for coming, and especially the speakers on this panel for a wonderful way to wrap up what was a very busy day. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> if you missed any of this day-long brookings institute forum, you can watch it at c- span.org. british prime minister, gordon brown, announced today he will resign by september, saying he has to accept his performance was not a judgment on him. the party came a distant second to the conservatives. he hoped his resignation will be an incentive for liberal democrats to join his party in a coalition government. more later on the bbc news night program. we will have that for you

starting at 5:30 here on c-span. it is election season in the u.s. as well with kentucky senator, jim benning, announcing his retirement. republicans hoping to replace him will debate tonight. for some background, we spoke earlier today with a reporter covering the race. >> joining us on the phone is a reporter. who are the leading candidates for the republican primary? . .

caller: he says that republicans have concerns about him. he had a tough race back in 2004. it is the first time he has been up for reelection. he has made some missteps along the way. a lot of republicans want him out. he dropped out last july. it was a huge surprise, because he had been a longtime family friend. his father had been contributing since way back when he was in the house of representatives.

host: that are present -- that endorsement went against republican leaders in washington. >> caller: -- guest: that is right. mcconnell announced that he was supporting trade reason -- grayson. mcconnell had helped raise money for him. everyone knew what was going on there. he very rarely comes out and endorse is in a primary. it is rare that he comes out and says he is publicly for this guy. host: he is in the lead. why? guest: there are a lot of things in play. it caught the attention of a lot of people, i think.

it is not just a tea party issue. mcconnell has logged in the godfather of the republican party in kentucky. the first republican in generations to be elected as a republican. he is over the years -- he is helping pick candidates, which has angered some other republicans. we thought he was universally loved. this may be an opportunity for someone like mcconnell to step up. is idea of paul's appeal that he brings a different message than what we have been seeing here in kentucky. some of the republicans are reeling from the bush years. the oregon lost ground

nationally and they are looking for something different. -- the republicans lost ground nationally and they are looking for something different. grayson as not been the greatest candidate in the world as far as his speeches. he comes off as a policy bog. host: let's look at their latest ads. >> i really endorsed in the primaries, but these are critical times. president obama is spending threatens to destroy more jobs. i know grayson and i trust him. we need him to help turn back the obama agenda. >> i am proud that i have won the endorsement of some many others. i am trey grayson. i approve this message and i'm

asking for your vote. >> it will not stop. >> he says he will not vote for a bill -- a budget that is not balanced. >> a balanced budget is not practical? what is not practical is a $1 trillion deficit. where will it end? rand paul will take on the washington machine. >> i am rand paul, and i approved this message. host: how is this playing out? guest: grayson's ad is running toward the establishment, which is where he has been, which seems to be taking it on the chin. bob bennett in utah, that's sort of thing. paul is doing what he has been doing on and off. he is the outsider. he is the one who does not want

the unbalanced budget. a couple of other places where these guys have differed is that paul favors term limits and grayson does not. paul favors doing away with all but it earmarks -- the budget -- budget earmarks. paul is in the fifth district of kentucky. this is the poorest congressional district in the united states and is represented by a republican. it has brought money back to the district. there is no republican who says the government cannot create jobs. he has been doing that for 30 years and bringing money back. there is a minor war going on there now between the paul people and the hal rogers

people receive this as defending the honor of rotors who is pretty popular as a politician there. host: "tea party success in utah sends warning." is a this senate republican primary contest that we're talking about today -- are people in kentucky looking at senator bob bennett's primary loss as a warning that the tea party could be influential? guest: to a degree, yes. the people who are truly interested in politics and watch it closely are probably. at the same time, we had a recent election in indiana in which the tea party did not succeed. i'm not sure it is all that instructive, but it could signal a trend. it will be state by state. we will see whether or not and where the tea party movement is

having any effect. host: live coverage of this senate republican primary debate is tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. thank you for your time. guest: thank you, i am glad to be here. >> again, there will be a debate tonight between the republicans hoping to replace retiring senator jim bunning. that is live at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. british prime minister gordon brown announced that he will resign by the end of september because of the results of last week's elections. we will hear more about that on "newsnight"starting at 5:30 eastern time here on c-span. until then got here is a look at the parallels between california and greece. host: he is joining us from los angeles this morning. he is here to talk about u.s. and europe economic instability.

we want to show our viewers an opinion piece written this morning. he writes that the least substantial line -- the u.s. may not be greece, but california could be. here is a state so strapped for cash that it has resorted to paying its workers with ious rather than money. that is not the fault, it is the next best thing. could california do for the u.s. what greece is doing for the you -- for the e.u.? guest: and you can draw parallels, but there are a lot of lessons to be learned. over the weekend, the big news was that the e.u. came together and agreed on a gigantic package, not just to bail out increase but to back all of the troubled states, or nations, in

the european union and bring some stability and certainty back to the market. good neighbor very explicit about targeting the market -- they were very explicit about targeting the rket. they are imposing a lot of conditions on greece and presumably other recipients of this aid that brings in a different dynamic. in 2009, states across the nation faced huge budget deficit and go passing the to the nine budgets caused lots of thanks to. we had a few -- a new stimulus package came out in which the government essentially gave billions of dollars to states to sustain their level of spending and in some cases to expand it. unless we have another stimulus package, that has run out and the states, to a large extent,

used the money to expand ongoing operations medicare recipients -- medicaid recipients, rather, the education system, and so forth. there are scrambling to find the money this year. california is the worst of the lot they say at least $20 billion deficit right now which means they will have to make massive cuts or massive tax increases to make this work host: -- to make this work. host: how does this work when it comes to a massive tax increases or cuts? guest: they doot. that is the real conundrum. look at greece. 40% of the economy was the government. a huge percentage of the population was employed by the government. there was a huge disincentive to take the steps necessary to live within their means. now that has exploded and brout thehole european union

in to try and stabilize it. it will take years for them to unwind this and -- in any rational way. they are in a bailout situation for some time to come. california's legislature is in a similar position. spending is at an unsustainable level and has been for a few years. revenue is not increasing yet. they are willing to raise taxes beyond the state policy largest tax increase level increase which was the largest last year. making $20 billion in cuts is not palatable. gov. schwarzenegger with about two give the may budget this week. -- is about to give the may budget. there are looking for a $15 billion cut and a $5 billion shell game.

there are going to have to face th music. they're not willing to embrace cuts or revenue increases. they are just waiting and hoping that someone will take the lead and make something happen. host: this is a piece this morning in "the baltimore sun" about teachers facing layoffs across the country. this chart shows that in california there are more than 5000 -- they expect off more than 5000 teachers in that state. guest: yes, it is always tricky. we have a law in california pass some laws -- passed some years ago that requires school district to hand out pink slips a full year in advance. and the last seven happen this year would have to be based on the opes handed off last year. administrators are looking at -- we do not know what will happen next year.

there is a lot of prophylactic paid slips to give them -- prophylactics pink slips to give them little room. a pretty high percentage of them have been acted on. it may be a f thousand teachers to get laid-off. how much of an effect at will have is hard to say because we have had efforts to reduce class sizes and we have a declining school enrollment in the last few yrs in california. it might not be as disastrous as it sounds. those kinds of cuts are necessary. that is at the local level. that is the other thing that plays into this california picture. the state heavily funds counties and cities in california, and school districts, and now that the state is in a blind they are holding on to some of the money they would normally pass on to the lower levels of government. those lower levels are may be in

more dire financial straits. we are looking at morcities in california declaring bankruptcy. host:utside of california for the situation in europe could impact the united states, a lot of newspapers are reporting that because people are fleeing from the euro that they will come to the dollar which will make our exports to other countries much more expensive. one will be the impact of that on a state like california and other states in our country? -- what will be the impact? guest: that is a to edgedword. but as a slowdown -- that is a two edged sword. it slows down job growth which is an essential part of a recovery. consumer spending is a crucial part of spending. cheaper imports can help stimulate consumer spending. there are a couple of counter effects of there. it is not clear yet that what is

happening with the bureau will have a large effect on our economic recovery. -- that what is happening with the euro will have a large effect. host: what are some other states that our viewers should be watching a similar to california's economic situation? guest: there are some interesting contrasts when you look at the states. some states have managed not to get in hot water or serious red ink. probably the biggest state economy that has not gone trouble is taxes. it is interesting to look at the contrast -- that has not gotten into trouble is texas. e majority of states are in pretty deep trouble. in percentage terms, states like illinois, michigan, new york -- new york is clearly the second worst.

a lot of steam rust belt states have substantial deficits. in percentage terms, they're pretty severe. we're lookingt many stes that have $7 billion deficits with budgets lot smaller than california's. the latest numbers coming out show that revenues are down in most states. they were really counting on coming into their budget here, in 2010, with some revenue increases to allow them to increase or at least sustained some levels of spending. that does not seem to be coming to pass. you will see cuts in many states. host: 83 says this, "california screwed up in a while ago with the ballot resolution of all critical measures. guest: i completely disagree with that.

i wrote a column for "the wa street journal" before christmas where weooked at some of the research done by a professor at usc who has studied all of the ballot initiatives passed in california that place to budgetary restrictions. it is pretty minor. a few billion dollars of our $50 billion to $60 million are spoken for by ballot initiatives. the challenge that california has is that year-on-year for the last decade, we have increased spending at more than double the rate of revenue growth. needless to say, you eventually hit the brick wall when you do that. you just cannot do that. revenue growth in almost every year was substantial up until 2009. we have had some revenue growth exceeding population growth and yet we could not live within

those circumstances. we had to spend even more. that has caught up with us. one way to look at this is that revenue projected right now to come in for this fiscal year that we are inow is about the same as what we had i 2006. essentially, we look at the crisis of having to go back to 2006 spending levels. i lived here in 2006 and the state was not a catastrophe. people were not living in the streets and we were not keeping kids out of schools. i do not think it would be a disaster if we had to go back to 2006 spending levels. and is getting the legislature to by the bullet and figure out which spending increases since then can we bring ourselves to rein in. host: lenny on the republican line. caller: there are several things that come to mind over your guest's subject here. one of the points i wanted to

bring out -- up is that when i look around the world and i look at what greece is gog for currently, it looks to me that the health-care issue is really resonating their best to when you look at what germany is asking greece to do. when the big things they are asking is for pvatized health care. how do you feel about what health care is going to do when it really starts coming into play? guest: the one thing we know for sure is that this is a large, new benefit them will have to be paid for. the numbers have been moving. the move to route the debe and immediately started moving after the law was passed. we are some time from knowing

the true cost of our current health care of policy. there is a lot of useful parallels there. if you look at grace's situation, -- greece's situation, they spent the last decade of ramping up government employment and the benefit packages provided to employees and citizens by the government across the board. it is a pretty widespread there. they created a surge -- a similar situation. spending that was programmed to increase each year which faster than revenue. it has been inevitable for some time that they were going to run into this crisis is like we look at portugal, italy, and ireland, and spain and the saying that there a deep concerns they might be on a similar track. california is in that boat.

other states in the united states are in that vote. you just cannot provide all of these benefits without having revenue to pay for it. something has to flex. the u.s. is not facing the music yet. if you look at the statements from timothy geithner in the last few months, he says that we recognize these problems but we do not much to solve them now because we are trying to get out of a recession. putting off dealing with this only makes this worse as we see in greece. host: a follow-up to the previous tweet, do revenue increases require a two-thirds majority in the california legislature? here is a headline that says " states cut tax incentives for new businesses" as a way to collect more revenue. guest: to the first part, tax

increases require a two-thirds majority in the legislature to pass in california. not all revenue increases necessarily amount to tax increases. there are a fair amount of discretion -- there is a fair amount of discretion to affect them in less direct ways. they do need than two-thirds vote to pass a budget and a tax increase. that makes it a bit of a challenge which has been partly what is both -- what has both prevented the sole solution to our problem right now. and has made it pretty tricky to pass a budget. it is a high hurdle, but i think it is very popular in california because it has prevented our very gerrymandered legislature to keep using tax increases to keep revenue up with it it's very high level of spending growth.

host: you are on the line with adrian moore. caller: how are you? one of the things that california has problems with its its interaction with the federal government. it is my understanding that for every $1 that california sends to the federal government we only get about 78 cents back as opposed to states like alabama and some other southern states that get over $1 back for every $1 they said. that is one thing. in the schoolystem, there are a bunch o unfunded federal mandates that strap the schools for cash and go there is a huge illegal alien problem in prison that californians bear the cost of. on top of that, my late mothe lived in south pennsylvania in delaware county and paid $6,000

a year in taxes, $4,000 for schools alone on a house that was worth between 200,300 thousand. -- between $200,000 and $300,000. i believe the interaction with the federal government is what has cost california. guest: there are a lot of ways of slicing the interaction with the federal government. generally speaking, it is true that california pumps more into the federal system than it gets out. that is because we have the federalystem which has crossed a subsidized. it gives money to the poor states because the programs they fund tended to flow that way. that is true, but i would not attribute that to having a serious role with california's current fiscal process.

-- california's current fiscal crisis. that does not really affect california's ability to live within its means. like i said, the spending levels that we would need to live within the revenue that we are making in california, or the state government is making, is not that dramatic a cutback. a lot of the of the things you mentioned are interesting parts of the problem. california is not a low tax state. you can find five differen reports published in the last year or two comparing total taxation levels and california is always a 48, 49, or 50 in terms of being the most heavily taxed states. property-tax is our kind of love because of proposition 13 that limits the increases, but we

have made out with -- made up for that. host: we are talking to adrian moore from the reason foundation talking about economic instability in europe and what it means for the united states. a reminder, president obama is slated to announce that his next supreme court nominee will be elena kagan. we'll havehat live at 10:00 a.m. eastern time. that is when we expect the announcement. keep your channel here on c- span. we will have that live for you. jonesboro, ark., go ahead. caller: good morning. i am originally from los angeles myself. my question concerns the impact of a serious default by california on the nation as a whole. what do you think would happen if california were to seriously default?

guest: i think it would be very bad for the mkets and for the financial system. we have been through a financial crisis. we seem to be climbing slowly out of that financial crisis as well as out of the recession. having california default would have a much bigger effect on our financial system than the default of grace -- greece. it would be disastrous. i do not think it is that likely would have an outright defaults by california. ultimately, the legislature has the ability to avoid it the fault. -- to avoid defaults. will they s default as a less painful option for them making

cuts or whenever options they might have? i do not know. that is hard to predict. watching the track record of the legislature over the last decade and have, ultimately when they are out of checks and they cannot shuffle money -- when they are out tricks and they cannot shovel money, they usually find a way to get by. occasionally they increase taxes. we are coming off as a big batch of increasing taxes. the worst thing that could happen is for them to ultimately face the music and make serious cuts. whether it will be a full $20 billion, i do not know. host:adrian -- adrian, what is the current bond rating? guest: california's ting is the lowest of any state in the nation right now. it cannot go much lower.

the state is not borrowing a lot of money because of the cost of that low credit rating. if you bond issues have gone out in the last few months. voters have approved bonds in the last several years that have not been issued. we are sitting on the potential of more borrowing, but california's debt levels are already veryigh. we have to hide that, too much of the budget being consumed -- wead too high debt. ultimately, the credit rating agencies know that the legislature just passed a number of tax increases last year. they can ps more increases this year if they really, really nt to and there is not some kind of a voter revolt.

in a sense, there is a floor on how low california'rating can go because they have shown they can raise taxes. as a calling for that is who have to pay taxes in california, that is how the rating agencies look at this. there is enough outrage over that now and they have looked at how it is actually cause revenue to go down. they may hesitate to do that again and made the get spending cuts in stead. host: any inkling from those who hold california bonds that they will demand a higher interest rate? guest: yes, ihink so. i think the last two batches of bonds that california sold in the last several months, in both instances they had to pay a highernterest rate than a

>> we're leaving this program for live coverage. prime minister gordon brown said he will resign by september because of the results of last week's election. here is the bbc "newsnight" coverage of the event. -- "newsnight" coverage of the event. >> first, the dramatic -- the dramatic resignation announcement. >> i have no desire to stay in my position longer than needed to assure the grot -- the past two economic growth is assured. >> the conservatives were making a new and improved bid. >> will offer to the liberal democrats a coalition government and the holding a referendum on the alternate invoked system. >> more drama with meetings

continuing into this evening. we are at westminster. >> talks broke up at the commons tonight a short while ago after a dramatic and exciting night. we still have no idea who will form our next government. >> we have a reaction from someone who was just come from the negotiations with the liberal democrat team. we will be joined by a key member of the shadow cabinet. the markets have been watching every move. our economics reporter is here. we also speak to the french finance minister after a massive european bailout. we will speak with brown did begone, who might soon be gone -- with brown soon to be gone, who might be his successor? he was clever and taciturn. good evening.

at the end of the day of frantic political maneuvering and the announcement by gordon brown of the end of his prime ministerial career, not a moment too soon for his political detractors, the pace and direction of the negotiations to secure a deal for government appears to be moving all the time. after gordon brown announced labour would begin formal negotiations with the liberal democrats, the conservatives but the anti -- upped the ante. our political editor is reporting on the latest political gambles. >> at 5:00 tonight came the news which may soon lead to the unblocking of this political crisis. gordon brown stopped -- stepped out into downing street to announce that labour was in formal discussions with the liberal democrats to try and form a government.

he then revealed the dramatic twist that had led to those talks starting. >> i would like to say something about my position. if it becomes clear that the national interest, which is stable and principled government, can be best served by forming a coalition between the labor party and the democrats -- the labour party and the liberal democrats, that i should discharge my duty to form that government. i have no desire to stay in my position longer than is needed to ensure the past -- the path to economic growth is assured and the process of political reform move forward quickly. the reason that we have a hung parliament is that no single party and no single leader was able to win the full support of the country. as a leader of my party, i must accept that that is a judgment on me.

tontend to ask the labour seven process its own leadership election. i hope it will be -- to start its own process for leadership election. i hope you'll be in place by the end of september. i will play no part in that and i will back no individual candidate. >> gordon brown resigning as the leader of the labour party in order to help bring about a coalition government between the coal -- between the labour party and the liberal democrats. how will things react? things have changed. with the negotiating team emerged from the latest discussions at the comet -- when the negotiating team emerged from their latest discussions, it was all smiles. discussions seem to be closing in on this -- on a historic deal. >> things would really day -- things went really well today. >> i cannot report on that.

>> behind the scenes we later learned that nick clegg was also holding a secret meeting with gordon brown. it may explain why the lib-dem team was being so tight-lipped. but i do not think i've ever seen three politicians so silent. >> they have to go off and meet their mps and the big party federal executives. the first meeting with libya-pm -- lib-dem mp's took place at lunchtime. they expected a live- down/conservative deal -- a lib- dem/conservative deal might be announced within hours. there were still problems. >> we're very conscious of the need to make these decisions quickly. that was a clear decision of the parliamentary party today. we also want to make sure we get

it right. >> liberal democrat mps have been briefed by their negotiators who they told to go back and seek clarification from the tories on a number of issues. it is not clear how much progress has been made so far. it is not clear whether they have been offered anything substantial on the tricky issue of proportional representation. do you think what you'll -- do think what you got from this deal? >> i did not know what the eventual outcome will be. we will judge the statement said in an constructively every step of the way. -- just a statement sensitively -- judge the statement sensitively and constructively every step of the way. >> i think most mps will be happy with that. but it is a step in the right direction. >> how precedent those words would prove to be.

for gordon's statement meant that it was now a game on. it is difficult to know where to go next or where the story is going next. gordon brown's dramatic intervention certainly changes things. for the last couple of days, we have all been assuming it is about a deal between the conservatives and the lib- dems. now, there is a service -- the serious alternative of a deal between labour and the lib-dems. when nick clegg made his statement soon after, it was clear they were conducting a bidding war between two buyers, fighting desperately for the same house. >> we think it is the right and responsible thing to open talks on the same basis as we have been having with the conservative party, with the labour party, and we're continuing our discussions with the conservatives. gordon brown made an important announcement today.

it must have been very difficult for him to say personally. it is done in the national interest. his announcement could be an important element in the smooth transition towards a stable government that the people deserve. >> when david cameron met his mps in the commons at 6:00, he knew he had to improve his offer to the lib-dems. to the dismay of many, he did so. it appears that the conservatives are willing to offer the liberal democrats are referendum on the alternative vote voting system, which is not the same as proportional representation. it would mean a slightly fairer distribution of seats. that is what gordon brown was offering before the election. but in the interests of trying to create a stable -- but in the interest of trying to create a

stable and secure government -- >> in the interest of trying to create a stable and secure government, will offer to the liberal democrats holding a referendum on the alternatives vote system. >> we're moving toward a conservative and democratic coalition? >> we want to get a move on with this. we're trying to reach a resolution. but in some ways it could be less proportional. -- >> in some ways it could be less proportional. >> we have had an offer and we will consider it. >> they held talks with the liberal democrats at the commons. the school secretary afterwards called them positive and constructive. labour is trying to crumb -- trump the conservatives. a referendum on the kind of proportional voting system that fell lib-dems prefer -- that the lib-dems prefer.

>> he joins us now from downing street. as cameron manage to keep the conservative right on board throughout this -- how fast cameron managed to keep the conservative right on board to route this? >> that is a big question. as i do -- throughout this? >> that is a big question. he has had to make offers to both sides. there are some serious concessions. there are serious misgivings about any kind of coalition agreement with the liberal democrats. as i understand it, the further and more conservative cabinet posts. there were some that are difficult for cameron to swallow. michael howard and ian duncan smith. >> could this actually work? >> i am skeptical about that.

a lot of people in politics are. a lot of people in the labour party are. the figures do not add up. labour as 258 seats. the liberal democrats have 57. you only reached 315 -- eight short of the majority that is the finishing line. it would have to bring in the other parties as well. the group for northern ireland would not be a problem. maybe other mps including clive comrie. that is assuming that all of the venture's remain totally obedient and loyal. we've seen what problems the gordon brown has had over the last few years. there's a problem of having a second, and elected leap -- unelected leader as prime

minister. there is a huge question of whether border brown and his successor could deliver on these promises of av and a more proportional voting system. would they be willing to agree to av without a referendum? what they agree on a referendum on stv? -- would they agree on a referendum on the stv? i'm still skeptical. >> as it happens, the labour deputy has been known -- has been in negotiations this evening. she is joining us now. have you done enough to get the liberal democrats to sign up? but it is not about getting them to sign up. -- >> it is not about getting them to sign up. the public has not voted for any party to have a majority. what is the best thing in the public interest for us to do to make sure that we play our part to have a stable and secure government? >> if that means the junior minister at -- your manifest a

commitment to -- if that means getting your manifest -- if that means getting rid of your manifesto you're willing to do that? >> you have to compromise and discuss things. the suggestion is really a conservative scare story. the idea that we have somehow gotten into negotiations and then immediately left behind the idea that there would be a referendum, without actually disclosing what has been discussed. perhaps i could draw the attention back to what our manifesto said, which was that we support the idea of changing the voting system to a.v., but we think it should not happen without a referendum. but we obviously have to discuss these things with the liberal democrats and the national executive committee of the labour party and the parliamentary. we have to do it sooner rather than later. we need a new government to get

the country forward. >> what is the continuation of gordon brown on -- was the continuation of gordon brown on downing street a deal breaker? >> he took the view that he needed to take responsibility for the election results and that would pave the more -- pave the way more easily to a partnership agreement. >> what about nick clegg? >> i think he felt it was in the public interest for him to step aside. we should give credit to him for doing that. >> the little democrats seem to suggest it was a deal breaker -- the liberal democrats seem to suggest it was a deal breaker. >> that is neither here nor there. before the discussion started, according brown has said that he is starting -- he is stepping aside. that is the best thing for the party and the country? -- >> that is the best thing for the party and the country? and i think it is. we should give him credit. it is not a question of the liberal democrats choosing a

labour leader. we have not got into that question. the question of who is the labor leader -- labour leader is for the labour party to actually decide. at the moment, we're trying to form a government after a general election. we have not set a timetable for the leadership election yet. >> are you going to stand? >> i have no plans to step aside from my role. >> that means you will not stand for leader. >> i will stay as deputy leader. you cannot run for leader at the same time as being deputy leader. >> there is no circumstance in which you'll actually resign deputy leader in order to stand. >> i plan to stay deputy leader. it is the best thing for stability. who will you -- >> who will you support? but it would be foolish to get into backing one or other can --

>> it would be foolish to get into backing one or the other candidate. no one has yet declared themselves as a candidate. we need to insure we have a new government for britain -- we need to make sure that we have a new government for britain. but you might have heard someone say this is clinging on to power -- >> you might have heard someone say this is clinging on to power at any price. dot -- >> gordon brown has stepped aside. >> i think he was referring to labour. >> we're prepared to play our part. if we get a part of a partnership, then so be it. we will do that in the public interest. we recognize that we did not win the election bid that is self- evident. we need to play our part as parliamentarians to form a new government. >> one of the key economic planks of the liberal democrat offer at the election was no tax for those earning less than

10,000 pounds. do you rule that out as a possibility? >> we have already gone over the years, increased the threshold at which to start paying tax. these sorts of issues will have to be discussed. >> that is a key policy. i will do another interview in a second. do you rule out new income tax for under 10,000 a year? >> you do not go into discussions ruling in or ruling out anything. it is not a matter principle. we want to help people on lower income. over the years, we have lightened the burden of tax on those in lower incomes by raising the tax threshold. >> thank you very much indeed. i can now be joined from westminster by someone from part of the other negotiating team. you been listening carefully. you're not part of the team, but close to it, i should say. if there is a referendum on alternative voting, and there is

referendum -- which would you campaign for or against? >> i prefer to stick with the past system. the most important thing is to maintain a visit to a -- a constituency link. it would be a free vote across the party. each party would decide if there were or referendum. there is a critical distinction between the position we are offering and a position that the labour party is offering. we believe there will be a change to the voting system. the british people need to decide. the labour party are preparing to change the voting system without the british people deciding. board than that, they are also attempting to arrange a coronation -- above that, they're also attending to arrange a coronation of a new prime minister -- they are also attempting to arrange a

coronation of a new prime minister. >> what about the key plank of their election manifesto? >> the liberal democrats pointed out that there were a range of things which they wanted to secure before the election. they wanted their taxes. we're making progress towards an agreement -- they wanted fair taxes. we're making progress towards an agreement. they also pointed towards an agreement on education. we're working towards consensus there. they've always wanted to change the voting system. it is part of their dna. it also want to stress it is just one of our range of options. >> on the question of fair taxes -- i understand you've given way on no income-tax on terms of less than 10,000 pounds? >> we have moved towards them and they have moved towards us on our positions on the need to do with the deficit.

that is the nature of these negotiations. >> that would take 17 billion pounds to pay for that tax break. are you going to strap -- scrap trident? it is 17 billion pounds. >> we're not going to scrap that. you're kind enough to knowledge that i am not part of the negotiating team. we're in a new political realm here. we have two parties who are seeking to provide stable government -- ourselves and the liberal democrats. negotiate -- negotiating goes on. >> i accept your not part of the negotiating team -- i accept that you are not part of the negotiating team. have you any idea how you're going to find that 17 billion pounds? and if you didn't -- you do know that you did not reveal your negotiations -- >> you do know that you did not reveal your negotiations even to someone who

asks questions seductively. >> we have an enormous deficit. we need to reduce the deficit pudu cannot go around and make promises like that. -- we need to reduce the deficit. you cannot go around and it promises like that. >> you cannot deploy the social vocabulary that he would expect. let's be clear through the electorate did not give any party a majority. -- let's be clear. the electorate did not give any party at majority. -- a majority. we're in discussions with the liberal democrats and we have respected some of each other's priorities. i did nothing we can provide what the country needs -- a stable and broadbased government -- if they choose to go into an agreement with labour. it is an unstable arrangement. if we choose to go in with labour -- we do not know the prime minister would be. we do know that nick clegg,

gordon brown, and deguerin all went through television debates. the -- and david cameron all went through television debates. we did end up with someone as prime minister who no one expects to be in that position. >> your generous enough to say that you would give up -- give up your cabinet post in favor of a liberal democrat. you feel as generous about the possible -- do you feel as generous about the possible right wingers? bennett is a team effort in the conservative party. -- >> it is a team effort in the conservative party. they need the support of the entire parliamentary conservative party. there is a difference between our party being united and ready to work with liberal democrats on an agreed basis and some of

the tensions we're seeing in the labour party. >> i have to stop it. thank you very much. there currently meeting to discuss the offers that were put to them. -- may are currently meeting to discuss the offers that were put to them. -- they are currently meeting to discuss the offers that were put to them. this is raw politics. could this blow to the labour party destory it? -- destroyed it? a would be picking up the pieces -- who would pick up the pieces? >> we do not know how or who it will be. everything has been thrown wide open. the calculation that was made inside downing street is perhaps the most nakedly political as could be imagined.

the labour party decided gordon brown would have to go, no matter what. getting him to announce his departure this afternoon -- there was just a chance that they could cling to power. but it was the measure of the man. he reached the judgment that the right course was for him to stand down, but for the coming labour party conference. he made clear his intentions to the people today. he also made clear that nick clegg as requested formal negotiations with the labour party. we cannot yet be clear on those negotiations. we will continue to discharge our responsibilities while engaging in those discussions. >> the big question is did the liberal democrats make his departure a precondition of the negotiations? and from what i know, at no point for the saying, it is dependent on gordon brown.

-- at no point were they saying, it is dependent on board and rum. the labour -- it is dependent on gordon brown. labour party will decide. >> this role of the dice by the prime minister on behalf of his party is controversial, even within the labour party. we've seen dire warnings. >> from the point of view of the electorate, the two losing parties trying to usurp the role of the major party -- i disagree with that party -- will not be welcomed. from the point of view of cobbling together the necessary numbers to rely on the scottish nationalists and the northern irish, as we would have to -- their demand will be that the english get all the cuts, that

they are protected. it will be pretty disastrous from the country's point of view. if we look at -- the electorate will reap their revenge on the labour party. that is my interest in the future of this party. >> battle to replace gordon brown as labour leader has been simmering just beneath the surface for the last two years. if this deal can work, the person who occupies number 10 long-term will be chosen not by the british people, but by the labour party. >> there are a lot of names in the frame. they expect several people to run. there are other candidates. many people who could run as well. any number of people.

>> labour's deputy leader has ruled herself out. everyone else, including the forever -- the front-runner, is presumably still in. >> we agreed that no potential candidates would launch their campaigns or put forward their names until the vital business of securing a government for this country that can command a majority in the house of commons is completed. once that is completed, then of labour party can get onto its business of electing a new leader. >> remember those debates that everyone made such a big deal about? our next prime minister could be someone who was not even there. >> we will not know until a new leader of a labour party is elected. it will be a proper democratic process inside the party to choose. it will be inside the labour party. it is quite common in our system to have the leaders and from

time to time the prime minister changed during the course of parliament. we are a parliamentary democracy. it rightly determined to governs. >> who is the big question. there was white smoke coming out of the chimney at downing street. the politics of picking up hope look simple next to this. -- a pope looked simple next to this period. 

we got 29% of the votes. for the labor party and liberal democrats, along with everybody else, a lot of people will be looking at that and scratching

their heads. >> i think it shows the leadership has gone the extra mile. >> that would be a good move as far as you're concerned. everybody understand it, but it would be up to the british people. >> what seems to be the case now is it went straight to a bill.

>> me be absolutely clear. a referendum is the very maximum we can offer the liberals. >> what do you think? >> a lot of my colleagues feel the same way, n.y. >> firth the story of david cameron and smith, a good move for a bad move? >> i would be happy to talk to

david about that. >> during the campaign it was clear he thought it was wrong. >> i was a tax cutter. i also want to know how it is going to be paid for. if there are tax increases, what would they be? >> can you think of hall -- said the frustrated offers in the office? is there a danger of the leaders

becoming too corrupt with a sniff of power? >> where do we start with how bad this looks for the electorate? what we have his exact what we would get after every general election. the parties have the manifestoes. you go behind closed doors. you have secret meetings. when it is offensive of democratic and transfer of. >> i agree. if you have hong parliaments, you have to have this horse trading. it is a very bad system. >> today began a long time ago in which the news of the eu and the imf is putting together a trillion dollars global rescue package to stock increased costs meltdown from affecting the euro

zone -- to stop greece's meltdown from affecting the euro zone. i am joined by paul mason to take as to what has been happening today and the impact of the resignation to reagan >> when gordon brown made a statement, and sterling slid 1/7 against the dollar. -- 1 cent against the dollar. it barely moved. people expected to go-tomorrow. they do not like a political instability. also, von credit rating agencies moved against the increase. h'm they have been waiting to see what is coming out of his. they do not like the arithmetic of the coalition.

the next thing they do not like is to see central right parties then throwing long-cherished principles of the window, so it is not just an anti-labour thanks, though the biggest concern wheis we are braced for tomorrow. >> it is a massive amount of money. is this going to do the business? >> let's looked at the details. and 60 billion to try to stop of portugal, spain, and ireland, and that is real money on the table. a much bigger sum from the eu government.

this may have some relevance. the biggest thing is to change the policy haato go into the market, buy bonds. >> one of the bank was buying the bonds across the euro zone this is akin to the quantitative easing. what this did was collapsed but cost of borrowing. greece would have been paying closer to 12%, but now it would effectively be 6%. >> when the cost of five is

fort north europe to impose conditions on south europe how -- because of that is for north europe to impose conditions on south europe. >> earlier i spoke to the frans wynans minister. i started by asking what her reaction -- they france finance minister. i started by asking what her reaction was we have a lot happening, and it is a clear change of the guard. >> which you prefer? do you prefer a coalition of liberal democrats or for a cold -- a coalition of labour, liberal democrats, and for others. >> it is for them to sort out what is best for the british people. >> is there not a danger if there is a vacuum while these negotiations are going on of instability? >> the action we took last night

and over the weekend following from the euro group head of state summit was clearly intended to avoid instability in the financial market. that brought about a significant rally today, and it is certainly better for the economy to have stability in then to have instability. stability is better. >> hollister indicated the united kingdom's hall exposure is around 8 billion. is that in accordance? >> it is agreed to provide the level of data, but it as a matter that we tried to sort out from the euro group of prospective.

it is for the euros to sort out the euro, thank you very much. >> do you think we're heading towards a fiscal government in europe? >> together with what i would not call a bailout -- because that is intended for something that is falling apart -- that is not the case for the euro group, but apart from that package, we have two other aspects. one is what i call fiscal consolidation, the determination by all members of the euro zone to cut the deficit, reduce the deficit, and to do that in a consistent manner so they can maintain the stability. the second chapter had to do with exhilarating.

>> this is not the last crisis, but are we seeing the possibility the imf will bailout other eu countries? >> the g-seven, the g-20, the european central spain, and the international monetary fund -- all of them -- central monetary fund, all of them say they want the euro to be stable, and there was a clear response in the market. that is not to say the imf is stepping in fees for night. what the imf is saying things, i will be of astute sordid if need be, and i will cost of every -- i will be of a two-step of if need be. that is a significant message.

>> thank you for a much. and how did the markets react? in new york, the dow surged more than 400 points. gordon brown said the election was a judgment upon him, but there are many who said this have been a long time ago. his political ambitions stretch back to his teenage years. he accompanied his father on business. his reputation of of bad whatever was reinforced by his behavior -- bad temper was reinforced by his behavior. will gordon brown go down as one of the tragic figures? >> there was a tragedy which he anticipated. there has been a pattern of dominant prime minister's followed by aother prime

ministers. he worried he would be like that, so he will not be entirely tragic, but if there is a tragedy that is part of it, he joined the second category. >> i disagree with a andrew about the tragedy thing. if you look back at his career, he has been at the top of british politics. he only had a short time, if but when he began in 1992, he was at the top of british politics. that is an epic amount of time. most do not survive very long. he was the chancellor for of love and years and then became a leader, so it is an effort -- chancellor for 11 years and then became a leader, so it is an

epic career. >> on the one hand, as prime minister, but in partnership with tony blair they won the last four elections. he will be seen as a unique chancellor and a very good chancellor of until when he started to spend too much money. >> let's look at "the guardian." "the independent," brown steps down to deal with the liberal democrats. brown to quit in bid to win over liberal democrats. he was very good at that kind of

maneuver, was he? >> they had been through 10,000 crises with brown. his own resignation is very cleverly turned. it will become five an important resignation. >> he was taking a big gamble with that. it was a surprise to many of his

friends that he never seem to find and narrative, and as a result he could not get some mission. >> he was only forced into this pattern of government. >> he had an awful inheritance. he never fully from his public prime minister voice. of course, he faced a whole range of crises by himself. all range of things. also, it was the end of a government that had been a round of long time. it was a difficult time to get it, i favor.

-- i've seen. >> given the legacy of iraq, afghanistan, the scandal. >> he would not have had this unelected prime minister hung around his neck. the other thing gordon brown and the colleagues are responsible for. he could have been quicker and been in a much better position. >> a quick word from both of you. who will be the next leader bowman -- of leader? >> it looks as if it will be david miller banilliband. it is very early on. i do not think it will be resolved for some time. >> 5 is all for tonight. be sure to join us tomorrow night of the same time and same

place. good night. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] ♪ >> with kentucky senator announcing his retirement, republicans hoping to replace him tonight. we will have that live at 80 stern -- 8:00 eastern on c-span. >> of discussion on broadcast frequencies and their potential use on broadcasts. our guests are two members of the commerce department advisory committee on c-span 2 the.

>> half that today's briefing, secretary clayton's interview was the subject of several questions. -- secretary clinton's interview with the subject of several questions. this is about 30 minutes. >> was part of the statement did for you? -- good for you? good afternoon, and welcome to the department of state. i have a number of things to talk about. president karzai and his delegation and 20 ministers and senior officials arrive this morning in washington for talks

on our strategic partnership. talks reflect relations between our governments. meeting formally kicks off. the teams will work on a range of challenges and opportunities we face in the road ahead in afghanistan. we have consulted closely with the afghan government and our national parties about the strategy and the constructive agenda president karzai discussed in his address. our commitment is to a stable, secure, and prosperous of afghanistan. we are in this for the long

haul. the minister was visiting washington for the second time as prime minister. he will receive an award. the secretary and prime minister discuss how we can foster greater dramatic reform with zimbabwe and political opening in zimbabwe. the united states continues to be the single largest donor of humanitarian aid. last year the united states funded over $300 million in assistance programs. assistant secretary kurt kendall -- kurt campbell was busy over the weekend. he met with opposition leaders in burma.

he was in meetings with burmese officials. the key was to make clear profound disappointment of the regime of failure to make progress on any court concerns. he stopped in bangkok yesterday. we met -- he met with a range of figures to discuss efforts to negotiate a resolution on the ongoing crisis.

the special envoy was due to return to the united states this afternoon on his first round of proximity talks. now is 55 was delayed by -- his flight back was delayed by ash. todd gordon will be visiting macedonia to meet with officials and representatives of -- representatives of non- governmental organizations. he will meet with the country's leadership to encourage continued strengthening of kosovo's institution, and they will discuss the bilateral leadership and other issues. jose fernandez is traveling to indonesia and japan to engage with the private sector as well as government and state

department mission to build support for opening markets as part of president obama's export initiative. the u.s. coordinator for international community's and information policy is leading a delegation from the state department, the national telecommunications administration, to the u.s. communications technologies roundtable and bilateral talks with the russian ministry of communications in moscow. this is the first round table since 2004. regarding the deepwater horizon oil spill, we receive two additional offers of assistance, which we are grateful for from the united arab emirates and

russia. turning to iraq, we condemn what has occurred in iraq today. these will not undermine the confidence in the iraqi people have demonstrated in their government and security forces. the iraqi people overwhelmingly reject violence as a way to address their differences. we express condolences for the families of all of the victims. u.s. personnel were directly accounted for. finally, we joined the decision to invite as dona, israel, and slovenia to become members of the organization of economic cooperation and development. this is the result of an intensive process.

the country was compelled to examine some laws and regulations, and in some areas, they were required to make regular changes to pass legislative reforms, so right now there were 31 members, and assuming the parliaments of these countries approve their membership, that will increase to 34. >> davis, of all -- did this come up at all? was there a reason to push this? >> i think this was a lengthy process. now i cannot say how far back, but i would not say this is a quid pro quo. it is the current quality of the

economy that recommended it for membership. >> last night when we interviewed on 60 minutes the secretary said of the pakistan is were told there would be a severe consequences if an attack linked to pakistan was successful. >> i do not think she said that. >> she said you made it clear to them. whether or not you told them, she announced it. >> i think she was responding to a hypothetical question. we would take seriously any foreign leader to any foreign country -- foreign link to another country. we would not single out any one country >> the entire line of

questioning was about pakistan. >> we took seriously and responded to the 2001 attack, and we will take it seriously and respond to any attack that was quite successful. >> what did she mean byron severe consequences -- what did she mean by severe consequences? >> one would be willing to conclude the war there a substantial length in a foreign country to a successful attack against the united states fire group that operated within the borders of any country, that we would take that seriously and there would be severe consequences. the statements before itself of

how we would respond. >> what is she thinking about? >> of the secretary also stressed, parts of which you saw and parts of which you did not cease -- see, the president along with others highlighted the fact that we do see a link with the pakistani taliban. this is an adversary that pakistan is already taking aggressive action against. i think we are very satisfied with the cooperation we are getting on this particular investigation, and i think we are confident that pakistan understands how seriously we take this episode.

>> by all accounts, he was not the brightest jewel in the shed rigid but he was able to get into -- but he was able to get into pakistani territory and see members of the taliban where the pakistani is maintained they cannot go after these guys.3 pakistani possibility to go after them? a second question is, presumably if you were happy with their cooperation today before the bombing, what is the difference -- the day before the bombing, what is the difference? if you were happy with the level of cooperation before, it was the same level. >> the difference is we obviously now have an investigation on going in terms of determining how this individual found his way into times square and what type of

training and support he might have received from individuals and groups in pakistan. as we have developed information relating to this investigation, we have shared the information, and they have launched an investigation. >> if you were have been before this incident, it turns out -- are you saying their cooperation was not as good as you thought it was? now it turns out this gentleman received guidance from pakistani tribal areas and received training. does it shed light on some flaw in cooperation? >> as the secretary said, on the one hand, we have seen a sea change in pakistan's attitude and its willingness to act against groups within its borders. that said, we expect more corp.

and more activity from pakistan , reading more cooperation and more activity from pakistan -- we expect more cooperation and more activity from pakistan. >> it seems they have conducted an attack on the u.s. after this. it does not square with it? >> an individual with links -- an american citizen with links to the pakistani taliban attempted to execute a bombing in times square. the circumstances of that relationship are still something to investigate. >> did eric holder go too far? he specifically said they directed it, they were involved in setting it up, and secretary clinton said, the exact links and how deep and whether it was a direct attack or they just

provided some training is clear. who is right, secretary clinton for attorney general holder? >> i do not find the statements today contradictory. >> they are completely different. one is saying, we do not know, and the other is saying, they were specifically involved in directing the attack, so is the u.s. government working under the assumption that the pakistani taliban directed this attack, or did they just provide training for any future attacks he might want to launch. >> there were clear links between the pakistani taliban and mr. shazaad. >> he said there were clear links and he provided the attack. but he provided the material

support helped execute the attack. " from the time the secretary take her interview. -- there might have been some time from when the secretary take her interview. the want to see them go into north waziristan? >> i am not going to go down that road. we have received firm pledges from pakistan. we are cooperating fully. they recognize there is a threat to pakistan within their borders. we work with them in terms of what action they should take and what actions we can take. >> to the pakistani snow what specifically you want? -- to the pakistanis know what specifically you want? >> not specifically. >> we have not told them what the more is. >> to the extent we have

identified a group. >> you want them to go after the group democrats that is it. to the extent we have identified a group -- you want them to go after a group? >> that is it. to the extent we have identified a group, we want to see pakistan take steps to eliminate this threat and to the extent pakistan can take action, we expect that. whether the united states can support that action, that is conversations we continue. >> you say may be expanding. if they are involved, they are expanding. >> there is an investigation on going. as we continue, there will be implications, but clearly, we are seeing there is those clear link between what happened in times square and pakistan. we are trying to understand what that means, and to the extent

that pakistan is already taking aggressive action against the pakistani taliban, we will evaluate whether additional steps are warranted. >> don't you think you should also look a little closer to home? why and how an american- pakistani went into the tribal region? how much of this is the fault of u.s. intelligence to be able to find out what this guy was three? he made several trips to pakistan over the last several years. >> there is a serious implication to what you suggested, that we should be able to monitor every single american citizen the troubles into south asia and they visit family and friends -- that travels into south asia and a visit family and friends. there is a tax issue. that is assuming everyone who visits pakistan has nefarious

intentions. >> i did not say that. >> there is a strong link between pakistan and the united 33 yen on the one hand, we are very cautious -- and the united states. on the one hand, we are very cautious about that. on the other hand, everyone has rights and civil liberties, and the presumption that anytime you have pakistani citizens visit the united states that this is something that is not only valuable, but we encourage this kind of commerce and interaction between the countries. >> the u.s. is not taking any responsibility for this guy almost getting on a plane and leaving this country. this is the second time in three months of someone -- a second foiled terrorist attack on the united states. where is the responsibility? >> this was an american citizen who decided to attack his own country, and we draw implications from that.

i think the government has recognized for some time that we are not immune to the same developments and trends we have seen elsewhere. there is potential for homegrown threats. we have seen it in this instance and others, and we are reacting accordingly, but that reaction is not primarily the province of the of ministration. >> there have been a number of people detained if not arrested. have americans taken part in the interrogation of people contained? >> that is probably a better question to direct to the fbi. >> can you say why she is speaking about this now? >> she was asked. >> we have asked over the past

week. why did she save it for that time? >> i think it is a matter of the information coming out of the investigation. it has clearly pointed to the pakistani taliban. at the time she did the interview for "60 minutes," at link became clear. she mentioned it. others mentioned it, and it is something worth pursuing aggressively. >> over the past several months, the u.s. has been urging pakistan to do more. she made it clear she would like them to do more and link the two. can you tell us why did she come out this time saying pakistan needs to do more and link it to the consequences? >> to the point that she was making, we have been focused on the extremist threat from south

asia and more specifically from pakistan for some time. there have been global implications to these groups and individuals that have the link to pakistan, but this is another indication the threat is not fair. -- not fair. the threat has links. -- the threat is not there. we have seen two or three attacks that have a clear link to pakistan, and the consequences are felt here. as we're seeing the implications, it is not that we're ignoring the threat. it remains a primarily a regional issue.

it is pakistan itself that arguably has suffered the greatest extremism in the region, so we're very conscious of that. we emphasize this is a shared threat and common enemy. that said, we learn more about a group that appears to be broadening its sights and specifically focused on the united states. we draw implications from that, and we will adjust our strategy going forward, and we will look at pakistan to do the same. >> a new topic? a rand? he ran tv is reporting the family of the american -- iranian tv is room -- reporting the family of american hikers is getting access. >> we have been reporting from

the families of the three hikers to be a will to visit their loved ones in tehran. we have been able to report done in. from our knowledge, they have not been able to receive visas. >> the proximity talks -- what guarantees did the israelis get in terms of freezing or requiring a moratorium on sentiment in east jerusalem so the proximity talks could start up again? they have never publicly outlined what those conditions were. >> nor have we. >> are you saying you're not going to >> we have charged both the israelis and the palestinians. we are taking affirmative steps to support the talks, but those will remain private.

>> given the somber note in curt campbell's statement, is this going to mean the end of efforts to engage the government, and as the united states feel there is further opportunity to influence them on the rules of the election? >> the outcome of the the elections will carry no international agenda. we have made that clear to burma. as to our efforts to continue to engage, it is why curt campbell went. during the course of his conversation, she shared his disappointment that the government was not willing to expand, was not willing to have meaningful dialogue with ethnic

groups, but she continued to support efforts to engage the burmese government. >> is there a possibility he will go back? >> our engagement will continue. in what form and were at what point will come later. >> is this an open ended engagement? are you going to at a certain plant review whether engagement is the best -- certain point review whether engagement is the best course? >> we review it all the time. >> it does not mean engagements so far. >> about 15 months into the administration, i think we are willing to stay in these three meetings. we're willing to say the burmese government has disappointed us. we will continue to evaluate. we will continue to make clear

what they should be doing. not only in terms of how it relates to its own people but another message curt campbell delivered today was to reaffirm that we expect for months to live up to its own obligations common -- we expect burma to live up to its own obligations. >> do we know when it was decided he would go i think it was told on friday by a certain official but there were conditions. >> there were conditions. >> when did we get the assurance that he would be able to meet with the people? >> saturday. >> the decision to go was made on saturday? >> we said we would go as long as they met the conditions, and we were satisfied prior to his arrival. >> was it ever possible he was not going to go to thailand if he went to burma?

i got the impression from someone that there were alternate ways one might get to burma. in thailand, what were his conversations like? did he have conversations about the crisis there? >> there have been conversations in recent days common end -- recent days, and we feel there is a road map to help thailand resolve this crisis, but we are not out of the woods yet. >> can you discuss your expectations for the u.s./china human rights dialogue later this week? there are some in the ngo community that think having a human rights dialogue separate from strategic dialogue that we know is coming up is an ineffective way of dealing with

this. >> i would not call them mutually exclusive. during the course of the secretary's upcoming strategic economic dialogue this month, she will have meetings with senior chinese officials on these topics -- and these topics always come up in high-level exchanges. in terms of economic issues and trade, there is issue of human rights, economic opportunity i,f how china meets its international obligations with the investment climate. all of these are inherent in the kinds of things that will be discussed. that said, the assistant secretary posner looks forward

to welcoming a chinese delegation this week for the human rights dialogue, and it allows him to go to some particular cases but also to some particular areas. we will draw upon outside experts, who will help also to explain to chinacentury how a ca can relate to organized religion. we will have a conversation about what the rule of law means in the 21st century, so this is about helping them identify and understand the issues that are part of our agenda but also clear areas of weakness china will have to improve upon. >> you said you are bringing in outside experts? >> we will have the opportunity -- our conversation in

washington will include others outside. >> like who? are you bringing in the dalai lama? >> distinguished americans will join the conversation. >> dozen that run the risk of insulting the chinese -- doesn't that run the risk of insulting the chinese? you're bringing in experts of human rights to tell them what they should be doing. >> we will help them understand how we view the issues in this country and share their perspective in hopes that they understand why we keep bringing up these issues because they are important to us. they are part of our foundation, and it will be helpful. >> you don't think they know that already? you think they don't get into? they do not understand why your bringing these things up, so that is why they do not do anything about it? >> i am serious. this is about helping them understand why we think these issues are important.

>> there is an aids activist who fled to the it u.s. to you have anything to say about that to the chinese. >> he is here in the united states, and we will be talking to him. it is a great concern to us, and we will be talking to him about the future. >> we will have stand-alone human rights talks. does that mean there will be diminished human rights component of the strategic stocks? >> no, our relationship with china is broad. it is deep and covers a number of areas. human rights are a central element to that, so as part of a strategic dialogue, it is part of the economic dialogue. it will touch on human rights. the access to information,

international -- intellectual property rights -- these are all fundamental. >> the check in his government has decided on a location -- the japanese government has decided on the location. have you heard from the japanese government, or are you waiting for a decision? >> i think we're waiting for the final recommendation from the japanese government. >> there is a meeting tomorrow between the two countries in washington, d.c. who is going to participate? >> whenever we get together with our counterparts in the japanese government, it touches upon a number of issues, that is one of them. >> they also decided to postpone the may deadline. is that going to affect the u.s.

scheduled neman >> if they it -- the u.s. scheduled? >> i am not sure. >> the torpedo -- is it like to north korea? do they have a response? >> the investigation remains on going. >> senior officials are coming out and talking about the investigation. are you hoping it will go away? >> we are not hoping it will go away. >> it is a never ending investigation? >> no, but the investigation has not finished. the results have not been officially released. when we see what are the specific conclusions from the investigation, then we will draw

specific conclusions. >> are we hoping they will come to a concrete conclusion gunman -- conclusion? >> when it is done, we will have a strong understanding of how that ships sunk. >> thank you. >> with kentucky senator announcing his retirement, republicans hoping to replace him will hold a debate tonight. we will have the life and a little over an hour from now at 8:00 eastern on c-span. >> why we cannot presume to replace justice stevens's wisdom or experience, i have selected a nominee i believe embodies the same excellence, independence, integrity, and passion for the

law, and who can ultimately provide the same kind of leadership on the court. our solicitor general and my friend, elaine kagan. >> learn more about the highest court from those who have served on the bench in c-span's latest book, "the supreme court." pages of candid conversation with all the justices, providing unique insight about the supreme court, available in hard cover or also hasn't e -- as an ebook. >> now president obama's announcement of kagan for the supreme court. he is joined by the nominee and vice president biden. [applause] >> thank you. thank you, everybody. thank you.

thank you very much. please have a sea. -- seat. good morning, everybody. of the many responsibilities recorded to a president by our constitution, few are more weighty or consequential than that of appointing a supreme court justice, particularly one to succeed a giant in the limelight, justice john paul stevens. he has stood as an impartial guardian of the law, faithfully applying core values of our founding to the cases of our time. he has done so with restraint and respect, understanding of judge's job is to interpret, not make laws, but also with

fidelity to the constitutional ideal of equal justice to all. he has brought not just mastery of the letter of law but a keen understanding of its impact on people's lives, and he has emerged as a consistent voice of reason, helping his colleagues find common ground on some of the most controversial issues the court has ever faced. while we cannot presume to replace justice stephen's wisdom or experience, i have selected a nominee i believe embodies the same excellence, integrity, and passion for the law, and we can -- and who can ultimately provide the same leadership. our solicitor general and my friend, elena kagan. [applause] [applause]

elena is widely regarded as one of the nation's foremost legal minds. she is an acclaimed legal scholar with a richer understanding of constitutional law. she is a former white house aide with a commitment to public service and a firm grasp of the boundaries between our three branches of government. she is a trailblazer in leader, the first woman to serve as the dean of harvard law school and one of the most successful and beloved beans in its history, and she is a superb solicit -- beloved deans in its history, and she is a superb solicitor general. .

[laughter] while she had a brilliant career in academia, her passion for the law is anything but academic. she is often referred to supreme court justice thurgood marshall. she credits him with reminding us that the hon law there are stories. there are stores are people's lives that might be changed by the law. that understanding of the law, not as an intellectual exercise forward on a page, but with

respect for the lives of ordinary people has covered each step of her career. during her time in this office, she has repeatedly defended the rights of shareholders and ordinary citizens against unscrupulous corporations. last year, the citizens united case, she defended by portis and finance reform. despite long odds and success, she still chosen as her first case to argue before the court. that says a great deal not just of her tenacity, but her commitment to serve the american people. it says a great deal about her commitment to defend our fundamental rights. i think it's as a great deal about the path that she has chosen -- i think it says a great deal about the fact that

she has chosen. she could have had a comfortable life in corporate practice. instead, she has chosen service, chosen service to her students sent to the law. choosing her is a truce that came naturally. as a granddaughter of immigrants, her mother was a beloved school teacher for many years, as are her two brothers. her father was a housing lawyer devoted to the rights of tenants. both were the first in the family to attend college. from an early age, they instilled in the valley of education and the importance of using it -- they instilled in them the value of education and the importance of using it to defend others. she has also spoken movingly about how her mother had grown up in a time when women had few

opportunities to pursue their ambitions. she took great joy in watching her mother do so. her parents did not live -- her father did not live to see this moment, but her mother will relish this moment. [applause] what would be more inclusive -- a court that would be more inclusive and more reflective than ever before, i think there would be tremendously proud of their daughter, a great lawyer, a great teacher, has a devoted public servant why am confident will make an outstanding supreme court justice. i hope that the senate will act

in a bipartisan fashion as they did in selecting her for the solicitor general next year -- solicitor general last year. with that, i would like to invite the person was believe will be the next supreme court justice of the united states, clinic in, to say a few words. elenaaine acadian -- is elen kagan, to say a few words. [applause]

>> thank you. thank you, mr. president. i am honored and i am humbled by this nomination and by the confidence you have shown in me. during the last year, as i have served as solicitor general, mile-long standing appreciation for the supreme court to rule in our constitutional democracy has become ever deeper and richer. the court is an extraordinary institution in the work that it does and the work it can do for the american people by advancing the tenets of their constitution, by upholding the rule law, and by enabling all americans, regardless of their background or their beliefs, to get to their fair hearing and an equal chance at justice. within that extraordinary institution, justice stevens has played a particularly

distinguished and exemplary role. it is therefore a special honor to be nominated to fill his seat. i have felt blessed to represent the united states before the supreme court, to walk into the highest court in this country when it is deciding the most important cases, cases that impact so many lies, and to represent the united states there is the most thrilling and the most humbling task a lawyer can perform. i have been fortunate to be supported in the work and have done as the solicitor general by a remarkable group of lawyers and staff, many of them are here today. they exemplify professionalism, public service, and integrity. i am grateful for all that they have taught me. my professional life has been marked with great good fortune. -- i clerked forju

a judge who was the best in public service. for justice thurgood marshall, who did more to promote justice over the course of his legal career then any other lawyer in his lifetime -- i have had the attendee to serve under two remarkable presidents who have devoted themselves to live in the lives of others and to have inspired a great many more to do the same. i had the privilege of leaving one of the world's greatest law schools and, while working theee, to bring people together and to make sure that they and the school were making the largest possible contribution to the public good, both in this country and around the world. i am proud of what all of us have accomplished there. through most of my professional life, i have had the simple joy

of teaching, of trying to communicate to students why i soloed will law, not just because it is challenging and endlessly interesting -- although it certainly is that -- but because the law matters, because it keeps us safe, because it protects our most fundamental rights and freedoms , and because it is the foundation of our democracy. i am thankful to my brothers and other family and friends for coming to washington to be with me here today. much more, i am thankful for all their support and loyalty and love, not just on this day, but always. if this day has just a touch of sadness for may, it is because my parents are not here to share it. as a sadness for me -- sadness

for me, it is because my parents are not here to share it. my father was the kind of lawyer who used his skills and training to represent every day people and to improve the community. my mother was a proud public schoolteacher, as are my two brothers, the kind of teachers and students remember for the rest of their lives -- the kind of students that students remember for the rest of their lives. i pray every day that i live up to the example they set. mr. president, i look forward to working with the senate in the next stage of this process and a thank you again, mr. president, for this honor of a lifetime. thank you so much. [applause]

>> lafd kaydin was born in new york city and hold -- elena kagan was born in new york city. she served for thurgood marshall.

in her current job, she represents the u.s. government and defense acts of congress before the supreme court and decides when to appeal a lower court rulings. she could be the fourth woman to serve on the supreme court. the senate judiciary committee chairman praised the choice of a limit kaydin -- of elena kagan. >> i hope you had a good mother's day. we were able to celebrated with

a daughter and a brother and two grandchildren. today, president obama announced his nomination of solicitor general elena kagan to succeed justice stevens on the supreme court. the president chose from an impressive list of superbly qualified candidates. and talking with them, as he was making this decision -- in talking with him, as he was making this decision, it was an amazing list of people he was considering. he consulted with both sides of the aisle as well as those outside of the senate. as a school of the constitution himself, he brought a wealth of knowledge and insight to the selection process. he wanted to select an outstanding future justice who was well within the mainstream of legal and constitutional fought.

her recent senate confirmation for solicitor general seemed to support that. we confirm her as solicitor general. -- we confirm her as solicitor general. -- we confirmed her as solicitor general. it was just a few decades ago, when most of the supreme court justices were from outside the judicial monastery, they did not come there as former judges. with this nomination, she will follow in the footsteps of her mentor, thurgood marshall. he was also nominated to the supreme court from the position as solicitor general. her nomination will bring to

this great court a diversity of experience that it has been missing since justice o'connor retired in 2006. i told the president that goes like to see he chose outside of the judicial monastery. if you look at the history of this country, the justices have a varied background coul if. some of the great justices, like sandra day o'connor, who had been in the arizona legislature, or justice louis brandeis, who professor, or hugo black, the defender of the first amendment, who had been a

federal senator -- they had not been justices and were nominated to the supreme court. ceviches justice earl warren, a justice who came to the -- the justice earl warren, he recognized the power of the unanimous decision and the supreme court rejection of racial discrimination in browner says the board of education. -- in brown vs. the board of education. there was a unanimous supreme court. we see in too many recent supreme court races a narrow majority.

i hope this confirmation process will be an opportunity for all americans to see a more detailed impact of the decisions of the highest court in all of our lives. there is no better time to consider these important decisions as we look at the confirmation of the next justice. that process should be an opportunity for all americans to learn about the courts in fact -- the courts and careful decisions on our lives. -- the courts and tactful -- the decisions ontful our lives. we recently reviewed her record in connection with her nomination to be solicitor

general. she received bipartisan support. this makes our job easier. it was just a short time ago that we had the confirmation hearing and we went through all of the things we will have to go through again to confirm her as a justice of the supreme court. we have an opportunity during the confirmation hearing to ask elena kagan about to the important fall that the supreme court holds in the lives of every american. she will discuss how she will approach the law from a different perspective as a member of the supreme court, rather than as an advocate for the supreme court. i look forward to welcoming the american people to those hearings, to make sure they are as open as possible to the american public. we will give her an opportunity to respond to critics who began

attacking her even begun -- even before she was nominated. there are 300 million americans who will be affected by this nomination. there are only 100 americans who get a chance to vote on his nomination. they're the 100 united states senators. we have to represent all 100 -- all 300 million americans, making a decision of a lifetime nomination. the senate is and should be the conscience of the nation. that is so no more than when considering the nomination for the supreme court. we 100 americans have a duty to the other 300 million americans

to make a wise decision. our constitution deserves a civil and thoughtful debate on this nomination. all 100 senators should stand up and vote yes or no. thank you very much. any questions? >> and number of republicans have said that the nomination for solicitor general is far different from a judicial appointment and that she has no judicial background. what do you say? >> i am glad to see somebody from outside of the judicial monastery. in their history, in recent decades come -- in our history, in recent decades, the justices have all been from federal courts. the most dynamic courts have been those who came from different backgrounds. i worry when they are in a judicial monastery. you do not have the real kind

of you -- you don't have the kind of real world experience that you would have otherwise. of course, it is a little ironic if any were to complain that she has not been a judge. she was nominated to be a member of the d.c. circuit court, the second highest court in the land. the republicans pocket filibustered her. on the one hand, you cannot say, man, we did a great job and a plot for nomination, and come on the other hand, say that she should have been a judge before we consider her. we have a superb nominee. we have somebody who should be seen by the american people as the best that this country can offer. we ought to confirm her. clerks do agree with the notion that -- >> do you agree with the

notion that senators should approach this nominee differently because it is a lifetime appointment? >> in many ways, the questions become the same. you're talking about one's legal abilities, the legal background. she was highly rated when she was nominated by president clinton for the d.c. court of appeals and was filibustered by the republicans. she has been dean of harvard law school. she has been solicitor general. of course, age confirmation, you would look at separately. but all of the questions that may be asked have already been asked. >> do you think that you can move the confirmation hearing [unintelligible]

what would that time frame be? >> i will meet with miss kagan this week. after i have met with her, i will meet with the ranking member, as i always do. then i will set a timetable. obviously, we will finish it this summer so that she can be sitting on the court when it session be thereessointo in september or october. >> what aspects of her record makes you confident that she has the experience she needs to be on the high court? >> actually, we have many supreme court members but did not have experience before they were there. she has real life experience. it would be hard to find people

in this country who would stand out as a greater legal scholar then she is. >> senator mcconnell made the point that she has had a very brief litigation experience. others have described her performance before the supreme court as somewhat shaky. does that give you pause that all? >> they can raise those questions at the confirmation hearing and we will see that she will be very impressive in the confirmation hearing. we have some republicans who would automatically oppose any body who was nominated. the president could nominate [unintelligible] i told the present, if you had nominated moses, someone would

raise that he does not have a burst this a ticket. -- i told the president, if you had nominated moses, onsomeone would raise that he does not have a birth certificate. come on. vote up or down. >> what is the counter from democrats on the committee? >> i will be glad to counter the republicans when they step forward in the light of day and make their argument. that will be the time to counter them. >> she lost 31 votes, including arlen specter. will some of those executive arguments have to be withdrawn? will he be given more information? >> we will have a thorough,

complete confirmation hearing. one of the things that both republicans and democrats have agreed upon after the semi or hearing is a after the sotomayor hearing -- after the sotomayor hearing, we need a hearing that is open and fair and anybody can ask any questions that they want to appear i will do the same here. -- that they want to. i will do the same here. i hope that the american public will pay as much attention to this one as they did for sotomayor. there were so many phone calls and the mills and letters. -- end e-mails and letters. people told us that they saw .atchethe hearings i hope they will do the same

thing in this hearing. >> senator, i know you do not think it should make a difference, but it is an election year. [unintelligible] >> up this year? >> that is the rimmer. >> i am up this year. will it make a difference? perhaps, with some, i should not. we are given terms as senators where we're supposed to be the conscience of the nation. we're supposed to represent 300 million americans. the people want to play politics with this, then they are not really fulfilling the duties of what they should do as a senator. >> we do not know a lot about the nominee, but she refused to have military recruiters come to

the harvard law school. >> she did say that there were plenty of recruiters closed by the campus. my youngest son joined the marine corps and he found that he could walk three blocks or four blocks off of campus and find the recruiting station and sign up. thank you. >> we have heard administration officials advocate for the widening of the public risk exception former randomizing -- for mirandizing, even american citizens. >> miranda came down when i was a prosecutor. i get a kick out of the number of police officers in vermont who will come up to may, pullout with the miranda

warning. we had a case where we fail to get a conviction when we had given the memory and a warning when i was a prosecutor. most prosecutors, it does not really affect whether it will get a conviction or not. it has not been a hindrance. there was a case once where, in a burglary, they had caught the person in the act. the defense said, did you give them the miranda warning? " they had put the handcuffs on first and then they did. they ask them to put down the back the stolen money. i think the jury understood.

thank you. congratulate solicitor general kagan on >> i want to congratulate solicitor general elena kagan. i expect that we will treat her with the same respect that we treated justice sotomayor last year. at the end of her confirmation process, then judge sotomayor recognized that she had been treated fairly by everyone. unfortunately, that has always been the case with supreme court nominees of republican presidents. american people know what they want in the supreme court justice. they want someone who will apply the law fairly, in partially,

without respect to persons as the judicial oath requires. they do not want someone to be a rubber stamp for any administration. ms. kagan is currently a member of president obama's administration. she was nominated to the highest court. the standard of scrutiny is much higher. we must determine whether someone who is a member of the president's administration will be an independent and impartial jurist on the nation's highest court. the american people also want a nominee ith a represent -- with a requisite little experience. the instinctively know that they lifetime on the supreme court does not lend itself to on the job training. one does not need expensive it being a judge to be on the

supreme court. but it strikes me that if a nominee does not have judicial experience, they should have substantial litigation experience. she has neither, unlike justice rehnquist who was in private practice for 16 years before his appointment. exploring these questions is exactly what the nomination process is about. both parties will begin the process of carefully reviewing her briefly asian experience as well as her judgment and her career in academia, both as a professor and as in the administrator. fulfilling our duty to advise and consent on the nomination of this office requires a thorough process, not a rush to judgment. senate republicans will have vigorous debate on the importance of equal justice under law.

this principle lies at the very heart of our judicial system. we will diligently review her record to ensure that she shares dispensable and that she possesses the requisite experience to serve on the supreme court. mr. president, i yield the floor. >> while we capra's them to replace justice stevens wisdom or spirits, i have a nominee who will believe them bodies excellence, independence, integrity, and passion for the law and who can ultimately provide that same kind of leadership on the court. our solicitor general and my friend, elena kagan. >> with the supreme court justice nominee in the news, learn more about the high court from those who have served on the bench. these are pages of candid conversation with all of the justices, active and retired providing unique insight of the

supreme court. it is available in hardcover and as an e-book. >> tonight, there is a discussion on broadcast frequencies and issues for the expansion of broadband. these are two members of the commerce department's advisory committee on spectrum use. that is on "the communicator's" on c-span 2. >> kentucky senator jim benninbg has announced his retirement and the new republican primary debate will be tonight. the first sitting center to lose an intra-party contest, we will hear from bob bennett and his challengers.

ññññ >> no more taxes, no irresponsible spending, no more troubling of state's rights, no more telling terrorists that you have the right to remain silent. [cheers and applause] no more apologies for the greatest nation on earth. [cheers and applause] do you want to take back our country? [cheers and applause] then vote him in bridgewater as your next senator. the job will not get done by some entrenched jobholders in washington, d.c. or buy more

lawyer politicians. it will take more than lawyer maneuvering to secure our borders, reduced illegal immigration, and to release restrictions on our own land. it will take a constitutionalist who is also a capitalist. [cheers and applause] i am a small businessman who has created jobs right here in utah. i understand payroll, taxes, trade, and economics. across this country, businessmen and women are rising up and running for the u.s. senate to defend our free market from the regime, the current obama regime, that is having a crushing assault on america's capitalism. in pennsylvania, a businessman

will defeat arlen specter. [cheers and applause] in connecticut, peter schiff will replace chris dodd. [cheers and applause] right next door, a businessman harry reid.woman will replace [cheers and applause] as a businessman, i can explain reality to lawmakers who have never worked in the private sector. they do not understand industry. they do not know how free markets work. to progressives and the liberals, the constitution is a right-winger wa-- a right wing relic. it is an inspired document that must be honored and upheld. it is undermined everytime the left assertsubvert our rights in

government. [cheers and applause] that is an issue way above obama's pay grade. you know and i know that our inalienable rights come from guide. [cheers and applause] we have all seen america diminished by the party in power. will our children and future generations so much more. -- we owe our children and future generations so much more. we owe them leaders to put the best interest of the u.s.a. over the demands of the aclu. [cheers and applause] count on my unwavering support for state's rights, limiting government, and count on me to say no to amnesty, no to camp

and trade, and no to further funding of the united nations. [cheers and applause] count on this gun owner to protect your right and my right to keep and bear arms. [cheers and applause] count on a small businessman to support free markets, despite the government intrusion to dismantle the department of education. i will never undercut our troops. the u.s. military is not administering social programs in afghanistan. they are risking their lives to protect this nation. we must say yes when we are asked to sacrifice. as your senator, i will ask all of america to transform entitlements. thank you. vote for me for senate. [cheers and applause]

[cheers and applause] >> hi there. good morning. it is an honor to be among went -- to be among men and women of good spirits. today, the causes we champion had even greater consequence. by our side, a man engaged in our battles, he rarely speaks up for itself. that is unusual for politicians. today, i want to stick up for him. you know his principles. he is a man of faith and family, who loves freedom and free enterprise. today, he faces an uphill battle at this convention.

some may disagree with a handful of his boats or simply want a new face. but with a sweet and arrogance in the onslaught of democrats today, we need intellect and loyalty and power. [years and applause] the people of utah have always shown the ability to work together and honor the spirit of fair play. very few things come to us by wright, including reelection to the senate. you have to work for those things. sometimes, you have to fight for them. i would like to introduce to you a fighter, a man of wisdom, a man that america and utah cannot afford to lose, senator bob bennett. [cheers and applause] >> thank you so much, mitch.

your support is so much appreciated. no one is better to leave our party then you are. [cheers and applause] during this campaign, that there are two questions that always come up. bob, are you truly listening to us? why do you want to do this again? yes, i am listening. i have been stimulated by your passion for america, your conservative cause and the seriousness of the problems we face. i hear you when you say you want a fighter to reflect that passion. i know you want to repeal obama care and i agree. indeed, i want to repeal obama. [cheers and applause] you want to take control of congress away from nancy pelosi and harry reid. i not only agree, but i believe that we will do it.

[cheers] you want more accountability in government. next week, i will be leading republicans to vote on an amendment to senator dodd for the federal reserve. you want to get spending under control. i have already voted for a balanced budget amendment for three times. i will again of making certain that it will not turn into a tax increase for democrats. our tax burden is already too high. [applause] i want to do this again because the fire in my belly is burning bright than ever. i yield to no one in my reverence for the constitution, like lincoln. i have an oath registered in heaven and i turned to it as the first checkpoint when considering any piece of legislation.

will this action strengthen america or weaken america? that question should apply to every issue we contemplate. fighting in afghanistan in strengthens america. returning power to the states strengthens america. but locking up 9.4 million acres of land in utah weakens america. [cheers and applause] i have supported the troops, voted against no child left behind, and watched the land grab every time it has come up. i can do this because i now have tools that i lacked as a freshman. give me the chance to use them as we face the current crisis of unsustainable debt. we cannot postpone the day of reckoning anymore. i do not want to walk into retirement and joining

testimonial dinners. i will do that in six years when we will have solved this problem. we are americans and americans have always risen to the challenge. we have overcome worst times than these. ronald reagan faced an unemployment rate higher than what we have now. but he was an optimist who believed that common sense americans can do anything they put their minds to it and so am i.. [cheers and applause] i do not despair in the task ahead. i have faith in america and faith in god and i believe that faith drives out fear. by voting for me, you will tell the rest of the nation that uconn is have not been taken in by the special interest groups who have tried to take over this campaign. [cheers and applause]

utahns -- the fear mongers. they have now lost their faith in the future because they remained convinced that god will continue to bless america. that is what i believe. that is what i believe. that is where i stand. and i asked you to stand with me. thank you very much. [cheers and applause] ♪ [cheers and applause]

>> my name is mike lee and i want to be your next u.s. senator. [cheers and applause] our federal government is too vague because the -- is too big because the constitution has been ignored by congress for too long. as americans, it is time to remember that power is in our hands. [applause] this election is not about any one individual. it is about the friends and neighbors we represent as delegates. it is about our children. it is about our grandchildren. it is about the greatness of our past and the greatest country we will leave the future generations of americans. in order to move lower, i invite you to join me on a journey back to a time and place that is

not unlike our own. it was a turbulent time of great division and unrest within our young republic. george washington recorded the events of march 4, 1797, the final day of his second term as president of the united states. washington road, "it was with a deep and heavy heart that i left my room today, thinking not so much of myself as a dark country." as he was walking on just a street, "i was just playing george washington now, neither general more president. suddenly, i realized that i was not alone. people were following me. at first, it was a few and then a swelling crowd. for a moment, i stood face-to- face with them, the young toddlers, the storekeeper, the labor. they all stood facing me. they said not a word. i realized that province was

showing me a vision of america, of what it would become. i could feel assured that, come what may, whether it be political bickering or another legal in government, our country rests in good hands, in the hands of the people." [cheers and applause] a similar but larger crowd has gathered today. political strife again divides our country and the federal government is expanding in a way that would shock the founding generation. as i look at this crowd, i do not see toddlers and shopkeepers, but i do see web designers and dr. bernard, scientists and schoolteachers, mothers and fathers -- web designers and entrepreneurs, scientists and schoolteachers, mothers and fathers. the fate of the country is in good hands, the fate of the

people -- the hands of the people. [cheers and applause] what makes 2010 different from other election years? people are realizing what has always been true, that the power of america's in the hands of its people. starting with the party members to the sunni 5000 + who flooded caucuses this year -- to 75,000 who flooded caucuses this year. [unintelligible] [applause] this begs the important question -- how do we ensure that the power remains in the hands of the people? we ensure that by returning to that document that placed the power in the people's has to

begin with, the u.s. constitution. [applause] that means we must ask ourselves the very same question placed before the founding fathers -- are we tired of the oppressive hand of an oppressive national government? [cheers] are we ready to restore power to our local governments? [cheers] are we ready to get governments greedy hands out of our pockets and out of 70% of our land? [cheers and applause] that being the case, let's join hands with americans down through the ages and across this country who have proven time and time again that we can do hard things. [cheers] will you join hands with me to

fight for our future? that future begins today. together, we will reject that as its spending. today, together, we will reform the tax code. we will restore the constitutional debate in congress. today, together, we will repeal government-run health care. when should we do that? [cheers] yes. tomorrow begins today, right here, right now, at this convention. as we recognize that constitutionally limited government unlocked some limited human potential, we will reclaim that feature. the constitution is central to every viable practical solution with our federal government. that is why i pledge never to vote for a single bill that i cannot reconcile with the text

and original understanding of the constitution. [cheers and applause] regardless of what the supreme court of the united states says, i will fight every day as your senator to end the cradle- to-grave entitlement mentality, to protect their flag, our borders, and national security, and four bills that can be read before they receive a final vote in congress. [cheers and applause] we are another crowd of individuals, armed with the constitution in one hand and a ballot in the other. george washington was right. america's future is in your hands. we are americans, hand in hand. we can confront the town of our day. we can restore the

constitutionally-limited government. we can come we must, and we will. -- we can, we must, and we will. [cheers and applause] >> republicans running for senate in kenwe will have them t over five minutes from now. >> tonight, there is a discussion on broadcast frequency and the potential use for the expansion of broadband. these are two members of the commerce department advisory committee on spectrum years. this will be on "the communicator's" on c-span 2. >> while we cannot presume to replace justice stevens's wisdom or spirits, i have selected a nominee why believe embodies that same excellence, independence, integrity, and passion for the law, and who can

ultimately provide that same kind of leadership on the court. our solicitor general and my friend, elena kagan. >> with the supreme court justice nominee in the news, learn more about the nation's highest court from those who have served on the bench in c- span's latest book, "the supreme court." they are candid conversations with all of the justices, providing unique insight. it is available in hardcover and as an e-book. >> c-span, our public affairs content is available on television, radio, and online. you can also connect with the signed -- you can also connect with us on twitter, facebook, and youtube. >> president obama nominated u.s. solicitor general elena kagan for the supreme court. here is an update from a reporter on the story before

live coverage of the kentucky republican senate debate. >> joining us is set stern -- seth stern. what do you think? >> it has lined up as expected. she has received seek unanimous reviews from democrats. on the republican side, they are reserving comment, not coming out of the gate. they want to be able to review her record and not be on record coming out against her from the get go. >> she was approved by the senate by a 61-39 for her current position. >> there were seven republicans

who voted for her for solicitor general, some even on the senate judiciary. but jon kyl of arizona and orrin hatch of utah have made the point that this is a different job. this is a lifetime appointment. this is the distinction that has often been made in the past. senators will say, yes, we may have done this before, but this is a different job. they make president. they do not follow it. it is a different game. >> you also wrote that the then- gop senator arlen specter voted against her for solicitor general. he indicated whether he supports her and why would this be a tough decision for him? >> this puts him in an awkward spot at the time that the solicitor general vote came up, he was the top republican on the senate judiciary committee. he will have some explaining to

do. he has been out today saying that it is a different job and that he has an open mind. he is trying to give himself some wiggle room. >> what about the hearings themselves. what sort of issues will be at the forefront of the confirmation hearings? >> this will be a unique hearing in the sense that we have a non- sitting judge, almost 40 years since powell and rehnquist. she was a law professor at the university of chicago and at harvard before she cambecame beg carried there will -- became dean. she had tried to bar military recruiting from using the services facilities siting the discrimination policy regarding gays. >> now that the announcement has been made, what to you here on

capitol here about the timeline for the confirmation hearing? >> the white house and senators are trying to talk about this before it the -- are talking about trying to get this done before the august recess. they have a several -- they have several weeks more than last year for the sotomayor nomination. it they are really ambitious, they would try to push it through before the july 4 recess. >> that is seth stern. thank you for joining us. >> you are welcome. >> live from lexington, kentucky, this is a debate between the republican candidates running in the may 18 republican primary for the u.s. senate seat. senate seat.