kabul for which i am grateful for your support and you're very kind advice. we also discussed the upcoming parllamentary elections and they kabul conference. we discussed in frank detail and in a productive manner the issues of protection of civilians and judicial independence of afghanistan. i am happy to convey back to the afghan people that i found a very supportive of voice from president obama on these accounts and i am very glad to report to you that we will be setting up a team of senior advisers to work out the exact time lines of transfer which i considered to be a major point of progress in our

conversations. mr. president, i once again would like to convey to you and to the people of the united states, our deep and heartfelt gratitude to the help that america has provided. because of that, afghanistan is once again on the world map in a significantly important way. the flag is flying all around the world. we once again have a voice as a people of afghanistan and this would not have been possible without the sacrifices and resources of the u.s. and other allies including other countries. there were issues that were a concern to all of us.

afghanistan is still a very poor country. the work we have done promises a better future for all of us and afghanistan will assure you that it will take the right steps in bringing it better government to afghanistan. thank you, once again, mr. president. [applause] >> thank you. we have time for to questions from the u.s. press and to questions from the afghan press. >> it says that you have been able to put aside the tensions and frictions that were evidenced a month or so ago.

have you discussed those concerns that were raised at that time? have you figured out how the relationship may have come off the tracks? may i also ask you about your talk with a new prime minister of the united kingdom yesterday? are you worried in any way that the u.k.'s support in afghanistan might wane? i will take the second question first. i had a conversation with david cameron yesterday. i have had the occasion of meeting him when i travel to england previously. i find him to be a smart, dedicated, effective leader and somebody who we will be able to work with. he reaffirmed, without me bringing it up, his commitment to our strategy and afghanistan.

i am confident that the new government is giving to recognize that it is in the interest of all the coalition partners to help president karzai 68 and to build a more prosperous -- to succeed and to build a more prosperous afghanistan which will in turn secure our long-term security. when i had the conversation with prime minister cameron, we reaffirmed the extraordinary special relationship between the u.s. and great britain. one that outlasts any individual party, individual leader. it was built up over centuries. it is not going to go away. with respect to perceived tensions between the u.s. government and the afghan government, let me begin by saying a lot of them were simply overstated. when i came into office, i made

it absolutely clear that i intended to resource and effective strategy in afghanistan and work with the afghan governments so that we have a strong, stable, prosperous afghanistan. i used whatever political capital i had to make the case to the american people that this is in our national security interest and it is absolutely critical that we succeed on this mission. president karzai agrees. he agrees that we have to deal with the extremists, that are disrupting life in afghanistan and our strategic approach has been entirely consistent. obviously, there are going to be tensions in such a complicated, difficult environment.

in a situation in which on the ground, both afghans and americans are making enormous sacrifices. we have had very frank discussions and president karzai agrees with me that we cannot win three military strategy alone. we have to make sure that we have effective governance, capacity-building, economic development, in order for us to succeed. i think that what we discussed this morning is a recognition on both sides that this transformation is not going to happen overnight. a country that has come out of 30 years of war and dire poverty is not going to suddenly change across the board. our job is to be a good friend

and to the franc with president karzai and saying here is where we think we have to put more effort. president karzai's job is to represent his country and insist that its sovereignty is properly respected even as he goes about the hard task of bringing about these changes in both his government and his economy. i am very comfortable with the strong efforts that president karzai has made thus far. i think that we both agreed that we will have to make more efforts in the future. there are going to be setbacks and * where our governments disagree on a particular tactic. what i am very confident about is we share a broad strategy, one that i hope we can

memorialize in the declaration by the end of this week. >> the relationship between afghanistan and the u.s. is now into its 10th year. it is not an imaginary relationship. it is a real relationship. it is based on some very hard and difficult realities. we are and a battle against terrorism together. there are days that we are happy, there are days we are not happy. it is a mutual relationship. toward a common objective. there are definitely days that have come where we have had differences of opinion and days inns in the future where we will have differences of opinion.

but the relationship between the two governments and the two nations is strong and well rooted and has entered the past 10 years of extreme activity on both sides. i believe that what you saw in the past few months is reflective of the deep and strong relationship and as president obama really described, there are moments when we speak frankly to each other and that frankness will only add to the strength of the relationship and to the mitchell success. the bottom-line is that we are much more strongly related to each other today than we ever were before.

that is a good message that i will take back to the afghan people the day after tomorrow. thank you. thank you for giving us a chance. >> i make correspondent for television from afghanistan. i am not talking about -- talking as a journalist but as a woman. as long as i have remembered, the afghanistan situation, the only reason that of can stand -- [inaudible] pakistan has two faces regarding afghanistan. that is why we have problems.

i need your answer, what is the new policy of the united states to solve this problem and next question for president karzai, i will ask. [speaking foreign-language close brackets -- ]. >> i know you will translate for us. [laughter] he is very good at that. he is very good at that. >> president karzai and i have in the past met with the

president of pakistan as well as their intelligence officers, there's military, their teams. we emphasized to pakistan the fact that our security is intertwined. i think there has been a view on the part of pakistan that their primary rival, india, was their only concern. i think what you have seen over the last several months is a growing recognition that they have a cancer in their midst, that the extremist organizations that have been allowed to congregate and use as a base the frontier areas to then go into afghanistan, that that now friends pakistan's sovereignty. our goal is to break down some

of the old suspicions and the old bad habits and continue to work with the pakistan the government to see their interest in a stable afghanistan which is free from foreign meddling and that afghanistan, pakistan, the u.s., the international community should all be working to reduce the influence of extremists in those regions. extremists in those regions. i am actually encourage by what i have seen from the pakistan the government over the last several months. -- pakistani government over the last several months. it will take some time for afghanistan's economy to recover from 30 years of war. it is going to take some time for pakistan, even where there is a will, to find a way in

order to effectively deal with these extremists and areas that are fairly loosely governed. part of what i have been encouraged is their willingness to assert more control over these areas. but it is not going to happen overnight. they have been taking enormous casualties. the military has been going in fairly aggressively. this will be an ongoing project. president karzai and i discussed the fact that the only way, ultimately, that pakistan is the care is its debt -- is if afghanistan is secure and the only way that afghanistan is the care is at the territorial integrity, the afghan constitution, the afghan people, are respected by their neighbors. we'd think that that message is

starting to get through but it is one that we have to continue to promote. >> we did discuss civilian casualties and protection of civilians. i must report to you that since the arrival of general mcchrystal, there has been considerable progress achieved. there are very open and frank attitudes about that. attitudes about that. the president expressed in fundamentally human terms his concern about civilian casualties, not only as a political issue but as a human

issue which i have my respect to the president on this issue will not only discussed the ways and means of civilian casualties and not having them at all. not having them at all. you will see the agreement between us on this in the joint carian nikkei -- communique. >> and thank you. for these thousands of u.s. troops and billions of dollars of aid that is still pouring into afghanistan, could you talk

to the american people and give us a sense of where we stand, how close we are to winning this war and if you will be able to meet your goal of pulling out u.s. troops by july of 2011? to president karzai, is there anything your government or your people can do to maintain that deadline? have you found your meetings with iran's president to be helpful or hurtful in your relationship with the obama administration? about or whatear july, 2011, represents. what i have said is having put in more troops over the last several months in order to break the momentum of the television. beginning in 2011, july, we will

start bringing those troops down and turning over more and more responsibility to afghan security forces we are building up. we are not suddenly, as of july, 2011, finished with afghanistan. to the country, part of what i have tried to emphasize is this is a long-term partnership. it is not defined by our military presence. i am confident that we are going to be able to reduce our troop strength in afghanistan starting july, 2011, and i am in constant discussions with general mcchrystal about the execution of that time frame. after july, 2011, we are still going to have an interest in making sure that afghanistan is

secure, that economic development is taking place, that good governance is being promoted, so we are going to be putting in resources and we will still pay a friend to the afghan people in their efforts to stabilize. that is something that i want to make absolutely clear. what the american people should know is we are steadily making progress. it is not overnight. it will not be instant. but the sacrifices of those young people result, over time, more and more of afghan government being in control. as i indicated in my opening

remarks, this is not just going to be a military solution. through the peace talks that are being organized which sends a strong message about the afghan's government to commit to human-rights and women's rights, through all of those mechanisms, the more and more the afghan people began feeling confident in the afghan government. as their confidence grows, their fear of the television weakens. we are confident that that approach, that has a strong military component to that is mindful of the enormous sacrifices of our troops and their families are making, that component is critical but these other -- but these other components will be critical. if we marry those two approaches, we are optimistic

about our success. there will be ups and downs. one thing i have tried to emphasize is the fact that there is going to be some hard fighting over the next several months. the fact that we are engaging, look at a place like marja. the taliban controlled the area. when you move in, you said you are not controlling this any more, they are going to fight back. they are tough. they are going to fight. what you are seeing for is we have succeeded in driving the taliban out of their but it is also a model of the partnership between u.s. forces dead you are starting to see horses the battle ready, but tough, if a more experienced. that helps us execute a transition so more and more afghan forces are able to take

the lead. this is going to be taking time. one last point i want to make a because the president referred to the issue of civilian casualties. let me be very clear about what i told president karzai. when there is a civilian casualty, that is not just a political problem for me. i am ultimately accountable, just as general mcchrystal is accountable. for somebody not on the battlefield who got killed. that is something that i have to carry with me and anybody who is involved in a military operation has to carry that with them. we do not take that lightly. we have an interest in reducing civilian casualties not because it is a problem for president karzai, it is because i do not

want civilians killed. we are going to do everything we can to prevent that. or is tough and difficult. mistakes are going to be made. our troops put themselves at risk oftentimes an order to reduce civilian casualties. they will take a chance often in a field of battle were they are trying to do with and certain information and they are not sure whether that is an attack coming or not or which house these shots are being fired from. because of general mcchrystal's direction, they are hesitating and holding fire and being cautious about how they operate even though it would be safer for them to go ahead and just take these locations out because part of what the american military stands for is that we

distinguish between civilians. something that our enemies do not do. that puts us more at risk and it makes it more difficult but that is a burden we are willing to bear. i want everybody to be clear, especially the afghan people. i take no pleasure in hearing a report a civilian has been killed. it is not why i ran for president. it is not why i am commander in chief. that is not why are young men and women signed up and sacrifice in the way that president karzai saw the sacrifice. we are going to work together as assiduously as we can to make sure the civilian casualties are reduced even as we try to accomplish a mission and even as we are reminded ourselves constantly that the overwhelming number of civilian casualties are as a consequence

of terrorist attacks by the taliban. >> on the july, 2011, afghanistan's army and police are progressing steadily. they're progressing towards strengthening institutionalizing. institutionalizing. we plan to be conducting to getting the ability within the next two years. by the time my term of office is by the time my term of office is complete, four years from today, afghanistan is working hard to

provide security for the whole of the country. of the country. the overall picture, president issue ofke on the july, 2011. on the question of iran and my meeting with the president in tehran, afghanistan's position there is very clear. we have been clear with our brothers and counterparts in iran on that, as well and with our other neighbors. afghanistan is a partner and a friend with the united states. the united states is our greatest contributor to

stability and reconstruction and a provider of 8% of the support that afghan receives. -- 80% of the support after it receives. afghanistan is looking forward to a long term and a strong relationship with united states and we have expressed that repeatedly and publicly. we have also spoken with our american counterparts from the beginning that iran is our neighbor and a brother and we want to have relations with them. they have contributed to our reconstruction. we wish that afghanistan remains friendly to both and it is not a place where we are seeing as a playground by our neighbors in any way.

the united states has been very clear and supportive and understanding of our position and this has been in the discussions between us. there was a reference to afghanistan have been friendly relations with its neighbors and iran is one of our neighbors. we are clear and distinct on our relationship with america and with iran, as well. we which -- we wish both countries the best and if there is anything we can do to make things better, call us. things better, call us. >> i will ask president karzai and then president obama.

one of the purposes of your trip here is to gain the support of u.s. government for reconciliation and reintegration of taliban and afghanistan. when you for started the strategy, you were willing to talk to lower and middle level taliban but you have shown interest in bringing in taliban leaders into the negotiations. the taliban made it clear that the only way for them to talk to the afghan to government is a complete withdrawal of foreign troops from afghanistan. troops from afghanistan. are you sure that the strategy after the support that you have gained from the international community will be a successful one? my question for president obama would be that secretary clinton yesterday mentioned that you would support this initiative only if the taliban put their

weapons down, respect the afghan constitution and cut ties with al qaeda. we note that taliban and al qaeda are fighting for the ideologies, not the gains. it is difficult to differentiate between the two because they are fighting as a united force. do you think is a viable strategy for afghanistan? . .

>> as president karzai scribe,

-- described, the taliban is a large turned to describe a loose group of fighters with different determinations. so long as there is a respect for the afghan constitution, rule of law, human rights -- and so long as they are willing to renounce violence and ties to al qaeda and other extremist networks, the president should be able to work to reintegrate those individuals into afghan society. this would have to be an afghan led effort. it is not one dictated by the united states or any other outside power. i think that it will allow for a

framework for them to move forward. one of the thing i emphasized to president karzai is that the incentives for the taliban to lay down arms, and make peace with the afghan governemtn -- a government, in part, depends on us breaking their momentum of militarily. that is why we put in the additional u.s. troops. that is why general met crystal -- mccrystal is working to clear up key population centers from television control. -- taliban control. at what point do they start

making different calculations about what is in their interest, and how they feel about these issues aren't part going to be dependent on our success in terms of carrying out our mission. we are an important partner in facilitating this potential reconciliation and effectively and powering the afghan government so it is in the strongest possible position as these talks move forward. let me say, in conclusion, as president, i am grateful for your visit. this is a reaffirmation of the friendship between the american people and the afghan people. when i came into office, i made it very clear that after years of drift and the relationship, i saw this as a critical priority. i also said to the american people that this was going to take some time. and it was going to be hard.

we will not seem magical transformations immediately, but with slow, steady, persistent work on the part of the united states and the afghan government, i was confident that we could achieve peace and stability and security there. and ultimately, the american people would be more safe and more secure. i am more convinced than ever that we have found it difficult but appropriate strategy for pursuing those goals. i am confident we will be able to achieve our mission. there will be setbacks. it there'll be times when the afghan government and u.s. government to disagree. but our overarching approach is unified, and i think the visit by president karzai and his

willingness to listen to our concerns as we listen to his only makes the relationship stronger. thank you very much, everybody. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> today, supreme court,elena ka -- nominee elena kagan was making the rounds. who did she meet with and what did they talk about? >> she met with senate majority

leader harry reid, minority leader mitch mcconnell, leaders of the judiciary committee, senator sessions and senator leahy. it seems like it was most of this was fairly easygoing discussions about basic issues. she hasn't really got to the meetings where the others have had a chance to discuss the big issues with her. >> how did the meetings go, particularly with republicans? >> these people are fairly guarded about what they talked about. they sort of did not explain what exactly they talked about with her. they seem to have gone fairly well, members coming away with a positive feeling. it looks like they're going fairly well at this point. >> what are the purpose of the meetings. are they substantial, or they meet and greet? >> for some of them, they're just meet and greet, but for

others, the lawmakers tell us that it provides a way for them to get a little bit of insight into the nominee is, how they will act as a judge, and whether or not they're going to be a good fit for the court. >> what did they say about when the confirmation hearings would begin? >> senator sessions and senator leahy are putting together the questionnaire that they would send to her. the senator has said that he would like to have it done before the august recess. republicans seem to be fairly okay with that, at least for right now. >> will the confirmation go smoothly, will there be opposition? >> republicans are going to look to be tougher on her than they were with sonia sotomayor. it doesn't seem like there is any major opposition. >> thank you for joining us. >> any time.

>> while we can't presume to replace justice stevens's wisdom or presence, but i have a nominee that i think embodies the same excellence, integrity, and passion for the law who can ultimately provide that same kind of leadership on the court. our solicitor general, and my friend, elena kagan. >> learn more about the nation's highest court in the latest book "the supreme court," providing unique insight about the supreme court, available in hardcover and as an e-book. >> c-span, our public affairs content is available on television, radio, and on line. you can also connect with us on twitter, facebook, and youtube. you can also sign up for e-

span.org. >> of britain has formed a ruling coalition with the liberal democrat party. it is the first coalition government in 65 years. the new prime minister david cameron held a news conference with the deputy prime minister nick clegg. this is half an hour. >> a good afternoon, everyone, and welcome. yesterday, i said that nick and i wanted to put aside party differences and work together in the national interest. since then, both our parties

have given their full backing to the coalition agreement. a liberal democrat-conservative government. this is the first coalition government in britain for 65 years. it will be an administration behind the three key principles. freedom, fairness, and responsibility. it will be an administration united behind one key purpose. and that is to give our country the strong and stable and determined leadership that we need for the long term. in the days and weeks ahead, we will together be sending out in detail the aims and the values of our partnership and the full policy program of our coalition government. we want to say just a few words about how we plan to work together, and the significance of what we have achieved in

coming to this agreement. as part of the process of establishing a new government, i have been working to appoint a cabinet. i will be chairing the first meeting of our national security council, and nec will be at my side. there will be five working hand- in-hand with conservative colleagues to address the big challenges that britain faces. starting with nick clegg, democrats will be represented at every level of government. this is the sign of the strength of the coalition and answers determination to work together constructively to make his coalition work in our national interest. we have a shared agenda and a shared resolve to tackle the challenges our country faces, to safeguard our national security and support our troops abroad, to tackle the debt crisis and broken political

system, and build a stronger society. we understand that we're not going to be these problems overnight, and in particular, no government in modern times has ever been left with such a terrible economic inheritance. today's unemployment figures are a sign of the human cost that the economic mistakes of the past decade. we know there'll be difficult decisions ahead, the working together, i know we can take the country through difficult times to the better times that i believe lie ahead. we're not just announcing a new government and the new ministers, we are announcing new politics. new politics for the national interest is more important than the party interests. reasonable, civilized, not a weakness, but a sign of strength.

one of the biggest problems has been a chronic short term is them -- termism in government. we can match for the long term and make the decisions about our country's future. it can be a historic and a seismic shift in our political landscape. it can demonstrate a new progressive partnership. believing in enterprise, committing to civil liberties and curbing the power of the state, passionate about building a great economy and determined build a big society with families and communities that are supported and strengthened. and eager to make sure that the big society is matched by citizens, that power is taken from politicians and put in the people. our liberal conservative take britain and

a historic new direction, a direction of conviction and common purpose. i am delighted to be standing here with the new deputy prime minister. the two of us together leading this historic administration, him to speak on what i think is a remarkable and very welcome day. nick. >> and thank you, david. we have just been through an election campaign, and we have a coalition. we were rivals, but now we are colleagues. that says a lot about the scale of the new politics which is now beginning to unfold. this is a new government, and a kind of government. a radical reform in government where it needs to be, and a source of reassurance and stability in a time of great uncertainty in our country, too. david spoke about many of the

challenges we now face. the economy is struggling, public finance is in a mass, our troops are engaged in difficult that requires resolution. in society still scarred by too much on venice and inequality. our politics not yet recovered from the recent months. and at a time of such enormous difficulties, our country needed a strong and stable government. it needed an ambitious government to work relentlessly for a better future. and that is what we have come together in this coalition to provide. this is a government that will last. not because of a list of policies, important though they are. not because it will be easy. we are different parties and we different ideas. this is a government that will despite those differences

united by a common purpose of for the job we wanted to do together in the next five years. our ambition is simple and yet profound. our ambition is to put real power and opportunity into the of people, families, and communities, to change their lives in our country for the better. for me, that is what liberalism about, insuring that everybody has a chance to be the person they want to be. to live the life they want to live. you can call it tennis, you can call it responsibility, whatever words you use -- the change will is the same. you will have the opportunities you crave. fair taxes, better schools, affair grain economy. -- green economy.

then you can deliver the help and the changes needed. i want this to be a bold reform in government that puts fairness back into britain. a government that restores our faith in what a healthy, strong society can achieve. a government that takes power away from politicians as david said and gives it back to you. a government that and hands back your liberties and your privacy. you can shape our schools and hospitals. where words are finally translated into real action. where social mobility becomes a all. or the british tradition of tolerance and fairness are restored. i came into politics to change politics, and to change britain for good. together, that job starts today. thank you. >> we name it -- we may not be allowed to take as many questions because we're still appointing members of the government, but we will do our

best. if we can start with gary. >> will fought this coalition was an accidental result of the election on friday, but you seem to make it sound like it is the mission, something that can carry on as a new dynamic that lasts beyond this arrangement. the think coalitions are a good thing, a bad thing, a necessary evil, a leap in the dark. >> this arrangement is a five- year arrangement. what we find so exciting is the prospect of having a five-year government, a five-year parliament making difficult decisions. it that is absolutely the key. the other point is this. we both had a choice. we looked at the options and talked extensively about a minority government.

we had a meeting about it over the last couple of days, and we of thought that this is so inspiring. it might last for a month, six months, a year, perhaps a bit longer, but it will not do what politics to achieve. we want to give the country good government. it would not actually mean anything. we looked at each other and really uninspiring. i think something bigger and better so we can change the face politics and get something done. >> he is absolutely right. but people told us that they didn't think any party deserved an outright majority. at the same time, it is obvious that we need stability. the only way to create stability is to create a coalition government which last.

and no government lasts unless it has a common purpose. and i think what david and i have both tried to set out today is that of course we have been working on specific policies, how we're going to advance them. we both have made compromises, good government that lasts is also one that is underpinned by a common fairness. we might use different words, but it is based on the simple idea of restoring stability to the economy and giving power back to people, more opportunity in their everyday life. >> thank you, minister. on the morning after the night before, do not think i am hooked who i barely know and have barely spoken to, and is a company under permanent joint leadership? will we see you again and again at each other's sides talking to ministers and presidents,

declaring war, saving the economy? >> you are a bit advance on some of those ideas. it is not just a huge responsibility that now land on my shoulders, but thinking, this is some much better than the alternative. there are really some things we next five years to sort out the country posing problems, give people power and control over lives, and a great sense of inspiration and excitement hit me, that this is much more than what could have been. i think we have taken a more difficult part, but a far more worthwhile one. doing things together? yes, we should. it is not just two teams trying to work together, it is two teams trying to perform one strong thing in government. we have already talked about the first election, saving the petrol.

but of course we should do things together, this is a joint endeavor. not competing teams trying to occupy office at the same time. >> just picking up on that, on agenda, what plans the you have any to reform the prime minister's the house of commons, whether you're going to monthly news conferences, whether those will be double ax? you both signed up for a five- year term, that will be 10 years if you are reelected -- if cameron is reelected. is this a general election the last one he will fight, term limit yourself a maximum limit of 10 years? >> that is taking it a bit further than i am ready to go. that is one thing we have

discussed, the questions -- if i am away, and it will stand in as deputy prime minister. he is a quite different beast. we have not discussed press conferences. we're going through a range of things, working things out of work in a proper and positive way. most of the areas, we found agreement quite quickly. this is the right thing to do. they were finding as they went through areas, there are great ways of resolving differences. the great thing about the agreement is that it does bite off the difficult areas first, and say, let's resolve those. so in terms of resolving these

issues, we have done very well. >> you can ask a lot of what but there is going to be a lot of change. this is what new politics looks like. in other parts of our politics, things will look differently as well. we have to proceed with an open how you do that. >> you both have criticized prime minister's questions. >> i am not going to be answering next questions, but he will be answering some of my -- nick's questions, but he will be answering some of mine. we're obviously looking for answering questions here at home. >> could i ask a bit more about the biology, prime minister? where will he function,?

will he be on downing street? what is the deal? if the phone rings at 3:00 in morning, will you both have the answer it? >> he is going to be responsible for political reform, many of the questions have been raised about six-term parliament, that be his responsibility. he has -- but we have not yet -- is pretty close together. this will not be a partnership where we have the book meetings or do a schedule call. >> i have no idea where i am, but is in close complementary to each other. >> what he really meant to say was, i agree with neck? let's move on.

this is a charming love-in. what the skeptics will say is that you are so far apart that however much you might have the best of intentions, it could never hold together for very long. >> this will succeed through its success. if we can demonstrate that this is a good government, a long- term government taking decisions and the national interest, it has this common purpose, if it does that, whatever way no one ever party, we will see a good government. politics is all about public service in the national interest. if we can demonstrate that we are delivering, whenever a person will say this is a good government. that is the only way to convince people.

>> there will always be skeptics and a thousand and one reasons why you don't try something new. are both of us taking big risks? yes. are both our parties taking a very big step that are historically utterly different? yes. i've been locked in discussions with the last several lights into the overnight hours. there is overwhelming support for this because we all collectively recognized it was the right thing to do for the country. and that we can do it together. we will show the skeptics that they are wrong. >> first of all, congratulations to you both. secondly, and prime minister, do you regret your reply, nick clegg?

[laughter] >> i am afraid i did. come back! we will all have things that we have said thrown back at us. it is a serious point, if you want to spend the next five years with lib dem politicians and you slightly agree about this, it is a nuanced policy, you can find a lot. we're looking at the bigger picture. . .

it said that very clearly what we aim to do. >> of question for the deputy prime minister. the abolition will be the largest act of the regulation. plenty of opportunity to carry out that promise. what you see is the government's role in supporting business? >> i think it would change very dramatically. the world is changing economically. a great bomb has gone off and our financial services sector. there's a hammer blow the lies we have not seen in the post-war period. we need to rebuild the british economy at a news sustainable level. one of the things that bans is

doing -- vince is doing is creating new ideas for growth and innovation. he is working very closely with george osborn and will be in a great position to map out an optimistic vision for a new economy built on the rubble of the old. >> two more questions. that is the observer and the times. >> if this is such a fantastic agreement for new politics, can i ask what you possibly have of dense proportional representation? >> i have stated very clearly my view about our electoral system and proportional representation. i think it was right, given the results to make the important concessions that we should have to recommend them -- we should have a referendum. the conservative party will go

the extra mile to try to build this coalition. we will have the legislation. it will include a referendum and it will include proportional vote. there will be a campaign in which people can campaign freely as a reset of the time it is a part of building the trust between our two parties. that is for the good of our country. >> just on the five-year parliament, is that aspiration or will that be fixed in our legislation? -- an early legislation? and the range of the spectrum that you both represent, will you be more tolerant of dissent than you would normally be, or are you demanding total loyalty to the calls? you mentioned a certain by

election. would you both be encouraging our candidates to campaign against each other? and as we get into the parliament and both of your candidates will have records to defend, how you see that panning out? >> we are not merging our two party is so we expect people to put up candidates. we always do. that is the first thing. and that will happen quite quickly, that by election. this is not an aspiration but will be very early legislation. we want that fixed because we think that would make for good and strong and determined government. a fixed parliament is something that has been around in all warm for a long time and now was the time to do that.

we want to have -- one of the reasons to come together is that we had a strong majority in both the house of commons and the house of lords together. of course people sometimes will want to take a stand on an issue. we want to have both parties firmly committed to a coalition agreement that will provide a good and stable government and the reforms that our country needs. that is the name and in a short period of time we have, a great way to achieve that. >> we have our own convention and cultures and traditions in this country. this represents a very significant change. in other political countries, there would not be a family radical thought that parliament's might cooperate in governments for the good of the country. we campaigned together at election time -- against each

other at all election time, and that is precisely what you will see now. the ambition in the way. i hope people find it relatively unsurprising relatively quickly. as david quite rightly said, we can only bring that about by being successful in delivering the good government that we have negotiated in this coalition agreement. >> we thank you all very much again. i am afraid i have to go and appoint the rest of this government, the rest of this cabinet so we can get on doing the work that nick and i have been talking to you about. thank you all for coming very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> up next on c-span, senators outlined their plan for climate change bill. a house hearing on the bill of mexico oil spill. astronauts neil armstrong and others testified at a capitol hill hearing on the future of manned space flight. on tomorrow's "washington journal," mike kaufman discusses the afghan president visit. we will talk to reporters about the senate climate change bill.

and the look of arizonas immigration law with an ims commissioner. washington journal is live starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern time on c-span. >> every weekend, booktv features 48 hours of nonfiction books. this weekend, the reluctance by. the former cia officer talks about life in the agency before and after 9/11. he is interviewed by a former cia and respect and -- inspector general. >> during the last year as i have served as inspector general, -- solicitor general, my long standing appreciation for the supreme court and our democracy has become ever deeper and richer. >> the next step for elena kagan is her appearance before the judicial circuit -- senate judicial committee.

find out more about her at the c-span video library. every program since 1987. watch what you want, when you want. >> a host of executives representing power companies joined john kerry and joe lieberman today for their revealing of the climate change bill. lindsey graham hill had been involved in crafting the legislation did not attend this event. this is an hour. >> thank you for coming to this introduction of the american power act. this bill will restore america's economy, reassert our position as a global leader, and clean

energy technology. it will create millions of jobs, move us toward energy independence, and strengthen american security, and it will give us cleaner air. we are offering america today, we believe, chief executives of major companies, different industries, members of faith based community -- environment community, national security community, we of all come together to offer america though chance to break out of a trap. we're caught today and an economic downturn that has left many people searching for the next new engine of growth and jobs. we are weighed down by a broken energy policy built on a dangerous addiction to foreign oil. we're threatened by the impacts of a changing climate. right now as one of the worst oil spills in our nation's history washes onto our shores, no one can down out -- doubt how

urgently we need a new energy policy in this country. now's the time to take action. the path of progress has been a long, but it -- but despite washington conventional wisdom, we are closer than we have ever been to a breakthrough. we had 38 votes in the senate for energy and climate legislation. last congress, we have 54 senators prepared to vote yes. we want to make this the senate where we finish the job and cast the decisive vote for the future. present to hear is a never before seen coalition for clean energy and jobs, a coalition put together across american life. all of them including key stakeholders that are embracing energy and climate legislation for the very first time. these groups and companies are not giving up on a new energy economy. on the contrary, they are

doubling down. they understand that this is not a choice. it is a necessity and we need to get it done as soon as possible. our clean energy jobs policy to date, what we're living with a day, is stuck in a web of contradictions. year after year we perpetuate policies that we know or wrong for america's future while putting off what we know is right. we're sending $1 billion overseas every day for foreign oil when we could invest those billions in say clean energy right here at home, with jobs that cannot be exported abroad and pay more money than jobs today. washington is standing by while generals and admirals warned that climate change will multiplied the threats we face and make the world more dangerous, when we know that we can prevent that catastrophe and protect our air and water. and washington is watching as other countries take jobs from

us literally, steal from us, while we know there are jobs that could belong to american workers. we could push the boundaries of innovation and create millions of jobs in this country. the american power act is a decision to seize this moment and transform our nation's energy policy from the national weakness into a national strength. it is a message to the world that america is ready to take back our role as the world's clean energy leader. and as we do it, we want to underscore the technology market that leaves many people wealthy and lifted america in the 1990's was of $1 trillion market with about billion users. the clean energy market that we are reaching for today is a $six trillion market with 6 billion users. we want to claim our share, america needs to lead. as president obama said in his

state of the union speech, america should not settle for being no. 2. the chinese are not waiting around. they just surpassed us in renewable energy investments for the first time ever. the germans are not waiting around. there renewable energy sector is now the second-largest purchaser of german steel. and if that is not reason enough to move, my friends, every day that washington fails to act, america since another $100 million to iran. the american power act marks a clean break from the policies of the past and a fresh start legislatively. it creates major incentives for clean, efficient, and renewable energy. it positions america to lead the world and electric cars, it invest on our highways, and modernize travel to and from every section of our country. it helps colt be able to develop

clean technologies in order to guarantee its future and lays the groundwork for a new generation of emission-free nuclear plants. more importantly, this bill finally creates a fair playing field that drives the right kind of competition, recognizes the true value of clean energy, and protect american consumers are a step of the way. to meet these goals, the american power act uses are reduced in a refund or corporate we reduce our level of carbon pollution, we reduce our dependency on foreign oil, we reduce the energy gap, and reduce the clean energy jobs with china. that is what we read these three and we refund the revenues of our efforts back to the american taxpayer and their families. after we help companies hold down their cost and adjust to the new standards, all the money -- all of it -- those directly

back to the american taxpayer. we of consumers to reduce their energy bills and then give taxpayers a refund. what's more, after 20 years of seeing the cost of pollution passed on to families and communities, this approach returns us to common sense. it is the polluters, not the people, who should pay. that is reinforced as you see today. for years i have heard the washington conventional wisdom that big answers to tough problems would be dead on arrival. replaced by a watered-down energy bill or even nothing at all. joe lieberman and i came together because we knew there had to be a better path forward. we welcome to all good ideas and all stakeholders, including many of those whose thoughts and concerns are reflected in this bill. we put everything on the table

and sought practical solutions, made painful confessions, and found common ground. companies, some of them standing here, who have opposed every pass piece of legislation today are now standing with environmentalists to support this bill. ceo's and religious leaders, venture capitalist and consumer advocates, small business and big business, members of the coal industry, transportation and trustee, nuclear industry, farmers and utilities are all real -- united around a common vision for a better energy future. the president and harry reid are with us and i've even heard fellow republicans tell me in private that they are encouraged by what is in this bill and they are anxious to review it and to work on it. there will be those who say this is the wrong political season. but we are here today because we believe that good policy is also bad politics.

this is a vote for clean energy. after a devastating oil spill. this is a vote to hold polluters accountable. this is a vote for billions of dollars for the next generation of jobs, in clean coal and safe nuclear power. this is a vote to end america's addiction to foreign oil and to safeguard the air that our children read and the water that they drink. this should be an easy vote. and yet history teaches us again and again that change never comes without a fight. the doubters declared that health care was dead right up until we passed it. another bill is ready to become law any day. with the help of president obama and harry reid, we believe that we can do it again. of course some will be deficient -- tended to defer the choices, settle for an easy road, and

then declare victory. that is the single surest way to guarantee that we will be having the same conversation in five years, 10 years, or even 20 years when other countries have cornered the market and is a lot tougher for americans to catch up. every year we wait costs us billions of dollars and lost market share, lost opportunities, lost leadership, lost jobs. we need to send the market price signal about carbon, that would release transform into the investment and clean energy right here in america. in 2010, that is the spirit -- that is the sign of a serious bill. we need to remind people that we passed the clean air act in an election year. we updated it in another election year. it in 2010, we need to show america that we can still do

what americans sent us here to do. those who spent years need to understand something. telling a senate bill is not a measure of success or victory. if congress cannot legislate solutions, the epa will regulate one. and it will come without the help to america's businesses and consumers that is in this bill. there will always be excuses to wait. we know that 3 martin luther king said that this way he encountered as almost always meant never. joe and i have been working on this for more than 20 years and we're not willing to wait anymore. dr. king also said the time is always right to do what is right. this is our moment to do what is right for the american people, what is good for our country, what will strengthen our nation. this year we're going to fight

to get 60 votes to get america more competitive, safer, and stronger. my colleague in this and a great friend overall these years, going way back to college, i am delighted to be working with him now and he has been a very important leader, joe lieberman. [applause] >> thank you, thank you. thank you so much, john. it is true that our relationship goes back to college. i cannot tell you that we were talking about energy independence and climate change. we were having a good time in some great debates. john kerry was one of those that convinced me to run for the senate in 1988. it's a particular good feeling that i've had having worked with him as closely as i have over the last several months to get us to this day. i want to thank john for all his work, for his principled,

passionate, and practical leadership that has enabled us, all of us here, to come together to launch the american power act. we call this legislation the american power act because it will protect and increase america's national power in this century. and it will do so by changing the way we power america. it will stop the flow of dollars out of america to buy oil, it just as simple stop the flow of jobs out of america to build the new energy system that are replacing oil. our legislation creates a market-driven partnership between america's private and public sectors to make three of america's greatest challenges, our dependence on oil from

abroad, our loss of jobs here and home, and the threat of harmful carbon pollution in our air. and it does all of that without adding a dime to our national deficit. but it will add billions of dollars of private investment to america's economy. it will create millions of new jobs for the american people. it will refund hundreds of billions of dollars to american consumers. our legislation will price carbon to reflect its real costs to our economy and our society, and in doing so, i think it will light the spark that will ignite america's entrepreneurial and innovation engines to solve some of our most serious problems.

this proposal does not cater to the politics of the moment, but it will protect the future of our country and our families, and ultimately that is the best politics. that is what our constituents sent us here to do -- not to play to the lowest common political dominate your of the moment, but to make their lives and the life of our country better and more secure. the challenges that we face today are clear and so were the choices that we have. we can lead or weaken the lead. we can grow or weaken shrink. we can keep sending our money for oil to the enemies of america by ahmadinejad in iran and shabazz in the venezuela, or we can develop our own sources of energy made by

americans right here in america. we can watch millions of jobs being created in china with solar, wind, clean coal power, and high-speed rail, or we can create those jobs right here in america. this bill faces the challenges, it makes the tough choices, and i believed it will not only preserve america's greatness, but help us in our generation achieve our national destiny. i would say one final word. i am very proud of this bill. it is strong, it is balanced, it will work. and am proud to be here with this group of people in introducing it, but i tell you this -- we would not be here today if we did not feel that with the help of the people

here, we can and will adopt the american power act in this session of congress. there's a lot more i could say about the american power act but fortunately, as john said, we again have fortunate to gather with us the largest, most of first group of supporters that have ever come together on behalf of an energy independence, climate, pollution reduction bill. kerry and i know because we have been part of every bill and to this kind. i am willing to grateful yield to the people who are with us for more the details. and first to discuss why the american power act is so critical to preserving america's national security in the decades ahead.

i am proud to introduce admiral william fallon, former commander of the pacific command and the central command, which of course governs the police. admiral fallon. >> thank you very much. this is an unusual turn of events for me. most of my previous appearances up here i was facing the diocese and the committee and the cameras were looking at the back of my head. i hope this is not too frightening to the audience. [laughter] i want to thank senators kerry and lieberman for the honor of being with you today and to salute the efforts of yourselves and your colleagues, senator lindsey graham, for your dedicated work in the most collaborative an inclusive matter to try and address some

critical issues that affect not only our country but people throughout the world. these several related issues that are of great import to the american citizens and others are energy, climate, and national security. the energy consumptions in this country continues to increase and relies on fossil fuels, particularly for power generation and for transportation with motor vehicles, it is accelerating climate change and this carbon pollution that is resulting in greenhouse gases and particulates matter, it is causing global warming. and this affects is resulting in changes not only to the atmosphere but particularly to the related aspects of water throughout the world.

this is been a significant challenge for national security. climate changes affecting the available water supplies, and the indicators are that this is going to continue. one does not have to go too far -- i was down in the antarctic and there's an awful lot of guys down there, but that data is becoming pretty impressive that the temperature changes are accelerating the definition of the cis, and the arctic is much more sensible to people and more obvious to many. this change in water on the planet, i believe, it is going to be significantly to stabilizing to our future, affecting people, and using more poverty as the climate makes many land less habitable, and affecting agriculture. the risks of conflict from just

the tension between peoples, i think, it is going to be of very significant effort and we're coined have to deal with it. we need comprehensible, easily understood policies which are going to make this country and our people stronger. economically and politically more satori. and certainly less reliant on on-site resources. -- outside resources. if we reduce our carbon emissions and persuade the others to do the same. these challenges need active leadership. we have got it. we have a year -- probably many years -- of effort trying to come up with enough momentum to make the changes that are necessary. we're going to need active leadership not only of the people in this room but of the legislatures here in washington and certainly the support of the american people. we are here today long overdue

for an opportunity to get moving. i salute you, senators, for picking up the challenge and i look for to supporting you in this effort. thank you. >> jim rogers. >> i am jim rogers, chairman and ceo, delighted to be here today and i wanted to us thank senators kerry and lieberman for working tirelessly to put together the american power act. i also want to thank senator gramm for putting in so many hours into this issue as well. my judgment is that this bill is all the better because of the time he put in an in helping shape going forward. for duke energy, up this bill is about real power in america.

this is our industry the road map we need to go ford, giving us the road map where we can provide the solution, where we can raise billions of dollars of investment and create jobs and move us toward energy independence, and at the same time make our air even cleaner than it is today. these investments that we will make and are prepared to make will not only -- and i want to underscore this point -- not only create jobs today but tomorrow and in the future, and that is going to really lead to the recovery of our economy, when you see the trajectory of the jobs that will be created over time. the legislation -- said in another way and i am getting this from tom friedman -- it can

help us get our economic mojo back, and we need to get that back and we will get that back and it would give us a chance as a country to leave on energy and technology. we should not see that leadership to anyone in the world. let me turn and spend a moment on the impact of electric consumers in america. i started my career as a consumer advocate in my home state, fighting rate increases at the utility company. i have come a long way. [laughter] but i am still a consumer advocate and i stand here today as an advocate for duke energy's 4 million customers, to touch the lives of 11 million people in five states in the midwest and the carolinas, who depend on coal for the majority of their electricity. i am also here as an advocate

for the tens of millions of electric consumers in the 25- states where more than 50% of the electricity comes from coal. in my judgment, senators kerry and lieberman, this bill helps get the transition right to a low carbon world and helps get a clean and efficient modern power system in a manner that protects family budgets and protect american factories, that depend on a source of power. the bill also creates incentives for clean coal and for nuclear, two key technologies that must be accelerated in their deployment going forward to achieve our national goals.

this bill, and i want to underscore this point, will indeed protect consumers and charts a course for our future. it is time to go to work. it is time to work out the remaining details and differences that we may have, and come together for the american people and make this bill a reality for all. and most importantly, did you take any message away from what i am saying today, take this message away. we can protect pursuconsumers we we pursue our clean energy goals. thank you for this opportunity to be here. >> i'm the president of the environmental defense fund,

representing families and individuals. we are in the middle of a rapid and fundamental shift in american public opinion about energy right now in this country. every day when we turn on cnn, we see pictures of the gulf that reminds us that the safety and security of our energy supply is in question. and that our environment is threatened by our dependence on oil. every day the business pages remind us that china and other countries are are eating our lunch in taking the jobs that comes with them. for decades, but congress has been arguing over stupid things while ignoring these problems. in the meantime, china is investing in its future. i think the president and congress should turn the focus on energy, the concern about our

environment, and the fundamental need to grow jobs into a referendum about building a better future for america. a better america that provides not only to protected environment, but could, well paying jobs for americans. the american power act is the opportunity for the president and the congress to do just that. the draft being released today is the product of six months effort to get the best ideas and approaches from everyone at the table, industry and environmentalists, democrats and republicans, but it is really the product of years of discussions about how to do energy policy the right way. it begins to end our dependence on oil and it can be the vehicle for new environmental safeguards at the same time. he has strong goals to reducing

carbon pollution to address the threat of climate change to our economy and our environment. it or remove the shackles of uncertainty that had constrained our investment in new ways of generating american-made power, and it will do all of this in a way that protect consumers. because of that, it has the support of the most important stakeholders like those here today who will work hard to improve it and push it across the finish line. i f been at this for a very long time. but this is the first time that and acts like this has had such a broad based support. it is the best opportunity we have ever had to achieve real meaningful change. it will require some bipartisanship and it will require leadership from the president and from the majority leader.

with their help, it can be held, so i salute you, senator kerry and senator lieberman, for getting this bill out in public so that we can get it enacted this year. [unintelligible] >> i'm the president of edison electric, representing an electric companies in the united states and have members all over the world. we all always disagreed about something and the senate never done important work. [laughter] thank you very much. i appreciate that. basically i am glad to be here with the leaders of the business community and environmental community and many other non- governmental organizations. this is a historic achievement and i want to commend senators

kerry and lieberman for the introduction of the bill today. i also want to commend them for the collaborative process that they undertook year. it essentially included every aspect of the economy as well as all the fuel that are important to continue our economic progress. that is exactly what they did. it was very hard work over many months as has been indicated. i also want to commend lindsey graham. he spent a long time and i agree with jim rogers that it is a much better product as a result of all his efforts. today does mark a critical milestone in the consideration of energy and climate legislation. i want to particularly thank the senators for their realization that customer protections are an incredibly important part of this legislation. we started to try and figure out how to do with climate legislation more than three years ago at eei.

we worked hard over that period of time and as you can imagine, it is a difficult thing sometimes to get everyone to agree on something but we managed to achieve that. and we managed to look at the idea that in order to achieve this goal, we needed to use all the technologies we could pop vote -- possibly years -- energy efficiency, nuclear, clean coal, solar, natural gas -- and it had to have a vital component and that was to make sure that the consumer was going to be protected and was not going to be taking form of the economy. i commend the centers because by the inclusion of provisions in there that provide allowances for electricity customers, a price caller to make sure it that there was not a great price volatility directed to customers, they make sure that we could do this task, achieve

major reduction in greenhouse gas emissions at the same time that we're protecting customers. again i commend the senators for their efforts. we will be working vigorously with them as the process continues to make sure that the impacts both regionally and nationally are considered three we look forward to working with you to continue this process and to pitch relief enact a good climate and energy legislation. thank you. >> david. >> honeywell may be the biggest company you never heard of. were about $33 billion in sales, 120,000 employees, more than half of which are outside the u.s.

when we think about this, one of the things as surprised as is that in all the discussion about climate change, one of the most important points as a business leader was ms., and that is this is about economic and energy security. and the premise is that low-cost clean power yield sustainable gdp growth, and that is what yields jobs. you start with that premise, it takes you down two facts. one for generations and one for inefficiency. on the generation side, that's more of a technology issue. we need to make sure that we stay technology-neutral and set the standards on what constitutes clean energy and then let 1000 flowers bloom. we need to engage the creativity of the american people and the american businesses to make that happen. on the efficiency side, this is more about behavior. and at what point to our own

companies. if the u.s. just aggressively used existing honeywell products and technology, stuff that exist already today, it would be a 20%-24 for a -- 25% savings. because i come from and they send that says where ico is saying something, and must be questioned, i had it bulletproof it. how come nobody does it? it is a behavioral issue. we have to change incentives and the way that people think in the economy without reducing standards. i think we have the opportunity to make that happen. when you look it energy efficiency investment, on megawatt say through efficiency is about 33% of what it takes to generate that megawatt. how do we encourage that efficiency while driving generation? in both of these areas, generation and technology, it is

important to recognize that the rest of the world is moving too often i've heard that we should not do it. i can tell you traveling the world a lot, as i do in my job, with half of the people in sales outside the u.s., those countries are moving and we should not be confusing political discussions about copenhagen with what is actually going on economically. the countries are moving, focused on efficiency and generation, because they know that low-cost clean power is what sustained -- create sustainable gdp growth and that yields jobs. we need new energy policy for our country. we do not have one and i am really hopeful the what our senators have proposed and that we can finally have one that will put us on a sustainable gdp pat. thanks. >> joel hunter from northland

ministries. >> i'm a pastor from florida and also on the board of directors of the national association of evangelicals, and i am on the world in evangelical alliance. i came to speak to a broader moral aspect than just being a part of the christian faith. these obvious benefits, these practical benefits that you have heard of so far are also part of of broader moral aspect of this bill. it is never too early or too late to do the right thing. religious people and non- believers alike have a sense that being a good stewards of our earth and our atmosphere is the right thing to do. in addition to that, all

scriptures, the hebrew increased use -- hebrew and christian scriptures, the koran, that they do and others, to keep the earth is to honor god. that we should cultivate the earth and keep it. what that means is that we need to balance protection with production. that is to say that we are not just interested in fighting pollution but in fighting poverty. we think that green should mean a growing economy as well as a healthy environment. that is the moral aspect. and the time for action is now. it is the business of those with political perspectives to calculate the chances of success. but legislative success is never the standard for moral action.

i personally -- just speaking for me -- don't want to be standing before god on judgment day and say, i really wanted to work to protect the earth and the poor, but we were not sure the votes were there. [laughter] it is never too early or too late to do the right thing. thanks. >> a man. -- amen. that was good. the ceo of florida power and light. >> i'm the chairman and ceo of fpl group. we also on that utility which is one of the largest electric utilities in the nation, 4.5 million customers representing 16 million people. we are the largest renewable energy producer in the united states, the largest wind producer and the solar energy producer.

senators kerry and lieberman deserve incredible and tremendous credit for crafting a proposal that will help move our country in the right direction on both energy and climate, while creating jobs and protecting the u.s. economy. i really think they have done a fabulous job threading a needle and balancing all the interest of people who are standing behind you today, but many other constituents. it is just incredible what they have done, who they have listened to, and as a small example of that is just the fact that jim rogers and i can be on the same state supporting this bill. seriously, jim and i both have been studying the climate issue and we think it is very important, it is a serious threat. we have been on the same page, but he represents a large number of customers who are primarily served by coal power. i represent a large number served by natural gas, nuclear,

and renewals. the good news about this bill is that it protects all the customers. that is what we have been arguing about and debating about, and this bill, i can assure you, works. it is important that we move this fall word. after many years of debate the united states still lacks a national energy strategy. this is our chance to fix that. one of the most important aspects of it is that we put a price on carbon that gradually increases over time. has the ceo of the nation's no. 1 renewable energy company, i can promise you this -- with a price of carbon in the other aspects of this bill, we will invest billions of dollars more money in renewals and nuclear power. we will create thousands of thousands of jobs, for more than under our current do nothing strategy. i want to thank senators kerry

and lieberman for showing true leadership in crafting a solution that all parties should be able to support. and that i act -- like to introduce the leader of the national wildlife foundation. >> i'm the president and ceo of the national wildlife federation. we have more than 4 million members across america. i'm here to thank especially senator kerry and senator lieberman for their years of unwavering leadership on this difficult issue. i spent much of my time over the last few weeks in the call tracking the unrelenting damage being done by this oil spill, the devastating impact to fishermen, to coastal communities, it is only just begun. the basque damage to marine life has not yet been measured and is beyond the media cameras. the price of congressional paralysis and america's addiction to oil can no longer be hidden.

when oil flows into our gulf waters as fast as our gasoline money is flowing into the persian gulf, it is time for new energy policy in america. for every day, we put our economy, our national security, and our environment at great risk. the american power act is one ingredient that is absolutely essential for any energy bill worth doing, it holds energy companies accountable for doing their fair share for reducing carbon pollution to read less pollution needs more clean energy jobs and more clean energy, less pollution, investing in clean energy alternatives in breaking this addiction that we have, particularly the floor and offered less pollution means cleaner air for my grandchildren to breed and a safer and healthier environment for them to inherit. i thank senators lieberman and kerry are making this moment possible, for drafting the bill,

and i trust they will continue to work on the bill as we continue forward in the days ahead. there's more to be learned about the tragedy in the gulf and we must incorporate what we've learned from that tragedy in this legislation as we move forward. we must protect our cause, are marine life, and all of our resources. the work on this important bill is not finished but it is of vital step in the senate must finish this work this year and deliver a comprehensive bill that america can live with. we will be mobilizing our 4 million members to help lawmakers in this important effort. thank you very much. hal >> and the president and ceo of the nuclear institute 3 we have 3 million members, including all the operators in this country,

and is a talk at all the great comments without repeating them. but i would like that that senators kerry and lieberman for what was a collaborative, open, very involved process. i think it made a better product that has come out. i certainly want to thank senator graham for his participation during that and note his personal support of nuclear energy, very important as this legislation moved. all the support of a diversified portfolio, there is no single bullet that will solve our problem from an energy standpoint or environmental standpoint. i think that one of the things that is recognized in this bill, and you heard tom kuhn others talk about it from a customer standpoint, of big recognition of the impact on the economy and a big recognition of looking at energy security as one of the call comes that we won on this. the bill does a lot to enhance and expand our ability to move

nuclear energy floor. we have plans to go in for right now, nothing like what china and india is doing right now. they are moving much more aggressively than we are right now. but we can move forward with this bill, meeting our energy supply. i will close by offering our support to work with the two centers, your colleagues on the republican democratic side of the house and -- i'll in the house has we try to get this to the president's desk. thank you very much. >> bob hansen opt-out. of --dow >> in the past five years dow corning had announced approximately $5 billion in domestic investments in solar

energy technology. these investments have created over 2000 direct jobs and countless indirect jobs. we are incurred standing here today by a legislation unveiled by senators kerry and lieberman, and we look forward to participating in the process that ultimately results in a comprehensive bill. as the leading u.s. manufacturer of alternative energy materials and components, dow corning welcomes the proposals which encourages further developments of domestic renewable energy, manufacturing, installation, and implementation. we want to be part of the solution and we appreciate the opportunity. thank you, senators. >> we're just about to the question period. any company -- just identify yourself so that the people of

the you are representing. -- know who you are representing. >> jim wallace from sojourners. [inaudible] did you hear that? anybody else? [inaudible] >> it is dated deals still here? did he have to leave? i like to call your attention to an article in the "los angeles times" a couple of days ago. battery's storage, about how they were forced to go to china because they could not find investment. they help build two plants in china, their original hope was to build up in michigan. they are now in michigan because

they have done so well in china. it is an example of the kind of thing we are talking about today. gillan i would be delighted or any of our folks here. [inaudible] >> who do you represent? [inaudible] >> of very important question. this bill incorporates by reference the energy bill that has been passed out of the energy committee. there are huge, very significant energy efficiency, alternative, renewable incentives in there, plus we have put additional alternative and renewable energy incentives into this bill. there is a certain increase in revenue here for alternative

energy, for transportation -- getting people out of their cars -- for electric cars, a very significant piece for electric cars. there's a significant automatic 50% reduction in emissions if you convert diesel trucks, particularly garbage trucks or big trucks in the local community, if you convert those to natural gas. t. boone pickens will be joining us next week for an event. he is supportive of this. and part of this embrace since but pickens plan -- the pickens plan which reduces opec dependency. does all those things. in addition to that, there is a major retrofitting component for homes, or buildings -- buildings represent about 37% of greenhouse gas emissions and there were huge benefits in that. .

>> the most important and unique thing that this bill does is to put a price on carbon that reflects its real cost to our society. when you do that, he will invest

billions of dollars in renewable energy because it becomes financially attractive once carbon is really priced at what it costs us. >> i think lou wants to talk about the renewables. >> the main thing is what senator lieberman said, is putting renewable on a level playing field with other sources of energy that emit carbon. with that level playing field and the renewable portfolio standard, which is in the bill, -- the last several years, we built about 1,000 megawatts each year of wind, and we would more than likely double that, which represents anywhere from $1 billion to $1.5 billion more of wind energy, and we think we would be investing in a

comparable amount into our energy business, roughly another $1.5 billion of solar, not to mention going forward with nuclear plants that, frankly, without a bill like this, just don't make as much economic sense. >> can i ask dave it from honeywell to tell a quick story about how this will work from him? >> it is kind of interesting, but three months ago, we were meeting on this same subject. i mentioned one that came to something as simple as solar water heaters that while we sold thousands of them in india, we sold none in the u.s. and the demand for them there, but here you do not even talk about them. we do not even see them when we drive around the u.s. over there, you see them everywhere. there are a lot of possibilities that we cannot

concentrate on, and i am hopeful with this new energy policy there will be a chance for the u.s. to start grabbing some of these ideas and running with them. >> one of the things that this bill does is provide a genuine opportunity for the revitalization of the american manufacturer and provides a market with our consumers. one at a time. why are no oil companies here today? one c.e.o. is very busy dealing with what is going on in the gulf, and the others have had board meetings. we have a number of executives who were not here today. general electric wanted to be here. there ceo was scheduled to be here the last time. he cannot change a board meeting he has in california today. he is not here. the ceo of dow corning was going to be here, could not be here today. there are a number of

executives who cannot be here today. today is t. boone pickens day in oklahoma, so he agreed to come here next week and he will do the event with us next week. their support of and it will issue statements. the ceo of shell oil co., conocophillips, british petroleum, and there are others who are not yet support of but who are looking at it, and we will hope that they will join. this is the first time we have ever had that kind of support. >> why aren't the oil companies supporting this? i think there are a couple of reasons. the first is without this kind of legislation, the environmental protection agency, under the massachusetts decision from the supreme court, the u.s. decision on the massachusetts case will start to order, by executive order and

regulation, policies of these companies. there would much prefer to comment, negotiate with us, which is what we opened our doors to, and legislate and enact a system that will be predictable. frankly, all of these companies have now become investors and developers of renewable energy as well. so we are glad to have them on board. >> several have said that offshore drilling is a nonstarter for them. they said they want to discuss this after memorial day. what are the real chances of real action, and you expect this to go through the committee's first? >> i think senator harry reid

has recognized that he needs to pull this together. there are really only two principle pieces. the energy bill, which we have respected throughout this process. we have met with the senator many times and made it clear that is incorporated through reference in this effort. there may be pieces where they have to be reconciled, but the fact is the other piece was the kerry-boxe5r bill. it is important to pull those together. there are some committees to have jurisdiction, and we have incorporated those components into this bill. harry will pull them together. the president has said he wants to move forward on this legislation and he thinks is important to do so. i think that senator reid is

expecting to have a meeting of the chairs up somewhere in the next week or two, after people have had a chance to take stock of it. i will say something with joe in our caucus next week with a full explanation, and we will work forward from here. i know the white house is committed as well as harry reid. >> one of the main concerns of u.s. agriculture is that the house bill would not have provided adequate pollution controls, so much so that 59.5 million acres of cropland would come out of production. how does your bill differ in addressing this with higher energy and fertilizer costs?

>> first of all, we have been very thoughtful about how the agriculture process all to work and we have worked very closely with tom harkin while he was chair, and now we're talking with plants lincoln, but have put together a provision before senator lincoln became chair, incorporated into the bill, which we think greatly assists agriculture. second, there are additional offsets in the bill. no. 3, agriculture as a whole is exempt from this bill, very important understand. this bill on the covers about 2% of america's business. only 7500 and cities in america come under this bill. small business is exempt. -- only 7500 and cities in america come under this bill. small business is exempt. that 2 percent equals about 75%

of greenhouse gas emissions. some of those 7500 entities are standing right here. dow corning, florida power and light, general electric, others. they know this is good policy for them because it gives them certainty about where it is going to go over the next 20, 30 years, and it gives them the ability to have a business plan which makes sense to them when they know they can create jobs. second, energy efficiency is the lowest hanging flute -- lowest hanging fruit and america. the mckinsey report shows that for the first 20, 30 years, this pays for itself. it is free, because the efficiencies that you get by putting in some of this technology actually reduces your cost and make more money. there are countless companies,

some of them standing right here, that have already produced their missions 20%, 30%, 40%, and they're making money doing it. i am convinced that agriculture will not get hurt, they will get help. secretary vilsack, john podesta, they all believe this will create great wealth for agriculture and provide new opportunities liked wind. i remember traveling the country and seeing farmers who are making more money off wind energy than the crops that were growing. there is a future here, and that is what we need people to see. >> this still has a lot of nuclear tax provisions which were not included in any prior version of the bill. i want to know what is with their inclusion out and how you see this moving along and the senate. >> this is very different from

the previous bill. for a lot of different reasons. that bill, according to epa, contemplated the construction of 260 nuclear plants over the life of the bill. what we're doing, we think, is more sensible. together, with the nuclear industry, we have joined together in a way that gives them the opportunity to get up on their feet and with that proves they could make it in the marketplace or it cannot, and we want to streamline the decision making. government decision making should not take 10 years. that is an insult to any taxpayer. we want to streamline, get rid of red tape, show people we can make a faster decision, and embrey standardizing, encourage the standardizing of plants and the modular plants. which will be less expensive, safer, and we think competitive on a global basis. what we do is give the nuclear

industry the opportunity to ask for, which is to show on its own and has the ability to retool, to gear up in human personnel as well as technology, to produce a better product and compete in the marketplace on its own. we think it sends it is absolutely emission-free and will be part of the mix, it makes sense to embrace it in the context of this bill. thank you very much, folks. appreciate it. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> today, the supreme court nominee was on capitol hill making the rounds in a series of meetings with key lawmakers. john simpson, what did they talk about? >> she met with senate majority leader harry reid, minority leader mitch mcconnell, the leaders of the judiciary committee, senators sessions and leahy. these were fairly easygoing discussions about the basic issues. they have all met with her before. she was meeting with some of the other members who have not had a chance to discuss the issues with care. >> how did the meetings go, particularly with republicans? >> they're very guarded about what they said. they have not explain exactly

what they talked about with her. they seem to have gone fairly well. most of the members came away with a positive feeling. it looks like they're going fairly well at this point. >> what is the purpose of the meetings? are they substantial? >> some of the members, it is meet and greet, but for others, lawmakers say it definitely provides a way for them to get insight into who the nominee is, how they will act as a judge, and whether or not -- how it will vote in court. >> when will the confirmation hearings begin? >> right now, senator sessions and leahy are putting together a questionnaire. once they get that back, they will begin negotiations. senator leahy has said he would like to have it before the august recess. >> what do you expect during

this path to confirmation? will there be opposition? >> there will be some opposition. republicans are looking to be tougher with her than they were with sonia sotomayor, but it looks like it should be no opposition in the senate to her. >> john, thank you for joining us. >> eric holder visits capitol hill tomorrow at to testify before the house judiciary committee. watch it live at 10:00 a.m. eastern time on c-span3 and c- span.org. >> in their relentless revolution, joyce applebee's describes why capitalism is a cultural look system. that is sunday night on c-span. >> while we cannot presume to replace justice stevens wisdom or experience, i have selected a

nominee i believe and bodies that excellent, independence, integrity, and a passion for all and who could ultimately provide that same kind of leadership on the courts. our solicitor general and my friend, elena kagan. >> 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." candid conversations, unique insight about the supreme court, available now in hardcover and also as an e-book. >> top executives from companies involved in the gulf oil spill returned to capitol hill for a second day of hearings. the chairman of the house energy subcommittee said the panel of investigators discovered the blowout prevention device on the deepwater horizon rig was modified, making it difficult to operate after the accident.

here is a part of the meeting that is about 3 1/2 hours. >> it should be noted for members that we ask each of our witnesses to have a technical expert with them to answer technical questions. to our witnesses, you may consult with your technical experts before responding to questions. if we get to a point where expert needs to answer directly, we will have them sworn in and hear from them directly. with that, let's begin our questions. mr. waxman, which like to begin? >> thank you, mr. chairman. round, mr. waxman, would you like to begin? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to return to a point i raised in my opening statement, a question about aeries of pressure tests performed on the wellefore the blowout took place. my understanding there are two tich types of pressure test, a

positive test involves adding fluid into t well to increase and exert additional pressure. this tells the well operator where the fluids can flow from the well into the surrounding formations. a negative pressure test is the reverse, it removes some of that pressure in the well, creating an inward or upward force from the pressure differeial and that would be used to detect flow into the well from a breach in the cement or casing. both tests are important and failure of either test can suggest a failure of the seals or the well's integrity. mr. newman, am i right in my understanding of the significance of these two tests? >> chairman waxman, i would agree with your assessment the successful performance of those tests is critical to understanding the condition and the integrity of the casing and cement and a negative response, negative ocome for either one of those tests would indicate there are potential problems. >>r. mckay, do you agree with

that? >> yes, i do. >> yes. >> i understand that the well passed positiv pressure tests on the morningf april 20th, 2010 but i also understand when negative pressure tests were performedater that day, starting around 5:00 p.m., there were anomalous results. let's go back to the document entitled, "what we know, put out by bp. interest rate says, quote after 16 1/2 hour waiting on the cement, a test was performed on the well bore below the blowout preventer, end quot and then it says, during this test, 1400 psi was observed on the drill pipe, while zero psi was observed on the kill and choke lines. mr. newman, can you explain why 1400 pound discrepancy in the negative pressure test might gnify, and what its importance might be? >> the indication of 1400 psi on

the drill pipe would indicate thathere was pressure in the well bore being registered on the pressure gage attached to the drill pipe. the absence of pressure on the choke and kill line would indicate a discrepancy between the well bore pressure being measured by the drill pape and the anulist pressure by the choke and kill line. >> what significance does that have? >> the significance of the discrepancy between the two pressures would lead to a conclusion there was something happening in the well bore that shouldn't be happening. >> mr. mckay and mr. proverb, do yoagree? >> i think difficult to speculate but that discrepancy is critical and in the investigation, we have to tear that apart piece-by-piece. >> we don't have knowledge of the sort of mechanical --

>> i'm just asking if that explanation of a differential is accurate? >> yes, i would say so >> now, mr. mckay, we were told monday the results were not satisfactory and said they were a possible warning that gas was seeping into the well and building up pressure insidehe bore hole. mr. dupree is your senior official responsible for results in the gulf of mexico. do you agree? >> mr. dupree has been working on the crisis 20 hours a day. i wasn't sitting on meeting you're referring to s i wasn't privy to that review. i would say 1400 psi on the drill pipe and no psi on the choke and kill lines indicates sothing should be investigated, absolutely. >> the anomalies in the pressure

testing present a significa pressure that should be investigated just hours before the explosion, tests on the well returned resul to signal the possible well failure and influx of gas up the wall, yet it appears the companies did not suspend well operations and now 11 workers are dead and the gulfcoast region faces catastrophic environmental damage. we need to know if that'the case and why it's the case and it appears from mr. dupree's statement to our staff that was the result of the test that was the negative test that was taken. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i needle back my time. i yield back my time. >> mr. barton, questions? >>thank you, mr. chairman. i've watched the testimony in my office as i did other work and

opening statements by the members so i have been participating by video. my first question is generally to the panel. do any of you allege that the incident that occurred should not have been foreseen, that it was such a catastrophic nature the equipment and technology should not have contained it? do you understand? i see absolutely no reonse. >> could i respond? >> yes. let me rephrase it. does anybody here believe that the blowout preventer and technology employed in the procedures, if they had worked proper properly, could not have prevented the spill? >> representative barton, it's

important to understand the design constraints of a blowout preventer. a blowout preventer is not designed to close around significant debris. the blowout preventer is designed to close around drill pipe and most sizes of casing. but without knowing exactly what's inside the blowout preventer today, it isifficult to conclude the blowout preventer wasn't subject to conditions that exceed its design constraints. >> well, i'm an ally of oc -- i'm a supporter of ocs drilling. i'm a registered professional engineer. i'm not a petroleum engineer. i'm not a geologist. but my assumption is in order to get a permit to drill, you have to show the mm srs that you'll

equipment on-site and drill the well in such a fashion that you can handle expected problems, and there have been millions of oil wells drilled and gas wells, there have been tens of thousands of gas wells drilled in the gulf. it has to be a design parameter that you could have a catastrophic pressure release or blowout, to use the common term, and i would think that your blowout preventer and your technology, your casing should be designed to handle that. am i wrong? >> the gentleman who's the president of cameron, it's your blowout preventer. >> i can -- congressman -- >> do you understand -there is a volcano that exploded around this well. i mean, we don't know what happened, but my aumption

is -- and if my assumption is wrong, then we have to re-assess the entire ocs drilling program, that if the technology had worked and the people had responded or had time enough to respond, even though you had the accident, it would have been contained, it would have been shut off. am i wrong about that? >> well, we don't know what happened. i think that's what everyone here is trying to learn. until we know what happens with this investigation, we will not be able to answer whether the owout preventer that was there was functioning for that particular purpose. our blowout preventers are built and designed to do specific things. we do know they will not sheer and seal casing, that way no but will sheer and seal drill pipe.

>> when you get a permit from mms, i guess this would go to the president of bp, you do have to show that if you have some sort of pressure release, you can prevent it escaping into the environment, don't you? >> ye i believe the permit requires a well construction plan that ao requires the blowout preventer required by the contractor with the permit. to answer your question, i think that, ineffect, the well design, the procedures that were used, and the functioning of the equipment are going to be the mainstays of this investigatn, and we do expect those to work, absoluly. >> it's my understanding, and i see my time's about to -- it's my understanding that the blowout preventer equipment is still intact, that it's not -- while itay be clogged up, or it may not be properly installed or connected, in terms of the activation mechanism,

that it's not been damaged, so it just hasn't worked properly, but it isn't like it's been bent or deformed or impaired, is that correct? >> there are no outward external incations of significant damage. i would caution the committee, the blowout preventer as a result of what's happened, particularly the sink offering the vessel, the blowout prevenr was subjected to significant stress. >> i see my time has expired. we will do another round, is that right, mr. chairman? >> yes, mr. barton, i think we will go at least another round. >> okay. >> let me ask about this blowout protector, i spent a little time on it. a blowout protector, like here's your pipe. it supposed to squeeze it off, right? if something goes wrong, squeeze it like a straw, pinch it so nothing can go up, mr. moore, is that basically correct? okay. i point out four ways in my

testimony where this blowout protector could not be working. number one, modifications that bp indicates they didn't know about, transocean said no, they know about it five years ago. there was the hydrolic leak. that wouldn't have enough pressure so you could pinch this off i it was serious enough, is that correct, mr. moore? >> that could be a cae, we're not sure. >> you also indicated when you get these joints here, if these join are in the bop, blowout protector, it won't cut a joint, is that correct? >> if those joints are in the shear ram -- >> it won't cut it. >> besides the dead man's switch, besides giving off even the battery in this case, one control panel we did find, the battery wasn't working, correct? >> that's what we were led to believe, yes. >> let me ask this. this is a 2001 blowout protector for this well? >> correct. it was built in 2001. >> in 2003 and 2004, new

regulations came out for blowout protectors, were there not, mr. moore? >> in terms of shearing capacity? >> shearing capacity in particular, yes. >> yes. >> doesn't section 250.416e indicate now it requires the lessee in this case, bp, to provide information that shows that the blind sheer or sheer rams installed in the bp stack, bop stack are capable of shearing the drill pipe in the hole under maximum or anticipated surface pressures, is that correct? >> i' not aware of that particular article. >> how about you, mr. mckay, since you're the lessee in this case? is it supposed to make sure the rams share this pipe? >> i'm not personally familiar with the article you're quoting. >> lking about rules of mineral management service rules and regulations that came out in 2003. mr. newman, are you familiar with those? >> i believe, chairman, you're

referring to federal code of regulations 30 subsection 250 s, i'm familiar with those. >> and they're supposed to cut these things in half in case there's an accident, yes? >> blind shear rams are supposed to shear the tubular. yes, sir. >> what kind of testing did you, transocean or bp, do to make a determination that the shear rams were satisfactory and could cut this pipe if something happened? did you do any testing? >> in terms of confirming the capability of the shear rams. >> correct. required under 254.3 s16e. >> it had nothing to do with the hydrolic fluid was leaking out, was there? >> there are regular tests performed on the bop, while the bop is on the rig, prior to its deployment. >> it's on the rig, okay. >> regularly, while the bop is

deployed on the seabed. >> right. in fact, section 446b says every three days, weather permitting, you must go down and look at the bop on the sea floor, does it no >> i believe that's correct, chairman. >> did you do that in this case? >> there is an rov,emote operated vehicle contracted by bp and located on the rig and it's out there for that purpose. >> did it perform any tests on the bop sitting on the sea floor? >> the only tests the rov would perform in that situation, chairman, is a visual inspection, observation of the bop? >> how about something as simple as -- then there's no shear test that's performed on the sea floor, right? there's no shear testing performed on the sea floor to cut this baby? >> during the progress of well construction operations and the routine testing that is performed, there is no test where the shear rams are

actually subjected to a shearing test. >> so the rov really just goes down and takes a look at it? >> it observes the external observation of the bop. >> is there any test that tests to make sure the batteries are working, so you can view your kill switch to actually shut this thing done? >> because the electronic signals, which transmit back and forth between the rig and the bop control system happen coinuously, there would be an indication, if the batteries are dead on the bop, there would be an indication of that on the rig. >> you're sigh don't have to test it because as long as electrical lines are working, that would indicate whether or not a batteries are fully charged? >> that's rrect. >> on this case, the battery was supposed t be a 27 amps, it was at 18 amps. did any of your testing show it was under the 27 amps required? >> i don't have any indication, chairm, the tests would have indicated that the charge in the

batteries had dropped from 27 to 18? >> would you have documents that would show what the power or the amps of these batteries were? doou have any kind of records that would show that? >> unfortunately, chairman, the records would have gone down with the rig. >> so we have to take the word of tho who looked at this control panel, that the battery was basically dead and dead man's switch would not work, correct? you have no records to dispute that, right? >> i have no records. >> my time is up. mr. burgess, five minutes for questions. we will do a second round. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. mckay, just to get back to specifics of the modifications of the blowout protector, our what we know form, tab 4, in the evidence binder, modifications that have been discovered in the brought protector system, can you give us the specific

modifications that were discovered in the bop system? >> what i was referring to yesterday, while we were doing rov, remote operated vehicle interventions as the crisis has unfolded, we discovered there were modifications made. i don't know personally whether those were the exact modifications that mr. newman referenced done in 2005 or additional ones. i think that's a very very important piece of the investigation. we found leaking hoses, and, you know, the diagrams we were using realtime did not match the blowout preventer. so that's -- >> mr. newman, if i understood him correctly, suggested that those modifications were requested and were paid for by bp, so it should be possible those records wouldn't have gone down with the ship, would they? we shod be able to get that paper trail at some point established, should we not, if

there were modifications requested? >> i have looked at the agreement that was signed between trancean and bp, so, yes, we have a copy o that. >> you will make that available to the committee? >> yes, sir. >> mr. mckay, will you look at your records and help us with -- >> absolutely. >> trying to define that? let me ask a question mr. waxman was asking about the negative pressure test. once i had read 1400 psi, the other side read zero, what should the other side have read? if the pressure test hadeen absolutely perfect? yes. >> the way i understand the configuration that was hydraulically connected such as pressure on choke and kill line, it should have been the same. >> identical pressure. i'm just a layman, but there at would indicate some obstruction that would not allow pressure to be transmitted from the drill line to the kill line or vice-versa?

>> yes. i can't speculate as to why but they should have been reading the same,rom the way they're hydraulically connected, from what i understand. >> going back to the previous issue, committee staffers have been told by your taffe, mr. mckay when bp attempted to operat one of the blowout protectors variable rams under water, the device was eher mislabeled or not labeled in the way they anticipated. is that correct? >> that is correct. i don't know if that has anything to do with the modifications we requested or not or whether there are different modifications, it is correct. >> do you think the bp approved the modification? >> yoi don't know. that will be a central part of the investigation to determine what modificions were made. >> if it was a mislabeling, you wouldn't have approved the labeling at bp? >> we wouldn't have been involved in the labeling. >> is there any reason why management wouldn't be aware of

this? why the labeling? why the discrepancy would exist? >> are you asking me? yes, sir. don't you have oversight overwhat happens? >> transocean owns those blowout preventers. >> you have oversight over transoan. >> they are our contractor, yes. >> let me -- ialked to the governor's office yesterday, i didn't talk to the governor but i talked to some of his folks. mr. mckay, let me just ask you, they are really concern ed, they've got a coastline because of indentations that is much longer than you would think, just looking at as the crow flies on the louisiana coast. they have 7700 miles offest stew astew -- ofe estuaries on the coastline. they tell us they are having

trouble getting bp to authorize additional purchase of additional boom and manufacture of additional boom. seems to me this should be all hands on deck, get the boom locally, get it from global sources but wherever we can, let's get the boom put into position and not go scrambling for it once the oil comes ashore. can you help me with that? why is the governor's office feeling like they don't have an adequate supply of boom? >> we are accessing, as i said earlier, we have 1.1 million feet deployed and 3.4 million more coming. this is deployment under the coast guard's direction. we have a supply chainranked up to supply boom as well. >> just if i can suggest, i think there needs to be -- i was impressed when we went down there last week, the cooperation between bp and coast guard and unified command, i have no complaints about what i was seeing but the governor feels or

at least the person i was talking to in the governor's 0 office feels they don't have the ability to start the production line on that boom and they're going to need a lot more than what they have. >> i will do two things. one, i will check on that and make aolutely sure. number two, i know of no limits by bp about getting stuff done in terms of boom or anything else. >> i appreciate your assurance you will check on that personally. the other thing is they don't have the rat of liaisons to the nber of parishes. there might be one liaison for eight parishes. that's not satisfactory. there needs to be one-to-one liaison for the parishes affected. >> okay. thank you. >> time is expired. mr. markey, time to ask questions. >> friday, i flew over the spill and saw a vast area of ocean covered in oil. this is oil from the gulf. we now see thousands of square

miles with this awful sludge. and although the spill started about 50 miles offshore, it has now reached the louisiana coastline. you are saying to us that bp is doing everything in its power to ensure that this spill is being stopped and that you currently estimate that the leaking is 5,000 barrels of oil per day into the gulf. but this isn't the only rig bp operates in the gulf. in itsil response plan for the lf of mexico, bp identified a worst case scenario for exploratory well explosion from offshore drilling in the gulf of mexico. as a leak that would release 25000 barrels of oil per day

into the ocean, about 30 miles off the coast of louisiana. the specific exploration plan that you provided to regulators for theorizon well states since bp exploration and production incorporated has the capability to respond to the appropriate worse case spill scenario, i hereby certify that bp exploration and production incorporated has the capability to respond to the maximum extent practicalable to a worst case discharge. so right now, deepwater horizon well is leaking an estimated 5,000 barrels per day, about 2% of the worst case scenario of 250,000 barrels, which your company assure d the government

the american people, that it was capable of addressing in the gulf. so if bp is already using every available resource to combat this 5,000 gallons a day and can't stop this worsening, i can't see how in the world you can certify you had the capability to respond to a spill of 250,000 barrels per day. mr. mckay, you had better rethink your certification for a worst case spill of 250,000 barrels per day. can you really say now, as you sit here, that that certification is accurate, that you can respond to a daily spill of 250,000 barrels per day? >> what i would say is that we are responding with three drilling rigs a surface response

plan that was in place, detailed, the largest ever put in place -- >> are you saying to us that you would use exactly the same resources for a spill of 5,000 barrels per day, which is what we have now, as you would for a spill of 250,000 barrels per day? >> each -- each spill is -- would be specific. this particular one is complicated at the emergency disconnect did n work on top ofhe blowout preventer, so we are still connected with a reiser that's 4300 feet long. we cannot get another blowout preventer on top o it right now, which would be the normal course in something like normal, but something you could do if the riser -- >> i understand that. right now, bp is scrambling to find enough booms. you're going to use nylons and hair to soak up the oil. i can only conclude that you really don't have the resources to respond to a spill of 250,000

barrels, and there are wells all over the gulf that are ticking time bombs that could result in spills of 250,000 barrels per day. do you really think you can certify, again, today, you could respond to a spill of 250,000 barrels per day? >> as i said, we're doing everything we can. i believe that we will learn things through this, there's no doubt. i believe that those certifications will be with the knowledge that we have. >> i just wish you had a little more humility today. an admission that you don't have it. last week, you tried to plug the leaks wit a huge dome, which failed, when it froze up. now, we're reading about a smaller top hat dome. if that fails, the solution looks increasingly desperate to plug the leak with a junk shot of golf balls and old tires and knotted ropes, soaking up some of the oil, with hair and

nylons, each of your -- each of your companies has represented itself as technology leaders in deep water oil and gas exploration and each of you now is flailing about with no clue about how you're going to get out of the mess that you've gotten yourselves into. top hats, golf balls, tires, hair, nylons, these are not the response actions of companies who are prepared for the worst case scenario accident and capable of carrying out that response plan. the american people expect your companies to have a technological response to this disaster, on par with the apollo project, not project runway. and that's what they're seeing, night after night. you need to do better, and you need to prepare for a worst case scenario, for the ticking time bomb that could be out there somewhere off the coast of the

united states. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. markey. mr. sullivan, for questions, please. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this is a big mess. i realize that you guys, it's tough to answer these quesons. you're probably, if not already, going to sue each other, be suing you, there will be litigation for years on this, a lot of money is involved, so i understand it's tough to answer these questions. it's easy to beat up on people when they're down in this tuation, so i'm not going to do that. i will focus on something different, even though i think it's bad,e will find out who did this and who's responsible, the investigation will be on-going and we will deal with that then. i'd like to really focusn the solution right now. we can focus on the problem all day long, it will not get us anywhere. someone is responsible, we'll find it out. let's focus on the solution. i'd just like to ask you, mr. newman and mr. mckay, have you ever dealt with a blowout of

this magnitude in the gulf ever before or even close? >> we've never dealt with a blowout of this magnitude in the gulf of mexico before. >> no. >> okay. >> both of you are involved in this, your rig, working together, he's a contractor. on the rig, who's quarterbacking the situation right now? who's in charge? it's his rig so if he's -- you have what do you call installation managers on the rig or offshore installation managers. if he says something, can you override him? how's that working? >> the offshore installation manager on a transocean vessel is the senior most manager out there. that person is responsible for the overall safety of the personnel and the vessel. >> what if mr. mackay, he says something, do you accept that? >> yes. >> also, i know you have a lot going on, on the rig, there's

people out there in harm's way, working feverishly to get this to stop. so, we talked about the golf balls and hair and all that. i know there's sophisticated efforts going on. cold either of you, mr. mckay, i guess you, elaborate what is going on, on-shore. do you have a command center. what's that command center doing? they'r working 24/7. ha you tapped into the industry, other companies, experts, the brightest in the world? what kind of technology are they using? is there video feeds from the floor, what kind of stuff is going on. >> we have several command centers. the source control is in houston. we have over 60 companies working with us across the industry, including our colleagues and partners as well as our competitors. we have the department of defense, the navy. we have labs, the brightest scientific minds in the world in these type of situations working

on it 24/7. we have the highest technology in the world working this. we have three different drilling vessels, transocean drilling vessels and six submarines working simultaneously, eight around the blowout preventer. this jump shot is actually a very sophisticated operation, a manifold is constructed to be utilized in 5,000 feet of water, never been done. the coffer dam was on-hand, we had that for shallow water, utilized in deep water, has hydrate problems, as people know. on the surface, we're using technology with the latest subsurface, dispersements, using subsea dispersal we think is extremely efficient from initiate tests like to get continuous injection going onn that. it is extremely higtech and the best minds in the world are working it 24-7. >> all these companies and others are involved as we speak?

>> that's right. >> do you have -- right now, are you drilling wells right now to go into two of them? >> we're drilling two relief wells. one has started and the other will start this weekend. >> i guess the coffer or cap would be plan a. was plan a, wouldou consider that? >> the cofferam had hydrate problems so we're working on a secondary dam for subc containment. >> do you have a variety of methods in case one fails. >> we have different levels tacking the subsurface with permanent securing with relief wells. we have the blowout preventer, which is top kill, is what we call it. then we hav the containmentnd collection system subsea, we have several things working on that. then we have aggressive on the surface attack, which is trying to fight it as far offshore and protect the shoreline, then clean up whatever gets to shore. >> when do you think this is going to stop? >> we're working every second to

get it stopped as fast as possible. there are viable options being worked that could work in the next few days to couple of weeks and ultimately, the permanent securing would be up to three months or so. >> okay. those wells you're drilling right now, how are those going to plug this well? how would that do it? >> we will drill and intersect the well just above or right into the reservoir horizon and pump heavyweight kill fluid to kill that well? >> that will take two months? >> it will probably take three months to get there in terms of the relief well. >> that would work right there? >> that's the normal way to kill a blowout around the world, permanently secure it, yes. >> thank you. i have no more questions. >> mr. ayly. >> thank you. i want to focus on the last two minutes at the deepwater horizon well that triggered this catastrophic event. when i go over this accident

mine head, i try too understand what was in place to protect the workers from a sudden event like this blowout. i'd like to talk about what happened just before the explosion. can we bring up the halliburton data screen at this point? you testified that part of your function on this particular well was to provide realtime data collection. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> and your company produced this particular chart to us as part of the contract you had with bp to perform monitoring of the mud and other data on this rig. is that your understanding? >> that's correct. >> are you generally familiar with how this type of chart is used in well monitoring? >> generally. >> generally. >> what this chart shows is what was happening inside the well and on the rig in the final two hours before the explosion. if you look, this chart is broken down into time intervals that are recorded, beginning at 2010, which would have been 8:10

p.m. that evening, correct? >> mr. braley, it's exhibit number 5. there should be an exhibit there, if you want to look at it. hopefully that helps 0 you out a little bit. it's exhibit numr 5. go ahead. >> this covers a data interval from 2010 or 8:10 p.m. on april 20th, to 2150, which would have been 9:50 that evening. is that the te frame we're talking about? >> it would appear to be so, yes. >> yes. if you look at this chart, tre are several abnormalppearing entries, where a line dramatical goes vertical during a time interval between 2146 and 2148. you see that? >> i see that. >> what this suggests is that the pressure in the standpipe at

that moment shot up from 500 psi, pounds per square inch to almost 3500 psi, in the space of about two minutes. that was immediately before the explosion, correct? >> that's immediately before the control -- the contact was lost with the rig, yes. >> right. >> so this is your company's data. what does this tell us? >> what it says is that at tom point, within two minutes or so of the loss of the transmission, that there was a significant increase in standpipe essure. >> all right. what's the significance of that, to people monitoring this well for safety and security reasons? >> the significancof this to allarties who would have had access tohis data and standd gages whichre present on the rig show this would be a significant red flag.

>> in addition to gages and this print-out, are there any other type of built-in safety devices that wouldrigger a shutdown of the rig? >> i would have to defer that question to mr. newman, as to whether or not there were any shutdown processes on the rig. >> all right. mr. newman, are you prepared to answer that question? >> if you could rephrase the question for me, representative, i'd be happy to te a shot. >> have you ever had surgery, mr. newman? >> i have had surgery. >> right when you're undergoing anesthesia, one of the last things that happen when you're going under, they put a device on your finger to monitor your oxygen. do you remember that device on your finger? >> the surgery i underwent, sir, was a bit traumatic and i was effectively incapacitated in advance of the surgery so i don't remember. >> just accept for the purpose of my question, that's what happens to most people, they actually do monitor your oxygen

saturation because they don't want you to die onhe operating table. >> i'll take your word for it. >> they are built into that machine the an anesthesia uses that when it gets to a level that is hypoxic, everybody in that operating room needs to know that. my question to you is in this setting, what type of alarm bells, whistles, alerts other than pressure gage do people on that rig have available to them to tell them they've got a catastrophic problem unfolding. >> there are a number of early warning indicators present on a drill rig that would alarm for the individuals who are monitoring those, to give them an indication. whicparticular alarms would have been triggered in this instance depends on exactly what was happening and i don't know the answer to the question about what exactly was happening.

>> how do we find out that information? how are those alarms recorded? what logs are kept and what additional information do we know to get to the bottom of what was transpiring on that rig? >> the alarms are monitored on the rig through what we refer to as vms, vessel management system. those alarms are logged and a record is kept of that. but that vms exists only on the rig. it's not transmitted off the rig. the vms system, along with the logs, would have gone down with the vessel. >> you have no mirrored backup data device so that information is recorded at some other location than on the rig itself? >> we do not have realtime offrig monitoring of what's going on, on the vessel. >> do you think that's a failure in the fail safe system that is currently used within the industry, to help understand the events of a catastrophe like this, and learn from