power that enables him also to bring all things. . we who are very privileged to watch the mass this morning had to be touched by the wonderful thought played by the younger generation of kennedys, the

warm and very personal tribute in the elegies of teddy's son and even that of the president of the united states whose friendship was so powerful. this made our farewell to senator kennedy and unforgettable. on learning of his death last wednesday morning, tributes to his half century of leadership in american life and politics, may i offer my own short on again. they called him the land of the senate. indeed, that is what he was. his zeal for what he believed made the difference in our nation's life.

sometimes, we who were his friends and had great affection for him, we would get mad at him for what we believe was the wrong side of the issue. but we always knew and we were always touched by his fight for the underdog. his legacy will surely place them in the dozen or so rategre. shortly before he died, he wrote a moving letter to the holy father. he asked the president if he would deliver it personally. the pope replied with a folly message of concern.

when vicki and i and others began to talk about the organization of this great service, the happy thought emerged to use part of these letters to show the warm and paternal spirit of pope benedict xvi. most holy father, i ask the benefits -- president obama to personally handle this letter to you. as a man of deep faith himself, he understands how important my roman catholic faith is to me and i am so deeply grateful to him. i hope this letter and find you in good health. i pray that you have all of god's blessings as you leave your church and inspire our world during these challenging times. i am writing with deep humility to ask that you pray fit -- that you pray for me as my own health declines. i was diagnosed with brain

cancer more than a year ago. although i continue treatment, the disease is taking its toll on me. i am 77 years old and preparing for the next passage of life. i have been blessed to be a part of a wonderful onfamily. my parents kept their catholic faith in the center of their lives. it has sustained and nurtured and provided solace to meet in my darkest hours. i know that i have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith, i have tried to write my path. i want you to know that in my years of elected office, i have done my best to champion the rights of the port and open doors of economic opportunity. i worked to welcome the immigrants, to fight discrimination, and expand access to health care and

education. i have opposed the death penalty and worked to end war appear. i also want you to know that, even though i am ill, i am committed to do everything i can to achieve access to health care for everyone in my country. this has been the political cause of my life. i believe in [unintelligible] and i will continue to advocate for it has my colleagues in the senate and dive work for -- and i work for an overall health policy. i have always tried to be a faithful catholic, your holiness. i have never failed to believe and respect the fundamental teachings of my faith.

i continue to pray for god's blessings on you and on our church and would be most thankful for your prayer for me. two weeks later, a reply came back from the vatican appeared in part, it read as follows. "the holy father has read the letter that you have entrusted to president obama. he was saddened to hear of your illness and best to assure you of his concern. he is particularly grateful [unintelligible] his holiness prays that, in the days ahead, he may be sustained in faith and hope and granted to the precious grace of joyful surrendered to the world of god, our merciful father. he invokes upon new the consolation and beep promised by the risen savior to all who

share in the suffering and trust in his promise of eternal life. commending you and the members of your family to the lovely intervention of the version mary, the holy father offers a solemn blessing as a pledge of wisdom, comfort, and strength in the lord. with the praise of our holy father added to our own purse, we entrust the body of edward moore kennedy, senator ted, to his resting place until the lord called us fourth to the end of time, amen. now let us pray. by your own three days in the tomb, you so made the grave the sign of hope of promise and direction.

grant that are brother may sleep in peace until you awaken him, for your the resurrection and the like. then he will see you face to face and, in your life, will see light and no the splendor of god, where you live and reign forever and ever. amen. i am going to ask gerry creedon to do the intersection for us. he will be saying some prayers. he will be adding lord in your mercy. our response is lord hear our prayer. >> gracious lord, forgive the since of those who died in christ. lord in your mercy -- >> hear our prayer. >> welcome them into eternal

life, lord in your mercy -- >> hear our prayer. >> let us pray for those who mourn. comfort them in their grief. lord, in your mercy -- >> hear our prayer. >> like in our hearts with your presence. increase their face, strengthen their hope. lord, in your mercy -- >> hear our prayer. >> lead us in our own pilgrimage to life. keep us faithful. lord, in your mercy -- >> hear our prayer. >> in the sure and certain health of the resurrection to return alive, to our lord jesus

christ, we commend to almighty god our brother ted. we commit his body to the ground, earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust. may the lord bless him and keep him. may be lured to keep him safe to shine upon him and be gracious to him. may the lord give up his countenance to him and give him peace. lettuce and join now in praising the prayer. our father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name carried by kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. give us this day our daily bread and for give us their trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. now, i will say again the careeprayers from the act of

commendation for they are the fitting at this moment as well. before we go our separate ways, let us take leave of our brother ted. but as express our affection for him in. may it be their sadness. one day, we show joyfully greet him again. into your hands, father of mercy, we commend our brother ted in the sure and certain hope that, together with all who have died in christ, he will rise with him on the last day. we give you things for the blessings of which you placed upon him in this life. they are signs it to us of your goodness and their fellowship with our things in christ. merciful lord, turn to us and listen to our prayers, open the gates of pervez to your servant, and help us to remain to comfort one another with assurances of faith until we meet in christ and are with you and with their

brother teddy forever. we asked this through christ our lord. >> amen. >> let us know raise their heads and prayed for god's blessing in. you are accepted to the pressures of the humble. hear your people who cry out to you in their need and strengthen their hopes in your lasting goodness. we asked this through christ our lord. >> amen. >> keep your hearts and minds in the lawn -- in the knowledge of the love of god and his sons. may almighty god bless you, the father, the sun, and the holy

spirit. >> amen. >> and now, i know that four of titties grandchildren are going to come and -- four of teddy's grandchildren are going to come and say something about their grandpa.

[then shgun shot] [taps plays]

>> my name is penny.

when most people think of ted kennedy, they think of -- i cannot say anything appeared when most people think of ted kennedy, they think about the man who changed the lives of millions of people by fighting for better health care. when i think about him, vibrant memories of sailing, laughing, thanksgiving dinner, talking on the front porch, and playing with splash come to mind. to me, all the things he has done to change the world are just icing on my front does kick of a truly miraculous person. you see, my grandpa was really a kid. if you ever saw him conducting the boston pops, that is what he was like all the time with me. he never it -- he knew how to joke, left, and have fun. i remember him laughing, smiling, and playing.

i will always remember the times we spent sailing and i could tell that he was the happiest in the world, even when he was yelling, get that fishermen up. what i will miss the most is the time i woke up at 6:30 a.m. and go to the front porch where my grandpa would be sitting with a splash and gazing out to sea. it would it -- it would be just as on the porch for a while. we would talk and talk and i would get the feeling that the world was just right. it was me and him sitting on his porch watching a new day unfold as he stared into the seat of freedom and possibility. i love you so much, grandpa, and i always will. >> i embrace allen. i am the second oldest grandchild. i just want to say a few words about my grandpa.

our favorite time of the year was thanksgiving. because we were all together as a family, sailing, and eating together at the table, all of us, including caroline kennedy and her family. i just want to sit -- i just want to give things to my grandpa because he is the best friend, i have ever had and the best in the world. [applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen, we have

a storm coming through. [unintelligible] >> that is a live picture on your screen of the capital of the united states. you can still see, faintly in

the darkness, the flag is at half mast. this concludes our coverage of the funeral of senator edward ted kennedy. you can see all kinds of material we have collected in the last couple of days on our website, including last memorial in boston. in about 90 minutes, right here on c-span, we will bring in today's events, including the funeral mass in boston earlier today for senator kennedy. >> as the debate over health care continues, c-span's healthcare of is a key resource. go online, follow the latest tweets, ads, and events. share your thoughts on the issue with your own citizen video, including video from any town hall you have been too. there is more on c-span.org /healthcare. >> this is the communicators. today, we will show the first of

two interviews conducted with members of congress on how they use technology and social media web sites. we have john culbertson of texas. >> when you think of the political process, what do you believe the role of social media is as far as how folks like you communicate to folks at home. >> my job at home is rep. the most important part of that is to use my own good judgment and my core principles and the knowledge i have of the feelings of my district 2 vote to represent them appear. equally important is my role as a communicator, to stay in touch with people and make sure they're plugged in and know what i and doing it on their behalf and ensuring that they know what is being done here in washington toward social media is part of my job to communicate with my constituents. quite frankly, i am a passionate jeffersonian republican who believes very strongly in the

10th amendment and we need to get the federal government out of our lives, of fairfax, out of our pocket, which from my kids, and out of their home. i think social media will be the root of the next american revolution, which will enable people, once they see and hear what the government is doing, i do not think it will put up with it. the way we will organize people and get them involved and it sure that everybody is participating in the next election and take the government back in a real way is through social media. >> talk about when you first started here, the way that you communicated with the folks at home. how has that changed in the few years and what technology are using now? >> traditionally, we have used letters and phone calls or originally appea. when i was elected in 1997, i had a macintosh lisa, my first computer. i brought the with me and set up

a program called white knights. it used to be called a bulletin board. i think i was the first elected official in america to use to communicate -- to use a computer to communicate with my constituents. my assistant and i typed in the daily house floor schedule pin we got in a fair amount of trouble because i almost succeeded in dialing up into the state mainframe computer. i wanted to download a bill information and share it with the public and that aggravated the speaker of the texas house and the leadership in january of 1987. nobody had ever heard of such a thing. but i did succeed finally, but i did it on my own. i had to type in the intermission. i think that was the first electronic town hall meeting because i did live dial-up sessions where people would >> me your typing questions and i would answer on a keyboard -- where they would text me or type

questions and i would answer on the keyboard. it was in january of 1987. i have used computers pretty aggressively since then appeared to me, it is interesting, exciting, fits a fast, a big new computer, and i love it. i tried to use the latest technology. now i am using a variety of things progress such as a? >> i am using twitter. -- now i am using a variety of things. >> such as? >> i am using twitter. i went to lunch in houston, erica o'grady. i want to give her a shout out because she got me on to this. was she extended to me, i realized it was a great way for people to communicate in real

time. >> that was your experience -- that was your first experience or knowledge thereof? >> she showed it to me and i lit up. she told me about facebook, about twitter, about quit, which is a site that allows you to streamline the video. i generally always carry my live quick camera so that, when i got ambushed, by example -- let me go in here and show you. i got ambushed one time by tmz duri. he pulled out a camera and said, i want to talk to you, congressman can i said that is great. -- congressman. i said, that is great. there we go. there is the image. i am actually transmitting live

through my clicked siquick site. i can interview now. this is broadcasting live on my website. so when these clowns from tmz and bush may, i was able to -- from tmz ambushed me, i was able to without my camera and you can fill us while we are conducting this interview. >> so you carry that and use it to talk to the folks at home about issues. what prompts it to pull it out? >> i will use it -- for example, the republican ruled -- when nancy pelosi adjourn the house and we were supposed to go home for the summer, i used my camera

to interview other members of congress to keep the conversation going. we were talking to the gallery. because of the technology, i was able to use the quick camera to talk to my colleagues and get the message out about how important it was to be energy independence by drilling here and a drilling. as far as we can tell, this has never been done before. it is something that everyone should keep an eye on. have a plan, for a change. >> c-span used my live video feed as the coverage of that season ended that day of the house. i used it they're very successfully and it turned nancy pelosi around. she allowed offshore drilling. the election -- if she allowed offshore drilling until of the

election when they got the majority. they were going to adopt rules that said they were going to center everything that we said on the internet and illegally use a preapproved website -- and we could only use a preapproved website and have preapproved content. we now have an unfettered access to the internet as a result of the social media network. >> what are the rules that strictly cover your ability to use the twitter or quick or something like that in the house? >> this is -- you're actually seeing a video -- the cameras are ruthless. this is the interview we were doing a minute ago. it is sometimes delayed. it i am not getting a good signal, it is time delayed.

i use the quick video for live feeds. this is a recording of a telephone town hall meeting that i did last week. i use my video camera on top of the monitor. i put the streamed video on my website. they can see me actually conducted the telephone town hall meeting, as the questions on text page using a chat room, he essentially. i will also take questions using twittered. they can ask me questions on whitewater web page. now i am late. people know that i am broadcasting live. if they were to click on the embedded links on whitewater page, they will go straight to my quick page and they can see -- if they were to click on the

embedded links on my twittered page, there will go straight to my quick page and see the interview i also use it to communicate with constituents on telephone town hall meetings so they can talk to me both on the telephone, at home. they can talk to me on the chat stream. and they can contact me through twitter. it is extraordinary. we are approaching a moment in history when we will have essentially real-time democracy, when everyone in the country will be wired in and able to use these hand-held devices, with live streaming video and high- speed uplinks, that the public

will actually be able to see and hear. my goal is total transparency. the public has the right to see and hear and know everything that their elected representatives are doing with their tax dollars. and when they see that, they will not stand for it. i had this out to everybody i know point this information needs to get out. the liberal leadership of the congress is a driving america into becoming argentina appeared the level of spending is unprecedented. the level of taxes is unprecedented. >> this is the kind of information you put out through your various sources. >> yes. people will muck about with it appeare. pelosi, obama, and reid are driving the country into bankruptcy. i am -- this is forbidden. i cannot say government-run

health care. she has made it illegal for me to say -- >> what do you mean you cannot say that? >> the house leadership said that i cannot quote barack obama -- i cannot say that electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. i am forbidden to say cabin tax. >> forbidden by whom? >> nancy pelosi and the leadership. here is the e-mail that i got from my press secretary. i cannot say all of these things because the leadership, it upsets them. they do not want the public to read the bills. [unintelligible] they do not want the public to see what we are doing. they do know what the public to read the bills. they do not want the public to know our unfettered opinions.

they are censoring us. i am not a rich guy. i am a middle-class guy. i am making payments on two houses. they would adopt my paycheck. >> -- they would dock my paycheck. this is sam houston. i asked him, are you committed to the transparency? are you committed to thliberali? or are you committed to transparency and open debate and unfettered public access to information? and i got a tremendous response. you can actually see some of mine -- i was retwitting these tweets last night.

colbert's son finally slams -- culberson finally slams policy on the bills. before the electronic revolution, we would be unable to tell our constituents that our voices are being stifled and that we cannot say certain things. if i were to go to the floor and get into some of this, they say that you are in violation of the rules and that they would take two of the floor. >> you have to send out a letter on personal stationery? >> yes. if the house ranking committee, which is nancy pelosi, says you cannot, they can dock my paycheck. the internet has made us all

journalists and made us all media moguls, in a sense, and we can -- i can bypass nancy pelosi. i can bypass the mainstream media. >> this is your personal twitter page? >> yes. but i do not do any campaigning on here. this is strictly me and my official capacity talking about what i am working on. people can send me direct messages. i do not do any campaigning on here. this is sort -- it is official, but it is also personal. common sense tells you that you deny use official resources to raise money, address -- that you do not use official resources to raise money. other than that, you should be completely free.

my access to social media should be no different than my access to the old media. there is no difference. they cannot answer my conversation with you. they cannot sensor my interview with a newspaper reporter. they cannot center my interview with a mere -- they cannot censor my interview with a media reporter. we won that last year. they would actually like to shut me down cn. please, nancy pelosi, stop me from using social media. i will sue her. if the house leadership tries to stifle me or other conservatives from using social media, i will sue her under the first amendment and winter and i sued a federal judge and texas and one parent -- and win.

i see a federal judge in texas and onwon. facebook is still a bit of a gray zone. in the senate, you have to submit everything that you're right to the franc in committee. -- to the franken committee pare. this is a wonderful page called semi.com where you can track of people are saying about you. you can show this conversation if you click on there. this allows you to see linked together an entire conversation. this is, allegedly, as far as i can tell, largely unfettered

they could not come in here and tell me what to say. i am actually waiting. if they ever do, i will soon nancy pelosi under the first amendment. >> now you have immediate feedback from some of your constituents, what is it like as far as you do your job? >> i can use all of this communication media. i want to make sure that i talk about facebook. it is the single most powerful communication tool on the internet. this allows me -- for example, this is everybody who has sent me messages this morning. this is just this morning. i am talking to constituents. these are people who are friends. i have more than 1500 friends. when i send out a message on twitter messagequick, -- on

twitter or quick, it sends out a message. i m quicking -- i am quicking live right now. i ask people to send out the message to their list and it is geometric. it is an extraordinarily powerful tool. it makes me a better representative. a guy asked me last night who said, i support obama's health care plan du. but we have 92% opposition are now. if it is a wonderful communication tool. i am convinced that the only way that the people will get control of our government again is their social media because people will not stand for it. when they see the level of spending and taxes and they can

actually look in the room, they can see it live. >> [unintelligible] >> people are wonderful. people are polite. the social media community is also a terrific enforcer of common courtesy and fact checking could there is no better way to check your facts. the social media community will not tolerate not checking facts. my hero, thomas jefferson, said that the free marketplace of ideas is the best place to have shot all problems and that all abuses, he said, should be tried at the bar of public opinion. when you put something out there, it ricochets around immediately and they will go

check your facts. >> this is your official facebook page. >> this is my personal one that i use. i am committed to the 10th amendment and to the lone star. these are the lone stars warren by our texas rangers. this is something that people will enjoy seeing. this is my personal page. i also combine my official duties here. i do not do any campaigning. i just want to make sure that everything i do is appropriate and in good taste. you try to use common sense. so far, it has been a great experience. it is a great way to communicate. i am convinced that it is the wave of the future. this will be expected of all future representatives.

i want to see what you are doing on facebook. i want to see you on twitter. the public is going to demand it. then we will have real control over the government and there is nowhere to hide for it and elected officials feare. >> do other legislators say to you, hey, i want to get more into this. what do i need to do? >> yes, they do. i have been actively proselytizing among my colleagues to sign up and use is wonderful tool. if i can figure it out, an old guy like me, then there is nothing to it. this is a tool to communicate. this is what they hire me to do. the water, in particular, is a snap. -- twitter, in particular, is a snap.

once they get into it and understand it, it is a lot of fun. it is a real-time conversation. it was never possible before. the time really is coming i represent a highly educated district. people are internet savvy. i will be able to go online -- for example, if i have 10,000 french, i can say, i want you to send this out to all of your friends -- if i have 10,000 friends, i get sick, i want you to send this out to all your friends. i can say, hit nancy pelosi's office with an e-mail or phone call, tgo. as you can imagine, 10,000 people, 50,000 people, 100,000 people, 500,000 people, they can ask their representatives of

their own free will to take action. the people will take back our government once people understand how easy this is. >> you are on the forefront. you think that the obama campaign brought more of this to the forefront. yes. i think it is tragic that they have reneged on every campaign promise they have made. he promised that he would never sign a bill that was not on the internet for at least five hours. that was false. every single piece of major legislation that nancy pelosi and the of liberal leadership has passed has been dropped on the house the night before. the public has never givebeen gn a chance to read it. the point is that the public has a right to read these bills.

every single piece of major legislation was dropped, typically, in the middle of the night before a vote. the stimulus was struck at 11:00 p.m. we voted the next day at 5:00 a.m. the omnibus spending bill, all of these major pieces of legislation -- obama talks a good game, but i have learned enough to pay attention to anything he says. watch what he does. they are rapidly taking over the private sector. they're expanding the government at an unprecedented rate. we have an obligation, as elected officials, to demand complete transparency, and open for a fair debate. what are they afraid of? they got the votes. let's debate these things out in the open. >> this is congressman culver sen. that for being our communicator. >> thank you very much >> he is

one of the cochairs of the republican new media caucus which hopes to educate other members on how to use new technology. it is not just republicans. we will talk with democrat steve israel about how he uses new media to talk to his constituents. you can see this program and others at our website at c- span.org. >> as washington and the nation continue to focus on health care, sunday, on c-span, we will talk about dealing with the h1n1 swine flu virus with dr. thomas friedman, director of centers for disease control. we will also have a look on the u.s. hospital system with dr. john garrett of the va hospital center.

>> this is c-span's "america and the courts." veterans for common sense is asking the courts to order the department of veterans affairs to reform the way it deals with disability claims for foot -- for post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury. >> good morning, i represent the

appellate nonprofit corporations dedicated to veterans' issues. i would like to reserve three minutes for rebuttal. what does it mean to be a veteran in america today? the essence of this appeal relates to the va's multiple failures to fulfill the statutory commands established by congress to provide veterans with timely medical care and disability compensation which have resulted in suicide and other tragic consequences for many of our veterans. we are struck at the outset by a fundamental disconnect between the district court's findings of fact and it's legal analysis. >> let me ask you this general question. if we were to rule in your favor, how will it keep the federal courts from taking over every federal agency in the federal government and running it? i am willing to say that most

agencies of the federal government do things that are not satisfactory to all the people. they are too slow and do not deal with all the issues. these are the complaints that people have against them. i did have a very hard time cabining this claim that you have. >> if you're referring to the delay claims, your honor, which appears that you might be -- >> it is one type of claim. but delay is a good one. we have lots of agencies that are slower than some people prefer. >> what differentiates this is from other cases is the fact that we're dealing with disability claims, which in all the health and welfare of our veterans. second, we are dealing with egregious delays.

>> that is what the social security administration does. >> that is different. the social security and ministration -- numerical a series of cases. we're dealing with 90 days to 180 days in the lakers' best i did not mean to suggest they were equally slow. but the social security administration does deal with medical claims. >> you have the right to retain counsel, whereas in the va system you do not. there is a prescribed time frame and flow. you have a review officer deciding the claims in the beginning. but the va itself decides the claims. there are not many cases involving veterans in the

article iii system that involves the passage of the federal review act. the robison case relates to procedures and cases involving constitutional claims. let me make a very important point with respect to the delays. it takes approximately 4.4 years, on average, just to exhaust the process within the agency. approximately 3000 veterans and die each year while their appeals are pending. over 85,000 veterans are on waiting lists for mental health care. >> i am willing to guess that at

least 3000 people die each year while social security claims are pending or immigration claims are pending. this is in the nature of like. >> the difference with social security is the time frames. we're talking about time frames. if you look at these cases decided by the veterans course, look at the docket sheet for those cases, and you can see how long they have been pending there. many of them have been pending for 12 years, 13 years, 14 years, 15 years. the time friends we're talking about are way beyond what is required in a case to comply with the due process. >> one part of your claim, at least, that is different from many other, as far as i can tell, is that you're talking

about emergency health care. >> that is very true. that is an important distinction. >> if you do not get the care within a certain time, you are not getting the care of all. >> yes, your honor. >> on an emergency basis. >> yes. we are concerned about the case of the rash of suicides from those coming back from iraq and afghanistan. if your turn toaway -- if you are turned away, there is no emergency procedure for the veteran to take any relief. the education system does not even apply to the medical side of the va, except for enrollment disputes. there is no remedy and that is the due process case we make on the medical side. >> [unintelligible] >> clinical decisions are not appeal.

the only procedure they have is the clinical review procedure which we believe does not even apply in this case. even if you assume it did, the clinical review process was intended for questions of the nature of treatment should do it chemotherapy, should you get radiation, and issues of that point. it is a seven-step process. three of the stages of that clinical review process have no time limits on them. the others total about 50 days or 60 days. the process ends in the seventh stage with a decision by the da itself. there's not a neutral decision maker. there is no procedure to expedite the clinical reviews procedures. >> you cannot take it to the federal circuit to? >> take it to the federal circuit? there is no provision for jurisdiction in the court over decisions made by the va on the hillside. there is no system -- on the

health side. there is no system of justice for the health care side. the health care side and the adjudication side are completely different arms of the va in. -- of the va. . -- whether you look at workers' compensation or you look at

social security in the system. the social security? >> no the system and the v.a. >> it's set up by statute. >> that's different than your delay claim, let's say, and the claim is the procedure set up by congress violate due process? >> the claim is that the procedures violate due process both in terms of delay and also in terms of the limitations that are placed upon what are fundamental due process issues such as the opportunity for a hearing in a reasonable time, in a reasonable place, the opportunity to present evidence to the decision maker and the right to an independent decision maker and so on. but with respect to the adjudication side, the principal issue -- >> these claims need to be taken up one at a time in front of the

federal circuit so if you have a client that is subject to a particular procedure and suffers because of that and it's inadequate and whatever, why isn't that the kind of thick that you take up in the case and it could have an effect on the rest of the system and congress clearly meant for those circuit to be the forum where whatever view there is of the veteran affairs decisions that there be -- that there would be -- >> we're getting to the jurisdiction point. the congress intended that individual claim decisions that are necessary to a decision by the administrator be handled at the veterans court and then

eventually the legal issues only go up to the federal circuit. however -- >> right. my question -- it's not the individual claim and then properly take it to federal sirkit? >> let me answer that question specifically. first of all, the remedy at the veterans court is by writ and it only affects one individual. the claim in this case is that there are systemic delays. >> no, but a lot of things only affect one individual, you know, roe versus wade only affected one individual but it had a big effect on the rest of the pop. it could have an effect on a lot of other people. that's how it works. >> that's not how it works at the veterans court because each case is an individual case that

comes up through the system. in fact, you hear in this case that the judge made findings that it can be th it cannot be e system and all the other veterans have to take a step back in line. it's not a remedy for systemic delay because the delays will still be the same, you're just shuffling the order in which the claims will be heard. >> but if the claim is one about systemic delay or adequate process and so on, eventually the federal circuit decided and then presume -- >> the system is exactly the same the day after the decision as it was before. there's still systemic delays of five, 10 or 15 years, but let me answer the second part of my answer to your question. in exhibit p-1097 in the record

below, do you know how many writs of mandate have been decided by the veterans court? if you look at the page it shows that between the years 1998 and 2004 there were none. in 2005, one. in 2006, zero. 2007, two. that includes all writs for every type of relief for mandate. nothing has ever happened in that veteran court because the veteran court interprets its jurisdiction very narrowly and it cannot deal with issues of systemic delay. it's only in an article three court that you can deal with questions of systemic delay. >> well, congress can too, why isn't this a political question then if you think that they're not given adequate resources or they need more personnel or they

need more money or different structures, or so on, why isn't this political question presented to congress? >> well, for several reasons. first of all, congress has enacted legislation relating to the timeliness of remands and the timeliness of appeals and that's part of our statutory claims -- nothing changes. in fact to answer your question, 20 years the court has been around. all these delays have steadily deteriorated for all those years, not withstanding efforts by congress to fix them. >> the fact that almost any violation with the federal agency, the federal government, almost any one of those could be solved by asking congress to change the law. but when we're dealing with here is with -- is with whether what is transpiring now is in compliance with the law. and i wanted to ask you, you

have two remedies you've suggested. one is under the a.p.a. and one is under the constitution. does it matter as far as the relief you seek which violation we find or is it necessary to find both or does either do and what's the difference? >> well, the substantive standard under the constitution, particularly with respect to the due process claims is different than the substance of standard that you apply under the a.d.a. for a question of delay, for example, the track factors are different. and the relief that is sought is sought under both. there is some overlap in the issues that you have to take up, for example, the reasonableness of the delay, but i think we brought both claims because with respect to the a.p.a. claims there are specific statutes that are being violated but the

relief is narrower than under the constitution. let me give you an example, we have delayed about the remand decision, 563 days and there's a federal statute that says that remands have to be handled expeditiously. and here the head of the adjudication side of the v.a., admiral cooper, admitted they were in violation of that statute so the relief there would be focused on the remand issue. the due process issues with respect to the same types of delay relate to a number of different stages in the administrative process, including some that have purely involved ministerial acts but not the express subject of enactments by congress. for example, certification of appeal. it's a ministerial act. 563 days.

if you look at these delays -- >> i understand if you had one case and, you know, said i've had 563 days and we have a delayed claim and we want the agency to decide the case, that kind of claim i can understand. but that's not what you're asking for. you're asking for relief effort generally across the board decrease in the amount of time it takes to assigning cases. essentially you want to take over the v.a. and so run it. and i'm just skeptical as to where we get the authority to do that and how exactly do we go about telling an agency, you know, you've got to sort of work faster and decide not just one case but all of your cases, where do we get authority, how do we implement something like that? >> well, the examples i think is

in the courts own jurisprudence here in respect to the armstrong case and other cases that have dealt with questions of systematic patterns of activity. we propose to the court that it employs someone -- well, first of all ask the v.a. itself for a remedial plan and, secondly, perhaps to get someone else involved in the process of trying to accelerate the disposition of these claims and appeals, but there's some very obvious things that can be done. i mean, it shouldn't take a couple years to certify an appeal, it's a purely administrative act. it shouldn't took two years to schedule a hearing which, by the way to answer judge rhine hart's question with the issue is also a violation of a federal statute which requires appeals to be handled in an expeditious manner and including the hearings. again, there are admissions on the record in this case that they're not handling those in an

expeditious manner. but to answer your question, judge, everyone i think would admit that in some point in time justice delay side justice denied. >> not everyone, no. when i was representing defendants we thought justice delayed was justice, but, you know, it really depends a great deal on your point of view, not everyone. >> but you're asking a question about source of authority and really too what is the constitution? and, second, is the a.p.a. track factors, when those track factors are satisfied under the a.p.a., relief is mandatory, that's what the cases say. and the whole purpose -- >> no, i understand that there's certain circumstances in which you can get a delay claim into the federal court. they're limited and my guess is that this one would have to go to the federal circuit, but those are sort of details, but

that's quite different from saying that we're going to tell the agency to be more efficient and presumably they get their -- congress and they prepare annual reports and there's the normal oversight and they are under supervison of at least the present -- the judges appointed by the veterans affairs are appointed by the president, yes? >> yes. >> so the normal supervison that happens within the executive branch of sort of independent agencagencies and if, you know,f there's a systematic problem and they are not getting enough resources and they can't handle stuff as quickly as people want then the political process gives

them more resources. >> there's a problem in regard to resources according to the fact finding of this court? >> you are correct. in fact they carried over billion dollar surpluses for the last several years and the testimony was that they had sufficient resources. >> there are ways that the veterans administration itself has determined, what with all these problems, would allow them to comply with the statute which requires a timely furnishing of medical care, particularly on the emergency basis. >> that is also true. >> it's not that it takes a genius to figure this out and if the v.a is not complying with the law and not furnishing timely medical services, i don't know what the great difficulty is in a court saying you must comply with the statute. it's not novel for a court to tell an agency to comply. the a.p.a. says it and the v.a.

statute says it. if they're in violation if they're not doing that. >> in fact -- >> supporting what judge rinehart says, what case do you have supporting what judge rinehart says? >> in the second circuit, affirming a decision by a district court saying that i believe a nine-month delay which is far shorter than we're talking about was a violation of due process but, judge -- >> that was an individual claim, wasn't it? >> i think, no, i don't think that it was. >> this is from connecticut? >> there's a district court case from connecticut, yes, and i believe it was a class action if i'm not mistaken. >> so it's not from the second circuit. >> no, it came out of connecticut but it was followed by a second circuit decision also by the same name, of course, and in that case a 10-month average delay was

adjutjute judeaddjude indicated- adjudicated to be a violation. they could find their way law to the federal circuit and it's contrary to the conclusion of law in this case because in conclusion of law number eight, the court explicitly found many plaintiff's challenges are used to reach decisions of individual claims. these processes as conceded by the cavc itself are outside the purview of its jurisdiction. there's no way for the cases, the issues brought in this case to come up in a context of the system and, indeed, one of the big gaping hole in the government's argument under robinson in this case is that they don't explain any way under which, if not this court, some other court could take up these issues and, in fact, there is no

alternative remedy suggested anywhere in this record by the appellees, by the judge or anyone else, where the issues that we've raised in this case could be resolved and i don't care whether you're talking about the administrative delay or talking about the failure to treat our veterans or are we talking about implementation at the strategic plan? >> he's mainly saying that these problems should be remedied by congress and the administration and he's basically right, you shouldn't have to come to court with these problems. congress and the administration should be solving this by themselves. that doesn't get us all the way to the answers because if they don't then you're left, unfortunately, with the court to do what the other branches should be doing. >> i agree with that, your honor -- >> i don't know why the

administration doesn't solve this problem. >> it is a problem that has been around for a long, long time. >> well, now is the time to solve it. >> one question about reasonableness that i wanted to -- >> maybe we could, since you're almost out of time we could ask this question of opposing counsel since you really can't give us a very good answer to judge rinehart's -- it was not a rhetorical question. >> rhetorical as far as this is concerned. >> it's something that we'd like to hear about. we'll give you time for rebuttal, it's a complicated case and we'll give you a little time for rebuttal so why don't we hear -- >> ok, can i add one short answer to judge rinehart's question before we do that? the court didn't order any declaratory relief so as to what the violations are under these federal statutes and health care could be subject to declaratory

relief. thank you. >> charles scottwell for the department of veterans affairs. the v.a. is ensured to assuring that our veterans receive top quality health care and timely decisions on claims or services connected to disability benefits. the v.a. works closely with congress to obtain the resources to -- you -- closely monitors these issues and imposed limitations on the jurisdiction -- >> are these findings of fact? as you -- some of these figures that opposing counsel posed are troubling, the delay photos and i was wondering if you think

that your client is succeeding in its effort to do what you said it's doing? >> certainly the v.a. is committing an extensive allocation of resources here and the court made a number of findings on just the benefits side, about dealing with pilot programs to shorten the delays here. the pilot programs are both innovations that the v.a. is experimenting with and innovations that congress is experimenting with in october 2008 in which essentially the timeframes are compressed by having the veteran essentially agree that the evidence is complete. part of the delay here and part of the area in which i actually agree with opposing counsel is that this is really a unique system. it's unique among any other federal agencies in the sense that the v.a. has an obligation to assist the veteran in developing the claim and takes that very seriously but that does sometimes lead to delays as evidence comes in in a piecemeal fashion and they have to go and

find more evidence and wait for the veteran to go and get more evidence and there's a back and forth and that leads to delays. those delays as counsel said are in many ways too long, however, with regard to the most serious delays that keep being bandied around here, it really does only affect a very small percentage of the cases here. the district court findings of facts is that it only affects a small percentage of cases, only 4% of the cases appeal, go all the way to a decision by the board of veteran appeals and that means that essentially at the r.o. level the veteran are getting their benefits and the v.a. is getting it right the first time and the v.a. is choosing -- i'm sorry -- >> maybe i misunderstood it but i wasn't exactly sure why that figure supported your position. maybe people sort of give up or die -- i'm not being i at all

facetious, but the fact -- if you draw out of process far enough in time given the limitational life and health and people's patience and so on, you probably would have very few cases reach a conclusion just because people don't live that long, or don't spend that much time in the process of trying to get the dispute resolved. so it wasn't clear to me that this figure that you had that, what was it, 4% -- >> go to a final decision by the court. >> how does that support your position? >> it shows as to the most significant delays that the district court found it affects a small percentage of the people here and it's pure speculation to sort of say, well, it's because of the delays -- >> well, how do we know -- >> we don't know that. >> that the 96%, there isn't a significant part that give us and say it's been too long, you

know, this is not worth pursuing? >> in a lot of cases the benefits are granted in full or in part. >> that would be more helpful, but saying 4% get to the end of the line, though there are many possible reasons that people drop out before the end short of victory, they may not have the resources or the patience, whatever, or, you know, the longevity to see it through. >> i understand, your honor and your point speaks to the breadth of the claims here and how it's difficult to assess the reasonableness of delay sort of in the abstract based on average decision times and things like that. normally in an unreasonable delay case under 706-1, you have a discreet set of facts and you have a deadline and you have the ability to say, come on, this is way too long for a case of this simplicity. as this court knows, cases vary

in complexity all over the map here and what may be reasonable delay in one case may be unreasonable in another case and our point here is that you can't assess this in a vacuum. >> you, i don't mean you personally but you as the department of justice and i assume that's a lawyer from the department of veteran affairs and counsel at that table really have a lot in common. you want, as i'm sure they want, to have timely delivery of services to the men and women who, you know -- >> absolutely, your honor. >> sort of getting away from the law and explain it to me in plain english, you know, as we pointed out, it's money, there's no shortage of money, congress

has always been generous with money. >> in 2008 -- >> i'm sure that there's not a shortage of goodwill in the department -- >> a large percentage are veterans. absolutely. >> and so i'm just wondering why are we here? why is this the kind -- what is the disconnect here that you or maybe counsel couldn't go out and work out a plan to get this done? you know, not so worried about who wins and who loses but do what everybody seems to want to do and that is to provide better service for our veterans? >> v.a. is trying to do that and has made a steady increase of its commitment towards these problems and these problems had become more sail iant in receipt years with -- recent years as you have more people returning

with ptsd and other suicide issues, they're very important concerns. it takes a while for the allocation of funds and the hiring of personnel to sort of catch up in terms of the provision of services. the district court made a number of findings on the health care side that the v.h.a. implemented at the time of the trial, 80% of the initiatives in the strategic health care plan. and every medical center now has a suicide prevention coordinator and there's been a tremendous allocation of resources to getting medical care -- >> but, i understand as to that issue, those are not available at the local centers where most veterans get their services, right? you have to go to hospital -- >> there's an effort to increase the availability at the c-box as they're called, the local medical centers as well. again, the mental health

strategic plan, and there's a difference between having initiatives and having the v.a. work with congress to obtain the funding to follow through fully and completely and have a court order it under the power of contempt, you must do these things. that's precisely what the supreme court said in the utah case, you can't do this because it entangles the court in the day-to-day management of the system which is not permissible in the day-to-day workings. so we are all aiming in the same direction but there's a significant and serious difference between a court ordering, you know, to compel -- or compelling an agency to implement everything -- >> you shouldn't have to do it but that's a last resort. >> but the district court's own finding -- >> it would be like the court in the prison system, for example.

>> the court tells you why do it for 17 years, why is the court telling us to for 17 years they haven't done it? it's the same thing with the veterans administration. >> no, it's not. >> everyone always tells the court let us do what we've been doing. >> that's not what we're telling the court. >> well the judge's question was whether you and the other side could get together and agree on things that would make it unnecessary for the court to issue an order? >> well, your honor, i think that the fundamental problem is that any settlement is backed by the decrees and the implementation of the pace of health care reform, institutional reform and that's something that southern utah says you just can't have anymore. maybe at one point you could have the courts intervening here but that's not the system that we have under the reasonable delay, especially in an area where the statute so clearly

commits the health care to the system. and you want to provide the right form of health care but there's no standards for a court to evaluate sort of are you providing good enough care, are you providing it fast enough to veterans. it's not something that a court can -- >> so your contention is that there is no unreasonable delay? you mentioned that it only involves a small amount but is it your contention that generally there is no unreasonable delay? >> yes, your honor, that's precisely what the district court found. >> oh, i don't think that's what the district court found. >> well -- >> as i recall, there were a lot of areas that had delay. >> well, with respect, your honor, they applied the track factors and that's the sort of legal set of factors that they have to go through and said i find that there's no unreasonable delay in part

because the sort of focusing in on the appellate delays which are the most serious delays here would in the district court's word, make a diversion of resources away from our level where the v.a. is doing much better and processing claims at the average of 180 days. again, some of these figures don't sound very good but it's a function of the fact that the evidence comes in a piecemeal way and there's a lot of back and forth between the v.a. and the veteran and the v.a. has duties to help the veteran out. some of those duties, they may not do it exactly right the first time and there may be a remand back because the v.a. failed to give notice that you needed this piece of evidence to show that some disability is serviceable. >> in your view the fact that these other two veterans groups are really worked up and concerned about unreasonable delay has no basis? >> no, your honor, i'm in no way

meaning to disparage the concerns here and i want to be very clear on that. what i am meaning to say is that with the benefit system, congress prescribe aid scene pre here. they may not be addressed in the systemic way that plaintiffs want but the court of appeals for veterans claim it's. >> you said earlier that i thought there is no unreasonable delay? >> i did say that but my point is simply, and then you asked the following question and i was trying to be responsive to that, do we care about that and how can it be addressed. and my point here is that the system that congress prescribed allows you -- >> this violation -- they're in the wrong forum? >> no, your honor, that's precisely the opposite of what i said. >> they're right on the merits? >> no, your honor. >> i don't understand, when i say they're wrong on the merits you say no or yes. and then when i ask am i right on the merits, the same thing.

which is it, they're wrong or right on the merits? >> they're wrong on the merits as the district court found, and now the district court didn't even have to get to that because there were jurisdictional barriers to a district court -- >> i'm trying to just find out whether they're right about the complaint that there's unreasonable delays and your answer is, no? you're doing your proper job, there are no unreasonable delays? >> this is the finding by judge conte. >> i'm asking for the ruling in the court, there are no unreasonable delays? >> we're adopting in full -- not in full, the opinion of judge conte on this. >> you don't have an opinion of your own? >> your honor, the v.a. officials all testified at trial that, yes, we'd like to move the system here along faster and there is a system -- >> that's what i said to you originally. it's just that they're in the wrong forum.

>> well, yes, in an individual case and perhaps the disconnect here that we're having judge rinehart is that in an individual case you could absolutely complain if you were sitting around for 500, 600 -- whatever it is, you could go to the court and say my case is unreasonably delayed, hear me. >> i know they could do that maybe as individuals, i'm only trying to find out who things. one, are their basic allegations correct that there's unreasonable delay? or is it that they are correct and should be in a different forum? i think that you said both, i don't know -- >> let me try to clarify here. no, their basic allegations that there's unreasonable delay are not correct as the district court found and, yes, they should be in a different forum. >> they shouldn't be in any forum if they're wrong. it's an old story, if you have 18 downs you can file a complaint, that doesn't mean that it has any merit.

you say that the complaints don't have merit -- >> absolutely. >> right. and if they did have merit they should be somewhere else so they don't have merritt and that should be the end of the case and you don't know what they're complaining about? >> your honor, there's factual findings here and there's the finding that there's no unreasonable delay. my point is that the district court didn't have to even get to that and we haven't talked about the jurisdictional regulations that proclude review of agency decisions affecting provision of benefits. this is the scheme that congress set up to avoid having the federal courts enmeshed, entangled, in these decisions about how fast to process things, of what evidence is necessary in a particular case. those sorts of things. that's what -- >> we won't goa get to that, an, because it's a wonderful system and everyone is getting to what they're entitled to? >> it's the opposite order, you deal with the jurisdictional question first so you'd have to

address -- >> as the judge said everybody is concerned about whether the veterans are being improperly treated by our government and if they're not then we should be giving you a medal. but you say that there isn't any problem really. if there were, they should be somewhere else but there's no problem, everything is going swimmingly. >> judge, i think that you're going to a policy argument. >> i'm asking about the facts, are the veterans receiving the treatment they're entitled to under the statute or is there an unreasonable delay and your answer as i understand it is that there's no unreasonable delay. >> that's correct. >> they're being treated properly and you're proud of the treatment you're giving them. >> that's not relevant here about being proud, this is a legal case ultimately. >> i know what it is, thank you.

>> it's whether a court can compel -- >> that's not what i'm asking you. i know you'd like to tell us what we can ask but as the judge said and you agreed that everybody here is concerned about the welfare of the veterans. i ask you about it you say it doesn't matter, you shouldn't be asking because it's a legal case. >> i don't believe that's a fair characterization. >> well, i do. >> ok, well, we don't have -- >> i'm sorry? >> we can't hand out medals so don't get your hopes up. that authority is still with congress and the president. so that's safe. >> the point is that this is not really a case -- >> we understand your position, thank you. >> thank you, your honor. >> would you like to take a minute for rebuttal? >> yes, your honor. i'd like to make --

>> i can guarantee no medals, there will be no medals. >> i'll leave that out. >> although this would resolve the case, i'd come you up with it, i'd find some way of coming up with a medal. >> a couple of quick observations with respect to the 4% issue only going up on appeal. the case of coe versus thurman establish where is there's a right to appeal the appeal procedures must comply with due process. so it's analytically improper to mix in with the regional office dispositions. and, second o' the 4% we have evidence in the record what happens to a lot of these appeals. the veterans are not represented in a lot of cases and exhibit p-1097, if you look in the dispositions at the court, the veterans court, you'll find that anywhere between 25% and 34% of the claims are either dismissed

for default, dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the veteran didn't satisfy the timeline or basically dismissed voluntarily, meaning he didn't file his brief on time. so how you get to down to 4% is complicated. second point, you ask, do the veterans give up, judge, and the evidence of the record is that they do give up, they get very frustrated with the system and often they give up at some stage in the process and the claim abandonment rates are very, very high in the regional level. >> so the 4% at the end doesn't reflect 96% that are unhappy -- >> it certainly doesn't not, there's testimony in the record for that. >> you don't have to embellish it. >> the other thing i'd like to talk about -- >> i'd like to know is your answer to the question that we

asked over and over to your opposition, are there other areas generally that there's unrealunreasonable delays? >> there's unreasonable delays that permeate the system but i'll break them down. the remand delays are unconscionable, when you're talking about a process that takes 12 or 15 years and so many people die before they get an ultimate resolution of their claim. there's unreasonable delays in the provision of health care, there are 160,000 people on a waiting list for just mental health care. it's a mandatory duty to provide that health care. in fact, all the provisions of that strategic plan, all the key provisions, are not only in the memo but also they've been codified in the suicide

prevention act after the trial. now one issue of reasonableness i wanted to point out to the court and it's not in the briefs is this, one measure of reasonableness of time is a task at hand. here we have a process of adjudicating a claim. we have in the record both the average time it takes to adjudicate a claim in hours and we have a work standard for adjudicating the claim and in both cases we're talking about somewhere between 3 1/2 and perhaps nine hours total time. what that means is for those veteran claims that are sitting for five or six years to be adjudicated, that they're sitting on a shelf for almost that entire period of time and it's as if you have an assembly line and the line stretches out so far that it takes, you know, it ultimately takes perhaps a day to do the specific task --

>> people waiting for mental health services? >> people are waiting for mental health -- >> what are you talking about? >> there's a specific finding that over 85,000 veterans have been waiting more than 30 days to schedule an appointment for mental health, though the memo require appointments within 14 days. >> you can go to emergency though, right? >> those include some emergency cases, in fact, some of the cases of the veterans where we got declarations of the widows where they went to the emergency room at the v.a. and you're told you're 36 on the waiting list, so come back in two months and he went back and killed himself. >> you both act as if there's money to do this, would that long a waiting list, you think they have all the personnel and facilities required with proper administration and they could eliminate the waiting list? >> well, that is an interesting question but the evidence in the

record on having enough money comes from the v.a. people who are running these programs, they say there's been more than enough money and there's been large increases in particularly the last three years, very large increases, so the question of retiring the backlog, i mean, the backlog on the adjudication side have grown so large -- >> it's not just a question of money, of course, they have to have the personnel and for that they need personal authority from o.p.m. i don't want to get into the -- >> well, that was one of my questions -- >> if there's money around, is there not enough people, they're not authorizing enough people? >> it's a combination of problems, i think. it's a management problem, number one. it's where the resources are dedicated, i mean, as an example the medical centers of the v.a. have a large amount of autonomy

and so even where congress earmarks money specifically for mental health care in a medical center the director of that center can divert that money for other uses and my understanding is that happens frequently so they don't spend the monly necessarily where congress says it should be spent. the v.a.'s budget is huge, absolutely enormous, and they say they have plenty of money to do all these things and they even have enough money for a worst case scenario of veteran coming back from iraq and afghanistan, many from multiple tours of duty, 40% of which will suffer from severe depression. >> do you agree with the opposition that the finding of the district court was that there was no unreasonable delay? >> i completely disagree with that. the findings of -- the court did not find that there was not unreasonable delay. the court went through the

delays at every stage of the process and i think that basically adopted all our proposed findings with respect to the timing of those delays. >> i was reading through that but the judge was pointing out all the unreasonable delays and the reason for the decision was that he didn't believe the court could reach it. >> yes, that's exactly right. in fact, the judge specifically said in his opinion that he found the delays to be troubling. i think the same language used by -- today by one of you in a question. the question though as to why these delays have become so protracted is a complex one but at this stage of the case, even under the case that is heavily relied upon, the court said that a.p.a. relief could extend to -- requiring a regulation, a series of regulations or, quote, even a

whole program to be revised by the agency in order to avoid the unlawful result that the court discerns. and i believe that this is a case where both medical and on the adjudication side that the time has come for a court to act. these are not problems of recent origin. >> ok. thank you. >> thank you. >> our case will argue and we thank kowbse counsel for their . i will defer summation of the case for a week and i will encourage counsel now that it's lunchtime, go get a sandwich together and i'd like you to consider the possibility of working something out in the case and i realize that on this side of the table this is something that we'd have to get permissions and approvals of the chair, so just have lunch.

but we have -- >> it's not an order. no. enjoy having lunch, but if you think you wouldn't -- >> at least chat. and we have a mediation office that does exceptionally good work that we could put at your disposal. they have been very successful in mediating a number of very difficult cases, including criminal cases, cases involving the death penalty, things that people would think are totally incapable of mediation. it occurs to me that we also have a number of our judges who are themselves veterans and those mediation processes involved might be useful in resolving the issue. part of my problem here is, putting aside the legal and jurisdictional question, this is one of those things that is very difficult for a court to manage

and it's much better managed if the parties work out something together. and i will defer summation for a week and we would like you to pursue something like that, through the mediation office or involving one of our senior judges who is a veteran who might help in the mediation process. we will be happy to consider my colleagues to continue to give you all a chance to try to work something out. what i'm struck by in this case is that everybody here on both sides of the table is concerned with helping our veterans with making sure that our men and women who fought and bled for our country are well taken care of. i see good faith on both sides, and maybe this is an occasion where that good faith can be brought together in a constructive way so rather than

having a winner or loser we could have winners on both sides. so we'll defer submission for a week and if we don't hear from the sides in a week we'll decide it. and if you need more time after a week because of permissions or whatever, you simply ask us for more time and you can be sure that we will be generous and granting additional time. if there's no possibility of settlement, of course, we will do what we are paid to do which is to decide the case but i do believe that there is some way of bridging the gap and having the lawyers become, rather than gladiators, to become healers and mediators and folks who bring parties together rather than keep them apart. that would be a tribute to our profession and to also a great service to the people who really do care about them. >> thank you, your honor. and i had one housekeeping

manner that i forget to mention. there's a very important case that came out this morning from the federal circuit, the cushman case, it deals with due process and the property interest and due process violations, we will be submitting a 28-j letter with respect to this case. >> go ahead and do that. but i do recommend breaking bread, even if it's only a bottle of water that you share together. >> [inaudible] >> well, on the other hand, you have heard some of the questions from the panel and if you are assured that it's available you could listen to it again and, you know, we haven't had a conference so i don't know for

sure what any of my colleagues think here but you've heard the questions and you've heard what we've all had to say so you know a lot more than you did when you did the initial assessment. i would think that you would, you know, excellent lawyers as you all are, you would be able to read between the lines and figure out what's going on with this case and on that basis with new information at hand maybe make a new assessment. so it's only a week and a bottle of water that you need to share with each other so why don't we give it a try. >> thank you, your honor. >> ok. anyway, we'll defer submission for a week and hope and pray that a resolution is found. >> a lower court ruled that the judicial branch does not have the authority to order the v.a. to provide timely medical care. the ninth circuit court has not issued a ruling in this case. you can watch this program again or other recent court programs

at c-span.org or just click on "america and the courts" under the c-span series link and join us next week for"america and the courts" saturday evenings at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. ♪ >> you're watching c-span, created for you as a public service by america's cable companies. coming up next, the funeral and burial of massachusetts senator edward kennedy. next, congressional members gather in boston to pay respects at the j.f.k. presidential library. then the funeral mass at the boston basilica with the eulogy from president obama and later senator kennedy is laid to rest at arlington national cemetery. >> in 1959, in the heat of the cold war soviet premier took an

unprecedented two-week tour of the u.s. peter carlson recounts that trip on "afterwords," part of c-span 2's book weekend. >> as washington and the nation continue to focus on health care, sunday on c-span we'll talk about dealing with the h1n1 swine flu virus with dr. thomas frieden on "newsmakers" and on on"q. and a. " a look inside the health care system with dr. john garrett of the health care center. >> this morning victoria kennedy greeted members of congress at the j.f.k. presidential library in boston. they had gathered for a brief memorial service before the casket was moved from the library to the boston basilica for the funeral mass. we'll watch for a few moments.

>> after members of congress gather forward that brief memorial service the casket containing the body of senator kennedy was taken from the j.f.k. library to the boston basilica for the funeral mass. we'll watch for about 10 minutes.

...

>> president and mrs. obama were present. these are pictures from inside the boston basilica before the

funeral mass began.

>> after members were seated inside the church, here's a look as the motorcade and to the sanctuary.

[bells ringing]

[no audio]

>> earlier today, family, friends, and colleagues of the senator edward kennedy gathered for a funeral mass. also, in attendance, former presidents jimmy carter, bill clinton, and george w. bush. this lets about 1 hour 45 minutes. >> so, good morning, everyone. once again, there has been a series of introductions. president and mrs. obama,

president and mrs. bush, president clinton and secretary clinton, president and mrs. carter, vice president and mrs. vicodin. -- mrs. biden. a sister that everyone would love to have in the world, you jean. the great team of doctors and nurses and so many helpers in hyannis port these last weeks and months, and most especially the youngest of ted's gang it, greasy and max, kiley and teddy. in the catholic tradition, the mass of christian burial weaves together memory and hope. the worship of the church locate

says precisely between the past we rightly remember and a future in which we firmly believe. we gather today as a community drawn from across the nation to entrust the life of senator edward kennedy into the hands of god and to provide you consolation and support. we bring with us treasured memories of ted kennedy, memory's not only of the national leader and a master legislator, but of a beloved husband, a great father, a terrific grandfather, a sweet uncle, a dear friend, a trusted colleague, a wise mentor. we enter this church with these memories achillea live for each of us. we gather to treasure the memory and to share our sense of loss. the liturgy of the mass, is

scripture, music, and ritual are designed to acknowledge these memories, to provide a context of prayerful and communal reflection in which they can be held as deeply personal and sacred. but the liturgy does not leave us in the past alone. eight points us in christian hope to the future. our prayer expressed in confidence and hope is about the destiny of our brother and friend. with his future, with god. the biblical readings of the day, selected by tad and vicki and his family, moved the bus from memory to hope, from the past to the future. karen proclaimed the first lesson of the mass, speaking the words of wisdom, the souls of the just art in the hands of god.

we believe our lives are in the hands of god, in life and death. said paul states are case with his usual confidence and caroline proclaim it with such beauty. for i am sure that neither death nor live nor angels nor principalities north things present north things to come nor powers nor height nor depth nor anything else in all creation will be able to separate us from the love of god in christ jesus our lord. that confidence, the triumph of life over death, is rooted in the central belief of christian faith, the resurrection of christ the lord. the christian conviction on which all faith is built is a that christ, who passed from

death to , well, as he promised, lead us through death to a new life as well. on this day, we hold the memory of the life of senator edward kennedy with reverence and respect. we also recognizes that, like all of us, his life has a destiny beyond history. the destiny of russia -- of prison ri prisonsen life and -- the destiny risen lief anife an the life of god. oh, come, blessed of my father. inherit the kingdom from the foundation of the wall. for was hungry and you give me food. i was thirsty and do give me a

drink. i was a stranger and you welcomed me. i was naked and you close the to me. i was sick and you visited me. i was in prison and you came to me. in this tax, on this day, our memories and our hopes converge. these works of the kingdom where daily concerns of the public life of teddy kennedy. they were the fabric of his mind, heart, and hands as he sought to realize them in a society dramatically more complex than the society in which jesus spoke these words. our hope, our confident christian hope is that the fruits of his work as a political and public figure have well-prepared him for god's kingdom. as we, together, reflect the contents life, the choice of this incredible bustle the

church as the place for his funeral provides a fitting context for our thoughts and prayers. this basilica reminds us of two important aspects of the senator's life and work. first, we have come to know in the days since his death that, when critical death -- when critical illness friend his own daughter, he came to this place daily to pray. he came here, like generations before him, seeking the healing hand of god. we are reminded that the most public personalities also lived a very personal existence. this church was the place of private prayer for a public man. second, this church sits in the midst of neighborhoods where the important issues that animated ted kennedy's career or so frankly visible.

the needs of the poor, social justice, healthcare, and education, housing and the minimum wage -- the senators' choice of this church for his funeral mass resonates with the meaning and the purpose of his life and work. as i search for words that could capture his life, i have been struck by how many different perspectives can be brought to bear upon it by so many gathered today, by vicki and their children, by the many members of the kennedy clan, by the presidents, by members of both the houses of the congress , by both political parties, by those who serve them for four decades, and by the citizens of massachusetts whom he faithfully

served. the extraordinary diversity of these many memories is rather overwhelming. it is neither my place nor within my power to capture them all. i know ted and vicki and their family as their parish priest. my sources are a reflection are the scriptures and the pastoral experience of administering to ted and his family. my vision, like yours, cannot envision they totality. my vision is seen through the lens of a catholic parish priest, how one person, one man, a husband, a father, a public figure, a catholic, and a citizen tried to meet the tests of the kingdom of matthew's gospel. to know him as a pastor was to be introduced to the kennedy family.

the senator led the family. he was supported by it through a long and complex career and he was sustained by your family as his life entered its final chapter. all of us know, by instance, the fundamental importance of our families. none of us expect to face the great responsibility of being the most visible figure in a family whose narrative is woven to the history of our nation over the past century. as a priest, i saw him treasurer and a draw strength from his family. like others here today, i watched as his role of this family's leader required that he sustain them all through life and death, through victory and a tragedy. it is not too much to say that

his abiding political and legislative concern for the welfare of families, especially those at the socio-economic edge of american life, was rooted in his own experience of a vibrant and caring family life. senator kennedy was a tower of strength to his family and a towering presence on the american public lands it. others are better suited than i to describe in detail his legacy. as a pastor, my description 62 route his public life -- my description seeks to rout his public life. the demands of christian disciple ship has clearly been principled. few of us, if any, meet them all. but we are all called to fulfill the vision of faith, even as we

recognize the inevitable gap between what we are called to end what we, in fact, achieve. indeed, most of us have a strong suit matched with the gaps and struggles. there are few passages which expresses more pointedly and more poignantly than senator kennedy's own eulogy for his dear brother robert f. st. patrick's cathedral 41 years ago in 1968. there, he said, "my brother need not be idealized or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life. to be remembered simply as a good and decent man who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to hewett, salt -- and tried to heal it, saw war and tried to stop it."

liked both of his brothers, ted kennedy was a public man with a public fate. his strong suit was a central stream of biblical faith expressed both in the hebrew and christian scriptures. his strong suit was the faith of the great hebrew profits of isaiah, jeremiah, amos. it was they that tied the quality of faith to the character of justice in land. it was they who stood in defense of the widows, the orphans, and refugees of their time. the striking resemblance of these groups to the women, children, families, and immigrants in poverty of our time did not escape ted kennedy's notice. his public face was reinforced

and nurtured in the christian scriptures. we have heard matthew today. now we should remember the gospel of luke, commonly known as the gospel of the poor. the jesus of luke knew the port of his time while -- the jesus of lucan indeed poor of his time well. he reminded his disciples of god's special care for them. senator kennedy had a special respect for mary's great prayer, a prayer which simultaneously glorify god for his blessings and promised god's protection of the poor. in his final days, the senator and vicki and i pondered this

prayer in terms of the meaning of his life's work. our blessed mother proclaims of these sentiments. "got mercy is from age to age to those who fear him. he has shown might with his arm and dispersed the arrogance of mind and heart. he has thrown down the rulers from their thrones, but lifted up the lead. the hungry, he's built with good things. the rich, he has sent them away empty. ted kennedy lived in a far more complex world than that of jesus' time and place. but that challenge evoked from him and his public gifts. he understood the complexity of the society in which he lived. he was renowned for his mastery of the data, for his sense of

the possible, and for his genius in crafting law and policy in ways that benefited the widows and orphans of our time. again, he described the motivation of his public life in light of the legacy of his brother robert's vision when he spoke these words. "our future may be beyond our vision. but it is not completely beyond our control. this is the shipping and pulse of america that need their fate nor nature nor the irresistible ties of history, but the work of our hands matched to reason and principle that will determine our destiny." every public figure has a uniquely personal life distinct from and not totally separated from the public world of work

and achievements. others have remembered in the past week and will address this morning the record of achievement of ted kennedy. i would like to close with this reflection. as one lives more toward the final moments of life, the public character fades and the deeper, personal convictions and commitments which have sustained a person through a long and complex life come to occupy the center stage. this was the case in the last few weeks and months as ted and become a together, faced the last measure of his life. -- as ted and vicki, together, faced the last measure of his life. the faith that which had sustained a visible, historic

presence now became the faith which teaches us how to see this life in light of the next life. the gift of the eucharist, which uses promised would nor shows in this life and would carry us to eternal life, became a source of even greater strength and comfort for ted and the key. as the end approached, -- and vicki. as the and approach, that which sustained senator ted kennedy through more troubles became the source of quiet confidence in a truth taught by his church at the second vatican council in these words. "we do not know the time for the consummation of the earth and of humanity. but we are taught that god is preparing a new dwelling place and a new earth where justice

will abide and his blessed this will answer and surpass all belongings for peace which sprang up in the human heart." today, at this holy eucharist, we pray. we are confident that ted kennedy has entered this new dwelling of god. for as the liturgy to date inspires us, lord, for your faithful people, life is changed, not ended. when the body of our earthly plane lies in death, we gain an everlasting dwelling place. may he rest in peace.

>> now we play it -- now we pray to the lord, not only for teddy, but for all of us he leaves behind. among his brothers and sisters,

he was the youngest. so now his grandchildren, his younger nieces and nephews, and the eldest child of one of his niece's will offer the intersection. each time, please respond "lord, hear our prayer." teddy served for 47 years. he summoned us all to service. these intersessions' are in his words, for the work of his life is our prayer for our country and our world. >> for my grandfather's commitment and persistence, not to have worn values, but too old values that will never wear out, that the poor may be at a political fashion, but they are never without human need, that

circumstances may change, but the work of compassion must continue, we pray to the lord. >> lord, hear our prayer. >> for my grandpa's summons that we will not, in our nation, measure human beings by of what they cannot do, but instead value them for what they can do, we pray to the lord -- >> lord, hear our prayer. >> for what my grandpa called the coveted life, as he said so often, in every part of this land, every american should have decent quality health care as a fundamental right and not a privilege, we pray to the lord -- >> lord, hear a prayer. >> where a new season of hope that my uncle to be envisioned, and close the book on the old policy of race and gender, we

pray to the lord -- >> lord, hear our prayer. >> for my uncle teddy's call to keep the promise that all men and women who live here, even strangers and newcomers, can rise no matter what their color, no matter what their place of birth -- for all americans seeking a better life and a better land, for all those left out or left behind, we pray to the lord. >> lord, hear our prayer. clive for my uncle's stand against violence, hit, and war and his belief that peace can be kept through the triumph of justice and the interest of justice can come only through the were suppresseworks of peaco

the lord. >> lord, hear our prayer. >> as my uncle teddy once told thousands of millions, maybe said of us in part -- in dark passages and bright days, in the words of tennyson, that my brothers quoted and love and will have special meaning for us and now, i am part of all that i have met. though much is taken, much of lights. that which we are, we are, one equal temperature rocard, strong-willed, to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield, we pray to the lord. >> lord, hear our prayer. >> for the joy of my uncle teddy's laughter, the light >> for his surrender and noble contributions to the human spirit, for his face in heaven, his father, his mother, his brothers and sisters, and all who went before him who

welcomed him home and for all the times to come when the rest of us will think of him, cuddling affectionately on the boat, surrounded by family as we sailed the nantucket sound, we pray to the lord. >> lord, hear our prayer. >> for my grandfather's brave promise last summer that the work begins anew, the hope rises again, and the dream lives on. we pray to the lord. >> lord hear our prayer. >> lord our god, giver of peace and giver of souls, hear the prayers of the redeemer jesus christ and the voices of your people whose lives were purchased by the blood of the lamb. forgive the sins of all who sleep in christ and grant them a

place in your kingdom. we ask this through christ our lord. >> amen. ♪