anything about harry reid, you can read a couple of books first. there is of " the town that would not die" and "the good fight." he will have to have a revised edition and add another chapter on to "the good fight." this has been a good fight. harry reid has led the fight. we have won it. . .

what we are building here is not a mansion. it is a starter home. but it has a great foundation. coverage for 31 million americans. it has a great protective roof. and there is room for expansion in the future. but we might never get there if we do not start a starter home. so this is not the end of health care reform. it is the beginning. i'm going to join our leaders in

making sure we can get done what we need to. >> i will take a few questions. yes. >> [inaudible] >> i worked with every democrating -- democratic senator for the merged bill, and now for the amendment. negotiations took place at this podiunm, sometimes individually, and ben nelson was like the rest of them. we worked for many, many weeks,

as we did with other senators. so we have, as you look through the bill, you will see different interests in the merged manager's package. >> [inaudible] >>the doctor's fix was done because doctors felt that was the best way to move forward. we feel it should be permanent. they are entitled to more than one, and that is why we support

the legislation. we will work on it as soon as we hear back for the holiday. >> the reality is that that is one state that gets 100% health for medicaid. >> i will sasy this. you will find in the bill that a number of states are treated differently from other states. it is compromise. we work to get a number of votes, including efforts for republican votes. a lot of times, you think

something was done and that is how they got the vote. most of the time, that is not true. senator nelson, that is a minor part of the issues. we started working on that weeks and weeks ago, that provision. >> do you have 60 commitments now for the commitments of fine gold? do you have everybody? >> it seems that way. [laughter] thank you very much. good job, you guys. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

>> shortly later, republicans held a briefing on health care, beginning with minority leader mitch mcconnell.

>> good morning, everybody. i hope you live on the hill. incredible day. it is still coming down. i have a rugged commute. i live about a half block from the hart building. i left the suburbs 20 years ago. i cannot take it. i am not even sure that a pizza stores are going to be able to deliver tonight. is everybody all set? let me just say in the beginning that if they were proud of this bill, they would not be doing it this way, jamming it through in the middle of the night in the last weekend before christmas, and that sums up, i think, but

we have seen on display here as they try to bob and weave and hide from the american people who have made it abundantly clear they do not support what they know about this bill. now we have got an expanded version now, and it is important we're having a red so we can figure out like 300 million other americans and all of you what is in it. so i am sure with a message for the american people. this morning, democratic leaders in washington stood on the senate floor and sprung a new piece of legislation. it will have a profound impact on our nation. this is not renaming a post office. make no mistake, this bill will reshape our nation, our lives. democrats are forcing a vote on

it over the weekend, as i indicated, counting on the fact that american people are preoccupied with christmas and not paying much attention to what they are doing. and the reason for that, obviously, is we know for all the survey data that americans are overwhelmingly opposed to this bill. this bill is a legislative train wreck of historic proportions. but they are so eager to claim a victory that they will do anything to jam it through in the next few days. we are in the process of reading this bill, like so many other people. but here are a few things americans need to know. in medicare, we know that the bill slashes hundreds of billions of dollars from medicare to fund a massive new

government bureaucracy. we know there are hospitals and nursing homes, cuts to home health care, cuts to hospice. with regard to taxes, the bill includes massive increases on american families and businesses. doing that at a time of double digit unemployment, taxes will make it much harder to create jobs coming out of the slowdown. there are taxes on health insurance and on medical devices. there are taxes on medicines. there are taxes on working families with very high medical expenses. abortion. the bill includes permissive language of government-funded

abortion, language that would lead the federal government to violate longstanding policies on abortion funding. a ponzi scheme is in the bill. medicaid is particularly interesting. it proposes massive burdens on the states that are already struggling. under the weight of the cost of medicaid. at the same time, it gives special sweetheart deals to a select few states. interestingly enough, two states standing out our nebraska and vermont. what is the upshot of this for

taxpayers everywhere? in kentucky and ohio and new york and michigan, they end up paying more so that nebraska and vermont can get a special deal. our conclusion would be this, based on what we know so far about the bill being read and analyzed, not only by my office, but by everyone in the senate and you. our friends like to talk about making history, about the historic steps they are still taking. the history being made here, make no mistake about it, the history made here is the ignoring of the will of the american people. the history being made is that a

bill sold as helping a major problem in our nation actually made the problem worse. because independent nonpartisan scorekeepers tell us that premiums, taxes, and overall health care spending will go up under this bill. america, if this was a good bill with bipartisan support, i assure you that they would not be trying to pass this the weekend before christmas in the middle of the night. and the reason i say the middle of the night is that the next vote will literally be at 1:00 a.m. monday morning. and the presumption is that no one will be watching. this is a good bill with bipartisan support. if we had followed senator

snowe's advice several weeks ago to sit down and write this bill and a way that could pass the senate with 80 votes, we would not be doing what we are doing. this is an absolute outrage perpetrated on the american people, an absolute outrage. americans need to know what is going on, and we'll give them every opportunity to do as much as we can get the process moving forward. >> [inaudible] do you plan to use other tactics if it does not work by christmas?

>> they are being jammed. there is an effort to deceive them and use this bill at a time when there is preoccupation with christmas holidays, nobody will notice. i do not think that is going to work. all the surveys indicate people are paying attention, they are concerned. this is not a post office bill. this is health care. regardless of how old you are, every one of 300 million americans care about this bill. >> senator, democrats are hoping along the lines of this bill that if the get cloture monday, it will be over, and you can go back without telegraphing. >> i want to talk about the

outrage of deceiving the american people will for christmas on an issue of extraordinary magnitude. >> what is the obsession with christmas. but would magically happened -- what is the obsession with christmas? what would magically happen if they had to wait a week before voting? >> i think it would be fine. we would have an opportunity for people to get thoroughly familiar with what is in it. >> what is objectionable to you about the compromise? why do you think it is permissive? >> as you know, the bill is still being read the first time by most -- the first time most

senators have had a chance to look at it. staff is still going through it. i cannot give you the definitive take, but i earlier gave you what the indications are that the abortion language is not adequate. >> i heard about how the gop was outraged. you were debating a decoy bill, a switch, a parliamentary move to have an amendment from the floor. can you talk about that? >> nobody had seen it before today except harry and a few people you could put in a phone booth. so it is important to give people an opportunity to read and understand it. what i have given me today is a preliminary take -- what i have

given you today is a preliminary take. we know that medicaid has been plussef in nebraska and vermont, and people will have to pay for that. we are trying to a valley with what kind of special deals and interesting insertions there have been behind closed doors over the next few weeks. >> the democrats are using the boats this way, and the acrimony, what does it mean for the year? >> this is not about acrimony. it is about policy. this bill is a 2100 page monstrosity full of special deals for people willing to vote for it.

they are playing games with the nation's health care. this is an outrage, and it needs to be called that. but it is not personal. that is not the case. it is a policy problem.

>> other senators also offered remarks, speaking for about 25 minutes and the radio and television gallery. >> the snow is beautiful this morning, and you have been going back to back on this. as somebody who has delivered babies, the writer of this bill

, this is a fictitious. for the first time, federal tax dollars will be used to pay for abortions. the negotiations through unborn babies under the bus. if you read the language, it violates a clear intent of the hyde, supak, and nelson amendments. federal funds for upcountry will be used to provide abortions. that is a drastic change in policy. there is no prohibition on coverage in federal exchanges, the new public option managed by the office of personnel

management will cover abortions, the manager's amendment includes reauthorization of the health care improvement act. the amendment rejects compromise proposal on abortions. this is far worse than the casey proposal, the cash proposal, and it will eventually have a negative result. >> the hyde amendment has been part of our law since 1977, and been bipartisan in its support. today we have the first time that that amendment is going to be watered down and no longer exist and that all the. the house clearly voted in a bipartisan way to protect the

amendment, and the fact that we would not have subsidize abortions in this country because so many people feel so strongly about it, i am in absolute support of the hyde amendment and believe that watering it down should defeat this bill. the rest of the things we are learning about this bill that were in the underlying bill should also be recommended for the rejection of it. all of the tax cuts that are going to start in two weeks. the bill does not become implemented for four years. so you are asking people to pay taxes for four years, higher insurance premiums on policies if they are covered, hired prescription drug costs, and hired a vice equipment costs because of higher taxes, and yet

there is no bill that anyone can sign up for or four years. >> i was hoping we could give the american people a process. it has a three energy-something page amendment being read. at the end of the day, i hope president obama will keep up to his campaign problems is -- promises of changing the way we will do business. he said that everyone will have a seat at the table, health care will be transparent, on c-span, and you will have access. maybe i do not have the channel,

because i do not see that on tv. what about the conference of bishops? there are opposing the compromise. but if you're wondering if this is a partisan measure, i would argue that the catholic church is not part of the republican or democratic party. they care about the on board. if i was making an important choice, people would have been standing behind me.

that is all about this bill. you could not find one group to stand behind and validated. at the end of the day, this reinforces everything that the american people hate about conquers -- congress. and the price tag has not changed one bit with the better. this new entitlement program for long-term health care has not changed at all. they will create a new entitlement, beginning in 2011, creating $72 billion. 11 senators wrote to the democratic party saying the class act is fiscally

irresponsible, and millions of americans are dying to have congress act responsibly. as we go forward between now and christmas, a democratic colleague said we have the votes, what can we go home? we are not going home. why couldn't we wait until after christmas to pass the bill? it was in their interest to pass it through. they have rounded up the 60th boat and they are applauding themselves when there is nothing to applaud. so we are going to talk about this until christmas, waiting until people not want to know the truth. the question is not why people can't go home, it is why can we do with the american people expect a bus and be responsible when it comes to legislation?

>> i think that this bill is clearly irresponsible and morally reprehensible. the abortion language in this bill fundus abortion for the first time since 1977. the last time the federal government funded abortion, the numbers funded, taxpayer funding of abortion and billy. it is funding abortion with federal taxpayer dollars and premiums that will go through federal taxpayer established insurance plans or proposals. that is morally reprehensible,

fiscally irresponsible, and we do not have the money to do this with. here we are on saturday morning, getting the bill, and people are saying what is in it, what is not in it, and rushing to pass it. if it were a traditional bill, it would be one that would work through the process that everybody has a chance to look at and at the end of the day we would have somewhere between 70 votes and 80 boats. but this hide the ball process, throwing it out at the last minute, is the process that people hate and that we hate seeing take place. it should not happen. it should be put off until christmas. instead of being done at the dark of night.

>> this is not about the difference between republicans and democrats. this is about members exercising their ability to get special treatment for their stake -- state when others will not pay for it. i agree with everything that has been said. i could go forward and to go further on the abortion language. the original language is better than what was negotiated, but you have to compliment them for applying the price is right. put -- for playing the price is right. the agreement fort nebraska puts

the federal government on the hook forever. not for six years, not for 10 years. this is not the louisiana purchase. this is the nebraska windfall agreement. it means that if you are a virginia taxpayer, you will pay taxes to make sure nebraska residents do not have to pay any portion in the future. this is not what the american people sign up for. we're supposed to tax equally and apply equally. but we are into something now that is a continuation of what has been so all told the past 12 months, picking winners and losers. harry reid only allowed some to win and other costs to lose.

-- others to lose. but in this process, the american people lose. this bill will be incredibly expensive, cost jobs in this country, and as has been proven, it does not reform health care, it raises taxes too high, spends too much money. the american people lose in an agreement like this. quickly, what this provision does is set up a supreme court challenge. roe versus wade is clear on funding for abortion, and now we are seeing that what that was laid down years ago is thrown up in the air, and it is obvious

that things have been -- votes have been bought. what ever it takes to get a vote, that is what the leader did. the list goes on and on. is that the way that the election nears envisioned the change that ought to come to america that they expressed in the last election? this is not business as usual. it is far worse than usual. it has been negotiated for 26 years by individuals. i know little bit about the subjects, and if this is what negotiation is all about, it is

a poor way of doing business and a poor way of negotiating. >> i would make one final statement. the crisis of confidence in this country is at an apex and has not seen in 150 years. and that lack confidence undermines the ability of legitimate government. we need to be paying attention to that, because a lot of people out there today through this process, not just the bill, but the process, will give up on government, and rightly so. questions?

>> i understand this is not explicitly say no abortion, but the position is that you are segregating apart. >> it is federal dollars. it is the policy in the country today under no taxpayers' dollars, or the use to pay for abortion. it has been that way for 34 years, but it changes with this bill. as soon as five states opt out, there will be a challenge using the president to say they cannot do that. consequently, we will have to hide language stripped forever, and you will be as a taxpayer, whether you believe in abortion or not, they will be paying for it.

there is also no conscience protection in this. so we will be going after those in terms of training systems when they may not want to offer that. we are going to vote on this at 11 on monday morning. that is ours from when we first looking at the amendment. we have had 10 republicans amendments voted on -- well, now we have nobeno bill. so description by our leader saying that this is a jam is

exactly right. they do not want the american people to know absolutely what is in this bill. >> it is the worst crisis of confidence in 150 years. do you think we are on the brink of civil war? >> there was no reference. but what i hear from constituents everywhere i travel, you represent what is in the best long-term interest of our country. and people are not having conference to govern. when you lose confidence, you lose the ability to govern. and we're thinking about long- term prospects, rather than how we benefit perot purely or

otherwise our own. >> trying to segment private money? >> there's no segmentation in the of improvement act. the hyde language is gone. so we will use federal government money to pay for abortions on indian reservations. how to use segment the money? you cannot segment the money. that is like saying we're not going to let social security money be spent on other things. you are saying we are going to have a lock box, when there is no lock box. this is caps redone. they have just try to say, ok, we will set another category, but it is the same sort of segment, and we went through that debate earlier and everyone said this is not funding for abortion because we're segmenting, but this is federal dollars, you artist putting them in a different pocket.

so that is funding of abortion. and in the exchange, you will have one that will fund abortion. and we have never done that. it is still federal money. >> if barbara boxer is ok with this language, nobody in the right-to-life community can be ok with it, because her position is well-known, and she thinks the federal government ought to spend money on abortion. >> i heard the explanation today about writing two checks. that is what was just alluded to. this is federal money. it is like social security money going in the general fund. the money will be mixed with federal money. i do not care whether there is additional separate premium or not, it's still is mixed with

federal money, and that is what pays for abortion. so they are disingenuous when they say that there is going to be segregation among the funding for abortion versus non-abortion policies. >> in your statement, at least what i grabbed, you seem to provide that center nelson used the abortion as a bargaining chip and wound up with worse language than the first place, but effectively used abortion to get a better deal for nebraska. >> you received it correctly, and i think that it shows a tremendous willingness to allow some in this country to win and many to lose by one member of the senate, and i think that is wrong.

>> you cannot get one republican vote change in 16 of the economy. that says a lot about the republican party and the process. i am one republican who does not mind trying to find common ground on tough issues. i am going to try it on energy policy, i have done it in the past and will do it again, but it is virtually impossible for any republican to have a meaningful say. the class act is a devastating program that will create long- term financial problems. senator nelson may have helped on medicaid, but has not helped nebraska with medicare cuts. at the end of the day, i hope the people realize it is not over. this is a long way from being done.

if you want to change, speak up. let people know. the cuts are going to affect people in nebraska, and tax increases will affect people in nebraska, and this abortion language, the conference of bishops understands the difference between stupac language and this language, and they have decided to oppose the bill. that's as all i need to know about the pro-life issue, when the conference of catholic bishops say they oppose the language and opposed the bill because of language. that is all you need to know from my point of view. i do not always agree with the catholic church, particularly on the death penalty, but i agree with them on right-to-life issue.

they have just got to pass the bill, because the democratic party features, that is the with a look at this thing. they go from reforming health care to worry about the future of the democratic party. that is what they did. they had nothing to do with the overall best interest of the country, and that can happen to both parties, i guess. but this is not about health care reform, it is about the democratic party trying to save themselves.

>> shortly later, of vermont independent senator bernie sanders offered his thoughts on the project of the debate. he spoke for just over five minutes from the radio and tv gallery. >> thank you very much. i'm here with the senator from maryland, who wanted to say a few words on one aspect of this legislation. in the midst of the overall crisis in america, there is one

crisis focused on, the crisis in primary health care. that means some 60 million americans today do not have access to a doctor on a regular basis. what that and that meaning is that when people get sick, they end up in the emergency room. a great personal suffering and pain, and somehow even death. we supported by a thousand americans who died because we do not get to it got them on a regular basis. what this manages to do is add $10 billion more over a five- year time into community health centers. what that means is that an additional 25 million americans will also have access to federally qualified health centers, meaning high quality

health care, low-cost drugs, and health counseling. it also means because of a significant increase in health services, we will be forgiving debts for students going into primary care. in recent years, it has had a profound impact on the health and well-being of people, and at the end of the day, studies indicate medicaid saved money because we keep people out of expensive emergency health rooms and hospitals. so this is a win-win

proposition. we have $10 billion now in the senate bill. there will be a revolution in primary health care in america, with millions more having access to mental health counseling. >> i have sat for many caucus meetings were bernie sanders has raised this issue over and over again. let me try and _ how important this is. we know we have a shortage of professionals. we also know we do not have enough facilities in our community to handle all our

population want to receive health care. we have been fighting for many years for coverage. this bill does a great service to america in getting a lot more people insured. we hope there will be even more. the question is, where will they get their needs met? we do not have enough primary- care physicians today, we do not have enough space and our clinics. i have visited a community health centers in maryland. they have one thing in common. they all need more capacity. they already are stretched as to what they can handle. we need more locations in rural areas people have a hard time finding primary-care help, and we need more capacity generally throughout the nation.

a colleague believes we should have affordable access to health insurance. he told me if we do not do something to produce more primary care professionals, and if we do not provide more community health center capacity, we are not going to be able to provide care in the most cost-effective way. the bill that we had on the floor of the united states senate needed to be improved, and senator sanders needed to accomplish that. i know that was a focus on major issues, but our objective was to find that every american have affordable have access to health care, and the initiative will help 25 more million americans reject all. congratulations on that. -- reach that goal. congratulations on that.

question you respond to special favors in the bill? >> i did not have all the details. but vermont has been very aggressive in making sure that all of our low-income kids and others have access to health care. we were there, doing the right thing. with many of us in vermont and around the country, we felt it was wrong to penalize a state that had done a better job than perhaps all of us. you do not penalize states because they come up with money to do the right thing. we are proud in vermont that we have done the right thing.

but taxpayers should not be penalized. the bottom line for me is that if you expand medicaid and health insurance in general, that is important. but at the end of the day, it does not mean much if people cannot find a doctor or a dentist, and we have at expanded to 10 dozen communities in america as a result of the legislation. they will now have access to community health centers. 10,000 more. and that is what is going to help revolutionize primary health care in america, an important step forward. ok? thank you very much.

by inserting ", or a nurse practitioner or clinical nurse specialist (as those terms are defined in section 1861(aa)(5)) who is working in collaboration with the physician in accordance

>> this morning, the senate voted 18 -- 88-10. see continued live coverage on c-span 2. in his new biography of polk, robert merry looks at the life and times of that president.

buzz aldrin and other astronauts on apollo 11. >> a unique contemporary. abraham lincoln, in hard cover at your favorite bookseller. available when digital downlaods are sold.

>> an update on preparations for the 2010 census. this si 45 minutes.

we will get to you when we can based on the people in the room as well. >> and breedings. since my coming to the bureau in july, we have tried to do these every once in awhile to make sure everyone is up to speed on how we're coming along with preparations. as you know, since 1790, the consensus has been done every 10 years, and each of those 10 years, we have alerted everyone in the population and tried to place them at their residential location so we have all persons in their usual abode.

this decade, we have the shortest in our lifetime, one that can be completed in any household. upcountry in minutes, so it is easy to do. let me give you a rundown of the basics of the timing this year. in mid-to-late-june, there will be a started advertising campaign going on throughout the country, a big event that we are preparing for now. at the end of january we're going to start in the state of alaska. we have to start early because of weather conditions. in march, the vast majority of the population will receive questionnaires at their homes. most of them through the postal service. april 1 is a sense this day. we ask everyone to return their poems by april 1, up and we

have to hope they will do so. if they do not, may through july, we will have a large set of people going to erupt country knocking on doors of those folks were not able to do questioners, and we will do interviews with them face-to-face. we are under a hard deadline to return the accounts. it is those accounts that determine the apportionment of the house of representatives going forward and then in about april of 2011, we will distribute data allowing each state to redistrict their states for representation. i want to be an update on how preparations are going, and specify -- i will say a few special words about hiring process because we are hiring

large amounts of people over the next few months, that i will say a few things about the address list. this is the key file we use to mail out all questioners around the country and we have to get this to produce a good census. first, how're we doing? on administration and processing, we have successfully opened 500 local census offices throughout the country. we are in place. that is the total we are expecting, getting step up and running, doing their thing. we have opened 3 very large processing centers. these centers and can process tens of thousands of questionnaires, a massive

operation. we have printed hundreds of millions of forms. your press kit has a picture of one of our warehouses', stacked up with kits for interviewers and forms of various kinds giving you a sense.

we have national partners and then we have local partners. the local partners are the heart beat of the system. they reach out to local communities, the local neighborhoods to get the word out about why this participation in the census is important. partners are really important for us. these are voluntary arrangements, people help us get the message out because they realize the group will benefit from their participation. then we have complete town committees. desert at the local level -- gizzi at the local level. -- these are at the local level.

the spearhead the effort to get the word out in their cities. we have over 9100 of those spread through of the country. 37 states have formed a complete count committees. we are looking for more, and we are also hougfocus on energizing their partners to around the country. this decade we have tailored our message to bury small areas. we have gotten pairs of our people at every local census office to focus in on individual small areas that we call census tracts. we focus on the hard to enumerate tracks. what we mean by that, those areas in neighborhoods that in the year 2000 had very low return rates or have

characteristic rates that suggests that their behavior in the 2010 census might be less than ideal. we are tailoring our methods, are our reach to those neighborhoods to the neighborhood itself. i am very excited about what we call those action plans because i think that will localize the census efforts and a particularly effective way. we have also launched a program called a census in the schools. there are curricular materials that teach the census, teach a little geography and arithmetic, but also teaches six lessons about how the participation in the census is the key thing for all communities. we will begin a road to where -- tour around the country.

we will spread the word in a particularly effective way. let me say a few things about software. we have run just a couple of those -- of very large load test of the key components of the software that will allow tesus o manage the overall census. this software involves thousands of people around the country. we had a lot of clericks working on the system. it was a successful test of the fact that we found glitches.

each of these glitches have solutions. tomorrow, we will do a follow-up test. we will do software testing prior to production to make sure the large census of software systems worked well when we need them in production. we have completed a variety of operations successfully on time, under budget. they include massive outreach to the country looking at crew quarters. these are facilities like assisted living facilities and dormitory and anywhere where groups of unrelated individuals live. in the last census those costs as problems. we want to get that right. we have had an an operation that we just completed. we're also doing pull the listings for the tools that we used to a evaluate the overall

sense is. -- the overall census. we are also recruiting. this is the second major point i wanted to make. you have read newspapers and local areas, you will see small articles that says the census has jobs for people. at this time in the recession we're all going through, these jobs are valued by the population. we are recruiting over this fiscal year 3.8 million applicants in order to sell 1.2 million jobs. -- in order to fill 1.2 million jobs. the biggest portion will be in the non-response dayphase.

the hiring process reaches out to the unemployed individuals. we're reaching out to make sure that everyone who need a job knows about the job opportunities. we are hiring locally. what does that mean? we want to how your people in the neighborhoods where they work. we have learned that hiring people who know the neighborhoods and the streets and the lifestyles and the goings and comings of neighborhoods work better. this is especially true when we have areas that have non-english speakers. we will high gear bilingual his interviewers to help us set the stage in order to help us beat -- speak the language of the resident. [inaudible]

as part of the paramount concern of the safety of the american public, we put all the applicants through unnamed check on the fbi data lists. the name check said its their name, social security #, date of birth, and gender to the fbi system. we checked for criminal histories based on the fbi. we also have gone beyond that. we are doing something extra this decade with response to safety at the american public and that is we're taking fingerprints on all applicants, even though that adds very few new discoveries of criminal history. we're also concerned about the safety of the enumerators.

we have a variety of procedures where they go to areas where crime rates are high to protect them and go in paris. -- go in pairs. we are actively -- we are acting aggressively to make sure they are safe and the public is safe. on criminal history check, if there are any felony convictions for crimes such as murder, sex offenders aggravated assault, weapons charges, grand theft, child molestation -- any conviction like that, you are ineligible to work as a numerator. if there are convictions of less serious crimes, you can be hired only if the applicant can demonstrate the extenuating circumstances that proves beyond

a doubt that they do not pose a risk to the american public. i cannot emphasize this enough -- the safety of the american public is of paramount concern. we need to rely on the cooperation of the american people. finally, let me talk about the address list that is so important to a successful census. of the process continues. we did a massive exercise this summer where about 150,000 lister's wind out on every road in st. -- went out and came armed up with a list of addresses we have built up over the decade with cooperation from the postal service and other services, especially local government. we went out with 145 million

addresses on this list. 67% of those were completely blind. -- were completely fine. some of them we could not find. when all is said and done at the end of this process, our address was about 134 million addresses. how do you evaluate that operation? an independent estimate of the number of housing units comes pretty close to that. we are 2 percentage point hiks . i remind us that the 2000 address list had a variety of duplicates of coming closer to that independent benchmark.

less than 1% had insufficient information. which will handle those with special follow-up procedures. about 100,000 of the addresses were estimating, we have a fine address but cannot place them in the block they belong. we're going through a special operation at the local area to update the geographical information on those and we will deal with those with follow-up operations. i want to give us special thanks to a set of local governments that supplied a set of addresses to us to help us in this process. we have just delivered back to them recently the address is we were able to find that they gave us. they are checking over those right now.

they will go back and give us their reaction to the address list quite quickly. this is called the local ahoy -- called the luka process. it is a great procedure. we are also at seeking -- out seeking their help in identifying new construction that is being built right now. we will get an update from the postal service on new addresses. we are constantly updating the address list to make sure it is up-to-date. we will keep doing it. those late advanc adds, many ofm will not get questionnaire's but we will follow up.

i think i can conclude navaow by noting we are entering a special time. the plan has been set. operations are being assembled for production use. if you will see in coming weeks more and more activity. you will see an advertising campaign in just a few weeks. you will see a lot more activity at the initial operation. it is the time for all of us, but especially social and religious leaders around the country to get the word alcoho that everyone needs to participate in the census. we need to get the word out that this is an important thing to do. it is easy to do and especially stake because of our strong laws. thank you for being here.

i am happy to take questions. >> for those of you on the phone, we will get to you. if you could please state your name and your affiliation. >> i am deborah vette barry. can you talk about the efforts to ensure or increased participation among people of color. i>> absolutely. let me tell you stories. these complete count committees are inventing their own solutions to energize their local community. these are really fascinating things. there are some local city itiest

have put signs on the tracks that say it is cintas time, to get out there. there are wonderful out reaches to the census in the school's program. i was in st. louis just a few days ago with a set of first graders who completed 01 of the exercises for first grade that we do and that is a class of census. all of them reported on whether they took a bus to school board took their car -- or took the car. all of these things that we attempt to do our efforts -- are efforts that communicate that participation is important.

four groups that are traditionally undercounted, we are reaching out with the level of energy that we never had before. we had 3000 partnership specialists. this is the result of stimulus funding. these partners are really down at a block by block level now. it some groups in some areas are not as energized as other groups. we always have that problem. if we are working in reaching out to local leadership. it is not just the politicians. it is social leaders, community leaders cut are connected to the different groups that we need accounting. the message is always the same -- you only benefit when you participate. nothing of benefit comes to you if you fail to participate in

the census. >> we're going to take a question on the phone. >> good morning. you talked about the address count and the process of tabulating addresses. one of the tools that the enumerators were supposed to be using with the hand-held computers, the address tally is the only role for the hand-held. i coui was wondering if you coud talk about the hand-held systems and the back of systems work. and if there has been met any thought given to possibly another role, maybe a creative

use of the hand held between now and the census day. >> for the benefit of everyone, there were small hand-held devices that have the ability of recording the addresses. these were used successfully in the thing we called address canvassing to list all of the addresses. it was judged at that time that the utility of the software was fine. they perform quite well. that operation finished early. though one set of switches on the hardware was a set of delete operations. we are going through this through a set of feedback we got. we are running through those right now. looking forward, there are no

plans to use those hand-held devices and any further operation of the 2010 census. the reason for that is the same adjustment that lead to when they're used for address canvassing amplitude the rejection of their use for more complicated operations. did that address your question? >> thank you. >> can you talk about whether chicago is any further ahead or behind any major cities, and particularly after stopping the use of acorn? did that have any affect? >> i was in the chicago region just a few weeks ago. they have a wonderful feature of their mobilization for the sense is that i think is a model for

other regions. a group of local on patients got together, offered small grants to communities throughout illinois to help them advertise the census. that has filled a gap in that region that needs to be killed and other regions. state and local governments are in hard times right now. many of the staff that we used in 2004 are reache0 for at react there now. the activities of private foundations are filling adapt. chicago is a wonderful example of that i think. >> we have a question on the phone. >> thank you.

in talking to some of the local liaison, they have a number of frustrations with address canvassing and the master address file. 01 is obviously the short deadlines, which cannot be helped. the information they have gotten back from the census bureau is murky in terms of what new addresses had been added. they are particularly concerned with units that have been converted. multi-use buildings and the impression seems to be they should get the benefit of the doubt on those units. can you talk about that? you mentioned you are 2% over an independent estimate. where does that estimate comes from? would you rather be 2% over or under? >> to address the last question,

i think we would prefer to be a little over because it does not bother us if we send to a unit that is not an habitable right now. we will not get a form back. we would rather have addresses on the high side then misaddresses. -- then miss addresses. we have given both ourselves a lot of work and the local governments participating in the program a lot of work in a short amount of time. we understand that we're all working really hard. the purpose of the timeline of is this is to make sure we stay up-to-date and have a complete address list. i realize the pressure that we are all working under. i think them for their cooperation. with regard to individual

appeal processes, a process as well specified in statute. that is there is an independent appeals office that is overseeing the office of management and budget in washington that receives those addresses that local areas think our new and we could not find. we are going to put them back in if they have passed the appeal process and we will follow up on those. this is the natural process. some of the materials could be designed better in retrospect, " we're all making redid working hard to make sure this works. -- we're all working hard to make sure this works. >> any additional questions on the telephone? >> at next question comes from the associated press.

the line is open. >> i am wondering at this point, taking a big picture look what is the overall readiness? >> it is a great question. i can answer it in this way -- i am much more confident than i was when i came in. i was more confident than i was at the end of the process. my confidence is growing, not declining. i am a warrior. -- were yeaorrier. we all need to realize that the moving parts all will not work perfectly when they are up and running. there will be bumps along the line.

this is the nature when you mobilize this many people to do this piece of work. the success of this is our preparation and also sang light on our feet when something bad happens.

>> when we estimate things there are good things and bad things. the cooperation of the american public has been declining slightly every year. it is a harder population to measure in some sense. on the other hand, we have put in place a set of procedures that are different, that should increase the cooperation rate, a short form cintas. -- census. our estimate at the end of all of that is that the range of possibilities include what we achieved in the 2000 census. there are lot of uncertainties that remain, but we think we can still aim for the 2000 rate. it could be worse or better. we will keep estimating this. i need to remind you of one

thing. it is a very fragile thing to estimate. an event that changes public precipitation -- participation can change that rate for good or bad. it is hard to forecast. >> i think we have a question in the front. >> on that point, there has been talk about an anti-government sentiment out there. is that among door where reese? and do you think it is any different now than it was 10 years ago? >> i worry about everything. the anti-government sentiment was there in 2000. it was there in 1990. i saw something wonderful from the 1940 census -- it is part

of the american spirit. a lot of it is being focused on why you can benefit from the participation in the census and also why it is safe. how the census bureau is detached independent from enforcement agencies. how we have a law that puts all of our cintas 0 people in jail for five years if there is a breach. this is a pretty tight system. we can say this honestly. we tried to deliver that i trusted voices in the community. people who share those sentiments about the federal government, but understand the census is a different parts of the government than the parts they fear.

local community leaders down to the block level. i am going to senior citizens centers where some people are undocumented and have been undocumented their entire life. they are working with their service providers to understand this process. why is it useful to respond to it? that is the key in our belief. you have to get down to the local to get effective communication. >> we're going to do two or three more questions. >> our next question from the phone lines from john mccormack with bloomberg news. >> thank you. you have touched on this a little bit, but the economy

isn't aware shape probably since the 1930 census. what advantages does that offer to the count? what are you doing specifically to address the challenges? >> as your question implies, there is good news and bad news. the horrible recession has benefited us and a direct -- and an indirect way. our applicant pool contains people with experience and background and training that is unprecedented leverage. if you visited our local cintas offices that are being staffed right now, you will see people with skills and team work experience that we will benefit from, the country will benefit from. the high unemployment rate has helped us. there are other things that are

bad news. cut the vacancy rate hurts us. -- the vacancy rate hurts us. there is nothing wrong with this. the forms will not come back. we have to check on that. we will call back on those houses from may through july. we will spend a lot of money determining that those houses are really vacant. there is a cost to the 2010 census. there is another impact to this -- those people went somewhere. many of them are in doubled up houses with relatives and friends. we are trying to get the word out, and you can help us, that people need to be counted where they are living, even if they don't think they will live there

the rest of their life. that is their usual residents. they have no other presidents. we want them counted which they are living, and getting that word out is important for all of us to work on. >> one more question. take o>> could you address the concerns of not having the availability of the country of origin. several are not there. there are raising concern. to cop>> you will see that ethny is one of the questions. every decade it changes almost. this is always a question about which there are debates when the

sun disappeared -- whent he censu the census arrises. for them, we have a box at the bottom that says if you do not fit in any of the check boxes of love, write down how you think of yourself and ethnic terms. there are 30 spaces in that box, and i was with a group of indian tribal leaders and we know when there is tribal names. it is a tough job to get right. that is where we want them to write in how they think of themselves. that is how we're handling it in 2010.

this will also keep changing in this country as it becomes more diverse. identification changes over time. >> dr. groves, arguably the 2010 census is sort of the super bowl for people in your profession and the statistical field and social research field. i was wondering -- >> we think of it as march madness. >> [inaudible] we're back. could you tell us about the disconnect if there is one between what you need to do to manage the census professionally at the very big offices that you have around the country and the understanding

and expectation that the mf rick -- that the american may have about how this will affect them. what does this do in your thinking and planning for the management of this? >> being as statistical geek's like i am, we are reminded every 10 years how the rest of the country goes on without thinking much about the census. we have a massive education challenge every 10 years about the basics. how do i actually do it? he mean that i fill out a form? the questions are at that level. we are answering those questions through our reach. you have to start at a fairly

low level and build up. that process is part of the process of a professional scientific organization when you mr. the public. -- when you measure the public. you cannot do this at your desk completely well. you have to know and understand the population you are measuring. a professional scientists who measures population has to understand the population to are measuring to be a good scientist. those things are together. >> thank you. that does conclude operational press briefing today. i would like to go over a couple of milestones coming up and give you an estimate of when we might meet again. i know it is a very busy holiday right now, but january is a very

busy month. on june report, we will launch a national road tour. also, the paid media launched will start airing on january 18. we will do a big kick off on the 14th. look for more details on that as well as the first enumeration of the country. dr. gross will go to alaska to participate in the first remote alaskan fizzles each in -- village. we will keep you posted on all the developments. we did not get to your questions on the telephone. -- if we didn't get to your questions on the telephone, please respond by e-mail. thank you for attending. have a great day. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

>> meanwhile, leaders from the african-american community met on wednesday with the commerce secretary to discuss the 2010 census. many spoke afterwards about efforts to ensure an african counts of african americans. this is 50 minutes. the undercount is one part of the story. the other part of the story is there was an over accounts of the country's white population. i need not emphasize that the census is a critical,

constitutional imperative that is utilized in determining proportionate and legislative districts of congress all the way down to the county, city, ship and state legislative levels. secondly, it is used by the congress and the federal agencies hot and the distribution of almost half a trillion dollars each year from the federal budget. also, the numbers are used fight any number of private sectors, academic, non-profit institutions in the work they do. a complete count, a reliable count, a full count is essential to the 21st century democracy we're all committed to. a few highlights i want to share

with you. first of all, we give secretary lock in the obama administration great credit for taking steps since they were inaugurated to improve a plan for the 2010 they inherited. that included commitment of additional dollars. commitment to the community partnership effort and a strengthening of the census bureau plan to reach a hard to count communities. that notwithstanding, we share today a number of areas of concern. we think while the secretary and the obama administration has taken in important steps, we

still feel there are important significant steps that need to be taken to ensure that there is a complete counts in the 2010 census. at today's press conference we will outline and talk a little bit of up those steps and those suggestions that we made today to the secretary. we are committed to raise awareness, to motivate people, to encourage people and impress upon people the importance of participating in 2010. we note that an accurate count incomplete count where a the -- where there is undercount is essential.

it is doubly important at a time in this nation with high unemployment, at a time with the nation in the subprime housing crisis, when the distribution of many federal investments to stem the tide of joblessness are determined by the information contained in the census. we are committed to ensuring a complete accounting. we are committed to doing everything we can to ensure that there is a complete count. we have important areas of concern. when is that we want to make sure -- one is that we want to make sure they're very important paid media plan is designed in such a way as to reach adequately the hard to count urban communities for the

use of media that is focused on the communities, that live in those communities, that function in those communities. secondly, we have a great concern that paid advertising when you are trying to reach people in urban communities is not enough. that community outreach is an essential part of that. there are a number of things that need to be done to strengthen what the census has planned in that area. there is a continual concerned about how this nation incarcerated citizens are counted. the current system almost ensures a built in endicott because of the large number of african americans who are in prison and jail outside of the neighborhoods where they reside. they are counted as a part of

the area where the prison is in fact located. that shortchanges communities. it shortchanges them in terms of dollars. that remains a continuing concern for all of us. we have a number of areas of concern. the meeting today, the commerce secretary remains with us a half hour pass his schedule time, delayed another meeting, listened intently, took notes, and we expect there will be a very important follow-up. our message today is one that is designed to be constructive, but our message today is one of the seriousness. we think there are important things that must be done.

this is especially true sports african american communities and communities that feel the franchise from the government. wheelchair from some important leaders. -- we will share from important leaders, and at the conclusion of that we will open the floor for questions. i want to begin today with ben gellis. >> thank you. we have our real situation on our hands. we have the opportunity to have the best cents discount that we have ever had. that is the possibility. -- we have opportunity to have the best census count that we

have ever had. this situation has to be taken seriously. there was a national capitagap. in 2000, it was .1. the differential was 28. if we can get the national and a cut dowundercut down to .1%, we can do this in the african- american community. let's be clear this is not a problem.

the inmates are counted with a prison presides. the administration has taken a great step, they will require the inmates to be counted out. we're asking them to go one step further, which is to assign the inmates back to the communities. tell us where they are from, did not just tell us how many inmates reside. this would give you -- this would power them with their real perspective on it who is in the neighborhoods. the government needs to do it. with regard to the media, the

reality is that they do have a firm that specializes in minority communities, but the prime contractors are still living in the 1960's. the reality is that about 5% of them are black, and 15% of them do not have any black employees. if they are calling the shots over the subcontractor of color, then the value of having a subcontractor is greatly diminished to the overall effort. they really need to make sure that the firm's are calling the shots. lastly, the reality is that this is a plan that is very aggressive and robust but relies

on government workers. government workers going into areas where there are high levels of distrust of government workers. we have asked the secretary and the commerce department to convene to have credibility and plans for doing an effective our reach to the communities that make up the 3% so that we can explain to third-party funders how we can all work together to make sure the country gets a full count. we need to be very serious about making sure there is a full count. the obama administration did a great improvement on the plan they inherited from bush, but it needs to go further quickly in very specific ways. thank you. >> i am melanie campbell.

i and the convening of the kennedy coalition. thank you for the leadership. what we also gained from concern is that the pop -- black population is made up of a melting pot of african americans, of african immigrants, have afro-latino immigrants. part of our concern is that the process -- [inaudible] but this gives us an additional challenge as a group. " we are doing is building the

coalition. some of those that are part of the coalition are those that help include -icf. that is our concern. we are going to partner, most of us are already nationally partner. most of the networks are already part of the process. we also know that the count, when we talk about the 3% -- what does that mean? wheel will do all that we can -- we will do all that we can to try to help close that 3 down to zero.

thank you. >> i am al sharpton. let me begin by commending him market for convening all of us for what is a very critical issue. as we continue to fight for equality and fairness for african americans and people of african descent, we cannot do that without an accurate count next year. this must be communicated and the politically in terms that we understand in our community. i want to begin by joining in commending secretary locke and others for taking this task seriously and trying to grab the tail of the tiger that has gone are right under the previous administration, in my judgment.

having said that, i think we have agreed to partner with them and have a very candid conversation about where we have areas that we need to come together on, as has been outlined. the undercount of blacks and last census is not just a washington beltway statistic, that manifests itself and representation that cost us. we cannot have some over counted, our community undercounted in we're already minorities. it is a double win emmhammy. this cannot be an entertainment- driven campaign. too many times government and the media acted as though entertainers are also our leaders.

entertainers are entertainers. we love them and look up to them, but when we want trusted information week " to the organizations that are represented so that when we see these voices we know it is serious. when we see an entertainer, we know we can't relax. -- we know we can relax. we communicate through our own media, our radio, are newspaper and our television station. we cannot get a real counts that we do not have included in the process those that address the issues and grievances. if it was not for black newspapers, we would not know who died that week. we need a contractors that

understand this. the secretary heard that this morning. the politics of this is there are many in this country that do not care about a real town. there are those of us that cannot afford to not be counted. there are those that would be acting like black should be satisfied with the black president and the fact that poor blacks are the only county should care about. we once every house counted. -- we want every house counted. we are committed to say do not under count us, do not count as out. when you count us out, you are counting as equal education in the community. do not count as out of what is ours as citizens of this

country. i have been to jail. i know they count you in the morning and at night, but to give the county the wrong people -- that counts should be part of the overall count. i believe that we communicated that this morning. it is our position to leave here and make sure we have a fair and equal counts. reverend jackson, thank you for showing up. >> danny baker welwell. many of our media partners -- we are very excited. i again thank mark and urban

league for the leadership they are providing to bring us all together. we do think the secretary for his positions critics think the secretary for his patience and understanding this morning. -- we do thank the secretary for his patience and understanding this morning. i am very discouraged by the plant that is currently in place. we have over 200 black newspapers and media partners through the country. we have been allocated meager budget allowances. wheat had 16 markets that have been identified to advertise in. this is leaving out new yorark,w jersey, places where black people have a population and need to be counted.

when you talk about the things we talk about this morning, we cannot afford for this census to not count the maximum amount of black people in this country. we have the core of what can be the most accurate counts in the history of the united states. . .

>> my name is dr. ron daniels, president of this institute of the blackwell 24th century. my leader has instructed me to acknowledge that we have hobert here. and of course gary flowers is here with the black leadership forum. i, too, want to say i left the meeting very impressed with the tone of the meeting and the fact that secretary locke was wanting to sit through the meeting and to consider seriously the kind of concerns that are being raised. a very impressive plan was laid out in many respects that

reflected their having received recommendations about how to improve the census. i, again, want to join everyone in offering commendations in that regard. i have to say, however, that the context which has been laid out is there is a state of emergency in the black community. in some communities, unemployment is as high as 50% when you take into account those who no longer are in the active job market. the subprime lending crisis, all of those things fit into the equation. therefore, we have a concern that a fair count, accurate count, fair count will end up in a fair share of resources. and it is somehow a cruel irony to some degree that the conditions that have propelled many people into the prison jail industrial complex, the way the ken suss is counted means that those resources can't go back to those communities to ameliorate those conditions. it is tantamount to the 3/5

compromise in which black people are count as less than a human being in terms of the resources that are being allocated. it's important to have community-based organizations and groups combho are not currently in the equation be a part of the equation. the issue of the media is obviously very crucial making sure it's not a media plan, but that media plan is culturally sensitive to the diverse groups in our community and those whoñ have the greatest credibility and capability to get the message out to make sure that we address this question. i'm optimistic we can get this job done. we commend the secretary, but there are these crucial issues that have to be addressed. as danny becamewell has said, we can get this done wrong and correct it tomorrow. this will be wrong for a decade in terms of the resources that will be allocated and the political representation that will go elsewhere while we need that representation to empower our people to resolve the critical issues facing us.

>> thank you, reverend. >> i want to express my thanks to the leadership in convening this family of leaders and secretary locke for hearing us out with his staff today. it's christmastime again. that was about the consent count and the babe was born with facing death warrants, i'm not counting or discounting an at-risk child. we're still not counting at-risk children. the documentation was that in every census count they show in a graph has a measure of undercount ofñ)r african-americans. the overcount and the undercount, one getting better

does not get a one to one ratio. we do know that there is nothing more illegal right now than citizens who are imprisoned losing their citizenship count because they're located where they can't live outside the walls, they're coming inside the walls. and their families are back home discounted. so you have people in prison who are counted as far as the local population, but the families back home that need the food and the bread and the milk cannot be counted because the count went to another town. that requires emergency right now legislation and involves some commitment -- intervention by the department of justice because that is on its face a civil rights violation. we have the civil right to be counted right. we cannot go through a states

rights process that, in fact, eliminates people from the count and, therefore, from the resources. lastly, given the home foreclosure crisis where blacks and browns are targeted, profiled, and accosted. the civil rights law was not enforced for fair lending laws, housing laws or contract compliance. it's for tens of thousands of blacks and browns living in relative homes, you have the overage of keeping the same house run the risk of not being counted with the impact of families doubling and tripling up living in the same house. the issue of the count of those americans who are in prison, those americans who are living in houses now doubling and tripling families because they have no place to stay will impact upon the outcome of who

gets resources and who in fact is representing government at every level. thank you very much. >> thank you. let me thank everyone for their remarks and we're open for questions and we just ask that you identify your media organization. yes. >> i'm from the "washington post." did you hear anything today that suggests that the census bureau is considering making a change in how they are going to count prison population? did you come away encouraged, or did you walk away with the impression they have no intention of making a change? >> we came away with an understanding that we were going to make some suggestions as to what we think they can do to fix it for this particular census. and they may be of the point of view that's difficult to do, it's our view that the -- and i want you to focus on this

point. there are about 40 million african-americans in the united states, african-americans and people of the africançó diaspra in the united states. there are 1.2 million franconas in prison. -- african-americans in prison. if they're not counted to the right neighborhoods, that in and of itself represents a 3% undercount. so what we have in the prison population issue is a built-in undercount meaning if a person is in a prison someplace outside of baltimore, maryland, but within the state of maryland, but their permanent residence is in baltimore and

they're counted at the location of that prison in that county, they're not going to be counted as living in baltimore, and therefore, not utilized in how many congressional seats, state legislative seats or how the baltimore city council is in fact allocated so we think this issue is the kind of issue that is important enough for us to press on, but understanding the numbers and understanding how if you put it to the side and say we can't deal with it, we're not going to deal with it, then what we have done is we have acknowledged that at the end, no matter how successful we are, there will be a 3% or so undercount so we're going to press forward. >> we did not get a commitment on that. they are at this point willing to discount the family of the

imprisoned, those needs of those in prison are being met. they're getting meals and a could the and/or recreation. the family are denied the resources while they are in prison. and the case is that it may take some legislative action to change that math. they must act now. we need some supreme court ruling on an emergency basis, those persons and their families must be counted and the resources must be allocated to those persons now. that is compounded by the issue of those who not living double and triple because of the home foreclosure crisis. the same got free money and the spread of treasurers to make money off of free money and

would not in fact honor the civil rights law for housing, the distribution of stimulus money and contract money, you cannot costs for civil rights with federal money comes federal law. you can't say that applies to companies and it does not apply to the banks. one standard for bob jones and another standard that got the stimulus money. >> i don't want us to give the wrong message. i think that it is important, you understand that the issue of prisoners was one of the issues raised. secretary locke himself cannot answer that as just was stated. that may require legislation. the main things he can answer in terms of how the media is used, trusted voices partnered with community organizations and dealing with the undercount of blacks in the past and the overcount of whites. that undercount was blacks not

in jail. in addition to that, we're considered about the blacks inñ jail. if the headlines were national black leaders met about the locked up, you're not getting the depth of the meeting and you give commerce a pass. commerce can deal with the issue that was central. they entertained this morning. in addition, we may have to litigator legislate the prisoners issue. that was not the only issue. >> any other questions? >> what you heard in the meeting today, are you confident that the undercount will be addressed? >> we are going to await commerce's response to the areas of concern that we represented. it's not -- it's premature for us to say that the issues we raised are or are not going to be addressed. my takeaway from the meeting is that the secretaryñi listened intently and took our concerns very seriously. >> we combine our concerns again with our commitment -- we

want this to go right. so when weñr make an offeredñrñ the spirit by changing this, j the ultimate outcome is going to be good. i expect that we'll have an opportunity to report back. we're going to have a follow-up conversation with commerce right after the first of the year in response to the yeah. >> debra berry. was there any discussion or any mention of all about katrina? it hasn't come up with in meeting. it has come up in prior conversations. i know that there are some special steps that the department of commerce have agreed to take in the case of katrina and in the case of gulf coast. some of those steps include hand delivering census forms to homes where there is not mail service. if it is clear that the home is

one in the process of being renovated or is habitable. number two, giving people in the gulf coast an opportunity to understand that if for some reason they do not get a form at their home, that they have the right to go to census information center and pick up that form. so some steps have been taken, some commitments that have been made with respect to katrina. while it didn't come up on the agenda specifically in this meeting, that does not mean it's on our overall agenda. as a black leadership forum, as civil rights leaders in this country, it is very important and the opportunities for a significant undercount are there, but we think that the communityxdó'c$]ñleadershipç has been very assertive and very aggressive in pushing forward and pushing census to take additional steps. and the commitment is there. we're going to hold their feet to the fire to make sure those

steps, in fact, those commitments are honored. >> let me say something on that issue. one of the things that was completely -- we were all unified about in that meeting was the necessity to devote and commit additional resources to this effort. all of the things that we are all talking about, all of the things that we are concerned about has to do with resources. if you have the political will, put up the money. and we have many, many illustrations, i have mentioned one of them in terms of the black press, thexd black media, but the same is true when you're dealing with things that are happening to african-americans around this country. barbara lee, chair of the congressional black caucus, lacy clay, oversight chairman of the census are committed to finding additional resources and communicated that to secretary locke because they

understand the importance of this issue being successful and our community being fully counted. >> historically the black community has had distrust account government. what steps is the black leadership doing to educate the black community as far as filling out these forms? >> thank you for the question. one of the things we talked about. we set up a coalition that is made up of leadership, trusted leadership, national and local, partnering together so that we can address those concerns because it's an issue of trust and being able to know where to go in washington, d.c., know that you live here in d.c. and maryland and in this area that there are large ethiopian populations. the people who know who are folks are people from the

community. this coalition that we're building to partner and this is a partnership, public with the government and with private and with ourselves. as marc said before, we're committed to this. so the leadership from the african countries that are all over the country, leadership from the caribbean, my brother here hoburt james from i.c.s. we have been working all year. the message is that we will augment with what the government states and will help our folks to know that to educate them that you can fill in that blank slate. if you're from one of the -- you want to identify your country of origin, you have the ability to at least give us those numbers even though it's not checked by the countries. so we have to educate our community on that and to make sure that with the immigrant populations, all immigrant populations that they know that they're not going to -- there

is not going to be something going wrong with them participating in the process, fear of being, what's the agency? i'm missing it now. i see it. i.n.s. to merge that information and that the only way the people will know that true is to hear that from our leadership. we represent just a small portion. >> let me ask this and i'll go to the question. one of the things that weçóñiw3 emphasized throughout is that census has to emphasize in its messaging the confidentality of the information provided. it's an iron-clad law in this nation that information that's provided to the census is confidential. census can't share it with anyone under any circumstances. they have got to emphasize that in their advertising and in their messaging to overcome the trust divide that may exist with people in this nation.

and we have got to do that on our part. we have to emphasize the value ñ when it comes to political and economic empowerment. this is not an administrative exercise, a count for the sake of a count, that it is a count that has a purpose. it determines the allocation of political seats. it determines the allocation of money. we got to emphasize that as well as the confidentality to ensure that people overcome and that we can overcome the trust divide and the trust issue that does exist out there. we have got to work against that. yes. >> charlie ericsson with hispanic link news service. a question, a number of press conferences dealing with hispanic organizations similar concerns. and i'm wondering if you are

working at all with hispanic organizations and what results you have? do you feel that working together with them, it will strengthen your case? >> it's an excellent question. i think it's fair to say that we have all been in touch with the leadership of latino organizations. we sit around the table in a number of places. i think coming out of this meeting today, i'm going to take it as my responsibility to reach out to the leaders of the latino community to compare notes. you're right. the concerns are similar. we in our community, there are afro-latinos and afra-latinos in our community, people who are both black and latino. you are correct to point out the similarity of concern and correct that we need to work together in order to be able to ensure that there is no

undercount in either community. one or two questions? >> sydney miller, black radio magazine. is there a plan that is in the works to utilize the power of black radio to get this message out to the black community? >> yes, there is. we are having -- we have formed an allegiance with black radio and we are working with members of the congressional black caucus. i have met with members of the census, to the commerce department, black radio will point front and center the same concerns that we have in the black press for making sure that that market was fully, fully funded you have specifics, $2.5 million for the black print media can never get a message out. as marc said, you got to have

repetition in terms of putting that message in front of people. the black press is the most trusted and received message bearer in our community. to not put the resources there is to say you don't care about the count, about the ultimate objective that we're after. so to answer your question, yes, we very much in concert with them. we have got to get more money. $2.5 million for us. we need $11 million in order to put -- and that's on the table right now -- in order to put a full page ad in 200 black newspapers throughout the country every week for 12 weeks. if that's what it takes for 12 weeks, which is only three months which would bring you right to the precipice of the actual count, where would $2.5 million get you? >> let me just say this also because it was stressed in the meeting that we're not talking about putting p.s.a.'s on black

radio or black television or blackñi newspapers. paid advertising because it was raidsed that congressman clay fought to get an increase of census funding in $1 billion, but there was no increase in what was geared toward the black press. so they got an increase and the budget remained the same. secondly, they cannot count black press as how many blacks watch the super bowl and they bought an ad on that station and black folk was watching. we're talking about targeting black persons who are trusted. we're not talking about them going to some major network, blacks are some percentage of that and we're going to charge that as how we do outreach. >> we'll take one or two more. any other questions? yes. >> jacob carpenter from the st. louis post dispatch. when you're talking about getting more resources, are you talking about moving around the resources that they have or adding more money to the census

budget and are you looking -- >> the most important thing for us is that more resources be devoted. whether it is the census received additional funding from the stimulus. they also received additional funding in the omnibus that passed this week. so at the end of the day, the important thing is that we are talking about communities and populations that historically have been hard to count. when they're hard to count, the effort and the targeting and the focus and the quality and the fabric has to be devoted to ensuring that those communities are counted. so our suggestion is that it is a decision by census as tow3 ho they approach it but the important thing is barbara lee, the chair of the congressional black caucus was in the meeting with us.

lacy clay, the chair of the census subcommittee from st. louis was in the meeting, and they committed to the secretary to help him in any way they, in fact, could to ensure that what we are seeking, commerce has the opportunity to do. let's look at this. this is the largest single advertising campaign in the history of the united states government. it's nearly $200 million when you add everything in on paid advertising, paid advertising in a very, very short window, not over a period of a year, but in a short window of 90 to 120 to 180 days. it's highly concentrated and means that the census will be the largest advertiser in the united states or one of the largest advertisers in the united states in that period of

time. so we think that there is ample room and ample opportunities to increase the focus, increase the resources that are going to be devoted to our community. i think to sort of con textualize the meeting, gary locke and president obama took important steps, more money with the stimulus appointing secretary locke, rick wade on his staff, dr. robert groves who for a short period of time have stepped things up, but nonetheless, there are a lot more things that have to be done for us to say that we're confident that this plan can address the historic undercount in this nation. the final thing i want to emphasize to everyone because we have talked about a number of things and a number of areas of concern, and that is to

emphasize that we are committed and many ofñi us are already working doing outreach in local communities with few, if any, resources because this is important. we are working in communities. the urban league, the naacp, national action, the national coalition just to name a few, we are working in local communities on outreach, on motivation, on awareness, on information, on organizing. we are committed to making sure and we're going to do our part. we want to make sure that census and commerce understand how they can do their job better, do their job best, get this job done. this is an important time, an important crossroads, we have got to get this right and we're

speaking out today because we did not want to sit back and when mistakes are revealed, call a press conference and say you could have done this, you should have done that. we decided that we were going to go in and very importantly, we have got an unprecedented coalition of organizations represented here today, who represent tens of millions of people, historic civil rights organization, organizations that work in the diaspera, people who have worked for years, new voices combined, unified with a single message and a single meeting talking to the secretary of commerce about something that's important to the nation. the final thing is, while our specific focus is on the african-american community and the african diaspera, reverend

sharpton said it well, we want everybody to be accurately counted, whites, latinos, asians across the board. the history of an undercount in the black community and an overcount in the white community is great cause for concern, which is why these steps have to be taken today. so let me thank everyone for coming. let me thank people in the media, veronica clemens, raise your hand, you can follow up with veronica to do interviews with anyone here today. we appreciate it, happy holidays. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> the senate has been in session all day today.

they did gaveled in today to finish work on the spending bill for 2010. that measure passed 88-10. after92w(letujóçó majority leader harry reid offered a manager's amendment to the health care bill, but republicans insisted it be read allowed. the clerks read the amendment for over seven hours. senator reid filed a motion to limit debate on the bill and we expect that vote at 1:00 a.m. that's when the 30 hours of post-debate time will expire. you can follow the senate live on c-span 2 when members return tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. eastern. early this morning, nebraska senator ben nelson held a brief on why he decided to support a version of the health care bill. he spoke to reporters for about a half hour.

>> since i didn't get a chance to do this on the floor this morning, i really want to make the statement right from the podium here and then i'll try to answer your questions. when i answer the questions, it's not going to be about the manager's package. it's going to be about the things that i worked on that i think are important and try to keep my focus fair because they're still doing the manager's package in there and i ought not to be the one to make the announcements about it. well, let me say at the outset, change is never easy. but change is what's necessary in america today and that's why i intend to vote for cloture and vote for health care reform. on the floor of the senate, in town hall meetings throughout our states and in one-on-one meetings with our constituents, we have all heard heart-wrenching stories of people who have been left behind or forced into

bankruptcy or caught in the grip of a health care system that just didn't work as well as it should have. and while each of my colleagues may differ on how to fix the system, i know of no members who are suggesting that the current system is satisfactory. i know of no member who doesn't think that we need to change our health care system. where we differ and i say so with great respect to all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle is in the way we fix our health care system. and i believe in the free marketplace as the foundation of our economy and as the primary focus that should drive our health care system and our debate. that's why i opposed the public option and yet supported the market exchanges. i truly believe that a competitive health care system will lower costs and provide better health care for the

american people. i would like to touch on the issue of abortion. as you know, i have strongly-held views on the subject and i have fought hard to prevent tax dollars from being used to subsidies abortions. that is long-standing at least 30 years federal law under the hyde amendment. i believe we have accomplished that goal. i also have fought hard to protect the right of states to regulate the kind of insurance that is offered and provide health insurance options in every state that do not provide coverage for abortion. i know this is hard for some of my colleagues to accept and i appreciate their right to disagree, but i would have not voted for this bill and would not vote for this bill without those provisions. i would like to acknowledge the assistance of the administration in working with us as well and perhaps the most

remarkable of all has been the leadership of majority leader senator reid. to craft this landmark legislation and to shepherd it through the legislative process and deal with the many competing interests associated with this legislation and acquire the necessary votes to end the filibuster is an accomplishment of historic proportions. i truly believe this legislation will stand the test of time and will be noted as one of the major reforms of the 21st century. much like social security, medicare, civil rights legislation were milestones of the 20th century. because of senator reid's dedication and hard work, the lives of millions of americans will be improved. lives will be saved and our health care system will once again reflect the better nature of our country. i would like to take a moment to talk about something that

will likely fall on deaf ears, the debate about health care debate has been passionate and i believe it's been good for the country in many ways. from the far right to the extreme left, the american people have voiced their opinion. that is good. that is part of our democracy. what has been disheartening about the debate is the reckless and ludicrous claims that have been hurled at one another from both sides at the heart of the debate. opponents are not less patriotic or less sensitive to the health care crisis we face and supporters would not be standing here today if not for a moment they thought this legislation would cause harm to the american people. but yet if you turn to the news and read some of the statements and listen to letters coming from both sides of the debate, you would think otherwise. the quality of this debate has not always measured up to the

quality of the american people. we can do better. there is still much work to be done before this legislation becomes a reality. in the weeks ahead, i look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to make it an even better bill. and without in any way intending to be threatening, to be more in the mode of promising, let me be clear, this cloture vote is based on the full understanding that there will be a limited conference between the senate and house. if there are material changes in that conference report different from this bill that adversely affect the agreement, i reserve the right to vote against the next cloture vote -- let me repeat it. i reserve the right to vote against the next cloture vote if there are material changes to this agreement in the

conference report. i will vote against it if that is the case. i know it's hard for some of my colleagues to accept and i appreciate their right to disagree, but it's clear i wouldn't have voted for this bill without these provisions. >> [inaudible] . what is in this for you? >> what's in it for me is what's in it for people in nebraska and the country. first of all, i am opposed to any kind of public option that would undermine the private insurance of 200 million americans. i didn't believe that the expansion or the buyin on medicare was an appropriate way to deal because that was more of a public plan rather than let the private market prevail

as i believe that it will. i raised certain concerns about other provisions in theçó legislation and let me refer to a few of them. i was concerned about the flexible spending count cap, but that now has -- will be dealtçó with. i was worried about both of the rural hospitals and home health care and nursing homes. i believe that is being addressed. these are all issues that affect not only in my state, they affect every other state, but because of my experience and knowledge of it, both as a senator and a former governor, i requested changes and i believe those changes will be made and will be announced. i was concerned about medicaid and the fact that that becomes

an underfunded federal mandate. i believe that that will be addressed and there will be comments about that. i think that there needs to be further work done on the so-called mandate to find a way to within the world of insurance to create open enrollment and closed enrollment periods rather than financial penalties to get people into the system to avoid the problem. the obvious problem you get with adverse selection, if everybody is not in the insurance package and you have eliminated the restrictions on preexisting conditions. the concern about medical malpractice, i believe we're going to work on a study to look to see what works in medical malpractice tort reform i should say based on certain states to find more information

out about it. i think there are a lot of thoughts about how this should work, but not necessarily any data that would tell us is the appropriate way to handle it. >> senator, on medicaid, it looks like your state -- [inaudible] . >> i'm going to leave it up to the leader to talk about the manager's package. he hasn't finished telling all of the members of the conference about it and i'm going to leave it up to him. i'm not going to talk about it. i'm comfortable that it's taken care of in the best way that i think it can be, but i think it's important that other states are taken care of as well. >> senator talk about the voice of the people, but when you look at the polls, they have been fairly universal over the last few weeks where public

opposition against this bill. >> which bill? the bill that is being talked about with the manager's package or the bill that existed before? that's one of the challenges that is there. this bill has been moving along every step of the way and changing. now what we need to see is how people respond to the bill with the manager's package and the modifications. there is opposition to public plans. i happen to know because that's what i heard in my town hall meetings. that's what i see. the concern about a public plan, there are some people opposed to doing anything, absolutely opposed to doing anything. you're not going to change their mind by doing something. so that is something that has to be dealt with. the abortion issue has been a concern. i made certain that the federal dollars are not used for abortion. the plan that we put together here, we have agreement on. in fact, it walls off that

money in a very effective manner and makes certain that the plans do not -- will use federal dollars to fund abortions. so i think as people begin to take a look at what a package is now, they may have some different opinions about it. i don't think the we will is so poisoned. i think it has been, efforts have been to poison it, but i don't think it's been so poisoned that people in most circumstances will take a close look at what the plan is today, at least from my perspective, i think that's what will happen. >> senator, will are a number of changes to the abortion petition. can you talk about those -- [inaudible] >> the fact that the requirement is that -- first of all, there are 12 states that ban abortion in public plans and five that ban in both public and private plans. we wanted to make sure in this

legislation that it was clear there was no preelse of the right of states to make those ban it is they choose to do so. so that is spelled out that there is nothing that would restrict the right of states to do that. we were concerned that some court would say because it wasn't addressed that, well, there must have been the intent to repeal. the second is that ex-exchange will have to have in it at least one plan that doesn't offer abortion, that doesn't require the exchanges to offer plans with abortion, but if they do, then the premium is calculated as follows. i'll give an example. let's say that my subsidy is 50% of the premium. that's the underlying premium for the basic benefits in the plan not including abortion. so i would write a check for

the other 50%, the second 50% of that coverage and i would write a separate check or a separate transaction if it's a credit card for the portion of abortion coverage and the premium for that. >> you have to specifically choose to have abortion coverage? >> yes. you get your choice between a plan that doesn't have it and a plan that has it. it's not about riders. it's not about anything like that it's a plan that happens to be inclusive of abortion. >> is it your understanding the state billñi could ban private insurance -- [inaudible] >> they can do it right now. it doesn't change. we want to make sure is that the current situation is the same.ñi >> [inaudible]

>> you have to do two separate transaction it's. it walls it, it makes it clear. the insurers will account for it accounting-wise and in risk pools separating out the coverages as well. typically that's the way it's done. >> senator, can any state decide not to include a plan that is free of the abortion bill? >> no, they have an exchange, they have to provide for at least one plan that doesn't provide abortion. that way you avoid the opt-out. >> what does congressman stupek think about this? >> i haven't had a chance to talk to him about it yet. this is very similar. weñi thinkñiñr !(huñi clearly t the language, but we think it's different. there are other provisions to it as well that i think are

important. first of all, the conscious clause will be included. there will be up to $250 million over 10 years for essentially teen pregnancies and people who want to continue their pregnancy, go to school, support them to move away from putting people in a position where they believe they got to have an abortion to be able to continue their lives. economically, this would help with that. in addition, the adoption credit has been increased and in addition to that, it's been made as a refundable tax credit so that lower-income people, adoption is getting more and more expensive. it's not like when i adopted, much more expensive, and this will mean that lower-income people would have the opportunity for adoption as well. so we think that when you look at this package together that

this is the package that we ought to have dealing with this. >> senator, there were over the last weeks and months, there were a lot of things in this bill that you lobbied and insisted come out, most of the things that had to come away from the bill for you to support it. now that you have gotten ançzi agreement, do you feel like this is a good bill or a less bad bil)h do youñi think this bill fulfil the imperatives that the leadership wants, more insurance? do you think if it's a good bill, if it popped up you would have supported it? >> i think it's good enough for me to support it. if i had my druthers, i said earlier i would have done it incrementally, i would have dealt with the cost containment first and extending covering second. that wasn't the choice that was accepted. you have to take the process that's in front of you and try to improve it. that's what i have attempted to do, both constructively and productively improved this legislation to the point where i can support it with a caveat that i said, we have to see

what happens with a veryñi limited conference because weñr don't want any wholesale substantive or material changes because my support is conditional. >> to that provision how they were able to give you assurances between the house and the senate and what kind of actions across the dome? >> i don't know. let's put it this way, i told the leader about my concerns and made it clear where i am and he understood it and he in doing his job will find a way to make that happen. >> everything you wanted in the bill, does that move some of the more liberal senators from the actually bill itself? >> not that i'm aware of. it's my understanding that no one has walked away from the bill of cloture at this time.

i don't know about the final vote tally or anything like that but i'm not aware of anyone walking away from the next cloture vote. >> could you tell us some of the conversations you had late last night early this morning with abortion rights groups back in nebraska, nationally and [inaudible] >> what i have done is outline to do them what this bill is. i'm not seeking approval, just informing them what it is and how we have gone about doing it and why i think it's not only the best way we can hand it, i think it's more than good enough. i think this actually does what everybody wants to wall off the money is after. they're looking at it. people are still looking at it trying to go over it i'm sure. there is a point in time where you have to move forward. if there is some modification or something like that, you keep your mind open, but i

believe in my heart of hearts that this handles the whole question of funding abortion of banning of the funding of abortion by federal money either directly or indirectly. >> [inaudible] particularly loud round of applause and you can hear it, what did you make of that? did you give a speaker you can talk about that? >> it might have been when i walked out the door. [laughter] >> no, i think it was for the leader when he came in. i can't emphasize enough how, whether you like this legislation, whether you can support it or not, i think everybody has to understand that senator reid has really tried to work with all groups. it's not an easy job to do. it's not always the he's ease job to work with me -- easiest job to work with me, i know.

i hold my views and hold tight. i can find some modifications if it doesn't involve bending or ignoring principal. >> [inaudible] >> what does that mean, no republican support? [inaudible] >> well, yes, i do. every major piece of landmark legislation has had bipartisan support, social security and clearly civil rights. the challenge is that others don't want to participate or can't quite reach what they're after. you can't make it happen. that's unfortunate. i think the voice levels, pro and con, have risen so high that the price of doing anything has also gotten very

high. it's easier to do nothing than it is to do something but it's not better. i'm one who will not obstruct. that doesn't mean i'm going to support. if i can't support something the way it is, i felt obliged to find a way to get it changed so it is something i could support. i did that with the last administration. i supported the president when i thought the president was right. i opposed when i thought the president was wrong. i didn't find a way to obstruct. i found a way to work together. the gang of 14 tax cuts or whatever it might have been, i sought to do that then and i seek to do that now. >> last night, how did you get to that moment where you shook hands or what did you tell schumer and reid about what you needed to do at that point after this very long day of negotiating? >> well, i wish i could remember exactly how that occurred. i would have to say that this was an evolving process where

if this proposal didn't work, then there were efforts to see how you would modify it to use harry's word, to jigger it, to try to find another way to get the same result. generally, there is usually more than one way to get to something. the problem was you had with opt in/opt out, you had those who were opposed to either one or in some cases to both it seems like not in our room. >> on abortion? >> yes, on abortion. that's what i'm talking about, i'm sorry. it seems like if it was a matter of choice here of having options, having one policy that does and at least one and potentially one that doesn't, people can make up their own minds. and if you already have states that have spoken about it by saying no, you don't want to disturb their local public

policy. i still am a jeffersonian when it comes to recognizing and respecting the rights of states to be able to make many decisions. that was one of the reasons why i thought the public option created a gigantic insurance operation run out of washington. i don't think that's the way to do it and i couldn't have moved in that direction. as a matter of fact, one of the major concerns that people had during the town hall meetings was that very thing. they didn't want washington telling them, taking more of the insurance business and telling them what to do from washington. and i heard them loudly and clearly. >> [inaudible] >> multistates. the reason is because when you -- pardon? >> [inaudible]

>> well, it's up to the o.p.m. to negotiate the best deal that they can. we trust them to glorkt our plan. i have to trust them to negotiate a good plan there. they are in charge of that. there won't be any effort to try to shade this. o.p.m. won't attempt to do that. they don't have a policy interest here. they have an administrative interest here. >> [inaudible] >> tell me when we're going home, then i'll tell you. >> [inaudible] >> then i'll be watching for santa claus to come down my criminalny back here if that's the case. i -- criminalny back here if that's the case. -- chimney back here if that's the case. i hope to be home. thank you, everyone.

>> [inaudible] >> i think what happened is my chief of staff and i basically developed this idea. let's offer at least choice here between this plan and that plan and if they don't like riders, if they got a policy, it's not a rider and you don't have to explain anything. we already agreed on how to count for the money in premium dollars. finding then the mechanism for coverage was the next. we just stumbled on to it. >> [inaudible] >> yes, it was. >> did you actually shake hands at 10:30 last night? >> yeah, we did. we had to seen the language. we had the concepts. we shook hands on concepts. >> after senator nelson's announcement, senate merit leader harry reid briefed reporters. he is joined with other leaders

at this 20-minute briefing. >> what day is it? [laughter] >> every part of this process from passing two very carefully crafted bills on the finance committee and the health committee into one comprehensive bill to reaching final consensus has been it's fair to say, an enormous undertaking. we wouldn't be in this position today without partners that i have had in this whole process. senator back cause, dodd, i want to say a -- senator

baucus, dodd, i want to say a short word about senator harkin. most of the work done in this, of course, was done in the committees. the health committee met for weeks. you all saw that. the finance committee met for months, you all saw that senator kennedy died. we had a new chairman of the health committee. we have a lot of people in this senate and that's the way it should be. we have very large egos. senator harkin who worked on that committee his entire career in the senate became chairman as we know. he has been so helpful to us, never wanting any limelight, never wanting any spotlight, in effect staying out of the way because he knew most of the work had been done by senator dodd and as kennedy turned it over to him. so tom harkin, thank you very much.

from the very beginning, we knew the end result had to be a bill that saved lives, saved money, and saved medicare. we did that. we knew we had to stabilize insurance for everyone who has it, help secure it for millions who didn't. we had to lower the costs of staying healthy and reduce the national debt. we did that. we had to stop insurance companies from stopping to pay for the sick. we're in the process of doing that. the bill we proposed a few weeks does everything we just mentioned. and the revision is being ready on the senate floor and they are stronger. some of the new elements, new programs to further rein in health care costs, make care more affordable by expanding small business tax credits. we did a lot in the last few weeks in that regard, demand even greater accountability for insurance companies, create more choice in competition with consumers.

we kept in mind as we were doing this legislation where we could let the market control a lot of what takes place. we also have a lot of controls to make sure that the insurance industry doesn'tñrñiñrhtu/j go they have with costs to people who have insurance policies. all these things will help lower the costs for americans and will find a level playing field between american families and the insurance industry. some who are progressives, they feel that this bill doesn't go far enough and there are others who say why didn't we get a public option? i think the public option, i spoke out loudly and strongly on it. but this bill, this bill will do so many good things for so many good people and we explained that in some detail

to the caucus just a few minutes ago. some on the right think this bill goes too far and they want it stopped. to them i say you're being -- you have a lack of understanding of what the problems in america are today. . úú it will not continue.

the broken system cannot continue. when president obama signs this into law, we will officially end the era wind insurance companies when while others lives. -- while others lose. american people know that inaction is not an option. and help make the hard choices -- is about strengthening our economy and making the hard choices necessary to do what is right. one of the senators wanted a chart of the tax incentives and credits in the bill. we're going to do that. there's almost $500 billion worth. throughout the process, many have tried to knock us off course. we've stayed true to the principles.

that is why we have succeeded in both continued to succeed. we will take a few questions on my colleagues in this their statements. at 1:00 today, you will have a detailed briefing by our staffs. save a lot of your questions for that. >> thank you. we came to the floor for the good bill. it is a product of years of hard work, study, and debate in committee and among people who have worked to get as better health care system. our bill is fully paid for. it will reduce the national debt. it will protect consumers from harmful insurance company

practices. it will provide billions of tax cuts to help working families and small businesses afford quality health insurance. it is the largest tax cut congress has passed since 2001. it will extend insurance coverage to more than 30 million americans. that is no small item. it will drive down premium costs for all of us. the amendment introduced today makes this good bill even better. it will provide even more consumer protections against harmful insurance industry practices. we will hold companies accountable for excessive increases in rates and require them to spend more on consumer

benefits and less on administrative costs and profits. there are much tighter provisions on the limiting of annual benefits. it will ensure the companie cannots discriminate against children with pre-existing conditions. it will provide tax credits for small businesses right away in 2010. it is a big improvement. it will provide more insurance choices the offer consumers the same health care insurance that congress has today. it will insurer even more access to quality health care for children and seniors. these are improvements from the earlier bill. i look forward to a healthy discussion on the amendment and to pass health care reform in a couple days. >> let me begin by thanking our leader, harry reid. the lot of people have been involved in this issue for a long time. you have to have a team captain that brings everyone together. we have been truly blessed to have harry reid as our leader through this. this is been as difficult a

task as i have seen in my 30 years in the senate. we still have work to be achieved. this is a major hurdle we've overcome. today, we stand ready to pass a bill into law that finally makes access to quality health care a right for every american. it is not a privilege for a fortunate few in our country. 59 years ago, franklin delano roosevelt outlined four freedoms. the freedom of religion, the freedom of speech, the freedom from want, and the freedom from fear. one of the great fears that americans have lived with for generations is the fear that their child, spouse, loved ones, or themselves will be hit with an illness for which they cannot receive treatment because they cannot afford it. they cannot see a doctor because they cannot afford it. this bill does not guarantee

you will not get sick. it does not guarantee he will not die. all we're trying to do is guarantee that if you are a fellow citizen and you are struck with an illness or a loved one is, that you will never again have the fear that he will in of losing your home, your job, the retirement, in life-saving speakers you have been afflicted by an illness rigid or life savings because you have been afflicted by an illness. americans will not have to suffer the indignity of not being able to afford health care. it frees americans from the fear that if they lose their job, they will not be able to find insurance. it frees them from the fear they cannot afford the treatment they need. it frees them from the fear that one illness or accident could cause them everything. if a nation founded on freedom, sustained by unimaginable prosperity, this bill is long

overdue. it is critically important. this goal or cause is older than most of us who serve in the senate today. our path is been eliminated by torch lit a long time ago, sustained for decades by good men and women who believed in fdr's vision of an asian free of fear. -- vision of america free of fear. senator kennedy never expected we could cure all of the ills in one fell swoop. over the years, he and others have fought to make the country a little bit better, more secure, freer from those fears. we fought for the medical leave act, the patients' bill of rights, the children's health insurance program. he saw our efforts fall short under president nixon and

president clinton. with every step forward and every step back, ted kennedy never stopped believing that in the wealthiest country in history, everyone should be guaranteed access to decent health care. he never stopped believing that in the freest country in history, it would someday come to pass. that someday is upon us. we are prepared to pass legislation guaranteeing that no american will go broke because they got sick. no one will die because they could not afford the treatment they needed. these moments do not come often. we will not and must not let it slip through our hands. tom? >> again, let me thank our leader, senator reid. has been our quarterback. he has called the plays. we have the goal in sight.

we will go over the goal shortly. if you want to get to know anything about harry reid, you can read a couple of books first. there is of " the town that would not die" and "the good fight." he will have to have a revised edition and add another chapter on to "the good fight." this has been a good fight. harry reid has led the fight. we have won it. -- they did such a great job on the finance committee of bringing this bill forward. and to my great friend, chris dodd. who did a great job of leading our committee, getting the bill through, and did such a great

masterful job on the floor of bringing these two things together. chris and max and i are all classmates. we came together and were sworn on the same day in 1975. a lot of things have been said about the bill. a lot of my progressive friends have been upset that certain things were not in it. i put it this way. what we are building here is not a mansion. it is a starter home. but it has a great foundation. coverage for 31 million americans. it has a great protective roof. and there is room for expansion in the future. but we might never get there if we do not start a starter home. so this is not the end of health care reform. it is the beginning. i'm going to join our leaders in making sure we can get done

what we need to. >> i will take a few questions. yes. >> [inaudible] >> i worked with every democrating -- democratic senator for the merged bill, and now for the amendment. negotiations took place at this podiunm, sometimes individually, and ben nelson was like the rest of them.

we worked for many, many weeks, as we did with other senators. so we have, as you look through the bill, you will see different interests in the merged manager's package. >> [inaudible] >> the doctor's fix was done because doctors felt that was the best way to move forward. we feel it should be permanent. they are entitled to more than one, and that is why we support

the legislation. we will work on it as soon as we hear back for the holiday. >> the reality is that that is one state that gets 100% health for medicaid. >> i will sasy this. -- i would say this. you will find in the bill that a number of states are treated differently from other states. it is compromise. we work to get a number of votes, including efforts for republican votes. a lot of times, you think something was done and that is how they got the vote.

most of the time, that is not true. senator nelson, that is a minor part of the issues. we started working on that weeks and weeks ago, that provision. >> do you have 60 commitments now for feingold? do you have everybody? >> it seems that way. [laughter] thank you very much. good job, you guys. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

[inaudible conversations] >> mitch mcconnell held a briefing and the comments on why he is opposed. this is 15 minutes. >> good morning, everybody.

i hope you live on the hill. incredible day. it is still coming down. >> i could use a ride home, senator, by the way. >>i have a rugged commute. i live about a half block from the hart building. i left the suburbs 20 years ago. i cannot take it. i am not even sure that a pizza stores are going to be able to deliver tonight. is everybody all set? let me just say in the beginning that if they were proud of this bill, they would not be doing it this way, jamming it through in the middle of the night in the last weekend before christmas, and that sums up, i think, but we have seen on display here as they try to bob and weave and hide from the american people who have made it

abundantly clear they do not support what they know about this bill. now we have got an expanded version now, and it is important we're having a red so we can -- read so we can figure out like 300 million other americans and all of you what is in it. so i am sure with a message for the american people. this morning, democratic leaders in washington stood on the senate floor and sprung a new piece of legislation. it will have a profound impact on our nation. this is not renaming a post office. make no mistake, this bill will reshape our nation, our lives. democrats are forcing a vote on it over the weekend, as i indicated, counting on the fact

that american people are preoccupied with christmas and not paying much attention to what they are doing. and the reason for that, obviously, is we know for all the survey data that americans are overwhelmingly opposed to this bill. this bill is a legislative train wreck of historic proportions. but they are so eager to claim a victory that they will do anything to jam it through in the next few days. we are in the process of reading this bill, like so many other people. but here are a few things americans need to know. in medicare, we know that the bill slashes hundreds of billions of dollars from medicare to fund a massive new government bureaucracy. we know there are hospitals and nursing homes, cuts to home health care, cuts to hospice.

with regard to taxes, the bill includes massive increases on american families and businesses. doing that at a time of double digit unemployment, taxes will make it much harder to create jobs coming out of the slowdown. there are taxes on health insurance and on medical devices. there are taxes on medicines. there are taxes on working families with very high medical expenses. abortion. the bill includes permissive language of government-funded abortion, language that would lead the federal government to

violate longstanding policies on abortion funding. a ponzi scheme is in the bill. medicaid is particularly interesting. it proposes massive burdens on the states that are already struggling. under the weight of the cost of medicaid. at the same time, it gives special sweetheart deals to a select few states. interestingly enough, two states standing out our nebraska and vermont. what is the upshot of this for taxpayers everywhere? in kentucky and ohio and new york and michigan, they end up paying more so that nebraska

and vermont can get a special deal. our conclusion would be this, based on what we know so far about the bill being read and analyzed, not only by my office, but by everyone in the senate and you. our friends like to talk about making history, about the historic steps they are still taking. the history being made here, make no mistake about it, the history made here is the ignoring of the will of the american people. the history being made is that a bill sold as helping a major problem in our nation actually

made the problem worse. because independent nonpartisan scorekeepers tell us that premiums, taxes, and overall health care spending will go up under this bill. america, if this was a good bill with bipartisan support, i assure you that they would not be trying to pass this the weekend before christmas in the middle of the night. and the reason i say the middle of the night is that the next vote will literally be at 1:00 a.m. monday morning. and the presumption is that no one will be watching. this is a good bill with bipartisan support. if we had followed senator snowe's advice several weeks ago to sit down and write this bill and a way that could pass

the senate with 80 votes, we would not be doing what we are doing. this is an absolute outrage perpetrated on the american people, an absolute outrage. americans need to know what is going on, and we'll give them every opportunity to do as much as we can get the process moving forward. >> [inaudible] do you plan to use other tactics if it does not work by christmas? >> they are being jammed. there is an effort to deceive

them and use this bill at a time when there is preoccupation with christmas holidays, nobody will notice. i do not think that is going to work. all the surveys indicate people are paying attention, they are concerned. this is not a post office bill. this is health care. regardless of how old you are, every one of 300 million americans care about this bill. >> senator, democrats are hoping along the lines of this bill that if the get cloture monday, it will be over, and you can go back without telegraphing. >> i want to talk about the outrage of deceiving the american people will for

christmas on an issue of extraordinary magnitude. >> what is the obsession with christmas. but would magically happened -- what is the obsession with christmas? what would magically happen if they had to wait a week before voting? >> i think it would be fine. we would have an opportunity for people to get thoroughly familiar with what is in it. >> what is objectionable to you about the compromise? why do you think it is permissive? >> as you know, the bill is still being read the first time by most -- the first time most senators have had a chance to look at it.

staff is still going through it. i cannot give you the definitive take, but i earlier gave you what the indications are that the abortion language is not adequate. >> i heard about how the gop was outraged. you were debating a decoy bill, a switch, a parliamentary move to have an amendment from the floor. can you talk about that? >> nobody had seen it before today except harry and a few people you could put in a phone booth. so it is important to give people an opportunity to read and understand it. what i have given me today is a preliminary take -- what i have given you today is a

preliminary take. we know that medicaid has been plussef in nebraska and vermont, and people will have to pay for that. we are trying to a valley with what kind of special deals and interesting insertions there have been behind closed doors over the next few weeks. >> the democrats are using the votes this way, and the acrimony, what does it mean for the year? >> this is not about acrimony. it is about policy. this bill is a 2100 page monstrosity full of special deals for people willing to vote for it. they are playing games with the nation's health care. this is an outrage, and it

needs to be called that. but it is not personal. that is not the case. it is a policy problem. anyone else? ok, thank you. >> oklahoma senator tom coburn held his address, and he is joined by other senators at the 25 minute briefing.

television gallery. >> the snow is beautiful this morning, and you have been going back to back on this. as somebody who has delivered babies, the writer of this bill, this is a fictitious. for the first time, federal tax dollars will be used to pay for abortions. the negotiations through unborn babies under the bus. if you read the language, it violates a clear intent of the hyde, supak, and nelson amendments.

federal funds for upcountry will be used to provide abortions. that is a drastic change in policy. there is no prohibition on coverage in federal exchanges, the new public option managed by the office of personnel management will cover abortions, the manager's amendment includes reauthorization of the health care improvement act. the amendment rejects compromise proposal on abortions. this is far worse than the casey proposal, the cash proposal, and it will eventually have a negative result.

>> the hyde amendment has been part of our law since 1977, and been bipartisan in its support. today we have the first time that that amendment is going to be watered down and no longer exist and that all the. -- exist at all. the house clearly voted in a bipartisan way to protect the amendment, and the fact that we would not have subsidize abortions in this country because so many people feel so strongly about it, i am in absolute support of the hyde amendment and believe that watering it down should defeat this bill. the rest of the things we are learning about this bill that were in the underlying bill should also be recommended for the rejection of it.

all of the tax cuts that are going to start in two weeks. the bill does not become implemented for four years. so you are asking people to pay taxes for four years, higher insurance premiums on policies if they are covered, hired prescription drug costs, and hired a vice equipment costs because of higher taxes, and yet there is no bill that anyone can sign up for or four years. >> i was hoping we could give the american people a process. it has a three energy-something page amendment being read. at the end of the day, i hope

president obama will keep up to his campaign problems is -- promises of changing the way we will do business. he said that everyone will have a seat at the table, health care will be transparent, on c- span, and you will have access. maybe i do not have the channel, because i do not see that on tv. what about the conference of bishops? there are opposing the compromise. but if you're wondering if this is a partisan measure, i would argue that the catholic church

is not part of the republican or democratic party. they care about the on board. -- the unborn. if i was making an important choice, people would have been standing behind me. that is all about this bill. you could not find one group to stand behind and validated. -- validate what he was saying. at the end of the day, this reinforces everything that the american people hate about conquers -- congress. and the price tag has not changed one bit with the better. this new entitlement program for long-term health care has not changed at all. they will create a new entitlement, beginning in 2011, creating $72 billion.

the class act was a ponzi scheme of the first order. 11 senators wrote to the democratic party saying the class act is fiscally irresponsible, and millions of americans are dying to have congress act responsibly. as we go forward between now and christmas, a democratic colleague said we have the votes, what can we go home? -- why can't we go home? we are not going home. why couldn't we wait until after christmas to pass the bill?

it was in their interest to pass it through. they have rounded up the 60th vote and they are applauding themselves when there is nothing to applaud. so we are going to talk about this until christmas, waiting until people not want to know the truth. the question is not why people can't go home, it is why can we do with the american people expect a bus and be responsible when it comes to legislation? >> i think that this bill is clearly irresponsible and morally reprehensible. the abortion language in this bill fundus abortion for the -- funds abortion for the first time since 1977. the last time the federal government funded abortion, the numbers funded, taxpayer funding of abortion and billy. -- funded 300,000 a year.

it is funding abortion with federal taxpayer dollars and premiums that will go through federal taxpayer established insurance plans or proposals. that is morally reprehensible, fiscally irresponsible, and we do not have the money to do this with. here we are on saturday morning, getting the bill, and people are saying what is in it, what is not in it, and rushing to pass it. if it were a traditional bill, it would be one that would work through the process that everybody has a chance to look at and at the end of the day we would have somewhere between 70

votes and 80 votes. but this hide the ball process, throwing it out at the last minute, is the process that people hate and that we hate seeing take place. it should not happen. it should be put off until christmas. instead of being done at the dark of night. >> this is not about the difference between republicans and democrats. this is about members exercising their ability to get special treatment for their stake -- state when others will not pay for it.

i agree with everything that has been said. i could go forward and to go further on the abortion language. the original language is better than what was negotiated, but you have to compliment them for applying the price is right. put -- for playing the price is right. the agreement fort nebraska puts the federal government on the hook forever. not for six years, not for 10 years. this is not the louisiana purchase. this is the nebraska windfall agreement. it means that if you are a virginia taxpayer, you will pay taxes to make sure nebraska residents do not have to pay any portion in the future. this is not what the american people sign up for.

we're supposed to tax equally and apply equally. but we are into something now that is a continuation of what has been so all told the past 12 -- so awful tehe last 12 months, picking winners and losers. harry reid only allowed some to win and other costs to lose. -- others to lose. but in this process, the american people lose. this bill will be incredibly expensive, cost jobs in this country, and as has been proven, it does not reform health care, it raises taxes too high, spends too much money. the american people lose in an agreement like this.

>>quickly, what this provision does is set up a supreme court challenge. roe versus wade is clear on funding for abortion, and now we are seeing that what that was laid down years ago is thrown up in the air, and it is obvious that things have been -- votes have been bought. what ever it takes to get a vote, that is what the leader did. taxpayers aren't sending money to nebraska. -- are sending money to nebraska. the list goes on and on. is that the way that the election nears envisioned the

change that ought to come to america that they expressed in the last election? this is not business as usual. it is far worse than usual. it has been negotiated for 26 years by individuals. i know little bit about the subjects, and if this is what negotiation is all about, it is a poor way of doing business and a poor way of negotiating. >> i would make one final statement. the crisis of confidence in this country is at an apex and has not seen in 150 years. and that lack confidence undermines the ability of legitimate government. we need to be paying attention to that, because a lot of people out there today through this process, not just the bill, but the process, will give up

on government, and rightly so. questions? >> help me out a little bit on your position, on how this is worse. >> i understand this is not explicitly say no abortion, but the position is that you are segregating apart. -- the parts of the exchange that are private. >> it is federal dollars. it is the policy in the country today under no taxpayers' dollars, or the use to pay for abortion. it has been that way for 34 years, but it changes with this bill. as soon as five states opt out,

there will be a challenge using the president to say they cannot do that. consequently, we will have to hide language stripped forever, and you will be as a taxpayer, whether you believe in abortion or not, they will be paying for it. there is also no conscience protection in this. so we will be going after those in terms of training systems when they may not want to offer that. >> [unintelligible] >> we can't find it yet, and that goes back to the other point. we are going to vote on this at 11 on monday morning. that is ours from when we first looking at the amendment.

you can see what people in this country don't have any confidence. the average bill is less than 400 pages. we have had 10 republicans amendments voted on -- well, now we have no bill. so description by our leader saying that this is a jam is exactly right. they do not want the american people to know absolutely what is in this bill. >> it is the worst crisis of confidence in 150 years. do you think we are on the brink of civil war? >> there was no reference. but what i hear from -- and i just picked 150 years. but what i hear from

constituents everywhere i travel, you represent what is in the best long-term interest of our country. and people are not having conference to govern. -- confidence to govern. when you lose confidence, you lose the ability to govern. and we're thinking about long- term prospects, rather than how we benefit perot purely or -- broccoli -- otherwise our own. >> trying to segment private money? >> there's no segmentation in the of improvement act. -- the health care improvement act. the hyde language is gone. so we will use federal government money to pay for abortions on indian reservations. how to use segment the money? you cannot segment the money. that is like saying we're not going to let socialçóñrñi secury money be spent on other things. you are saying we are going to have a lock box, when there is

no lock box. this is caps redone. >-- >> this is caps redone. they have just try to say, ok, we will set another category, but it is the same sort of segment, and we went through that debate earlier and everyone said this is not funding for abortion because we're segmenting, but this is federal dollars, you artist putting them in a different pocket. so that is funding of abortion. and in the exchange, you will have one that will fund abortion. and we have never done that. it is still federal money. >> if barbara boxer is ok with this language, nobody in the right-to-life community can be ok with it, because her position is well-known, and she thinks the federal government ought to spend money on abortion. >> i heard the explanation today about writing two checks.

that is what was just alluded to. this is federal money. it is like social securityñliñi money going in the general fund. the money will be mixed withçóñr federal money. i do not care whether there is additional separate premium or not, it's still is mixed with federal money, and that is what pays for abortion. so they are disingenuous when they say that there is going to be segregation among the funding for abortion versus non- abortion policies. >> in your statement, at least what i grabbed, you seem to provide that center nelson used the abortion as a bargaining chip and wound up with worse language than the first place, but effectively used abortion to get a better deal for nebraska. >> you received it correctly,

and i think that it shows a tremendous willingness to allow some in this country to win and many to lose by one member of the senate, and i think that is wrong. >> you cannot get one republican vote change in 16 of the -- 1/6 of the economy. that says a lot about the republican party and the process. i am one republican who does not mind trying to find common ground on tough issues. i am going to try it on energy policy, i have done it in the past and will do it again, but it is virtually impossible for any republican to have a meaningful say. senator collins and senator

snowe are not on board. the class act is a devastating program that will create long- term financial problems. senator nelson may have helped on medicaid, but has not helped nebraska with medicare cuts. at the end of the day, i hope the people realize it is not over. this is a long way from being done. if you want to change, speak up. let people know. the cuts are going to affect people in nebraska, and tax increases will affect people in nebraska, and this abortion language, the conference of bishops understands the difference between stupac language and this language, and they have decided to oppose the bill. that's as all i need to know

about the pro-life issue, when the conference of catholic bishops say they oppose the language and opposed the bill because of language. that is all you need to know from my point of view. i do not always agree with the catholic church, particularly on the death penalty, but i agree with them on right-to-life issue. they have just got to pass the bill, because the democratic party features, that is the with a look at this thing. they go from reforming health care to worry about the future of the democratic party. whatever it took to get the last boat,that is what they did. they had nothing to do with the overall best interest of the country, and that can happen to both parties, i guess. but this is not about health care reform, it is about the democratic party trying to save themselves.

>> and now, vt. independent senator bernie sanders. this is just under 10 minutes. >> thank you very much. i'm here with the senator from maryland, who wanted to say a few words on one aspect of this legislation. in the midst of the overall crisis in america, there is one crisis focused on, the crisis in primary health care.

that means some 60 million americans today do not have access to a doctor on a regular basis. what that and that meaning is that when people get sick, they end up in the emergency room. or they become sicker than they should have banned and end up in the hospital, a great personal suffering and pain, and somehow even death. we supported by a thousand americans who died because we do not get to it got them on a regular basis. what this manages to do is add $10 billion more over a five- year time into community health centers. what that means is that an additional 25 million americans will also have access to federally qualified health centers, meaning high quality health care, low-cost drugs, and health counseling.

it also means because of a significant increase in health services, we will be forgiving debts for students going into primary care. in recent years, it has had a -- 20,000 more doctors, teachers, and nurses will be created. i can tell you that in my state, in recent years, we have significantly increased centers. it has had a profound impact on the health and well-being of people, and at the end of the day, studies indicate medicaid saved money because we keep people out of expensive emergency health rooms and hospitals. so this is a win-win proposition. we have $10 billion now in the senate bill.

they have $14 billion in the house bill. we believe the final number will probably be $14 billion. if that happens, there will be a revolution in primary health care in america, with millions more having access to mental health counseling. let me introduce senator kardin. >> i have sat for many caucus meetings were bernie sanders has raised this issue over and over again. let me try and _ how important -- to underscore how important this is. we know we have a shortage of professionals. we also know we do not have enough facilities in our community to handle all our population want to receive

health care. we have been fighting for many years for coverage. this bill does a great service to america in getting a lot more people insured. 31 million is what the congressional budget office has said. we hope there will be even more. the question is, where will they get their needs met? we do not have enough primary- care physicians today, we do not have enough space and our clinics. i have visited a community health centers in maryland. they have one thing in common. they all need more capacity. they already are stretched as to what they can handle. we need more locations in rural areas people have a hard time finding primary-care help, and we need more capacity generally throughout the nation. i had a chance to talk to one of the leaders of johns hopkins hospital in baltimore. a colleague believes we should have affordable access to

health insurance. he told me if we do not do something to produce more primary care professionals, and if we do not provide more community health center capacity, we are not going to be able to provide care in the most cost-effective way. the bill that we had on the floor of the united states senate needed to be improved, and senator sanders needed to accomplish that. -- has accomplished that. i know that was a focus on major issues, but our objective was to find that every american have affordable have access to health care, and the initiative will help 25 more million americans reject all. congratulations on that. -- reach that goal. congratulations on that. >> they talked about certain special favors and the bill.

>> i did not have all the details. but vermont has been very aggressive in making sure that all of our low-income kids and others have access to health care. we were there, doing the right thing. with many of us in vermont and around the country, we felt it was wrong to penalize a state that had done a better job than perhaps all of us. massachusetts was up there as well. you do not penalize states because they come up with money to do the right thing. thank you for taking care of more people, and we will penalize you for doing that. that is saying that we're not going to penalize states that have done the right thing. we are proud in vermont that we have done the right thing. but taxpayers should not be penalized.

the bottom line for me is that if you expand medicaid and health insurance in general, that is important. but at the end of the day, it does not mean much if people cannot find a doctor or a dentist, and we have at expanded to 10,000 communities in america as a result of the legislation. they will now have access to community health centers. 10,000 more. 20,000 more primary health care physicians. and that is what is going to help revolutionize primary health care in america, an important step forward. ok? thank you very much. . .

>> that offers security to those who have health insurance around affordable options for those who do not. i want to thank senator hare reid and everyone who's been working around the clock to make this half. there's still much work to left to be done but not a lot of time to do it. but today is a major step forward for the american people. after a nearly century-long struggle we are on the cusp of making healthcare reform a reality in the united states of america. as with any legislation, compromise is part of the process. the but i'm pleased that recently-added amendments have made this landmark bill even stronger. between the time the bill passes and the time when the insurance exchange gets up and run there will now be penalties for insurance companies that arbitrarily jack up rates on consumers. and while from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing conditions once the exchange is

open, in the meantime there will be a high rix pool where people with pre-existing conditions can purchase affordable coverage. a recent amendment has made these protections even strong the insurance companies will now be prohibited from denying coverage to children immediately after this bill passes. there's also explicit language in this bill that will protect a patient's choice of doctor. and small businesses will get additional assistance as dig to the ones we've been talking about for some time. no longer will insurance companies be able to drop your coverage if you become sick, and no longer will you have to pay unlimited amounts out of your own pocket for treatments that you need. under this bill, family will save on their premiums. businesses that will see their costs rise if we don't act will save money now and in the future. this bill will strengthen medicare and extend the life of the program. because it's paid for and gets rid of waste and inefficiency in

our healthcare system, this will be the largest deficit-reductions plan in over a decade. in fact, we just learned from the congressional budget office that this bill will reduce our deficit by $132 billion over the first decade of the program, and more than $1 trillion in the decade after that. finally, this reform will make coverage affordable for over 30 million americans who don't have it. over 30 million americans. as i said before, these are not small changes. these are big changes. they're fundamental reforms. they will save money, they will save lives, and i look forward to working with the senate and the house to finish the work that remains so that we can make this reform a reality for the american people. i also want to briefly mention the progress we made in copenhagen yesterday. for the first time in history, all of the accept their responsibility to take action to

confront the threat of climate change. after extremely difficult and complex negotiations, this important break through lays the foundation for international action in the years to come. this progress did not come easily and we know that progress on this particular aspect of climate change negotiations is not enough. going forward, we're going to have to build on the momentum that we established in copenhagen to ensure that international action to significantly reduce emissions is sustained and sufficient over time. at home that means continuing our efforts to build a clean enaur economy that has the potential to create millions of new jobs and new industries. and it means passing legislation that will create the incentives necessary to spark this clean enaur revolution. so even though we have a long way to go, there's no question that we've accomplished a great deal over the last few days. and i want america to continue to lead on this journey. because if america leads in

developing clean enaur, we will lead in -- clean energy, we will lead in growing our economy and putting our people back tell work and leaving a stronger and more healthy country to our children. that's why i went to copenhagen and will continue these efforts in the weeks and months to come. thank you very much. everybody. >> [inaudible] >> up next a discussion on the obama administration's human rights agenda for the 21st century, which secretary of state hillary clinton announced this week. from this morning's washington journal thinks about 25 minutes. >> michael posener is assistant secretary of state for democracy and human rights and joins us from new york city. good morning, sir. >> good morning. >> tell us in your opinion why has the obama administration been criticized for lagging on human rights? us from new york city. host:o( us why has the obama lagging on human rights?

guest: there's been a determination from president obama and secretary clinton from the get go to say these are really an essential peace of the foreign policy he >> the president to act military in afghanistan as we are, but at the same time maintain a commitment to human rights and justice. i think one of the challenges we face in the world is that there

are multiple needs and agendas for us. but the key for us is to again to take the world as we find it and find ways to push a human rights agenda on a parallel track with economic, political, diplomatic and other security interests. so there is in our view a need to insert human rights and maintain the human rights policy in all countries in the world. >> the secretary spoke about the administration's commitment to human rights last monday at georgetown university. thinks part of what she had to say. >> first, a commitment to human rights starts with universal standards and withholding everyone accountable to those standards, including ourselves. on his second full day in office, president obama issued an executive order prohibiting the use of torture or official cruelty by any u.s. official and ordered the closure of

guantanemo. next year we will report on human trafficking as we do every year. but this time not only just on other countries but also on our own. bay. we will participate in the united nations of our own human rights record just as we encouraged other nations to do. by holding ourselves accountable, we reinforce moral authority to adhere to obligations under international law. among them not to torture or engage in political killings. >> what's the plan going

forward. how will they hold others >> i think important in what a notion that there is a single standard and we'll apply it to yourself ises as well. what we are doing in the second day and announcing the closing of guantanamo. we have to follow through in those thingsñi we have a ways t go. we expect you to doñi the same. ever >> every government in the world has to submit to this periodic review of the united nations. we're pushing that and we're making sure that as governments come up and are being reviewed, we're making sure that those

reviews are more serious than they've been in the past. we're also on a bilateral level going to governments in the last several months i've probably talked to 15 or 16 governments about very specific things on our agenda on human rights. i met with the government of uzbekastan yesterday, the government of egypt. we're really taking each country and saying, we have an agenda not based on u.s. standards but an universal decoration of human rights concept of what human rights are. >> we're talking about the obama administration's human rights agenda with michael posener, assistant secretary of state for democracy and human rights. if you'd like to get involved in our conversation the number is on the screen for republicans and democrats and independents. if you are calling outside the united states, call

202-628-0104. what's been the response so far from the countries you have been asherting the human rights policy. the approach we are taking in the notion >> that we're working from an universal standard that we just tack about but also the change occurs from within societies. so our primary focus is often how to help create space for members of civil society, for human rights groups, for women's groups, for the media to operate within their own societies and raise these issues in a way that's consistent with their own

culture, history, background. often that's the hardest part of the discussion but it's most important. and i think there is a recognition on our part that the thing that we can do that's going to make the most difference is to create an open political and social process that allows human rights and democracy to flourish in every country in the world. that's the theory. and i think governments, they don't like some of the details of the conversation, but it's harder to argue with that premise. >> our first call for michael posener comes from daytona beach, florida. tim on our line for democrats. >> yes. i heard what they were saying about human rights. the war that we're fighting? >> yes. >> and i just -- i'm a hard-working man. i pay my taxes. and it's like when are you guys going to take time out to help us u.s. citizens? we're struggling out here. i'm a single dad.

i take care of my child. there is nothing out here to help us. >> tim, how is taking care of human rights both here and abroad taking away from your ability to take care of your family? tim? >> really we have no business over there. if you read the bible, the bible is quite clear about that. hello? >> yeah, all right. we're going to leave it there. mr. posener, did you want to comment on that? >> no. obviously to me the obama administration is doing a range of things on the domestic front to try to address jobs, health, et cetera. my place in the government is really to try more globally to address some of those same issues by creating a stronger democratic institutions in other countries. >> in the article in last tuesday's "new york times," they talkbo