that it could hurt the movement. on the other side of the caller's point, term limits are kind of a nonstarter. campaign finance reform, the schumer van-hollen bill, that is one the white house has been supporting, calling out c ongress. so we do see political will for finance reform, which otherwise is a wonky issue. .

sarah palin would seem to have more claim to having the energy behind her and perhaps some portion of the base. it is questionable as to how brought her support is, even in the base, let alone beyond the base, headed toward the general

election. it also should be pointed out that she has a relatively skeleton political operation. she has been focusing much more on her burgeoning media career, selling her book, and she has a contract with fox news. she signed on to do with travel type show for another cable network. it is really early to handicap these things, as much as i love to do that. i would take a flier and pick a republican presidential nominee for 2012. host: for more information, go to politico.com. you can see the front page is about fund-raising efforts for not just 2010, but 2012 as well. thank you for being here. we will bring you to live coverage of the senate judiciary committee. they are holding and oversight

of the civil rights division within the justice department. senator ben cardin is presiding. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> he heads the civil rights division of the justice department. senator jeff sessions, the ranking member of the judiciary committee. and ben cardin is the acting chair and this is live on c- span.

>> the judiciary committee will come to order. today's hearing will be an oversight hearing for the civil rights division of the department of justice. i want to thank chairman leahy for giving me the opportunity to chair today's hearing. it is a pleasure to have thomas

press here, who heads up the civil rights division -- thomas perez here, who heads up the civil rights division. it is a corporate to acknowledge the great loss -- it is appropriate to a college degree loss of one of our civil rights leaders, dorothy i. height, who passed away. was a longtime chairman of the -- she was a strong fighter for equal justice based on gender and race. her leadership was critically important during the civil rights movement, with her insistence for racial justice and gender equality. the saying that i will always remember about dorothy i. height, "if times are not ripe, you have to ripen the times." i think that her legacy will stay with us as we meet the current challenges for equality in america. for more than 50 years, the

civil rights division has been charged with protecting americans against discrimination throughout our society. the vision is our nation's -- the division is our nation's moral compass. it is the unfinished business of the nation and there is much work to be done. whether in employment, education, housing, voting, personal liberties, the civil rights division must take action and not stay on the sidelines against those who violate our law. they have a proud tradition of fighting to enforce anti- discriminationç laws in the ars of voting rights, civil rights, housing, elections, and he crimes. during the last administration, the division had an alarming lack of civil rights enforcement and a multitude of politicization. so much that their own offices began independent investigations of the political appointees at the department of justice. more evidence of corruption and

lack of enforcement came to the surface. between 2001 and 2006, they failed to file any cases on çbehalf of error -- on behalf f african-american voters. there was just one case filed for minority bovote dilution. they played no role in holding a lender's accountable for discrimination. disability lawsuits declined by 50% under the last administration. only 10 hate crimes are prosecuted -- the lowest number in more than a decade. by the way, there is evidence that there was a rise in activity during that time. there is a lot to be done to restore its role in protecting civil rights. when president obama nominated tom perez to be assistant attorney general, i was confident that he would restore the moral -- morale in the division, because he came from the division. tampere's -- tom perez served as

a criminal attorney for 10 years. he moved up the ladder as a trial attorney and then as deputy assistant general for civil rights. he knows the importance of setting aside political and ideological affiliations when hiring. he knows from firsthand experience the need to ensure protection for those who been discriminated against. for these reasons as well as his leadership under attorney general holder and president obama, i was confident that the division would return to its roots and provide a voice for the voiceless. he knows what civil-rights attorneys should do. the ministers and has taken action. i look forward to hearing about the -- the administration has taken action. i look forward to hearing about this. what types of cases have been initiated within the housing and civil enforcement sections, the criminal section, the voting

section, the employment section, and a disability section? that is the purpose for the hearing today. we look forward to a dialogue with the division chief. we're happy to carry out our responsibility of a oversight -- of oversight. let me turn it over to jeff sessions. >> thank you for acknowledging dorothy i. height. what a history she has in advocating for civil rights in america. this division is important. properly exercise, it provides tremendous benefit to american citizens. i think that chairman -- i think that the chairman is right to recognize that politics is an important in the department.

we need to be concerned. one purpose i believe of this hearing is to make sure that civil rights division is exercising its authority to shield and protect individuals from discrimination, but not as a sword for the inappropriate claims to promote political agendas. you know, civil rights principles need to be professionally and allies. with regard to the housing collapse, -- need to be professionally analyzed. with regard to the housing collapse, there was pressure to make loans to individuals in ways that demonstrated clearly that there was no housing prejudice could well have

resulted in institutions making bad loans that they really should not have made. the threats and pressures can cause some of that. i think that was part of the housing collapse. on election day, november, 2008, members of the new black panther party intimidated voters in a precinct in philadelphia. one member wielded by a knife. it was described as, "the most blatant form of voter intimidation," which she had ever seen, even during the crisis a century before. despite his characterization and direct evidence of guilt that appeared, the department of justice decided to not fully pursue every avenue to ensure that the guilty parties did not disenfranchise other voters in the future. in fact, one of the intimidators recently worked at

another voting precinct. the united states commission on civil rights has many of the same goals as the civil rights division, and they are concerned about this matter. a majority of commissioners are not satisfied that the department of justice has fully pursued every avenue on behalf of the voters to make sure that these actions do not strike again in philadelphia or elsewhere. but instead of coordinating with the commission, the justice department has put up a steel barrier in attempting to thwart any effort the commission has raised about this case. this does not bode well for the administration that has promised to be open and transparent, it seems to me. i am concerned that this might be producing some harmful results for the last several months, -- harmful results.

for the last several months, we have gotten many phone calls about the abuses of a.c.o.r.n. it is an organization that was reported that the administration concluded a criminal investigation into voter fraud complaints. in 2008, at least two crew individuals file complaints can produce documents demonstrating that -- two individuals filed complaints and produced documents demonstrating that they were registering voters fraudulently. they have let a.cor. -- a.c.o.r.n. off the hook, even though questionable, hiring and

training -- even the questionable hiring and training practices occurred. they move forward with -- does that mean they moved forward with activities that were illegal? should not more be done about that? in north carolina, some voters decided to do away with party affiliations in local elections, city elections. it is a majority african- american community. according to an article in the washington times -- "the washington times that gave the administration overruled -- "washington times" the administration overruled them. she said the following, "voting

rights act is supposed to protect against situations when black voters are locked out because of racism. there is no entitlement to elect the candidate they prefer on the assumption that all black voters preferred democratic candidates." i know we have heard a lot of rhetoric about the division being back open for business and the voting booths being protected once again. i am concerned about some of these actions and whether or not the administration has any plans to enforce section 8 of the voter bill. that requires debt and to book a votes -- dead and duplicate voters to be removed from the rolls. i am concerned about some of the -- removed from the roles.

i am concerned about some of the disparate hearings we heard about during the sotomayor confirmation. mr. chairman, i would note that, after this financial crisis lawsuit, the administration is planning to file a disparate impact lawsuits because the practices -- filed disparate impact lawsuits because the practices have a disproportionate results. the doj is beginning a major campaign against banks and mortgage brokers suspected of discriminating against minority applicants in lending. some critics have contended that the government rules punishing banks -- pushing banks to lend

to minorities and low-income borrowers could treated to the financial meltdown -- contributed to the financial meltdown. we need to understand with clarity just howwo#d that people are not discriminated against. it is another to pressure banks to make loans that are not sound. that is not good for the borrowers or the country. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator sessions. we will hear from the assistant attorney general of tom perez. -- assistant attorney general tom perez. >> it is always greatxd to be he in front of someone who parenthetically has one of the most remarkable lives in america -- wives in america as well. >> i am glad you put that in the record.

>> i appreciate the respect accorded me, dating back to 1989, when i was in mobile, alabama, in a case that use your credit -- in a case that you supported 100% of the way. i appreciate your acknowledgement of dr. height. it has been a sad week for the civil rights division. what today is equal pay day, and when that act was signed in 1963 by president kennedy, who was standing next to him? dorothy i. height, our rules of the rights icon -- a real civil rights icon. i had three wonderful days meeting with civil rights leaders. i met an old colleague of mine that i had prosecuted the case with in 1991, when i was a career civil servant.

it was great to get reacquainted. i had one of the best meals i have ever had in birmingham that evening. good vittles -- as we say in the business. >> i would say how proud i am a birmingham for its principled and sincere effort to confront its past, where racial discrimination was far too prevalent. much of it was very, very destructive and damaging to that whole city. it has confronted its past in an honest and forthright way. i think other cities can learn from what birmingham has done. >> i look forward to bring my children there into the museum in greensboro, which i had the privilege of participating in the grand opening for. it is remarkable to be part of our nation's history. the attorney general has called

our division the crown jewel of the apartment of justice. the president singled out that civil-rights division in his state of the union. you have been very supportive of our budget request. we're very grateful. that enables us to increase our efforts in a number of ways. my first party was to take immediate steps to restore trust between career staff and political leadership, to restore public confidence come into the politicize decision making. we worked quickly to return -- to restore public confidence, and to depoliticize decision- making. we worked quickly to return to the hands of career people, hiring a bumper crop of 16 new law graduates who will start this summer and fall. we have made it easier for lawyers to do their jobs by

elevating a wide range of needless bureaucratic obstacles that or in their way. we restore communication between career and non-career staff. -- we have restored communication between iran and non-career staff. i will always consider myself -- between career and non-career staff. i will always consider myself an attorney. we have an open to hearing what policies or, s were. we may not always agree, but every voice will be heard. we encourage our lawyers, rather than forbidding them to conduct aggressive outreach to key stakeholders and communities across this country. stepped-up enforcement across the board. we're focused not on quantity, -- we have a step up enforcement across the board. we're not focused on quantity,

but on quality. i want to give you some highlights. in the wake of the national housing crisis, the enforcement of the fair housing and their lending protections are among our top priorities. working with the president's financial fraud enforcement task force, which established a dedicated fair lending unit and hired a special counsel for fair lending. we have 39 open matters in that unit. we announced a landmark settlement last month with two subsidiaries of aig to resolve allegations of discrimination against african that american borrowers -- against african american borrowers who were being subjected to excessive fees. we've sent a clear statement that lenders must take steps to ensure that brokers with whom they partner are not engaged in discrimination. 2500 african-american borrowers who were subjected to an necessarily excessive fees will

receive relief in the context of the settlement. in california, we reached the largest settlement ever in a case involving rental discrimination. meanwhile, as president obama said in the state of the union, we are once again working to combat all forms of employment discrimination. of in -- we have reinvigorated our employment litigation section. in a significant case against the new york fire department for hiring discrimination, the trial judge granted summary judgment to the united states, after an explicit decision where he discussed how bthat did not apply to the fact of this particular case pretty down so much evidence of difficulty -- particular case. he found so much difficulty that he ruled that it constituted evidence of intentional discrimination, not disparate impact. with roundup our enforcement of

the uniformed services employment and reemployment -- we have ramped up our enforcement of the uniformed services employment and reemployment act. in addition, just last week, we closed an investigation of the state of oregon regarding a law dating back to 1923 that banned public schoolteachers from wearing religious clothing. we worked heavily on that case because we felt it was discriminatory. the governor signed a bill repealing the law and we were able to settle the case. in the education context, look no further than the front page of today's newspaper to see the work we're doing in that section. regrettably and very troubling, we continue to see a need to combat the resegregation of schools, to ensure that all students have equal access to quality education. one is a city school district case is a case that is an outgrowth -- one of mississippi

-- one mississippi school district case is a case that is an outgrowth of an old case. there are "white schools" and "black schoolsç." the segregation of the schools was happening again. to make matters worse, in the predominantly african-american schools, classrooms were being segregated by race, so that the remaining non-minority students anwere being segregated. it was wrong and illegal. we attempted to settle the case with the school district. we were forced to go to court. the court ordered the relief that is noted in the paper today. i wish i could say that was the only case of this nature. in louisiana, we had a case involving a school district where 87% -- which was 87%

african-american. they have to go high schools -- two high schools. in the school district that has 100% african-american students, there were no ap class is offered and by the gifted and talented horses. in the other school-- and five gifted and talented courses. this was not fair and we reach a settlement. -- we reached a settlement. in criminal enforcement, the prosecution of the crimes remains a top priority. we're working to implement the hate crimes prevention after 2009, turning lawyers, law enforcement officers, state and local, across theç country. we've seen an increase in the number of hate crimes cases we have brought. we announced the indictment of the five individuals, including

three police officers, on charges related to the fatal, racially-motivated beating of a latino immigrant. there was a cover-up of the incident by three members of the police department. it was a very troubling incident. i have great respect for law enforcement officers and the work that they do. when they crossed the line, they must be held accountable for their actions. in addition, we have a number of cases pending against the new orleans police department, in one case involving police- involved fatal shootings following hurricane rita. -- hurricane katrina. at the most recent plea hearing, the district judge said the following, after our attorney read the underlying facts into the record, "i do not think you can listen to that account with that -- without being sickened by the raw brutality of the shooting and the craven lawlessness of the cover-up."

we will continue our work in new orleans. on the voting front, we are actively preparing for the upcoming round of critics as being -- of redistricting. we will be prepared. we're continuing the critical work of protecting the rights of minorities to access the ballot, while stepping up our enforcement of section 2. we are paring guidance on section 7, section 8, so that states and others understand their obligations in that area. there are initiatives underway to ensure compliance with critical provisions, requiring that eligible voters be able to register at state social service agencies. will expand our inquiries -- we will expand our increasquiries.

we want motor voter to be available to state-funded institutions of higher education. we have verbose -- a robust act as we prepare for the 20th anniversary of being a.d.a. we've stepped up efforts to prevent the unnecessary institutional as asian of people with disabilities, including significant -- and since june the -- unnecessary institutionalization of people with disabilities. there was a 14-year-old girl in an institution in georgia. she did not need to be there. she a treatment for her condition pared one side effect was constipation -- she had treatment for her condition. one side effect was come -- one

side effect was as a paconstipa. she literally imploded and died. i cannot sleep that night when i think about things like that happening across this country. we will continue to work on efforts to make sure that institutions are safe and that only people who should be there are there. in short, the civil rights division is open for business. we're using all the tools in our arsenal, including litigation, education and outreach, and technical assistance. for new partnerships with state and local partnerships -- we have new partnerships with state and local law enforcement. we discussed many issues with them. with numerous partnerships with federal partnerships. as senator kennedy said, "civil rights remains the unfinished business of america where i wish

i could be the maytag repairman waiting for the -- as senator kennedy said, "civil rights remains the unfinished business of america." i wish i could be the maytag repair man waiting for the phone call, but we're more like toyota. >> i appreciate you being here. i very much acknowledge the great results on recruitment. that is a clear sign that the right climate has returned to the civil rights division. we have heard and you have told us about the regular meetings between the career attorneys and the political appointments, so that you have a seamless system, taking the best advice from the career attorneys. we very much appreciate that and applaud your efforts in that

regard. i also appreciate that you started with fair lending appeared in these economic times, -- i also appreciate that he started with their lending. -- i also appreciate that you started with fair lending. we did not want to create a climate that is irresponsible -- we do not want to create a climate that is irresponsible. their brands administered -- there were programs administered by the fha which was tried to be justified based on economic realities. it held down a class of pe ople. wealth accumulation was based on the ability to own a home and getting the equity out of that

hole and it was denied to minority populations -- getting the equity out of that home. it was denied the minority populations. the net worth of white families was $40,000. black households, it was $3,000. that has a rippling effect as we look at trying to develop. did you do not have wealth accumulation -- if you do not have wealth accumulation, it holds down the economy. the same thing could be mentioned in other areas. predatory lending occurred during this period. there were black families in maryland that are targeted. they could have gotten traditional loans, but they were steered into more expensive

types of financing. they find themselves -- they found themselves in a situation they could not get out of. i want to applaud you for focusing on the lending issue, setting up a separate unit. the lending discriminations in this country as a profound effect -- has a profound effect. i want to encourage you to continue. i want to give you more time to talk about what you are doing about the predatory lending practices to make sure that all communities in our country have equal access to credit. >> thank you for that question and for your longstanding support of these efforts to curb predatory lending. i had the privilege of serving as governor o'malley's point person for foreclosure

prevention. i met with families who work hours and days within losing their homes. -- who were hours and days within losing their homes. consumer protection and preserving a sound lending climate go hand in hand. we sometimes live in an unnecessarily binary universe. we say you can either do one or the other pretty we can and must do both -- we say you can either do one or the other. we can and must do both. the mortgage brokers gave me an award for the work we did. when you do not have sound consumer protections, that can undermine the system at large. the work we're doing builds on

that. the data is clear. the foreclosure crisis has touched virtually every community in this country, but disproportionately touching communities of color, particularly african-americans and latinos. 34% of the foreclosure activity was in a predominantly african- american suburb in the state of maryland. we've seen in the aig case that the brokers were understood -- that they understood they could take advantage of african- american borrowers. it is a very overt form of bigotry. lending discrimination is discrimination with a smile. they're happy to be in a home. they do not realize that the 8% interest rate is far worse than what they were eligible for.

i truly believe that the work we're doing on the president's financial fraud task force, the partnerships we have -- i will be with the attorney-general from illinois tomorrow. those partnerships are critical. we have seen, regrettably, that this issue has a very, very strong civil rights dimension. it calls for us to use the tools in our arsenal -- but there housing act and the equal credit opportunity act -- the fair housing act and the equal credit opportunity act. >> i want to talk about the implementation of two acts. you noted in your opening comments about pieces that have

been -- cases that have been filed by your division. that bill was passed for two purposes -- to make it clear that the federal government would be available to deal with those activities and also to enhance the partnership between federal and local governments. could you share with us what your division is doing in working with the local prosecutor to enhance their capacity to deal with this? >> that is a great question. i was in birmingham the week before last with a number of key stakeholders. we had a very robust session with local law enforcement. i do not measure success of that act by the number of federal prosecutions that are brought. i measure it by the number of cases we can bring. in every case i do, i ask what is in the best interests of the case. church arsons -- wants to solve

the case, it was in the best interest to give it to the local authorities so they could prosecute it faster. some hate crimes cases are easier to give to local authorities. laramie, wyoming, almost went bankrupt in the prosecution of matthew shepard because it was a small community. the average d.a. office has something like nine employees. we are now a resource for local law enforcement. that is why i travel the country to deliver that message and work with colleagues, including nonprofit partners. what are your first impressions on the job, mr. chairman? one of my first impressions is, the more things change, the more they stay the same period in south carolina, there will be the sentencing in a eight -- the more they stay the same.

in south carolina, there will be the sentencing in the hate crimes case assaulted in of hate crimes case -- there will be a sentencing in a hate crimes case. they attacked him with a chainsaw. hthey pled guilty. i thought the cancer of the soul was behind us, but it continues to rear its ugly head. he crimes are on the rise. this bill is a critical tool -- hate crimes are on the rise. this bill is a critical tool. we look forward to empower and people to do what needs to be done to combat a crimes -- and powering -- empowering people to

do what needs to be done to combat hate crimes. >> a couple of years ago, some of our republican colleagues raise the issue of access to voting by our military -- raised the issue of access to voting by our military. we took steps to make sure they could participate in local elections. there could be a problem with states that have late primaries, as to how they comply with time limits. we need to make sure our military are fully empowered -- that all voters are fully empowered during the 2010 elections. i want to remind the committee about the type of innovative deception that seems to come about every election. how we seem mysterious elections appear in every

community telling them that the election will change from tuesday to wednesday. or people with outstanding parking tickets who are told not to show up for the election. it is aimed at a segment of voters who are likely to be intimidated by that use of material. i think we all condemn and that. -- condemned that. this should be a national priority, to make sure it is clear that we have the capacity of the federal government to support our states. we need to make it abundantly obvious that people who participate in this will be held accountable and that it should have no place in american elections. what are you doing in preparation for the 2010 elections? >> i completely agree with what you said. we're working hard to implement the voting act, and to ensure

that oversees military can vote in the upcoming primaries -- overseas military can vote in the upcoming primaries. i share your concerns about voter intimidation. i have the literature from prince georges county that i suspect you also have. >> i keep it as a constant reminder. >> i have seen those and we will continue to be very vigilant in the prosecution of all forms of voter intimidation. we share that responsibility with the criminal division. we coordinate closely with the criminal division. we have jurisdiction over intimidation that has a civil rights dimension. they have jurisdiction over a broader array of statutes. we continue to ensure that is a

top priority. >> my request is that if you believe you needed stronger tools -- believe you need startles, let us know. president obama -- believe you need stronger tools, let us know. >> i will. >> senator sessions. >> i like your enthusiasm and experience. i like the idea that, i think i hear you say that you work closely with your prosecutors to get involved in the cases yourself. you are responsible to answer and make decisions and set a good policy for the department. i am a strong believer that many people are discriminated against and unfairly handled

with regard to big items like homes, and pay more interest. they may not know how significant that is -- how every month they made py be paying extra money that they do not have. that can be avoided. i have spent a lot of time having meetings to make sure that our african-american community can take advantage of the housing opportunities the better government had provided. i believe strongly in that. i could be criticized for being aware that -- being unaware that they were making loans to people who could not afford them, or that the backgrounds were not

being done sufficiently to make good loans. it does not help people to make loans that they cannot reasonably be expected to pay back. it is a difficult issue. i certainly appreciate your work against the redlining and things that are clearly discriminatory were clearly discriminatory -- and things that were clearly discriminatory. it was reported in the media that a political appointee in your division assemble an entire voting -- assembled an entire voting section. section 8 gives the attorney

general power to ensure that states are complying and moving dead and duplicate voters off of the roles. it is easier to slip in and have someone vote in that name. it creates a risk. section 8 "has nothing to do with increasing turnout of minority voters, so there is no interest in enforcing that law." have you heard that? >> i have not. we're actually in the middle of preparing guidance. i am a firm believer that the way to ensure full enforcement of our law is through some litigation activity as well as technical assistance and other guidance.

we're in the middle of preparing guidance on section 7, section 8, section 5. >> section 8. did an employee makes such a statement? -- make such a statement? will you check? that is against your view, is that correct? >> i am unaware of any such statement. i will make clear to you our view on section eight. our job is to enforce all of the law. >> do you think that it is inappropriate if this individual -- i believe is most of the julie fernandez -- who said that the obama administration had no interest in enforcing section 8? >> i am confident that, given the conversations i have had with her, because she is

preparing and helping prepare the guidance, you will see an aggressive statement of what state can and should not do in the voting perching -- voter purging context. >> have you brought lawsuits to ensure that these roles remove the dead and duplicate voters? >> the guidance we are trying to bring now is to prevent problems from happening. we have heard of situations where there have been improper purging of voter rollls. >> i am seeing that happen from the department of justice have been quite a lot. do you have proof that they have removed people improperly? >> the way i approach this is, whether it is section 4, section 5, section 7, section 8 -- we

need to have transparent guidance for state authorities to make sure that they know what the rules of engagement are. we're treating section 8 enforcement exactly how we treat every other section -- which is to make sure that we a transparent guidance, that we get feedback from the state's -- we have transparent guidance and that we get feedback from the states. >> if you are finished, i would like to follow up and remind you that congress is part of thas pe legislation insisted that the voter rolls be cleaned up. >> we're committed to the enforcement of that. >> the the car and a justice has -- the department of justice has had more emphasis on trying to block the removal of to p

duplicate names, then they have of the enforcement of this section. but you act to have them removed -- will you act to have dead and duplicate voters removed? >> yes, sir. >> you have given speeches about being back open for business, or that the voting booth is being protected again. since the inauguration, the voting rights section, according to the information i have, has brought only four cases and dismissed another -- that is against the black panther party for voter intimidation. it was an infamous case. three of those four cases were

instigated during the bush administration. vote dilution, spanish language enforcement. i do not think it fair to say that they shut down civil rights enforcement and i reject that. i believe that is an overstatement. i believe it is a danger -- it is in danger of politicizing your office, frankly. what about the overseas uniformed voting right act cases? the civil rights division will now be implementing the new provisions of the recently passed act which was intended to

secure voting for over 25% of military overseas voters who were unable to cast a ballot in 2008. that is -- certainly, we should take every effort to make sure that those who are serving us abroad have the opportunity to vote. does your voting section have any attorneys with military experience? are they experience -- is their experience been used in the implementation of this act? i understand the voting section has only four attorneys that are -- that are monitoring this. i understand you will be hiring a lot of attorneys for redistricting. do you have enough attorneys to enforce these laws? >> absolutely. i am confident in our people who are working on that a, and we

just got a very good verdict. we aggressively enforce that and will continue to do so. i appreciate the leadership of senator schumer and others in the passage of that act. it was a bipartisan bill. we will fully and aggressively enforce it. i look forward to doing so. >> the election is coming up in november. we do not want another election with 25 present and our military not able to vote -- 25% of our military not able to vote. on this new black panther party case dismissal, you told the house judiciary committee that the maximum penalty was saw in that case -- sought in that

case. could you compare the remedy saw with the actual remedy obtained -- sought with the actual remedy obtained? the of the injection -- the ultimate injunction was only for a few years. >> you indicated in your opening statement that we had erected a steel barrier paired for the record, -- erected a steel barrier. for theç record, we have provid thousands of documents to them. i have offered to come to testify on that. with all due respect, i would not call that a steel barrier. >> what about the people who make decisions in the case? those who are involved in it and had discussions with other

members of the department and political appointees of of them who did not agree with the dismissal of the case -- political appointees who did not agree with the dismissal of the case. >> the people who made the decision came to the hillç and briefed congressman wolfe at his request. you know that there is a longstanding department position that was applied in the republican and democratic administrations, that front line trial attorneys are not brought before committees, because we want to make sure that they have the ability to make their decisions, and not be looking over their shoulder wondering whether they will be asked to testify. and at i am not come -- >> i am not comfortable with the powers

we give to the quiet side -- quasi-independent agencies. you have issued subpoenas to have employees testified against this case, but you have not responded or have not -- or maybe have opposed it. >> we did respond, senator. those regulations that have been in place since the mid-1950's apply in this situation as well. part of our response has been to offer and submit over 4000 pages of documents. you will be getting those as well. we have directed -- the civil division handles the request of this nature. they inform people that the front line trial attorneys are not going to be produced. >> you are asserting that you do not have to comply with

subpoenas from the u.s. civil rights commission. >> we are applying the two regulations -- the regulation that pertains to a supreme court case that -- when front-line trial attorneys are subpoenaed to talk about case-related decisions, there is a certain process that must be followed. to the extent that there are questions of a body, this committee or a civil rights commission, seeking to be asked about the deliberative process, the privilege has been asserted by administrations of four decades. it is being asserted again here. i've offered to come up, and they have accepted that offer. >> you had certain attorneys

come and provide information to the congress, but not certain attorneys. my understanding is we are involved in the handling of this case -- but not certain attorneys who were involved in the handling of this case. >> the acting attorneys came up. a front-line trial attorneys did not, as is the case in the republican and democratic administrations for decades. .

>> the authority of the civil rights commission, as i understand it, does not exceed the authority of the united states senate. we have spent considerable time attempting to work with the commission. that is why we provided the 4000 pages of documents. that is why i offered to come up. i have great respect for the institution of the civil rights commission, and that is one reason why i am more than willing to come up and explain why we reached the decision that we reached. as you know, senator, that is why we have political leadership in place to come up and explain those things. we are treating the civil rights commission with great respect. we are applying the same principles to them that we would apply to any request that we

would get from another commission. >> i have concerns about how this case was handled and i do not think they are going to be resolved, and that is just the way it is going to be, i suppose. when we dealt with the hate crimes legislation, i think the fbi statistics showed a slight decline in the crime cases. have they gone up in recent months, or what numbers are you facing? >> if you look at the hate crimes against latinos, for instance, they have gone up four years in a row. we have now seen a significant case that we indicted in new jersey. >> where the get the numbers? >> the hit crimes division, and

the southern poverty law center have the numbers they are tracking. >> and they both show that there has been an increase? >> i know in the context of latino -- >> i mean over all. >> let me get the figures. >> you are claiming that the figures are up. one category is not all of the categories, and we need the figures to see what needs attention. >> i will get you all of the sources that collect that data. i will also get you the data on the hate crimes prosecutions we have done, and what you will see is that in the cases that have been brought, there has been indeed a significant rise in the number of cases. when i was a deputy chief in the criminal section in 1996, we handle summer in the vicinity of about 50 cases. a decade later there were about

a dozen cases that we were prosecuting. >> the federal government is doing a more aggressive job of prosecuting these cases. i would hope that the amount of hate crimes is down, not up. my understanding is that the fbi numbers do not show that. i assume they are the most authoritative. i could be wrong. thank you very much. i have a very important armed services committee, and i need to step out. >> when i get you the section 8 information, i will also get you the information's on the current section eight cases we have going on. >> i would just point out that the southern poverty law center has provided him permission to this committee that has shown an

increase in hate crime activities. i would also point out that they do not provide the fbi with information. i have tried to work with members of the committee to increase debt -- to increase the amount of the information made available to the fbi so that we have more reliable and permission on a crime activities, and have met resistance from the republicans on this committee to get that information to the fbi. let me also point out, in the conversations i have had with local law enforcement officials, and with local advocacy groups, there is no question that there is an alarming increase in hate crime activity in this country. that is something i think has been well documented and a knowledge as far as the problems being confronted by law- enforcement around this country. senator franken. >> bros is -- thank you.

i apologize. i was in the health committee meeting, and i just got here. i assume i have 60 minutes. i am joking. i know he had to leave. mr. perez, last month your division settled a case against the school district. you mentioned the case in your opening testimony. it involved a 14 year-old student from upstate new york. the student is gay. because he is gay, his classmates destroyed his clothes, his phone, his music player, one student knocked him down a flight of stairs, another brought a knife to school and threatened to kill him. when the student and his parents complained to school officials, the school principal just told him, "boys will be boys

exhibiting -- boys will be boys ." you helped broker a settlement. unfortunately, this case is hardly unique. a similar case came up in my state. unfortunately, discrimination is a fact of life for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered students across the country, yet there is no explicit protection in federal law that bars discrimination and harassment against lgbt students in public schools. what do you think of this? do we need an explicit ban on discrimination in public schools based on sexual orientation or gender identity? >> thank you for your question, senator. i was in seattle about three weeks ago, at a middle school,

as part of an anti-bullying campaign. i told students that today's belize are tomorrow's -- today's bullies art tomorrow's civil rights defendants. i believe we need to start early on in our prevention efforts. i am very proud of the work we did in the case you mentioned. until we intervened in that case, it was languishing. the federal government can make a difference. i have an 11 year-old and a seven year-old, and i have every right to believe that they will be safe in school. we used title nine as the defense of gender nonconformity. it is not the first time we have used a title 9 theory.

in my first year of duty in the clinton administration, working with the education section, we used it. i will continue to monitor those, and i would be happy to work with you on the underlying issue of ensuring that everybody going to school can have the reality of a learning environment that is nurturing, nondiscriminatory, -- 9 >> do we not have explicit laws against bullying people on race -- >> depending on the facts and circumstances of the case, there may be local, state laws, or potentially federal civil rights laws. again, we have had cases before involving racially motivated violence committed by it school-

aged kids. oftentimes, it has been arson of schools or churches, a pretty significant assault. >> i am talking about bullying. right now, title 9 covers sex discrimination. while some have interpreted that to include discrimination on the basis of sex stereotypes, not one that circuit has found that to include discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. >> that is correct. our theory was a theory of gender non-conformity, which is a form of sex discrimination. it is not a theory of discrimination based on sunday's -- based on the fact that somebody is gay. >> i would like to work with you on this onç explicit protectios for folks who are lesbian, gay,

bisexual and transgendered kids. it is a very real thing that there is this bullying in schools. >> i would be happy to. >> let's turn to a couple of other matters. as you know, the u.s. commission on civil rights was founded by president eisenhower to promote civil rights. that may sound self-evident, but let me list some of the recent actions by the commission and commission members. they include, one, testifying against the reauthorization of the voting rights act, to do, opposing the matthew shepard hate crimes bill, and three,

opposing legislation to protect diversity. that is the civil rights commission there. as the nation poser chief enforcer of civil rights, -- as the nation's chief enforcer of several -- a civil rights, can you tell me what is happening there? i would also like to talk to about the voting rights act. are those pieces of legislation central to your mission? >> absolutely. in the voting context, we are feverishly preparing for redistricting. senator sessions mentioned some voting cases. i look forward to giving him the full and monopoly of a voting cases that we are -- the full panopoly of a voting cases that

we are working on. we are working on a case in south dakota to make sure that people living in indian country have access to the ballot. i would be happy to share the full load of cases that we are working on in the obama administration. i had the privilege during transition of overseeing the obama transition of all of the agencies that have a robust civil rights presence, large agencies, such as the department of justice, smaller agencies such as the civil rights commission. i actually got a history lesson on the civil rights commission and the creation. civil rights has always been bipartisan in our country. if you look at all of the pieces

of civil rights legislation, they have been a function of bipartisan work. i look forward to the 20th anniversary of the ada this summer, a bill signed by george herbert walker bush. i have profound respect for the tradition and the history of the civil rights commission. that is why, when they ask me to come over recently to talk about the work in the new black panther party case, i said of course. i will be over there in a few weeks to discuss our actions there. i hope that we can reach a point where we can return to our bipartisan routes, because really, civil rights is about bipartisan coalition building. that is what i have learned from the movement, and that is what it is, and that is what i hope it will return to. >> thank you.

>> i would remind the senator, he went 16 seconds over his allotted time. >> i guess i am not the ranking member. >> that was not your fault senator, it was mine. >> let me first say, you are being very diplomatic on civil rights. i understand your position on testifying before us. i think senator frank and was correct in the manner he presented that. çthe civil rights commission is an important institution, and it is one that should be on the forefront of advocacy for civil rights for all americans. looking at its recent actions, it calls into question whether it is carrying out its intended responsibility. now, that is our responsibility as congress, to oversight that commission, and it is an issue of great concern to me.

i know it is to this committee as well. in thank senator franken for the manner in which he presented his question. in the black panther party case, it was a career attorney that made that judgment. and it should have been. i applaud you for keeping this out of the political arena. i want to go back to senator sessions points on the enforcement of section 8. i certainly agree with senator sessions. anyone who has died or moved should be taken off the rolls. the roles should be accurate. i certainly agree with that. but i can tell you, after every election, and get more complaints -- i get more complaints about people who

were eligible to vote and who were inappropriately taken off upper -- off a roll, and who had to fill out a provisional ballot, or who were harassed to the point where they just left. after every election there is always these accusations the people fraudulently voted, and then we take a look at it, and we do not find it. there have been a lot of studies done. the number of people who are fraudulently voting are miniscule compared to those who are eligible to vote and either can or their boats do not get counted -- and either cannot or if their votes do notç get counted properly. i would hope that we would be empowering people to vote who are eligible to vote, and spending our resources to do

that, and not spending a lot of effort on a problem that really does not exist, or exists in such a minor way that we should be very surgical about how we go about it. i think there are many who share my view on that, and i did not want senator sessions' comments to go without response. >> when you asked me a fair lending question, i said that consumer protections and a fair lending environment go hand in hand. there is a tendency to create a binary world where you create one or the other, instead of focusingç on both. similarly, we can protect from of a voter fraud without denying access to the ballots. there is a right way and a wrong way to enforce section 8, and we are preparing guidance to ensure that states do it the right way.

similarly, we are preparing guidance to help state and forced -- to help states enforce section seven. there are motor vehicle agencies who are not doing a good job of providing those materials, so we need to be vigilant across the board. >> i certainly support that. one additional question, and then a senator franken would like a second round, and we have time for it. in dealing with people with disabilities, there was an expansion by the supreme court of the interpretation of title 2 of the ada act. it appears that we are making some significant progress on behalf of people with disabilities. georgia's department of human resources did not segregate two women with mental disabilities into the state psychiatric hospital long after officials had recommended they get

community care. could you just speak a bit on your interpretation of the rights of people with disabilities? >> this is a situation that occurs in almost every state in the united states. the old paradigm of looking at people who are in institutions was, is the institution safe? are the conditions constitutional? that is an important question, but it is the second question that should be asked. the first question that should be asked is, are there people in this institution who should not be there, who can and want to live in the community with the appropriate support? in every case that we are now doing, we are asking both questions. i get pushed back from time to is too expensive. with all due respect, it is too expensive to warehouse people in institutions. the average cost is $200,000 per

person, when you could live humanely in a community-based setting. in a new york, we got a very good ruling from the court. in georgia, i personally went down and sat with the governor. i did that, because 10 years after the olmsted case, there was scant evidence of progress. we have been negotiating with the state, and we are also doing similar negotiations elsewhere. i am confident that we can build a new paradigm so that people with disabilities who want to live in community-based settings can do so. just as the segregation of people by race in the schools is unconstitutional and immoral, the segregation of people, the

unnecessary segregation of people with disabilities in institutions, is equally illegal and must be stemmed. >> senator franken. >> thank you. mr. perez, part of your job is enforcing the freedom of access to clinic entrances act, which protect americans' access to reproductive service providers. i know that the attorney general and the u.s. marshals service's help protect reproductive service providers around the country after the murder of a doctor last year. how are you working with the u.s. marshals service to ensure ongoing protection for these providers, and are you and the attorney general still recommending increased protection, or do you believe that the need was temporary?

>> we conduct regular threat assessments. we have an active stock get -- an active docket. the last thing i worked on in the clinton administration was the murder of a doctor in new york. the first thing i got briefed on when i returned 11 years later was a murder in kansas. the more things change, the more they stay the same. this is an ongoing threat that we take seriously. we are constantly assessing, not only working with our partners in the u.s. marshals service, but with other law-enforcement partners. i cannot comment in any detail, but there is an investigation that remains on going. we will continue to fully exercise our civil authority as well. we had a case last year in new mexico involving an arson of a clinic that came to a successful

prosecution. these cases are among our highest priority. >> thank you. i know that the department of justice has helped enforce the help america of the act, and has worked with polling places to ensure accessibility for individuals with disabilities, but although most polling places now have accessible voting machines, the gao recently found that half of "accessible voting machines" may pose problems to many with disabilities, as such as those in wheelchairs. what action has the civil rights division taken to address this problem? >> i am familiar with that report, and we are actively working jurisdiction by jurisdiction. because of the volume of precincts, and i know in my own

state of maryland we had a number of precincts that had accessibility issues, so we are feverishly working to make sure, not simply that the facilities are physically accessible, but then workingq on issues involvig people with vision impairment. we have read more about that and heard more about that recently. that is certainly a broad part of our overall agenda of ensuring that everybody who is eligible to vote can do so. >> thank you. that is so important. if i had known i had two rounds, i would not have come down so hard on the ranking member who had an important armed services committee hearing, and i apologize for that. that was uncalled for. >> if i could, of my staff handed me something that i wanted to make sure it was in at the record related to the fbi

report. according to the information i received, the most recent fbi hate crimes report documents the highest level of hate crimes since 2001. the numbers reported in 2008 were 77,083, the highest level since 2001. i will be certain to share that information with senator sessions, but i just wanted to make sure that the record was complete regarding what the data shows. i can tell you from our own experience, as i said at the outset, the phone is ringing off the hook. the cases are more and more brutal, and we have a lot of father-senate deems, one in indiana, one in south carolina. they are -- a lot of father-son teams, one in indiana, one in

south carolina. they are handing down their hate from generation to generation. we have a threat against the president. we had a person who, when the pending trial, threatened the pre-trial services officer in his case. he has now been detained. there are a lot of dangerous people out there who want to divide this country along racial, ethnic and other lines. >> that is unfortunately consistent with the information that i think each of us has observed in our own communities. it is clearly a circumstance that we need to take aggressive action on, and we thank you for the action you are taking in this regard. i would send an open invitation to all of my colleagues on this committee, if we can get more reliable information to the fbi from local officials on these types of activities, i think it would be useful. i did authored legislation to

try to get the information so that we can act on what is a significant problem, of violence against people who are homeless. i did that not to initiate new policy, but to find out what the facts are so that we can try to develop the right policy to protect people in our community. it was not received and away it needs to be to be in this committee. çif there is support by republicans to have the fbi received more information in this area, i am happy to work with my republican colleagues in this area. we do have a rise in hate crime activities. we have local information from local law enforcement. we have the southern poverty law center which has produced a great deal of the information in this regard. all of it confirms that there has been an alarming increase in hate crime type activities in

this country. we thank you for moving forward aggressively in this area, and i appreciate very much your testimony. >> and thank you for your time and your interest. >> if there is nothing further, the committee will stand adjourned. the record will stay open for seven days. [inaudible]

>> the judiciary committee is wrapping up its session on oversight of the civil rights commission. the leadership will meet tomorrow with president barack obama. the president has scheduled a meeting at the white house to look at potential nominees to the supreme court in the wake of the retirement of justice john paul stevens. that is set for the white house tomorrow. alsoç today in washington, thee is word from steny hoyer that there will not be a vote from the house this week or this session, likely, on giving the delegate from washington, d.c. of boat and the house -- up votes -- a vote in at the

house. steny hoyer was very disappointed. also today, the crew of the space shuttle discovery is back today. here is a look at the landing in cape canaveral. >> touchdown. pilot deploying the drag chute. nose gear touchdown. that brings an end to the mission, the 131st space shuttle flight, and the 33rd to the international space station. discovery left florida on april 5th, with new science equipment and spare parts, including

equipment that should improve the capability of earth observation work, equipment that will help prevent atrophy and will keep the space station running properly. discovery brings home with it the last load of used equipment. >> roger, wheels stop discovery. welcome home. congratulations to you and the crew on an outstanding mission. >> that landing at just after 9:00 eastern, this morning. the u.s. house takes up legislative business in about one hour. the supreme court is also handing down decisions today. they struck down a federal law aimed at banning of videos that show graphic violence against animals, saying that it

violates free speech. the justices voted 8-1 on that. a discussion of the citizens united came up this morning on "washington journal." let's take a listen to that. >host: according to this report, the most money raised for a campaign comes in massachusetts, followed by pennsylvania, then florida, nevada, and connecticut. on the house side, south carolina comes in first, followed by pennsylvania, minnesota, ohio, and florida. that is where the numbers are

right now, but where are we headed in 2010 when it comes to how much a house seat or a tenant -- a senate seat will cost this time around? guest: is getting more expensive to run a race statewide for senate. we have a more expensive media markets. we are also going to see, some experts predict, unprecedented spending by outside groups, particularly corporations or non-profit groups that are incorporated, as well as unions, facilitated by this recent supreme court decision back in january. in that case, the supreme court struck down decades of laws and rules that prohibited corporations and unions from spending money on ads that specifically support or oppose candidates. we are already seeing 527

groups, some of these outside groups, the u.s. chamber of commerce, and gear up for extremely expensive, aggressive campaigns, that are sort of outside of the direct fund- raising that we are seeing here. candidates are going to feel the pressure to keep up their fundraising so that they can compete and answer, in some cases, negative attack ads that they will be seeing from these outside groups. there is a combination of factors, a very competitive cycle traditionally, historically. the first midterm election after a new president comes in is going to be very competitive and expensive. republicans are gearing up for what they think are going to be significant gains in both chambers of commerce, combined with that come -- combined with

that supreme court decision, it will make for a very expensive 2010. >> we have an overview from opensecrets.org about fundraising. here is the amount that democrats have raised, spend and have on hand. here is a look at what the republicans have. democrats and the senate have raised these numbers, the republicans these. what is happening here in the senate with the same amount of a fund-raising, obverses the house? >> house democrats have long had

an edgu  terms of cash on hand. we are seeing republicans cut into that. in the first quarter, republicans raised $10 million more than democrats. that is not a whole lot, but it does demonstrate that there is something close to parity, at least in fundraising. in a lot of these cases, that is a little surprising, given that things seem to be aligning for republicans to be able to take advantage of more opportunities in this election cycle, and yet democrats, for the most part, are keeping up with them. the democratic national committee is almost on a par with the republican national committee, which is a very surprising. the republican national committee traditionally out raises the democrats. this point to some of the problems that chairman michael steele has had under his tenure. he has dissuaded large donors

and to make up an inordinate share of national party fund- raising from giving as much as they might otherwise be doing to the republican national committee. there are outside groups that are picking up the slack, including the republican governors association, which has filed with the federal election commission and the irs. there are also outside groups trying to compete with the rnc for fund-raising supremacy and ford trying to be the campaign arm of republicans, including one run by carl rove and some well-connected republican operatives here in washington. these are all things to watch headed into what is going to be a very expensive election cycle. the first quarter of the year

does tend to be a time to make initial, preliminary judgments, including that democrats have done a very good job of keeping up with republicans. we should point out, in a few key races on the senate side, you mentioned some of the senate races being among the most expensive, and in those races, we see republicans out raising democrats substantially, including in pennsylvania. also in florida, there is a republican superstar who has raised $3.5 million in the first quarter, very impressive. in massachusetts, scott brown did very well for an unknown candidate. he ran against a very well-known candidate, who he of course bea t. these are senate races where we

are seeing some republicans put some distance between themselves and their democratic opponents. >> in the florida race, what of the democrat becomes an independent? guest: we saw the same thing with arlen specter when he switched from the republican party to the democratic party. there were calls that his donors made to him, organized by a very prominent washington, d.c. political group that reached out to his donors and requested a refund -- and advise them to request a refund. if the trust between a donor and recipient campaign is broken -- and arlen specter set himself up for this by saying that if

anyone was offended and wanted their money back he would give it to them. one group took him up on that. that was substantial. the governor of florida is under no obligation to do that, but he may face some of the similar calls that based arlen specter. he is a very aggressive, a successful fund-raiser. his opponent is largely drawing on his tea party superstar appeal. he is raising a lot of money from out of state in order to out raised the democrats. there may be new fund-raising avenues for him, certainly, from the electoral side, he could be seen as siphoning off votes. host: what are you seeing as far

as the tea party? are they raising money? are they giving money? guest: they certainly are giving. some of the tea party groups have someç semblance of an organizational structure, which is somewhat rare in the tea party. this is a grassroots movement, and what -- and one that has not taken kindly to efforts to cut off or capitalized -- to co-op or capitalize on their movement. but they have to raise money board directed money to some of these campaigns. we do see some of these tea party activists saying they are in a large part responsible for scott brown's successful fund- raising. there is no way to prove that definitively. one anti party group out of

sacramento -- one tea party group out of sacramento weighed in on behalf of john mccain. they call themselves t. party express. they run the bus tours that we see. they are raising a lot of money. they raised $1.6 million in the first quarter. that is nothing to sniff at. it is not uncommon for them to have high overhead and direct a lot of money back to themselves. that gets a lot of criticism from opponents. but they also spend on independent campaigns, including scott brown, where they say they spent $400,000.

they saw that as key to stopping the health-care overhaul. they took credit for the retirement of a congressman. again, it is unclear how much they really had to do with it, but they are throwing around money in a way that we do not see from other tea party groups. host: let's take a step back. we saw a new survey that came out yesterday that only one in five americans say they can trust their government. if that is the case, are individuals giving to campaigns in 2010, and who? what type of person is giving money? guest: it is always a very small universe of people who have both the income as well as the interest to put their money into campaigns. where we see a shift in the paradigm of some of the disparity that we just went through where even as some of

the conditions seemed wildly different than any other election cycle, nevertheless, there is parity in these key races. when you add it up across the board, when we see ships in that is when there is -- when we see shifts in the that is when there is real anger toward the government, or when the economy is tanking as it is now. during times of economic struggle you would think that more people would give to campaigns, but it does take years to activate your base. it is typically the base that gives money. you have to light a fire under them, and again, in this case, it would seem to bode well for republicans that even as the economy is showing signs of life, democrats have control

over both houses of congress, it would seem to bode well for republicans. nevertheless, it is the same small universe of people who are giving. that is why the tea party is looked at so lustily by people in washington. they see the potential to have a new group of people to give to their campaigns. you saw with president barack obama's presidential campaign that he motivated a large group of previous non- donors, perhaps folks who were not even particularly active in politics, to give small sums of money that added up to a big amount for his campaign. republicans would be lucky if they are able to channel even that tea party energy, or the anti-incumbent energy. so far, we do not really see it.

host: on individual contributions, there are limits. in oklahoma, tom is joining us on the republican line. go ahead. caller: i am concerned about the money that went from the stimulus bill to the unions. will it be funded back into the democrat's campaign? guest: it certainly could. as i said before, unions as well as corporations will have unprecedented flexibility in how they can spend money. previously, unions were limited in who they could communicate with, and how they could communicate. most of their general fund, as they call it, most of their money, not their political

action committee money, they were limited in using that. they had to communicate exclusively with their own members. now they are allowed to use that money to communicate more widely. that could include airing ads or going door-to-door. previously they had to identify that they were going to a union door. now they could conceivably go to every door in a key district, and that could make a difference in terms of how much influence they have. and they could throw around substantially more money. i have not seen the evidence that that will be the case. there could be an uptick in the dues. host: opensecrets.org has a list

of the top 20 political action committees. the service employees union topped the list, followed by the national rifle association midway down. next caller, go ahead. caller: i looked at the massachusetts race. the chamber of commerce -- host: so sorry about that, caller. i pushed the wrong button. please call back. we will take the next call. caller: i have a comment. i hate distortions. i hate lies. i hate fraud. we have seen a lot of it. the republican party is on a fox news and everybody keeps hearing it. is it against the law for fox news to raise money for the

republican party? guest: it is actually not. this is an interesting line of inquiry that we haven't seen in recent days from some on the left, including me and other media watchdogs. we have raised concerns using legitimate numbers about fundraising, political action committees maintained by fox, whose contributors, folks like newt gingrich or it sarah palin, who have contracts with fox news but are nonetheless active in politics, raising money to give to republican candidates, raising money to give to republicans -- the more cynical among us might say

raising money for their own campaigns. these folks are commentators. another thing to consider is the a lot of people during the campaign season like to assert that one side is getting more air time than another. the rules that would prohibit that a ostensibly, the so-called equal time doctrine, only apply to broadcast television, not to cable television. the idea is that the public owns the broadcast airwaves that the networks barrault, or use, and therefore they are prepared -- the networks borrow, or use, and therefore they are prohibited from using an equal time. we saw this with fred thompson

who was also an actor. they said nbc should be prohibited from playing any of the episodes he was in. they should not bear reruns' featuring fred thompson, because that would violate the equal time doctrine. it turned out that even though there were some questions about whether it actually applied, they decided voluntarily to not carry these reruns. other cable networks that have contracts or syndication agreements for the show or not -- were not obligated to oblige, and they aired the reruns because they said the equal time doctrine did not apply. i am not sure if that answers to the caller's question, but there is some interesting back story there. host: our next caller is karen.

go ahead. caller: 1 think i have a problem with is that i see the tea party targeting the democrats. i think it would be fair, it's a republican comes up for reelection, like senator campaign -- like senator mccain , he voted for the bailout, i think we should target everybody. we should target democrats and republicans. anybody who has been in office for the last eight years is too should be getting out of there. i say get rid of all of them. çhost: there are two things i want to share based on that caller's comments.

one article says that a shift to unaffiliated may shape the midterms. another says that the gop bid to reclaim the senate is feeling a fight for the party's sol. polls favor republicans in many key states, but senate heard jim demint is endorsing challengers in many primaries, pushing into- establishment candidate in florida, california and colorado. do you have any idea of the fund-raising efforts going on in the battles between these candidates?

guest: there is no way that they could compete with the national republican senatorial committee overall in terms of fund- raising. however, because jim demint is strategically targeting the political action committee giving to it specific primaries in which there are more moderate candidates, sometimes there is a further challenge to the more moderate candidate. we have seen his efforts and the efforts of folks like him who are ideologically in sync with him have an impact. the republican senatorial committee early gone through

their support behind the idea that they were supporting the moderates governor upper -- a moderate governor of florida. senator demint supports the more extreme canada. -- more extreme candidate. he is using rhetoric that urges his own supporters to support the candidate he supports, and that urges the governor to get out of the race altogether. we are hearing this voiced from tea party activists and others around the country. it is an anti-incumbency sentiment. it is not limited to democrats.

it is targeting republicans. john mccain is no favorite of the tea party movement. in fact, he is despised by the tea party movement. there are several republican candidates who are challenging him for the republican nomination for his reelection, who are seeking to tie -- to tap into this anti-incumbent energy. however, john mccain has a substantial fund-raising event. host: our next call is from washington state. susan, go ahead. caller: it is sad where i live. there are between three and 5 ft. of rainfall. right now, and i am going through we modification -- re-

modification, trying to modify my home loan. big pharma, anheuser-busch i guess also helped to pave the way, but then we have a guy you wrote intellectual properties for the fda, yet suddenly he is right thing legislation having to do with disabled people, minorities trying to maintain their homes. host: susan, what is your point? caller: people are trying to figure out a time line. when did it all break loose? it was in 1995, and big farming is to blame -- big pharma is to blame.

host: let's talk about corporations and what the supreme court ruling is going to maine. -- going to mean. guest: democrats and at least one republican are scrambling to create legislation that would dial back some of the effects of this supreme court decision. it is unclear whether they will be able to pass anything in time to really impact the spending before the 2010 election. perhaps they could get something in place passed and implemented before the 2012 election. however, as it stands right now, there are a number of trade associations, not summit corporations, that are devising plans to take advantage -- not so much corporations, that are devising plans to take advantage of this new law.

we will see that some of the increased spending will be from trade associations like the chamber of commerce and union advocacy groups, or groups with unique names like the association for better choice or an american enterprise fund for new energy -- i just made those two up. nonetheless, there will be specific policy interests funded by corporations, interest groups, or wealthy donors to are really trying to weigh end -- weigh in, with the ability to be more aggressive and support candidates. i think that it's sort of remains unclear. we are going to have to pay attention. there is also a question about

how much of this new spending will even be reported. how much will be required to be reported to the federal election commission? . . themselves. obama sees the spending as having a deleterious effect on the economy, drowning out the voices of voters and influencing elections in a way that could be

misleading. and it is probably expected at this point to favor republicans, because corporations tend to have more to invest in the political process and have favored republicans. in this cycle, where you have congress pushing far-reaching initiatives, including a clampdown on wall street and the financial services industry, they have a target on their back, so corporations have more ammunition for their target. host: one republican from delaware has become the only republican to sign a bill by

obama and democrats protesting the supreme court decision. scores of seats within their grasp, repubilca -- republicans are turning up the heat on corporations and private entities to win the elections. caller: a comment and a question. i wonder if you had read an article in the "american thinker" that looked at the campaign of a man who ran for governor of california against schwarzenegger, and i learned there was an independent group called "californian's for a better government," that sieu

were allowed to raise 23 million dollars for that candidate as long as their was no coordination between the union and campaign. there were meetings where officials were seen coordinating with the campaign, and nothing was done. so there is a loophole. host: ken vogel? guest: i.e. is independ exp -- independent expenditure, where you have political action committees of unions and interest groups being able to air ads of unlimited amount that mention candidates, and in some cases, in some states, these

expenditures are even allowed to explicitly support or oppose candidates. at the state level, the campaigns themselves, the diea -- idea being if they are coordinated, it becomes a de facto contribution, and of course corporations and unions are federally prohibited from direct contribution. so if they could air a 23 million dollar expenditure, it would be coordination.

so something that echoes the message without crossing the line into coordinating with the candidate. that's one area we see an appetite for increased regulation where advocates say, hey, one way to prohibit this new spending from having a significant impact is to toughen coordination rules so not only do candidates not talk with each other, they can't even use the same words or messages. so that would be problematic in that it would allow groups to say, "hey, this violates our freedom of speech.

all wew an -- we want is to weigh in here." host: eric cantor is now endorsing rubio over crist. what is going on? guest: we are seeing a rising tide of support for rubio, and it will become increasingly untenable for crist. he may drop out and run nidependent, or drop out entirely. many groups had already thrown in with rubio over crist, but this is yet another indication that it is not just the tea party movement, and the real

conservatives throwing in with rubio, it is everyone. you have the washington d.c. republican establishment deciding that rubio is their chance for success. and mitt romney met criticism. he recently also endorsed rubio over crist, and people said, "hey, you are late to the game here. the lines have been drawn." but the battle lines are drawn with even the establishment on rubio's side and fewer and fewer supporting crist. host: "crist considers bolting from the party and running as an independent. he trails rubio by double-

digits, but polls suggest crist could win as an independent in a 3-way race." florida, go ahead. caller: greta, i watch you all the time. i have two statements. host: make it quick, mary. caller: yes, i will. regarding meeks, everyone keeps forgetting about meeks. one lady said yesterday that democrats need to vote for meeks. i'm going to be there. i'm going to vote for meeks. but see how republicans push everyone out, getting this rubio guy in there, the tea party. you're fooling yourself if you

think rubio will win, but that's another story. guest: as far as meek goes, he's a fromi -- formidable candidate, a state trooper, an african american who can rally votes back there. and you have a race between meeks, rubio, and crist, it would seem to look good for meeks, because you would have crist and rubio duking it out for conservative votes. host: winston-salem, north carolina.

larry, independent line. good morning. caller: one quick comment. a lot of people in this nation have forgotten we're a republic, not a two-party system or otherwise. this is the first time i've done this in my life, i hate what is happening to our nation. it's being torn asunder. i am sick of it. these people who go to "tea parties," they love the country, they are getting fed up with not who is in the white house, but fed up with the foulness and stench coming from all the money wasted on stupid things. to begin with, when i turned on my tv, you were talking about

campaign finance money. host: ken vogel? guest: foreign money is prohibited. there were news stories about foreign contributions to obaa. the obama campaign went through it's rather extensive filings and flagged and returned every one of them. as recently of -- as last year, we were still seeing the obama campaign return donations. it's not unusual to refuse or return donations, including foreign nationals, a donor gave more than allowed, or it was from a corporate structure,

also prohibited. an infusion of foreign nmoney could come from the campaign, the allowing for television ads supporting candidates. chuck schumer and chris van hollen are seeking to address in legislation closing some of these loopholes from the supreme court decision. host: 2012, your story, gingrich raises 2.7 million for a possible run in 2012. and democrats raise cash for 2012.

guest: potentially, if some lawmakers want to run for president, they could transfer money to a nascent presidential campaign. on the flip-side, you have republicans gearing up for a run, raising money into political action committees. many times you see leadership pac's like romney's paying

staffers who end up being staffers for presidential runs, and a lot of pac's, the main purpose of them, they do give money to other candidates, so that puts out chips they can collect if they decide to run in the future. gingrich's committee is different, a 527, not registered with the lection commcis -- election commission, so he can raise money, except for contributions. whereas mitt romney can give contributions to anything. in fact, he did get $52,000 to the current governor of

minnesota, tim pawlenty. sarah palin, same thing, $400,000. mike huckabee, former governor of arkansaw, $273,000. how you have to raise your eyebrows at that and say that is something to watch going into the campaign. -- mick huckabee, former governor of arkansas, $273,000. these are things you have to watch going into 2012. there is concern about inc endiary rhetoric on both sides,

and we've seen a concerted effort with leaders in the tea party movement in particular to clamp down, to self-police. i definitely see signs at these rallies that area -- are a little edgy. i saw one in searchlight, nevada, that said "exterminate the democrats in 2010." nonetheless, i do see far fewer of them, including this week in washington, d.c., i saw a rally, and a lot of the signs were more passe, but there was a sign of this inflammatory rhetoric, that it could hurt the movement.

on the other side of the caller's point, term limits are kind of a nonstarter. campaign finance reform, the schumer van-hollen bill, that is one the white house has been supporting, calling out c ongress. so we do see political will for finance reform, which otherwise is a wonky issue. .

guest: thank you, peter. looking at some of the infrastructures developed by some of the perspective candidates that i just picked off there, mitt romney, among one of them, has by far the most comprehensive and well-oiled political apparatus. however, to be pointed out, that he had something very similar to that in the 2008 campaign where he ran for and did not receive the republican presidential nomination. so having money, having organization is one thing. having the sort of energy and the will of the electorate and the base is another. sarah palin would seem to have sort of more claim to having energy behind her and perhaps some portion of the base. but it's questionable as to sort of how broad her support is even in the base let alone beyond the base headed toward the general election and she --

it also should be pointed out -- has a relatively sort of schedule ton political operation. she's been focusing much more on her sort of burgeoning media career, selling her book. k, and she has a contract with fox news. she signed on to do with travel type show for another cable network. it is really early to handicap these things, as much as i love to do that. i would take a flier and pick a republican presidential nominee for 2012. host: for more information, go to politico.com. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> this year's c-span student cam competition asked middle and high school students to create a five to eight-minute video dealing with one of our country's greatest strength or a challenge the country is facing. here is one of our second-place finishers. >> this is marsha, your average senior citizen. she, among millions of other senior citizens, are worried about the current health care debate. we need to understand how health care affects her to have a better tomorrow. >> if we do nothing to slow these skyrocketing costs, we will eventually be spending more on medicare and complade -- medicaid than every other government program combined. >> president obama spoke of the increasing costs associated with medicaid. this is a serious issues and raises numerous questions.

>> what cuts for seniors are going to be in this bill? no one knows. >> c.m.s. innovation center, hospices, accountable care organizations, $800 million power wheelchair component of that and comparative effectiveness, $300 million. the list goes on. >> seniors have also raised many questions and concerns regarding the medicare doughnut hole. >> as drug prices increase, medicare says we will pay your prescription benefits up to -- up to the point where you have spent $2,500. after that amount everything you spend is quote-unquote in a doughnut hole it is the patient's expenditure for those medications. >> security for our seniors by strengthening medicare secures the financial stability and solvency of medicare for years to come, provide seniors with better benefits and guaranteed

access to their doctors. and in this legislation we will immediately begin to close the doughnut hole. >> i can't count the amount of patient i see on a daily basis that tell me that they cannot pay for their medications. and these are medications that they need. >> so we must take 13 different medications each day, sometimes two or three times a day. we live on social security and we have less than $100 each week for food, gas and everything else. i am proud that my state's representative is helping to make prescription drugs more affordable and by closing the medicare doughnut hole. >> as you can see, this topic has most impact on the senior citizens of our nation. margaret, my grandmother, who i introduced earlier, gave us her spective on what health care means to her. >> we will be losing a lot of money so they are going to take

some money out of our pension for medicare and that's going to be the biggest thing. as far as the pros, i am not really sure what the pros would be for us. i prefer they stay exactly the way they are. >> senior citizens can pay up to six times what an average person pays for. >> we can get a little more money which they are not going to do right now. we are going to be losing a tremendous amount. you children are going to have to pay for it. and that part we don't like and that would be the cons. >> the physicians also had information regarding how medicare proposals had affected their patients. >> if you could say anything to the people in washington about the recent health care debate regarding medicare and health care for senior citizens, what would you say? >> i think they're trying to attack too much of it at one time. i say let's do one piece at a time and move on and try to help with this process.

>> be careful what you do because whatever you do will impact health care. a lot of doctors are not even accepting medicare patients because the cost benefit ratio are so difficult. they are the sickest people. they have the most problems. they have trouble seeing doctors. >> elderly patients are scared to death. they perceive there is going to be a form of rationed care. >> one of the most active positions in the debate, howard dean gave his thoughts on the proposals at the howard banker center in september. >> the cuts do not come out of care. it comes out of the subsidies for insurance companies and drug companies so they're going to be the ones paying for this. the other place that cuts come from is what congress calls waste, fraud and abuse. it is not being taken away from seniors. it is being taken away from people who provide equipment, drugs and insurance. we just want to open up medicare and allow younger people to sign up for it -- it works pretty well. how do you pay for it?

you have to do the things that are tough to do. you got to make sure, first of all, you cut half a trillion dollars out. out of wasted money in medicare and go to suppliers and drug companies and pharmaceutical companies. and then you have to start either raising premiums or cutting benefits. >> another one of these physicians, bill frist, gave his approximation at the knoxville chamber of commerce. >> you know, medicare reserves almost 50 million seniors today. so it's very important in terms of health care security. unless you reform a system, that means you pay nurses less and you pay doctors a lot less for delivering the care that they're expected to give and you pay hospitals a lot less. so i'm very concerned about the proposal. i think first the american people have a moral obligation to fulfill our commitment to our seniors today. i think our seniors today will be ok. the cuts, if they occur under this administration, will not

be so severe that you'll be denied health care. the cost of health care is going up three times faster than what people's wages do. it is going to cost more money to bring the uninsured in the market. as long as we can cut costs over time. that means taxes will go up, that means health care premiums, because somebody has to pay for it, are actually going to go up. the house bill does two things. there are 46 million people uninsured. it gets about half of those uninsured into the market itself. what it does not do is slow down the cost of health care. it increases health care costs to your parents and to your family and to the taxpayer out there today. i'm very hopeful that the body i ran, the united states senate, will be able to do something very different and that is slow down those health care -- slow down that growth in health care costs. in it they can do that we can pass a very effective bill. >> on christmas eve, 2009, the

senate passed an $871 billion health care bill. a conference committee is beginning to meet this month which both chambers will vote on. >> listen to the elled leer. listen to the -- elderly. listen to the doctors. i think the main people they -- they are the ones going to suffer the most. >> health care is a big challenge in this country. and there's a lot of different opinions out there about how you take care of it. i think we should all respect each sides of the aisle. no one person has the answers. and a lot of times in politics when you're trying to -- people are trying to attack each other rather than attack the problem. i would encourage people to keep an open mind. it doesn't mean you can't disagree. i'd encourage people to keep an open mind and just -- and work your hardest to tackle this problem. we can tackle it together if we can work together.

>> i'm very hopeful that as an american people we can come together in a bipartisan way. both parties come together and address both of those two issues. it can be done. i hope it will be done. >> to see all of the winning entries in this year's student cam competition, visit studentcam.org. >> later today, legislation including a resolution honoring civil rights leader benjamin hooks who died last week. and savings plans. all of those coming up in the u.s. house. later this week, the house was to have taken up a vote on the district d.c. delegate but majority leader steny hoyer says the house will not take up that vote giving the district a full voting seat in congress. that earlier today from house majority leader steny hoyer from his news briefing. the senate is in session today working on a judicial nomination. possibly later in the senate,

financial regulations. follow the senate live on c-span2. and now to the house floor here on c-span. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] sly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. april 20, 2010. i hereby appoint the honorable rick larsen to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore:

pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2009, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties, with eacher party limited to 30 minutes and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and minority whip limited to five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. stearns, for five minutes. mr. stearns: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. stearns: mr. speaker, last friday the s.e.c., security and exchange commission, filed fraud charges against investment bank goldman sachs for misleading and defrauding investors through their selling of a complex financial product based on toxic subprime mortgages. these charges are serious. but the s.e.c. should have been investigating the abusive practices that contributed to our financial crisis much sooner. american taxpayers could see

that goldman sachs was a lot of smoke and mirrors. american taxpayers could see past lloyd blankfine's defense of his company when he said such things as we are very, very important. he went on to say, i'm doing god's work. americans could see that there were problems on wall street well before the s.e.c. was willing to publicly acknowledge it. now, according to the s.e.c., goldman sachs was approached by one of the world's largest hedge funds, paulsen and company, which asked the firm to create and market collateralize debt obligations whose values were linked to the value of toxic home loans. with billions being offered, goldman sachs created abacus which the hedge fund then placed bets against knowing this new financial instrument was certain to lose value. then goldman sachs failed, failed to tell abacus investors that the very hedge fund that they helped to create and assemble, the toxic c.d.o.'s,

they were betting against it. the product was new and complex but the concept is sold and simple. goldman wrongly permitted a client that was betting against the mortgage market to heavily influence which mortgage securities to include in an investment portfolio while telling other investors that the securities were selected by an independent, objective third party. the goldman sachs paulsen company deal closed on april 26, 2007. with the hedge fund paying goldman sachs $15 million for restructuring and marketing abacus to unknowing investors. unfortunately, however, by october 24 of that same year, 83% of the residential mortgage-backed securities in abacus portfolio had been downgraded and 17% were on negative -- on the negative watch. less than a year later on january 28, 2008, 99% of

abacus' portfolio had been down graded. those who invested in this hedge fund lost more than a billion dollars. goldman sachs official statement, that, quote, the s.e.c. charges are completely unfounded in law and in fact. we will vigorously contest them and defend the firm and its reputation. now, that statement contrasts greatly with the words of goldman c.e.o. when he publicly apologized in november of last year for the bank's role in some of the activities that lead up to the financial crisis. this is what he said, quote, we participated in things that were clearly wrong and have reason to regret we are sorry. we apologize. unfortunately, however, it appears the senior leadership at goldman sachs knew months before they even marketed abacus to investors that the housing market was about to crash. goldman's vice president, who

is said to be the man who structured the toxic financial instrument, preparing the marketing materials, and communicated directly with investors, he sent an email stating the whole thing is about to collapse any time now. now he's taking a leave of absence from the position at the firm. the allegations against goldman sachs are very serious and goldman sachs has the right to challenge the charges. but the s.e.c. also has a duty to american taxpayers to get to the bottom of this and continue to investigate any abusive practice employed by all financial institutions, not just goldman sachs. mr. speaker, the american people recall that goldman sachs was a bailout recipient and one of the few big wall street banks that managed to not only benefit from taxpayer bailout but also to emerge stronger than before. goldman sachs received $10 billion in tarp funds, was allowed to convert to a bank holding company in order to gain additional support from the federal reserve, and was one of the largest recipients

from the $180 billion a.i.g. bailout when it received 100% on the payments and public funds from the insurance giant. the american public is now an unwilling majority owner in a.i.g. and with goldman having received a backdoor bailout with public funds through a.i.g., it would only be fair to make all of a.i.g.'s counterparty, including goldman sachs, buy back the c.d.o.'s at full price. goldman sachs could use the prop from the bailout to pay down the billions in public debt still held by a.i.g. if goldman sachs truly has regret for participating in these activities leading up and they are clearly wrong, then their c.e.o. has said he apologized, goldman sachs should step up to the plate and make represent paragraphations that were owed to the american taxpayers. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise? without objection.

ms. delauro: among the many great benefits. commonsense health reform package we passed last month is a guarantee that finally in america being a woman is no longer a pre-existing condition. by bringing an end to discriminatory policies like gender rating and insurance coverage from ma tern knit, preventive, and wellness care, our legislation puts women's health on an equal footing. it is time now to do the same for women's earnings. i cannot think of a better way to follow our historic success on health care last month than finally signing the paycheck fairness act into law. in america today women now make up half of the work force. 2/3 of women are either the sole breadwinner or co-breadwinner in their family. women are also more likely than men to grad wit from college. they run more than 10 million businesses with combined annual sales of $1.1 trillion, and are

responsible for making 80% of the consumer buying decisions. and yet right now in the 21st century women make only 78 cents on the dollar as compared to men. women of color are even worse of. african-american women make 68 cents on the dollar compared to the highest earners. while hispanic women make only 57 cents. unmarried women, those who are single, widowed, divorced, or separated have an average annual household salary that is almost $12,000 lower than unmarried men. and they make a paltry 56 cents on the dollar when compared to married men. over a lifetime, these dess parties take a huge toll on women. according to the national committee for pay equity, women are losing out on between $4,000 and $2 million on average over the course of a lifetime. as a result, 70% of seniors living in poverty are women.

and it's particularly galling when you consider the current crisis in our labor market. it is sure that more men have lost jobs than women in the recent recession mainly because of the industry's affected. but that only means that more and more women are forced to take on the full burden of keeping their families afloat. making the problem about smaller paychecks even more acute. the recession aside this is not a new problem. in 1956 president dwight eisenhower told the congress, that, i quote, legislation to apply the principle of equal pay for equal work without discrimination because of sex is a matter of simple justice. seven years later under president kennedy, the congress passed the equal pay act to end the, quote, serious and endemic problem of unequal wages. and 47 years later, all we know now is that the act is not working as intended in its current form. that is why we mark today, pay equity day, the day that a

woman's 2009 earnings catches up with what men made last year. this is an occasion quite frankly i wish we no longer had to commemorate. the good news is that conditions are finally ripe to achieve real pay equity in america. we in the house of representatives have now passed the paycheck fairness bill twice. legislation that will give real peace to the equal pay act at last. simply said, men and women in the same job, in the same job should get the same amount of wages. you think that that is a no-brainer, but the fact of the matter is whether you are a waitress, bus driver, engineer, university professor, news anchor, women are being paid less for the same job as their male counterparts. those of us who serve in the house of representatives, men and women, different parts of the country, different education, different skills, we all get paid the same amount of money. that is not true for most women in this nation.

now we pass it in the house we wait only for the united states senate to act. so we are on the cup of achieving real economic security for american women. i urge my colleagues to impress upon the senate the necessaryity of this legislation. we have a -- necessaryity of this legislation. we have a moral object gation to face this continuing inequity head-on. our passage of health reformulas month has shown the american government can still accomplish great things. we can still make this country a fairer and more humane place for people to live. let's finally ensure america's you women are treated as fairly and as equitably as the other half. let's give real teeth to the equal pay act at last and make sure that women are respected and valued for the job that they do and paid the same amount of money in the same job that any man may have. what we need to do is to make one of these the last equal

payday in our history. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. sherman, for five minutes. mr. sherman: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. sherman: i rise to comment on the regulatory reform bill pending before the senate, senator dodd has brought a bill that will provide for consumer protection, higher capital requirements, and the regulation of derivatives. we need all that. but we have to ask the question, does the senate draft increase or decrease the statutory authority of the executive branch to bail out wall street giants and their creditors and counterparties? unfortunately the current draft of the senate bill increases bailout authority. it provides first in section 210 for the use of taxpayer

money when an insolvant institution is to be liquidated in order to protect the counterparties and the creditors of that institution. now, senator mcconnell has gone even further in the pro-bailout direction. he has criticized the fact that the senate bill has a $50 billion advance fund collected from wall street which would be used before any amounts would be borrowed from the taxpayer. so mr. mcconnell says do away with the fund be -- but he barely comments on the taxpayer borrowing. the results will be that the federal government when it liquidates one of these wall street giants will be borrowing the first dollar from the taxpayer. we need -- we certainly don't need a circumstance where we are lending money in order to bail out the creditors and counterparties of giants and

improvident financial institutions and we haven't even collected any of that money in advance. the house bill provides strict dollar limits on the amount that could be borrowed from the treasury and sunsets all of this authority in 2013. section 1155 of the senate bill allows the executive branch to put unlimited taxpayer dollars at risk in order to guarantee the obligations on solvent banks. the senate bill does say you can have this resolution of disapproval come before the congress, but a resolution of disapproval is a phony device designed to give the illusion of congressional control. what it says is that in order to stop a $100 billion transfer or so to wall street of our taxpayer money, you would need a vote in the house of the senate then vetoed by the executive branch, then if you had an overwhelming vote in the house as long as 34 senators were in favor of the bailout,

the bailout would go further forward. a resolution of disapproval is the illusion of congressional control. instead, we should follow the house approach to put a dollar limit on this emergency financial stabilization and we should sunset all authority under it in the year 2013. just as important is the existing section 1303 of the federal reserve act. since 1935 the federal reserve has had the power, and this is enormous, to lend any amount of money to just about anybody so long as they think they have adequate security. now, this fed has already used this statutory authority to lend over $2 trillion. if we are against bailouts, we've got to ask what limits does the senate bill place on section 1303 authority? it provides only some minimal limits, pittsburgh that that authority be used not to bailout one company on wall

street but systemwide. instead the senate can learn from the house bill to put dollar restrictions on this authority and to provide that the security must be so good that we have a 99% likelihood of repayment. even better yet. we ought to simply refeel section 13-3. finally, too big to fail is too big to exist. in the house bill we authorize the regulators to break up institutions that are too big to fail. the senate instead of -- i believe has basically ignored this house provision. they should not only embrace it, they should go much further. they should require the breakup of any institution whose liabilities to american persons exceeds 1% of the u.s. g.d.p. there is no reason that a bank has to be over $140 billion in size, and if they are, they ought to be at least as smart

as an ameeba. when it gets too big it divides itself into two separate cells. banks can do the same. in conclusion, the people of this country want to give the executive branch the power to nail wall street firms. to require regulations of derivatives, higher capital requirements, and to liquidate them when they get themselves into trouble and pose a risk to the entire economy. but the american people don't want to bail. so let's provide nail authority without bail authority. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, for five minutes. mr. connolly: thanks to this congress, hundreds of millions of americans have received hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts. in fact, more than $800 billion. in that sounds like an astounding number, it is. it astounded ronald agean's

domestic advisor who said taxes are considerably lower by every measure since obama became president. the proof of these tax cuts is clearly evident in the latest tax data. the average refund in america went to a record $3,000. thanks to the tax cuts passed by this congress, rereturned more money to taxpayers than ever before. the recovery act we passed last year was enacted to stabilize the economy. it created 25 separate tax cuts now benefiting 95% of all americans. while they haven't received the same level of attention as the jobs and infrastructure we worked on in that bill, the tax cuts actually make up the largest component of that act. more than 240,000 families in my district, the 11th district of virginia, benefited from making work pay tax cuts that provided $4 lund to individuals and $800 to every family.

the act also included a tax credit of $250 for social security recipients providing some relief to 79,000 seniors in my district. and to 1.3 million virginia seniors throughout the commonwealth. we provided 26 million millions from being subjected to the a.m.t. tax. we expanded the child tax credits of families over 16 million children. in total the recovery act was a $288 billion tax cut bill. in addition to expanding health care coverage and lowering insurance premiums, the recently passed health insurance reform will provide billions of dollars in tax relief. it provides $40 billion in tax cuts for small businesses to help them afford health insurance. currently only 43% of those companies are able to afford that coverage. 8% of companies that do provide insurance say without reform they'd have to cut health insurance this year. the new law provides billions of dollars in tax credits to those small businesses the

engine of economic growth and job creation in america so that they can provide necessary health care coverage to their employees. small businesses in the nation's -- are the nation's job creator and represent the backbone of our economy. congress has provided billions of tax relief to these small businesses. we expanded business deductions, increased the carryback ratio and provided money to research and development. the hire act provided tax incentives to hire new employees throughout the country. a full economic recovery will depend on the expansion of the private sector and the hire act is a way to incentivizing those businesses to make those hires. we also extended tax cuts to homebuyers to encourage demand and stabilize the housing market, thereby safeguarding the equity of existing homeowners. and lower the engine bills.

car buyers also received tax cuts through a sales tax deduction in last year's recovery act. that's just a sample, mr. speaker, of how the more than $800 billion in tax cuts are benefiting the american people. but we're not done. we got at least another $285 billion in proposed tax cuts. for example, the house passed a revised estate tax that will dramatically lower taxes starting next year and we now await senate action. in addition the house and senate are finalizing the american worky and state relief act that will preserve the standard deduction for state and local property tax and expand additional business tax cuts. and i have introduced bipartisan legislation, i might add, to completely eliminate the antiquated telethon exeyes tax to fund the spanish american war. this bill provides millions of

dollars in tax relief, especially to our seniors. mr. speaker, perhaps you're wondering why we don't hear the other side of the aisle touting these tax cuts. maybe it's not because a single one of them voted for the 25 tax cuts provided in the recovery act. not one voted for the small business tax cuts of the hire act. not one voted for the estate tax relief act. these are real tax cuts that have put real money back in the hands of america and into the hands of working americans and seniors, back in the hands of america's small business owners. that's the leadership of this congress and this leadership will continue providing strength -- to strengthen our families, our small businesses and our economy through additional tax relief. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. larsen: the failure of washington mutual pictured a bank selling mortgages to risky homeowners in order to get profits. it allowed washington mutual to gamble with our future. now, when i grew up in arlington, washington, washington mutual was known as the friend of the family. but their reckless behavior at the expense of consumers helped bring about the greatest crisis of our time. as the largest bank failure in u.s. history, resulting of thousands of job losses in northwestern state, friend of the family no more. federal regulators were asleep at the switch while washington mutual made tens of thousands of risky loans. consumers were put ahead of working families.

last week we heard that the securities and exchange commission filed a lawsuit against goldman sachs allegeding misdealings in the collateralized debt collaboration market. and today the households hearnings on the fall of lehman brothers and the huge impact of middle-class families. these revelations and the washington mutual hearings and the inspectors' general report provides a sobering reminder of the urgent need of financial regulatory reform. we must prevent a crisis like this from happening again of provide strong oversight and protecting american consumers and american taxpayers from unfair and abusive financial products like those in washington mutual's risky mortgages. so i urge the senate to act quickly and pass financial regulatory reform so that the house and the senate can get together to come up with an even stronger bill. and to financial firms like washington mutual that in the future if they want to drive

off the cliff they may be free to do so but no longer will american families be trapped in the car as an innocent passenger. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house 1, the chair declares the house in recess until 2:00 p.m. or last week. the c-span video library features 115,000 unique individuals and every day adds new faces to the politicians,

reporters and experts you can follow. search it, watch it, clip it and share it. every program since 16987 now available free online at the c-span video library. >> all this month, see the winners of c-span's student cam video documentary. they submitted videos on one of the country's greatest strength or a challenge the country is facing. watch it every morning at 6:50 eastern just before "washington journal." and at 8:30 during the program, meet the students who made them. and for a preview, visit studentcam.org. >> president obama's heading to the white house after speaking yesterday at a los angeles fundraiser for senator barbara boxer and the d.n.c. last night. the chairman of the two senate committees is running for a fourth term in november. the republican in that race -- republicans in that race are former hew lit packard c.e.o.,

tom a comfortable and chuck defour. this is about half an hour. -- tom campbell and chuck defour. this is about half an hour. [applause] >> hello, california! oh, i am fired up. good to see you. it's good to see you. it's good to see you.

all right. all right. all right. ok. thank you. thank you, california. i -- i want to begin by just thanking -- everybody is a special guest. let me -- first of all, somebody who was one of the finest governors in the country is now one of the best d.n.c. chairman of the country. give it up for tim. attorney general and may soon be another great governor, jerry brown. [applause] he's around here somewhere.

thanks, superintendent of public instruction, jack o'connell, is in the house. congresswoman -- outstanding congresswoman jane harman. congressman joe baca. congresswoman diane watson. congresswoman laura richardson. congresswoman judy chu. former governor, greg davis. speaker emeritus -- that's a pretty fancy title -- speaker emeritus of the california assembly karen bass is in the house. i haven't seen her but i'm told she's here and i love this woman'sus