150 committee staff members, just for one committee. but they're dealing with the budget of the entire government. you do not want it to be amateur hour. the turnover within the appropriations committee staff is relatively low, as i understand it, because they are experts. it is pretty hard to replace them. i am speaking slowly because i am not sure i really agree with that. the words -- there were no professional staff to speak out until after world war ii. congress got so frustrated with franklin roosevelt calling the shots, he had all the expertise and congress had none. they pass legislation in 1946 that allowed for the first time

committees to hire four professional staffers. it does come a long way since that time. members could also hire professional staffers, because it is a separated and balanced government. members of the house of commons in great britain, that come over, they ask why we have so many staff members. i have to share of member with another member of the house. and the british government is a unitary government. we need to check and balance the executive, particularly at a time at a wildly asserted executive. terry wills recently wrote a book on that, and i have not read the book so i cannot say it is the best book but he is on to

something. when president bush issued signing statements -- i will sign this legislation but do it with these reservations -- where is that called for in the constitution? in times of national peril, the president takes on more responsibility. it is not the senate of the 19th century for the sure, but congress of the 19th century. it is a constant struggle. one scholar famously said that the constitution is an invitation to struggle between the branches for power. and that struggle is alive and well today. >> a couple of hands right here. >> if you could speak to the history of that -- the senate

may be the greatest debating society in the world, and it came -- and it became a shock to americans when the cameras went on when they saw a senate turf speaking in an empty room. when did it began to depart from the full group really debating? >> march 4, 19 of 9. that is that date that the person of office building opened. senators had real offices and real desks to go to. prior to 99, -- 1909, they would meet with their constituents on the floor of the senate and that would have issued their constituents out. now have a lot of things to do, but television became a fact of

life in 1986, you did not have to be in the chamber. you could have -- you could watch it on television and you could be there in three minutes, at the most five. prior to that time, senators would have floorwalkers who would sit in the galleries and call them on the telephone any time there was something that the senator should know about. but it does make the point that there is some much going on, committee hearings, schedules, there is a very long list of committee hearings bad boy. so it is discouraging for sure. >> a question right here, and tree. right here, this gentleman. >> what are your thoughts on

bipartisan commissions and being governed by them? >> i -- a bipartisan commission, they have been used in some high- profile events in recent years, one that i followed for a while the commission to set congressional salaries. it is too hot a topic for members to debate on and vote on themselves, so let's have a commission to debate proper source. and there have been proposals for ethics commission's, may be made up a bipartisan groups of former members. i can tell you one thing -- current members are not terribly happy to be advised by former members.

if you're any good, you would still be here. [laughter] we're the ones and a line of fire. it is convenient for commission to do that, to study -- but that is what congressional committees are for. that is what they do all the time. it depends on the reason for particular commission being created and it varies widely. it is extra-constitutional, outside the normal path of how loss or ideas are debated and digested. it is one source of expertise, so in these complex times, the more the merrier. >> there's a question right back there. >> reconciliation is a hot topic right now.

in the 1970's, senator muskie and others at the congressional budget process passed. and the first time it was used was by senator baker with the help of a guy named marty go uld, that guy most of the reagan things passed by a simple majority. can you comment on that? and i would make a comment on that, i think in recent years the center most interested in the history is robert c. byrd, and i suspect that he has given you a lot of support in the years. >> we have work with him a a lot. his interest in history is typical -- while his interest and history of the senate has cancer -- unsurpassed by any other member, to be sure.

and not just journeymen senators, they have to look and have the broader perspective and that often turn to history of the senate to get a sense of all fat. -- all of that. reconciliation, you mentioned robert gold, and you have to care about senate procedure, but he is the master, a very bright guy who is taken on some tough assignments, and howard baker was lucky to have him. he basically turn reconciliation on its head. there reason for reconciliation was to reconcile differences between expenditures and tax receipts, and it was a minor matter to be done during the budget cycle. no one intended it to be used as a way to get around the 60-vote majority to pass major,

controversial legislation. the republicans used it quite a bit in the 1980's. the democrats have not been shy about using it either. congress may be defined about how successful they aren't making reconciliation work with regard to health care. the whole business of how when the senator can visit the chamber and try to figure out how your survive in the environment, how'd you get your will it imposed on the other 99 senators? the -- you need some very seasoned staff like martin gold, and the democrats have their counterparts as well. >> another question right here, we need a microphone here. >> have there been many times

when the senate chaplain has made a remarkable difference? >> the nature of the job is private. i know that when senator byrd's 16-year-old grandson was killed in 1982, the senate chaplain was of incalculable personal comfort, according to senator byrd. the chaplain considers the whole senate including the staff to be his flock. it is pretty much on a personal basis. they lead the senate with a prayer every day and then they are there to be helpful and available. >> i know we have another question right here. have stepped in front of the camera. >> in a search for

bipartisanship, as the senate ever entertain the idea of trying to seek people in some way and other ways besides left- hand side and right hand side? instead of whether they agreed with them and not, ranking them by social security number, way to -- [laughter] charm, any other factor? >> whatever there is a ceremonial session, members instinctively set on their assigned decided as they would be in the current chamber. and then they catch themselves and look nervous and embarrassed, as if some will cross over and sit on the other side, but there's a lot pressure against doing that. in the early days of the senate,

there was no party seating. that developed in the 1840's as parties coalesced in the senate. i think that will be on the bottom of the list of recommendations. [laughter] one recommendation was that they have lunch together, the two parties have lunch every tuesday as our group. once a month, get them all together. who knows how that would work? i think the attendance might be low. >> we have time for one last question. ok, i am going to ask it. [unintelligible] let's get a microphone right here. >> explain the procedure that senator bain is using right now that requires only one person to stop everything -- senator

bunning is using right now that requires only one person to stop everything. >> the senate runs on unanimous consent because of the way the rules are constructed. to avoid any hard feelings, and this gets back to the question of the job of the majority leader and the minority leader to organize these unanimous consent agreements. weather is as simple as having a vote it 5:00 in the afternoon to something more complex, and they spend hours with a lot of staff involved on this. the leader goes then, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to do this. and then at the back of the senate chamber, you hear the two most hateful words a senator can utter -- i object. that is what is going on here. perfectly within the right of the senator to do that.

to the great credit of the majority and minority leaders, they try to keep that to a minimum the lot of personal consultation, maybe back scratching here in there, but every once in awhile, particularly in contentious times, it happens. >> tell everyone about the custom that got started under then-senator jack kennedy, the guidelines for how the senators and the hall of fame were selected. >> lyndon johnson as majority leader in the middle of the cold war, senators were grumpy and they needed to feel better about being in the united states senate. just off the senate chamber is the reception room, and although it is grandly decorated by the italian fresco artists, there

were five medallion portraits spaces left vacant. lbj came up with the idea of selecting five outstanding former senators no longer living, who can serve as role models the current senators. they can be proud of being a senator or at least had ideals to aspire to in human form. then lbj suffered a heart attack in the summer of 1955, so he cannot share -- chaired the committee to make the selections. it fell to john f. kennedy, the junior senator in the middle of writing his book "profiles in courage." he became chairman of the committee but the other senators were much more senior than he. they brought in a group of 160 academics, including harry truman, to send in a less. and i think the list had about

68 major senators. they could always a light five. that finally did boil it down to henry clay, daniel webster, john c. telcalhoun -- no-brainers. but there were two slots for the toy center. the great progressive republican from nebraska, father of the tva another progress of legislation, that the first vote from the outside panel. but the nebraska senators decided that they were not going to let him brace holes, so they agreed that this would be unanimous. so they said -- they selected a senator from wisconsin, another progress of senator, and then

robert taft of ohio, who had been the republican leader for a very short period of time. and that was set. and then in 1999, trent lott looked around and saw some other interspaces. -- empty spaces. so we in the senate office -- senate historical office played that role. we ran a competition and they ran up -- ended up with one republican and one democrat. there were more space is available on the walls there, and so that is for future generations to decide. but it was a good exercise by saying, what you mean by outstanding? no one would agree with best,

but outstanding -- why did they deserve that credit? and there they are in the senate reception room, hopefully in spiring senators as they go about their daily work 3 >> richard, thank you for this great evening. we appreciate you being with us. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> the minutes that wall street firms were in the business of harvesting americans for home equity value and making loans against it, there was a natural risk of abuse. >> sunday, michael lewis on the subprime mortgage crisis. his latest is "the big short." he is also the author of "wires poker."

one was the basis for the center bullet movie. michael lewis on c-span "q&a." >> tomorrow on optical washington journal," clark kent ervin talks about the no fly less. donna edwards discusses midterm politics and the targeting of vulnerable gop members. and the president of the american association of homes and services for the aging books at the current need for long- term care. "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> tomorrow, a preview of president obama trip to sign a new treaty with russia, hosted by the center for strategic and international studies. live coverage begins at 10:30

hear on c-span. >> now, president obama closing remarks at all white house workplace flexibility forum where he met with labor leaders, small business owners, and scholars. this portion is 10 minutes. >> thank you. thank you, at everybody. hello, hello. thank you, everybody. please, please, have a seat. good first, one caveat -- i will not be good -- as good as michelle. [laughter] so keep your expectations lower. i want to make knowledge john berry for the extraordinary work he is doing here and for helping to organize this. thank you, john. [applause] in addition, we have secretary hilda solis is here from our

department of labour. dr. christina romer, who is the chair of our council of economic advisers -- where are you, christina? right there. mallory jarrett, a senior advisor and chair of the white house council on women and girls. ms. melanie bonds, i actually just saw run off to the garden. she was on my list, the chair of our domestic policy council, but she is not here. karen mills, the administrator for our small business administration. and ms. martha johnson, administrator of the general services administration. [applause] i understand you have had a wonderful session. i heard all about it. and i want to thank all of you for joining us today and sharing your thoughts on what we can do as business leaders and advocates, as employees and as a

government official, to modernize our workplaces to meet the needs of our workforce and our families. all of us here today know just how wide that gap has grown. and we are all familiar with the economic and demographic changes that have brought us to this point -- how over the past generation or two, at costs has driven -- as costs have risen and wages have lagged, many families have found they can no longer survive on just one income. and at the same time, we have broken down bayer's -- barriers and opened up opportunities so that more women have entered the work force. today, 2/3 of american families with kids are headed by two working parents or a single working parent, and the result is a rise of 11 expert refers to as the "that juggler family." for these families, i everything is scheduled right down to the minute. there is no room for error.

the car breaks down, or someone gets sick, or there's a problem at school, that begins a cascading domino effect that leaves everybody scrambling. and this is something that michelle and i have struggled with in our own families. as she told you earlier today, it was not that long ago that both of us were working full- time outside the home while raising two young daughters. i was away for days on end for my job, and michelle was working hard at hers, so a lot at times we felt that we were just barely keeping everything together. when we will work, we were worrying about what was happening at home. when we were at home, we were worrying about work. our overloaded schedules were taking a toll on our marriage. and we had it relatively easy. we can afford good health care. we had a wonderful mother-in- law, grandmother, who could help out. we had to ship her in and, even in the white house. [laughter] we could rework our schedules in

an emergency without risking being fired or having our paychecks docked. most folks are not that lucky. particularly in today's economy when many people are not just working one job but are having to work two or three to get by, or they are working longer hours or they are out of a job and they cannot afford to be choosy about things like flexibility and benefits. and this disconnect between the needs of our families and the demand of our workplace also reflects a broader problem, that today, we as a society still see workplace flexibility policies as a special perk for women rather than a critical part of a workplace that can help all of us. they're still a perception out there that an employee who needs some time to tend to an aging parent or attend to a parent teachers conference is not fully committed to his or her job -- or that if you make a workplace more flexible, it necessarily will be less profitable. now it is true that women are

still this professionally affected by this issue, something michelle always reminds me of, which is another reason why it is such great concern for me. but plenty of fathers out there wish they had more time to spend with their kids. plenty of sons wish they could do more for their elderly parents. plenty of workers, both women and men, which they could go back to school so that they can beef up their skills and advance their careers. and there are plenty of communities that desperately need the new jobs we can create when we embrace teleworking and mobile workplaces. and as for how this issue affects the bottom line, a report by the white house council of economic advisers that we are releasing today found that companies with flexible work arrangements can actually have lower turnover and absenteeism, and higher productivity and healthier workers. so let's be clear -- workplace flexibility is not just a women's issue.

it is an issue that affects the well-being of our families and the success of our businesses. it reflects the strength of our economy, whether we will create the workplaces and jobs of the future we need to compete in today's global economy. and it reflects our priorities as a society -- our belief that no matter what each of us does for a living, caring for our loved ones and raising the next generation is the single most important job that we have. i think it is time we started making that job all easier for folks. many of you here represent companies and workplaces that are already doing just that, embracing telecommuting, flextime, compressed work weeks, job sharing, flexible start and end times, and helping your employees generally find quality child care and elder care. and if you are doing this not just because it is the right thing to do but because you have found that what is good for your workers and is good for your families can be good for your

bottom lines and your shareholders as well, then you need to spread the word. my administration is committed to supporting efforts like these. our budget for this next year includes competitive grants to help states launch their own paid leave programs. increases funding for childcare and nearly doubles the child care tax credit for millions of middle-class families. and it provides support for folks caring for aging relatives, and for seniors who want to live independently for as long as possible. we're also committed to practicing what we preach and serving as a model for the policies that we are encouraging. john has been all over this, the purpose of the pilot project that john just told you about. and that is why john is working with our chief technology offers are, aneesh chopra, to provide opportunities for federal employees to telework on a regular basis. where regulations are in the way, we will see we can do to change them. where new technology can help, we will find a cost-effective way to install it. we're training is needed to help

managers and workers embrace this approach, we will adopt best practices. because in the end, we believe that all of this is not just about providing a better work experience but about providing better, more efficient service for the american people, even in the face of snowstorms and other crises that keep folks from getting to the office. i do not want to see the government close because of snow again. [laughter] it is about attracting and retaining top talent in the federal workplace and empowering them to do their jobs, and judging their success by the results that they get -- not by how many meetings they attend or how much face time they log or how many hours are spent on airplanes. it is about creating a culture where, as martha johnson puts it, work is what you do not where you are. and in these efforts, we will be looking to all of you for advice

and ideas, and we plan to continue this conversation in the coming months, holding forums and roundtables in communities across the country so we can seek out more good ideas and best practices that we can adopt and promote. so i thank you for being part of this forum. i look for to hearing about what you came up with today. and i look forward to working with all of you in the years to come. thank you very much, everybody. [applause]