domestic animals? guest: yes, the caller is correct that plague can be spread by fleas. it is normally a disease of small mammals. often prrodents.

nowadays, it can be found in a wild rodents. that is the most common reservoir in the western hemisphere. the radical, a flea that has been jumping from rodent to rodent that happens to land on the human could transmit the plague to a human. very few cases of plague in the u.s. every year. a handful. it is a bacterial infection. it is treatable with antibiotics. i do know that it is not a big public health worry. that is partly because it is treatable. we do not have the same ecological arrangements that erupted in the -- that europe

did in 1340's. rat species is different. the entire is logical system is different now. i am not sure if i have answered the question about fleas in particular. if you what can be in a place where there was wild rodents known to harbor the plague, your physician might advise you to come in for care if you have symptoms. it is rare. host: the next call is from mark on the independent line from california. caller: and was concerned about the origins of some of these diseases and whether or not a biological researcher may be involved in this. for instance, most people may

recall the panic that occurred when aids was right been the nation. two people initially came forward and said they knew what the disease was. the french person wrote a book about aids. in the book, he said that he believed that aids as it is in africa was likely brought to africa by u.s. homosexuals who contracted the disease here from research that was going on in new york and places like that, and then took the disease to africa. this is one of the discoverers of the disease who said this. this is not some sort of crackpot. when he said that jews were often executed when diseases started to spread. this was also true in germany.

most people might be surprised to learn that -- hitler talks quite a lot about disease. and makes the connection between jews and syphilis and homosexuals. guest: let me try to break this down. there have been a number of allegations that the aids virus may have come from a laboratory. that is almost certainly not the case for the main reason that the state of knowledge about molecular biology in the late 1970's when the aids virus started to produce the disease that we now call aids was not sufficiently advanced to create a virus that is at dispatthis

sophisticated. the allegation that americans brought aids to africa -- american and european scientists believe that the virus that causes aids originated in africa. africans believed it originated in the u.s. for quite some time. this is a fairly common phenomenon. everybody thinks the terrible epidemic came from someone else. it is so ancient a phenomenon that the ancient greek historian wrote that when the plague of athens cam around 430bc, the people said they came from africa bill that goes on today. -- came from africa. that goes on today. like an earlier caller said, people like