1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately also tonight, campaign 2010

primary election coverage from races today in pennsylvania, kentucky and arkansas. president obama today spoke at a manufacturing plant in ohio. his remarks were the late nest a series of white house-sponsored events focusing on the u.s. economy, on job creation. this is 20 minutes. >> thank you, thank you, everybody. please, have a seat. let me first of all just say thank you to some people who are doing outstanding work, beginning with somebody who i think is one of the best governors we've got in this country and just a great guy, give it up for your governor.

you've got an outstanding young mayor, mayor jay williams. the mayor of gerard, jim melfy, is here as well. secretary of state jennifer bruiner. and three terrific members of congress, tim ryan, charlie wilson, john boccieri -- john boccieri. give them all a round of applause. it is good to be back in ohio. and it is good to be back in the valley. i appreciate the chance to tour this unbelievable facility. sometimes when you're president you get kind of jaded.

you've seen a lot of stuff, you go through these factories. this one, when you walk through, is just unbelievable. it's like off of a movie set. and so it was exciting to see but what was especially exciting was to see all the people who are working here and to see the work that you're doing here. so i saw the 85-ton electric arc furnace. i didn't see any evidence but i know that you're building iron man suits somewhere in here. i appreciate the time that i've had to spend with all of you. partly because it's nice to get out of washington. washington's a wonderful place, beautiful, nice monuments. i have this nice home office, live right above the store so i don't have a commute. but sometimes in washington

everybody's spending all their time arguing about politics and you lose track of the folks who sent you there in the first place. and so the important for me to meet you directly and hear your concerns and your hopes and your dreeps -- dreams and i've been trying to make a habit out of doing this. about once a week i try to take a trip like this just to talk to folks who are working in various parts of our economy, to find out what's going on in demuents. and obviously the issue that's front and center on everybody's minds is the state of our economy. you know, in the two years i was running for president i wasn't any stranger to the state, these guys know i came here an awful lot. and i saw firsthand what years of failed policies have done to working families and i saw how hard these guys were working to put ohio back to work. and the mahoney valley is a place that doesn't need an

economist to tell you when a recession begins or when a recession ends because plenty of folks here have known their own private resessions for 10, 20, 30 years. now, they may not have seen one like the one we just had with the unemployment rate here that's at 14% and families having a tougher time than they'd ever imagined and a lot of people, let's just be blunt, aren't always real impressed when a governor or president comes swooping in talking about the economy. because the only headline they want to see is the headline that says, you're hired. but i do want to talk about a piece of encouraging news for a change. something concrete. not just talk. because for a lot of the last two yorse you didn't get a lot of good us in -- news. a year ago we took significant action to jumpstart economic growth and job creation. that action included making

investments in sectors with the greatest potential for private sector job growth. areas like clean energy and infrastructure. and one of those investments is going toward revitalizing the site right next door, preparing it for new construction and building a rail spur that connects to the norfolk southern line that runs through town. so as a result of this investment the v&m star's parent company decided to invest $650 million of its own money, its own money. [applause] to build a new $1 -- one-million-square-foot mill here, the largest industrial plant built in the valley since g.m. built its plant in the 1960's. think about that.

biggest investment since the 1960's. 50 years. [applause] so right here in the heart of the old steel corridor, where some never thought we'd see an investment like this again, they're placing a bet on american manufacturing and on this community. and that bet's going to pay off for 400 construction jobs, once they break ground this summer, 350 new manufacturing jobs once the mill comes online which doubles the current work force and as everybody here knows every time a new factory or plant opens or expands in america it doesn't just employ the people who are working at the plant. everybody here is going to have money to go buy lunch somewhere or buy a computer for the kids or do something else and so it becomes an economic lifeline for the whole community. capable of supporting hundreds,

even thousands, of jobs indirectly. and so that's a success story that all of you are part of. now, i don't want to suggest that this one plant and the jobs that will will create are going to make the difference for the entire community. it took us decades to get to where we are, it's going to take some time to get to the point where we needen to much -- to be. but just think about where we were a year ago. our economy was collapsing, our businesses were losing 750,000 jobs every month. economists across the spectrum were warning very seriously of the possibility of another great depression. and all of this was on top of one of the toughest decades for america's middle class that we've ever seen. so that was the situation just a year ago. everybody's got kind of a selective memory here. but nobody was sure whether the economy was going to hold up.

so we had to make a choice. we could sit back, do nothing, make a bunch of excuses, play politics and watch america decline or we could stand up and fight for our future and i ran for president, youngstown, because i believe that we're at a deit -- defining moment in our history and if we're going to keep the american dream alive for us and the next generation, we couldn't just sit back and put off solving these big problems. we had to tackle them head on. job one was rescuing our economy. and that requires some steps that were frankly up upon lar. steps like stabilizing a financial system that was on the brink of collapse and intervening in an auto sthri that was on the brink of extinction. i knew those steps would be unpopular. even in ohio, even in michigan,

even in auto making states, if you polled, people say, don't do anything about the auto companies. and i knew politics being what it is that some people would try to score political points off our decisions. but i think it's fair to say, any fair-minded person would say, that if we hadn't acted, more people in the valley, more people in ohio, more people across america would be out of work today. i can give you a very concrete example. the g.m. plant over in lordstown would not be there because g.m. would have liquidated. instead g.m. paid backity debts, turned a profit for the first time in three years and a third shift is about to come back to work in lordstown, putting that plant at maximum capacity. [cheers and applause] right next door. and by the way, it was in part

because of the decisions that these three guys made in congress. that's not easy. they've been -- they got bumps all over the bam of their head. some on tomorrow. but it was the right thing to do. today my administration is announcing a landmark agreement to help dozens of communities like youngstown revite lie lies and redevelop old shuttered g.m. facilities, preparing them for new industries, new jobs and new opportunities. these steps were the right thing to do. and it was the right thing to do to give tax relief to small businesses and working families right in the middle of this enormous recession. 4.5 million working families in ohio alone got tax breaks. most of you guys didn't know it. didn't notice in your paycheck, we didn't go around advertising it. but each paycheck was a little bit bigger because of the steps that we took and that meant that you could recirculate that money into the economy and keep demand up which helped avert a

depression. that was the right thing to do. it was the right thing to do to give loans to small businesses to keep their doors open. more than 2,400 right here in ohio got small business loans. because of the recovery act, because of the work that these guys did. it was the right thing to do to extend unemployment benefits and make achievements for people caught up in the recession until they could get back on their feet. there's probably not a single person here who doesn't know somebody who got unemployment benefits or used cobra to make sure they could keep health insurance for their families when they lost their jobs. that was the right thing to do. it was the right thing to do to help governors like ted avoid massive cuts to medicaid and layoffs to teachers and police officers and it was the right thing to do to invest in this town's infrastructure. we put all of that stuff in the recovery package because it was the right thing to do. now we've got a long way to go

before this recovery is felt in the lives of our neighbors and in all the communities that have lost so much ground in this recession and in years before. but despite that sobering reality, despite all the naysayers in washington who are always looking for the cloud in every silver lining, the fact is, our economy's growing again. last month we gained 290,000 jobs. [cheers and applause] so think about this. we gained more jons jobs last month -- jobs last month than any time in four years. and it was the fourth month in a row that we've added jobs. and almost all those jobs are in the private sector. everybody talks about government was doing this, government was doing that. no, what we did was we encouraged the private second quarter, gave them the funding,

the financing, the support, the infrastructure support in order to invest and get the economy moving again. and last month also brought the largest increase in manufacturing employment since 1998. 1998. i believe in manufacturing and i believe in manufacturing right here in the united states of america. [applause] we can compete against anybody. youngstown can compete against anybody. got the best workers. there's no reason why we can't compete with anybody if you guys have the support that you need. and you know what? i think those critics who have been trying to bad mouth these efforts, they know it's working. these folks who oppose us every step of the way, predicting nothing but failure, they know

it's working because, this always puts a smile on my face, even as they they've tried to score political points, attacking these members of congress, a lot of them go home and then claim credit for the very things they voted against. they'll show up at the -- to cut the ribbon, they'll put out a press release, they'll send the mail touting the very projects they were opposing in washington. they're trying to have it both ways. i know that's hard to imagine in politics, that a politician might try to have it both ways. here's the fact. if the just is a no crowd had won out, if we had done things the way they wanted to go, we'd be in a deeper world of hurt than we are right now. families want to see those tax cut, small business wouldn't have gotten those loans or health care tax credits that they're now eligible for, insurance companies would still be deciding who they want to cover and when they want to cover and dropping your health

care coverage and whatever they felt like it. the steady progress we're beginning to see across america would not exist. and neither would the plant that you're about to build. so, i invite anybody who thinks we shouldn't have taken those actions that we took last year or made those investments to come to youngstown. [applause] and explain to us why that plant shouldn't be built. [applause] come to the mayor, come tell us why companies like this in towns like youngstown shouldn't be given every chance to expand and add new jobs. tell us why small businesses shouldn't receive tax credits so they can help purchase health insurance for their employs -- employees. explain why seniors shouldn't get help paying for their medications, when they hit that gap called the doughnut hole.

explain why we should tell families that children with pre-existing conditions aren't going to be able to get health insurance because we decided that insurance companies should be able to do whatever they want. they need to explain why they would be doing nothing to solve some of these problems have been plaguing america for years and decades. now, i'm here to say, that's not how we deal with crisis. that's not what america's about. we did not become the greatest economic power that the world has ever known by avoiding problems. the united states of america does not play for second place. we step up, we face our challenges, we compete and we win. that's something we should all agree on. [applause] but everybody should be able to agree on that.

for all the things we've gotten done despite the unified determined opposition of one party, imagine how much further we could have gotten if i'd got an little help. if people had decided to step up. [applause] they don't have to agree with me on everything, but step up, take responsibility, don't just play political games. you're welcome. it is not too late to work together. not when there's so much progress to make. so many more success stories like this one to write. because we're not democrats first or republicans first, we are americans first. [applause] that's what we're about. so, i know it's still tough, i know a lot of times the future still feels uncertain and i'm not going to stand here and pretend that things are back to normal or even close to where they need to be.

i read too many letters each night from people who are hurting, who were still out of work, so i know things are still tough out there. but i will tell you one thing, it's people like you, people in towns like youngstown, all across america, that i'm thinking about every single day when i go to the oval office. i ran for office to make sure not just you but your kids and your grandkids have a shot at the american dream. because i wouldn't be in office if somebody hadn't worked hard to give me a shot at the american dream. i didn't come from money. i didn't come from a powerful family. i got a name nobody could pronounce. but somebody gave me a shot. somebody made an investment in me. that's why i ran for president, that's why i wake up every morning insisting to everybody

who works -- works for me that we're not going to rest until the future brightens for middle class americans all across this economy. hardworking people. and i'm absolutely convinced that the steps we're taking are going to help us bring about a better future for america. i believe -- [applause] i believe in seeking new markets for our exports is the right thing to go to do and enforcing the rules of free and fair trade is the right thing to do for our workers. i believe in investing in a clean energy economy, to create good jobs for the future, building pipes for natural gas but also building wind mills and turbines and advanced batteries for the new generation of electric cars. that's the right thing to do for our economy and for our environment. i believe that raising standards

in our schools and making college more affordable and upgrading our community colleges is the right thing to do so that every child has a chance to live out their dreams. [applause] i believe that reforming our health care system to crack down on the worst practices of the insurance company and giving everybody a decent shot at getting health insurance is the right thing to do. [applause] and trying to control costses on premiums is the right thing to do. it's the right thing to do for families and it's the right thing to do for businesses. so we're going to keep up every effort to rebuild our economy and restore some security for the middle class. a middle class that supports plants just like this one. so that places like youngstown don't just survive year after year but they are thriving year after year. and as long as i have the privilege of being your president, i'm going to keep fighting for a future that is brighter for this community and for ohio and for the united states of america. the country that we love the god

bless you, well done on all the work done here, god bless the united states of america. i appreciate it. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] he [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> supreme court justice clarence thomas on the confirmation process. >> i did not have a fond experiences up there and i just don't wish that on anyone. and also something justice white said when i first got here has stuck with me. that it doesn't matter how you got here, it matters what you do after you have gotten here. >> with a new supreme court nominee heading into the confirmation process, learn more about the nation's highest court in c-span's latest book "the supreme court: pages of -- the supreme court." available now in hard cover and also as an ebook. >> c-span, our public affairs

content is available on television, radio and online and you can also connect with us on twitter, facebook and youtube. and sign up for our scheduled alert emails at c-span.org. >> secretary of state clinton testified today about a potential agreement between the u.s., china and russia to impose additional sanctions on iran for its nuclear program. her comments came at a hearing of the new strategic arms reduction treaty with russia. here's part of our comments. >> it's a pleasure to testify along with secretary gates and admiral mullen because we share a strong belief that the new start treaty will make our country more secure. this treaty also reflects our growing cooperation with russia on matters of mutual interest and it will aid us in advancing our broader nonproliferation agenda. to that end we have been working

closely with our p-5 plus one partners for several weeks on the draft of a new sanctions revolution on iran. and today i am pleased to announce to this committee, we have reached agreement on a strong draft with a cooperation of both russia and china. we plan to circulate that draft, resolution to the entire security council today and let me say, mr. chairman, that i think this announcement is as convincing an answer to the efforts undertaken in tehran over the last few days as any we could provide. there are a number of unanswered questions regarding the announcement coming from tehran and although we acknowledged the sincere efforts of both turkey and brazil to find a solution

regarding iran's standoff with the international community over its nuclear program, the p-5 plus one which consists of course of russia, china, the united states, the u.k., france and germany along with the high representativive of the e.u. are proceeding to rally the international community on behalf of a strong sanctions resolution that will in our view send an unmistakable message about what is expected from iran. >> the state department today described efforts to bring a new sanctions resolution against iran to the u.n. security council. spokesman p.g. crowley said the newly announced nuclear deal between iran, turkey and brazil does not ensure that iran will stop its nuclear enrichment activities. he speaks with reporters for about 50 minutes.

>> good afternoon and welcome to the department of state. i'll mention several things before getting to the only top take you're probably interested in. secretary of state clinton are will travel to japan, china and korea, departing washington, d.c., on may 20. she will visit tokyo on may 21, shanghai on may 21 and 22, beijing may 23 through may 26. i will conclude -- and will conclude her travel in seoul on may 26. in tokyo she will discuss regional and global issues with our japanese ally.

in shanghai she will visit the 2010 shanghai expo and attend a dinner in honor of the u.s. pacific onsponsors. she'll participate in a an event and job creaths. in beijing she will join a secretary of treasury tim geithner and over a dozen u.s. cabinet members and agency heads as part of the u.s. delegation to the second joint meeting of the u.s.-china strategic and economic dialogue, together with her respective co-chair, state counselor dye, and vice premier wong. on may 25 she will participate in an event to celebrate people to people engagement with state counselor yo and on may 26 she finishes in the republic of korea where she'll meet with senior government officials to discuss regional stability and other issues. tomorrow morning at 11:45 we'll have a trip briefing here at

state featuring curt campbell and dave levin injury from the department of treasury. turning to afghanistan, the united states strongly condemns the bombing that occurred this morning along a road in kabul, trangically -- tragically killing and woumeding innocent afghan civilians. this deplorable act of violence also took the lives of at least six international service members and wounded several more. the taliban have claimed responsibility for this attack and once again demonstrate their callus disregard for the well-being of the afghan people. the united states remains undeterred in standing with the people of afghanistan against the scourge of terrorism. our thoughts and deep sympathies are with the families affected by today's bombing. the united states condemns the recent offensive actions in darfur, particularly the government of sudan's use of aerial bombing and local militias against darfur rebel

positions in west darfur. such operations endanger civilians and lead to mass displacement. subsequent incidents of looting and attacks on infrastructure by the justice and quality movement or the j.e.m. movement must immediately cease. the government of sudan and darfur rebel movements need to refrain from any further actions that would undermine the darfur peace process and endanger civilians. and return to active negotiation in the a.u. u.n. mediated peace process in qatar, to reach a political settlement to the conflict in darfur. the government of sudan must grant access to the affected areas, to the african union, united nations hybrid operation in darfur and to humanitarian organizations. the united states is deeply

disappointmented in today's conviction of same-sex couple in malawi. we view the criminalization of sexual orientation and gender identity as a step backward in the protection of human rights in malawi. the government of malawi must respect the human rights of all of its citizens. the united states views the decriminalization of sexual orientation and gender identity as integral to the protection of human rights in malawi and elsewhere in the world. in terms of travel of our seniors leaders, jeff is in baghdad meeting with political leaders and today he met with presidential hatchmy --al hashmy and deputy p.m.s -- prime ministers. likewise, assistant secretary for economic energy and business affairs in brazil today gave the

key note address at the society of the americas, council of americas 2010 and this morning. he also met with business leaders including the chamber of commerce and brazilian economic officials. we certainly welcome the report delivered yesterday at nato, submitted by the group of experts led by former secretaryal bright and thank the grood for their valuable -- secretary albright and thank the group for the valuable positions. we look forward to working with the secretary general and ow our lies as the process of developing the new nato strategic concept moves forward. and likewise we certainly welcome the president's signing of the daniel pearl freedom of the press act which enhances the existing reporting requirements

in the annual reports on human rights practices here at the state department. we will continue and expand our description of the status of freedom of the press and each country reviewed in the report and whether such governments condone violations of freedom of the press and whether they took measures to preserve the safety and independence of media around the world. >> can i ask you something? didn't it already do that report? >> we have had -- yeah. >> they already did it. so what the point of this was -- the point of this is what? >> i think we will go through a more detailed and fullsome analysis. >> you can explain to us when the agreement was reached on the resolution? two things related to the trip to get them out of the way? one, do you have any reason to expect that the base matter will be resolvinged by the end of may as is the japanese prime

minister's deadline? >> i would think we will touch on a variety of issues in tokyo. certainly it will be among those issues discussed. i think the japanese government has set its own target at the end of may to present his final ideas on the base relocation plan. as to where the discussion goes, i can't predict. but as far as we know he right now, the process is leading toward a presentation by japan to the united states by the end of this month. >> on the sinking of the ship, do you have -- to what extent will that be discussed with the secretary of south korea? and, two, do you believe that the -- do you have any reason to think that the investigation into the cause of its sinking will have been completed by her visit? >> that is largely up to the

republic of korea. the investigation i think is in its final stages. i would expect, you know, that there will be an investigation itself but the regional implications of the findings of the investigation will be something that the secretary will discuss with her counterparts in korea. >> apparently the investigation is over, reports coming from south korea right now, that they found the north koreans to blame for the incident. how do you think this will impact -- you have been briefed on -- has the u.s. been briefed on the outcome of the investigation so far? do you believe that north korea's formally to blame? and how do you think this will impact your desire to restart the six-party talk? >> taking those in sequence. we have been supporting the investigation, i think we have some familiarity with the

evidence that has been produced during the investigation. i'm not aware that the investigation is actually final, certainly it will be up to south korea to announce the findings. as to the particular timetable of when that announcement will take place, that i defer to officials in seoul. clearly as we have said, our focus is on broad regional security, provocative actions we've seen over a period of time have not been helpful to regional security. at times impeded the progress of the six-party process. to the extent that the south koreans brief us in the coming days on final results of the investigation, then we will work

closely with south korea and others within the six-party process on the implication. >> to the extent that north korea is responsible for the attack, i mean, does this illustrate the need for more engagement with north korea to make sure they don't do these provocative acts or is this the time of -- type of thing they should be punished for and further isolated? which is better for regional security? >> what is better for regional security is that north korea cease provocative acts, cease acts of aggression that destabilize the region, we he would like to see north korea live up to its obligations and take affirmative steps toward denuclearization. as to what the specific implications of the investigation are in terms of the process moving forward, those will be some things we'll discuss in both tokyo and in seoul. >> on the resolution, when did

they -- where was the agreement reached? >> it's hard to put a -- i think in the last 24 hours we have reached agreement on a consensus draft. as the secretary indicated i think, you know, we will be presenting that draft to the full council later on this afternoon. i think there's a meeting at 4:00 at the u.n. i believe that ambassador rice will have a media availability -- immediate availability after that meeting. >> it's my understanding in the last 24 hours -- [inaudible] today, essentially the basics of the resolution were in place last week and have been and it was a question of how long we wanted to wait until after the brazil-turkey -- [inaudible] >> i wouldn't necessarily agree with you. we have been getting closer and

closer after intensive dialogue within the p-5 plus one over several weeks. as week of indicated to you, not only with various meetings in new york but also, you know, cause between the secretary at her counterpart calls between the president and leaders of p countries, we have come to the point that we are at, you know, over this time there have been -- we've narrowed differences and come down in recent days to one or two sticking points regarding specific details of the resolution. in some cases, you know, the president talking or some cases the secretary talking to counterparts, you know, further instructions have been given from capitals to our ambassadors in new york. and we reach consensus in the

last 24 hours. >> you reached consensus over the weekend, i thought. >> i think we reached the point where the secretary felt confident with the support for counterparts that she could make the announcement that she did this morning. >> when is the last high level conversation you had with the chinese about this? if you reached consensus in the last 24 hours, then who talked to who? >> in terms of china, you will recall in the last several days the secretary had a conversation with state counselor dye and i think there were further discussions in new york and some of this was in fact over the weekend clarifying the details that particular countries felt were appropriate. and the secretary, you know,

even was on the phone this morning to foreign minister where everyone felt comfortable that there was consensus within the p-5 plus one. >> this resolution, you call it a consensus. it's not -- you know, it has a lot of elements they do want but it doesn't go as far as the united states wanted to go. and i'm wondering why, if in fact you think that this brazil-turkey deal, iran will prove that its not serious and you don't have a lot of optimism that it's going to go forward in iran, well, continuing to show the not serious about supervisions, why don't you wait for that to play out and you can get a tougher resolution and presumably brazil and turkey would vote for it because iran would have humiliated them and embarrassed them? why don't you wait to see how that plays out? >> as we have said all along, we've had two treks to -- tracks to our strategy. the diplomatic track, the pressure track, we think they're

interlater. with the subject of the meeting over the weekend, we will see what iran comes forward with to the i.e.a. over the next several days. i think one of the telling aspects of how we have reached con us is -- consensus within the pen-5 plus one is the fact that iran made the bold declaration over the weekend, something that our ambassadors had heard at dinner with foreign minister mitaki in new york that notwithstanding any perspective deal on the tehran research reactor, iran will continue to enrich uranium and that is, as we said yesterday, a clear -- a defines of five security council resolutions. , so i think over time it has precisely been the demonstrated unwillingness of iran to come

forward and construction the engagement of the international community that have helped us achieve the consensus that the secretary talked about today. >> two questions real quick. yesterday when asked about the deal, you were skeptical saying that this could prove palpable. to what extent does introducing this resolution today represent a rejection of that deal? >> i don't see them as necessarily connected. the t.r.r. deal was envisioned as a stip to build confidence between iran and the international community. the issue of the resolution is about iran's defines of u.n. security council resolutions. it is about its unwillingness to engage the you iaea seriously and its unwillingness to answer the questions that the international community has about its nuclear program.

so they are interrelated but ultimately we have our eyes on the primary issue which is, you know, the ongoing enrichment of ewe -- uranium by iran. >> that's what i'm trying to understand. if the t.r.r. deal was supposed to be a confidence building measure, how is pursuing sanctions and bringing them to the full council which is a major step, how is that supposed to help the confidence building aspect? >> to the extent that iran continues to, you know, to work the -- thwart the will of the international community, we're making sure that there is a consequence for that failure. >> but here's an example where they're trying to prove that they're not thwarting. they're trying to build confidence. but why don't you let them build confidence? >> we are making clear to iran

that, you know, what is expected of them. so as we look the next several dales, iran has indicated in its declaration with turkey and brazil that it will present a response formally to the iaea within the next six days or five days. that is something that we have called upon iran to do going back, you know, many months. we will see if iran is prepared to engage the iaea constructively. but one of our central concerns remains the declaration by iran that it plans to continue to enrich uranium, regardless of the t.r.r. arrangement. >> [inaudible] though to the agreement that was announced yesterday, the joint declaration issued yesterday. >> a rebut? >> yeah. >> i mean, again, what the resolution is focused on is

iran's unwilling tons abide by security council resolutions. and the fact that the draft resolution that will be shared across the u.n. security council builds upon the last -- the previous resolutions. it will have further pressure if supported by the formal council. it will increase -- it will add teeth to what we hope will and send a very clear message to iran of what we expect iran to do. >> doesn't this send a clear message to iran that no matter what you do we're still going to impose sanctions against you? >> no. we're not moving the goal post here. the goal posts have always been iran's failing -- >> it's not encouraging. after they say they're going to do something that you said yourself that could be positive if implemented, you consider the resolution. why don't you wait to see if they do it? >> it's a crucial if. iran we've seen more fean months has made public declarations but failed to follow through. so, you know, we will be

watching what iran does in the coming days and what its formal response to the iaea will be. at the same time you're seeing that the international community is unswayed by what iran promised over the weekend. it promised a lot but has failed to deliver it has said it was enriching to 20% expressly because it had concerned about the tehran return reactor. now it's saying it's willing to potentially agree to the t.r.r. arrangement but at the same time said it doesn't matter, we're still going to enrich uranium. that is in violation of what u.n. security council resolutions have called on iran to do.

that is what we're focused on. the t.r.r., you know, was an important means to an end, to build confidence, but ultimately this is about the failure of iran to live up to its international obligations. >> since you have consensus on the resolution, when do you expect to put it in for a vote. >> i think we're still guided by desire to get this done as quickly as possible in a matter of weeks. but obviously we're also con us is of the fact that now in tabling the resolution, others will have some ideas. there will be further changes we'll anticipate as we go through this. we think this is a very important step in the process. >> do you expect the -- by the end of this month? >> by the end of this month? it will take as long as it takes. it will take as long as it takes.

i think that the president laid out a goal of having this done by the end of spring. we still think that's a reasonable goal. >> more on the secretary's comments about turkey and brazil. i mean, you must be walking a fine line to be kind of poo-pooing this agreement and at the same time not offending turkey and brazil. you introduced -- they -- you know, you may not think that their diplomatic efforts will lead to much, will bear much fruit, but at the same time haven't you kind of handicapped any efforts by turkey and brazil to get iran to do this? >> again, we have said and the secretary repeated today, we value the intervention by turkey and brazil. the real question about this joint declaration is, you know, what does it really mean? what is iran actually prepared to do? to borrow a phrase, is there real beef beneath this piece of paper? so that's the real fundamental question. what is iran actually prepared

-- prepared to do? is it going to live up to its obligations? is it going to engage the iaea seriously? is it going to stop enriching uranium and then is it going to actually be willing to talk to the p-5 plus one about the nuclear program? it hinted in this joint declaration that it would talk to the international community about every issue but the nuclear program. so there are clearly things that iran has to do, if it comes forward and acts constructively, then obviously that will be something that we and others take into account. >> did you give both turkey and brazil a heads up that this resolution would be bounced around this afternoon? >> the secretary talked yesterday afternoon with both foreign ministers. she listened atentatively to their descriptions of what took place over the weekend in tehran. and she indicated that this

morning, assuming that we had to reach consensus with the p-5 plus one, we'd be sharing the resolution with the full council. >> what did she tell them about their efforts to bring iran to the table over the weekend, leading to this deal? how did she characterize it? >> i'm not sure it's about how she characterized it. they described what happened and what they were able to accomplish. what they hoped to accomplish but weren't able to do so in the time that was available. the secretary reiterated to both foreign ministers exactly what she said before the congress this morning. that notwithstanding the significant effort by turkey and brazil, there were still questions about this declaration, there are still very specific concerns about whether iran would seriously engage the iaea and whether it was willing to suspend

enrichment as demanded by previous u.n. security council resolutions. >> did she indicate to them that washington appreciated in the positive sense of the word what they were trying to achieve this weekend? or not? >> yes. i mean, we have been understanding and supportive of what brazil and turkey attempted to do this weekend and as the secretary has said, we remain skeptical that notwithstanding this joint declaration that iran is actually going to fulfill its international obligations. >> but you say that you're supportive and appreciative but you don't think you handicapped it any way? now by introducing the resolution a day after at agreement, you almost guarantee that iran is going to react in a negative way. >> that's up to iran. iran has specific international -- >> you're certainly not creating an atmosphere for diplomacy, are you? >> oh, please. we have attempted for many, many

months to attempt a constructive engagement with iran. that was the whole purpose of the meeting in geneva on october 1. and at that meeting you'll recall iran initially said it would accept the deal and then immediately backed away from it. and it has failed to respond significantly since. it's iran that is unwilling to come back to the p-5 plus one specifically to talk about its nuclear program. it's iran that has failed to engage the iaea, it's iran that has failed to live up to the demands of previous u.n. security council resolutions. we have bent over backwards to have constructive engagement with iran. it's been iran that has failed to meet us halfway. >> are you in this agreement now with turkey and brazil because of this agreement? >> we are tabling this afternoon a draft resolution. it has a consensus within the

p-5 plus one and we trust that with further dialogue within the council that we think at the end of this process it will gain, you know, the support of the council. >> do you expect them to support the resolution? >> ultimately that is up to turkey and brazil. we will continue our dialogue with all of the countries within the security council and we will continue to watch closely and see, you know, what iran's response is in the coming days to the iaea. >> what sort of accusations -- accommodations were given to both russia and china as you were reaching a consensus on this draft? >> i think we are working with russia and china and others. we think that we have produced a draft resolution that is tough. it's economy comprehensive, it's broad-based. we think it send as very strong

message to iran. >> what specifically did the u.s. say it would back away from in order to address rush -- >> i'm not going to get into the particulars of the negotiation. >> you made the judgment that having agreed on the resolution, that announcing that agreement and circulating it today, a, would not harm the turkish or brazilian efforts to coax the iranians into some kind of a fuel swap deal and/or, b, might in fact strengthen the chances of iran responding to their ideas because it would see that the sanctions train continued to move down the track. >> i think first and foremost i would say that we are moving down a process that we have been following for some months. if this was the priority of the

obama administration coming in from october 1, we had a genuine offer of constructive engagement with iran. we put on the table the confidence-building measure. as the president yoit lined, you know, we assessed that iran would not be more forth coming absent the clear statement to iran and we are now moving down that process that we envisioned several months ago. the president has outlined an approach that would have this process lead to a resolution by the end of spring and that's exactly what we're doing. the fact that we understood completely what brazil and turkey hoped to accomplish in its intervention this weekend in tehran, but we've always

envisioned that these are parallel and mutually supporting tracks. >> [inaudible] today you're talking about the agreement with china and russia -- [inaudible] >> first of all, i'll leave it to the countries that you mentioned to characterize how they viewed what happened over the weekend. i think everyone is struck by the iranian state that -- statement that notwithstanding any arrangement on the t.r.r. that iran would continue to enrich uranium. that remains the fundamental international concern and it ultimately poses the greatest danger in terms of the true nature of iran's nuclear program. so i think as the secretary said during her testimony this is a very compelling response to that iranian declaration over the

weekend, that regardless of the views of the international community, it plans to keep enriching and it cannot offer at this point any validations for that enrichment activity. >> turkey announced an agreement and the u.n. advanced that this will not be acceptable. >> well, the -- i mean, let's understand that what you have coming out of tehran this weekend is a significant diplomatic effort by brazil and turkey but you have a piece of paper that would, you know, no one knows whether iran will actually follow through on. so there is a piece of paper and it says that iran will respond to the iaea within a week's time. ok, let's see what the nature of that is he response is. it says that iran is willing to willing tone gauge the p-5 plus one. if iran is willing to do that it

knows the phone number, it can pick up and say, let's talk. we have said for many, many months, since october 1, we're willing to engage iran any time, anyplace, provided the top issue on the list is iran's nuclear program. . >> i think the "washington post" is saying that south korea is blaming north korea for the important peedo attack and will

be a-- torpedo a task. >> we will work with south korea and when there is an announcement, we will work with the countries in the region regarding what happens in light of that investigation. >> on the secretary's schedule today she is supposed to be meeting -- can you give us an agenda what they are expected to talk about? >> the secretary is updated by ambassador bosworth and ambassador kim on a regular basis and they are keeping her up to date as she prepares for her trip. we are clearly in tokyo and seoul and china as well. the issue of north korea will be

discussed. >> will they be on the trip with her? >> not to my knowledge. >> let's stay on north korea. >> [inaudible question] >> we have enjoyed a strong consensus with china going back to last summer when there was a resolution passed, 1874, which has been aggressively implemented across the international community ever since. we will obviously be guided by the results of this investigation. clearly any act taken against any country in the region is a matter of concern. if north korea wishes to have a different relationship with the international community and other countries in the region,

it has to stop the kinds of actions that we have seen over the past few years. so we will be talking to china and japan and korea in light of the anticipated results of the investigation and will collectively chart a path forward. same subject. >> [inaudible question] >> we will be talking to south korea about that issue, i would expect. >> are you concerned that this resolution is going to affect anyway the outcome of the conference --

[inaudible] >> the n.p.t. review conference is the global efforts to restrict the proliferation of nuclear material. the conference is about that global effort. it is not about any one country in particular, but certainly as a subtext of the ongoing n.p.t. review conference, you have pledges by all of the countries of the world to abide by their international obligations. as the secretary said in new york, there was one count trip represented in the room that had failed to live up to its international obligations. so i think we will all be guided by the what is happening on the

sanctions resolution, but we want to strengthen the n.p.t.. we want to reaffirm -- all countries have to live up to their obligations. we want to see the iaea strengthen its capabilities so it can work constructively with countries around the world and we want to develop a better mechanism so countries can develop civilian nuclear exarktse while limiting the -- capabilities while limiting the nuclear breakup. >> [inaudible question] >> we think so. >> there is an absolute surprise, i mean the question we

do face today is what happens. so how do we have u.s., russian and chinese agreement resolution? and they also claim they have walked every step of the way when they were reaching an agreement with the iranians. this is what they claim at least. can you just talk to us at least about the level of coordination that they had with you as they were trying to reach the deal with the iranians and why do you think they are taken by surprise by the secretary's statement today? >> i don't think they should be taken by surprise. in her conversation yesterday afternoon with the foreign minister, she indicated that we would be sharing the text of the resolution today. the secretary talked to the foreign minister both yesterday and prior to his trip to tehran. we have been engaged with turkey

going back many weeks and months and we, again, genuinely appreciate the efforts of turkey to try to mediate this. but this is not about turkey and brazil. this is about iran. and everyone agrees that the focus should remain on iran and what actions it will take in light of this joint declaration and we may have a difference of opinion as to the likely outcome of this. i think our colleagues in brazil and turkey may still be hopeful that iran is going to live up to the specific steps outlined in the declaration. we remain skeptical. >> before the prime minister went to tehran, they said they would be coming up with a resolution in the next day or two? >> i certainly -- all countries have been aware that we have been working intensively within the p-5 plus one and getting

closer to agreement on consensus regarding a draft resolution. the idea that we would be getting very, very close, should not be a surprise to any country on the u.n. security council. but the fact is as i have outlined, this was not keyed off of the meeting in tehran. it was the fact that through the intensive efforts of the past few weeks, we arrived at consensus just in the last 24 hours. >> can i follow up on that? >> wait. wait. the timing question is important here. the secretary herself said this morning on the hill in response to a question that with all due respect to her turkish and brazilian friends, the reason iran signed off is because they knew that the resolution was going to be presented this week and she said, quote, namely today.

>> i'm just simply saying, did we circle today on the calendar and say this is the day we're going to drop a resolution. >> wasn't it originally the plan to do it over the weekend and then the decision was to wait until monday? >> as we have outlined to you going back a number of days, we have been getting very close. we have had high level conversations between u.s. officials, including the secretary and others. and we arrived at consensus just in the last 24 hours. >> have you conveyed this message that no matter what happens in tehran, you will be coming up with a sanctions resolution, then why did you allow them to have a deal with the iranians? >> the decision to go to tehran was a decision made by the prime

minister. we have been clear in multiple conversations with turkey and brazil going back to a number of meetings that we have had in the margins in new york, here in washington and we have been very clear on what we're doing on the so-called pressure track. nothing that's happening here is a surprise to anyone, nor as we've said, it was very clear when the secretary met with the foreign minister in new york at the start of the n.p.t. conference, he outlined what the president's goals were going to tehran this past weekend. we knew what was happening on the brazil and turkey front. brazil and turkey knew what was happening on the other track. and i don't think -- there's

been very close, intensive collaboration both prior to the trip and just in the past 24 hours where the foreign minister of turkey and brazil outlined what they think they have accomplished and the secretary made clear that we still have concerns. >> before tehran, you were aware they were about to announce a resolution? >> no. again, the timing here -- i would say is just where we felt we had reached consensus with the p-5 plus one. >> just happened to be the day after? >> look, what is remarkable here is notwithstanding the weekend. you still have consensus within the p-5 plus one, which means we share the same concern that notwithstanding iran's agreement to -- which is caveated and

remains to be seen what they are agreeing to or not, but you have consensus in the p-5 plus one, including china and rush that this is a resolution that should be tarblede. that sends a strong message to iran that its efforts over the past many weeks to dock, dodge and evade and avoid their obligations, that strategy has failed. >> you can see where turkey and brazil might feel you didn't give their diplomatic efforts any consideration at all? >> we have made clear to a number of countries, including turkey, brazil, russia, china that absent additional pressure from the international community, that iran was unlikely to change course and in fact, i think we feel given the

public statements of iran over the past 48 hours that notwithstanding a t.r.r. arrangement, they are still going to enrich which is a contravention of the u.n. security council resolutions tells us that our skepticism is well founded. it doesn't mean we aren't appreciatetive of the efforts of turkey and brazil and we will see what iran will do when it prepares a response. >> but this specifically undertook this mission in the hopes of at least temporarily avoiding a sanctions resolution. >> i will deaver to turkey and brazil -- i will defer to turkey and brazil the purposes of their trip to tehran this weekend. we have made clear that we are open to engagement, but the ball remains in iran's court. >> the impression left is that the message here to turkey and

brazil and that is get out of the sand box and we don't need your meddling. do you not -- do you not accept that? >> i just simply said. i can repeat it again. we appreciate the efforts of turkey and brazil and will be watching to see if -- major if -- if iran follows up on what is on that joint declaration. we remain skeptical that iran will, in fact, respond to the international community. and we would call as exhibit a its statement over the weekend which reit rates what the prime minister told the ambassadors in new york, that regardless of what happens on the t.r.r. front, it will continue to enrich and will continue to avoid living up to its u.n. security council resolutions. >> how long are you willing to

wait to see how iran carriers out any olingses it has under this new deal before you put the resolution to a vote? are there any other steps that you need to avoid a vote? >> we will share the draft resolution with the security council this afternoon. that will begin a process where all of the countries involved will weigh in. some of them may offer suggestions in terms of the particulars in the resolution. that process will take as long as it takes. all we're saying is, just as we will watch to see if iran responds to the iaea and calls the p-5 plus one and expresses a willingness to engage on the nuclear issue, if it is willing to suspend its enrichment program, we will watch to see if

those steps are taken and followed through by iran. we will continue to work within the council on a draft resolution that we hope in the coming weeks. >> i understand you're going to continue working on it, but how long will you wait before you put this to a vote? when you say they haven't done it and put it to a vote? >> the president has indicated he would like to see it by the end of spring. >> are there any other steps beyond responding to the iaea officially that they need to take in order to avoid sanctions? >> let me go back to where i was a while ago. our major concern remains the enrichment activity that iran continues to say is going to continue regardless of what the international community does. that is at the core of our concerns about iran. the international community going back a number of years has expressed a willingness to

engage iran on the issues provided iran suspends its enrichment activity. iran has failed to do that. u.n. security council resolutions have called upon iran clearly to do that. that's the bottom line. if iran is willing to respond to the iaea, engage the p-5 plus one, those will be constructive steps, but the key is iran has to suspend its uranium enrichment. >> so you're going to put this to a vote no matter whatever they say? >> as we said yesterday, we will be guided by what iran does. there are lots of things that iran has said. iran has tried to create the impression that it's reasonable, but every encounter we have seen where iran has engaged a variety of countries, they talk a good game but do very little.

>> how long are you willing to wait? are you willing to give them a chance to implement everything that they said if they hand in a glowing declaration to the iaea and ready to implement everything in that agreement, are you still going to vote? >> obviously, there will be further discussion within the security council. all of the countries represented on the security council will take note as we go through this of what iran does. but we're not going to stop a process just because iran talks a good game. >> can you say what happened over the weekend helped to reach a final consensus in the p-5 plus one? >> we reached consensus in the last 24 hours. >> you have put it out over the weekend. has it helped in the last 24 hours to reach that consensus? >> yes. clearly, iran's statement

regardless of the joint declaration that it would continue to enrich. that is in direct delilings of u.n. security council resolutions. that had to have an impact on our deliberations. thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> u.s. senate candidate richard blumenthal stopped short of officially apologizing for past statements which implied that the connecticut attorney general had served in combat. this was the subject of a "new york times" story published on monday. he addressed the veterans foreign wars office in connecticut. we'll show you part of his remarks while waiting for the house to return. >> i'm marine corps veteran,

former marine, member of the marine corps league and connecticut marine corps logan thank you for joining us here today. i'm here today because i could not let these malicious, deceptive charges against my good friend go unanswered. [cheers and applause] >> we met back in 1996, even before we joined the logan he supported senior citizens, letting them being aware of fraud and not to be taken away by scams or deadbeat dads. and then i noticed that everything he started to do for the veterans, when i joined the marine corps league myself, i

was more than impressed, actually it touched my heart because everything we did in the marine corps league, everything we did at a veteran function, a homecoming, sendoff between desert storm, iraq, afghanistan, he was there. every marine corps board i have attended since 2004, dick was there and always had something to say and joined hands with all the people, spoke to all the veterans. excuse me for being sentimental, but this man has been in my heart since i have been in connecticut. [cheers and applause] >> and as a member of the marine corps league i have stood with him at dozens of gatherings. i have been at funerals, homecomings and sendoffs and in 2008 and 2009 and there was a

park dedicated in a veteran's honor and dick came out in the pouring rain and spoke for four, five minutes and every word, i was with his wife, brian's wife, and we owe you a debt of gratitude. his sincerity is always in his heart. and the brother of all veterans in this room and throughout the nation. through the hardest times, dick has always, always been there for us. and dick hasn't just been standing for veterans and military families for years, as long as dick has stood with us, mourned with us and joined us in our families, he has always been , been completely straightforward about his

honorable service in the marine corps reserve. i said dozens upon dozens, i'm going to say 50, 100 different events i heard dick speak at, he always talked about his proud service in new haven with the motor transport units. he spoke about his reserve unit here in the states. he said that he was proud to be with motor transport because they have spent at least two tours in vietnam. he always stood up there for the rights of the veterans. it is outrageous for anyone to take one quote where he misspoke and attack him on it. after hearing him speak as many times and i'm a little redid you understand ant here, i could see where that quote could have been misread. i only talk a few times throughout the year to represent the marine corps league. dick has spoken many and many

times. and being in vietnam, the word was during vietnam. during vietnam, he wants the message out there that the veterans do not get treated. he wants us all to stick together in honor and support our veterans here today, yesterday and in the future. [cheers and applause] >> i just want to say he has always stood by us and we are proud to stand with him, dick, we love you. [cheers and applause] >> i would like to turn the microphone over to a friend of mine, geen who brought it to coventry and brought the vietnam

war to rensleer field. jean. [applause] >> i'm from coventry. i'm chairperson for the connecticut vietnam veterans memorial. i'm the sister of a combat medic who died in vietnam in 1965. i have known dick for many, many years. i have attended many functions that he has attended and has been a speaker. we've gone to homecomings, we've gone to sendoffs, we have been at memorial services, we have

been at funerals. he has supported me through the creation of the connecticut vietnam veterans memorial. i have heard him speak many times of his service in the marine reserves. and in all that will time, i never once heard him say that he was in vietnam. i did hear him say how passionately he felt about our veterans and how we had to honor them and never let happen again what happened to our vietnam veterans when they returned home. that's what he's always done.

there isn't a nicer, more honorable, more responsive advocate for our vietnam veterans, our veterans in general than dick blumenthal. [cheers and applause] >> thank eugene and peter and thank you to my brothers and sisters who are here today and many who are with us off the stage. i couldn't be prouder than to be with you today as i am always to be with you. i volunteered to join the united states marine corps reserves 40 years ago. i left my job working for pat moynihan at the white house. at midnight, i got on a bus, i

went to boot camp at paris island. you want to know how i got into the united states marine corps reserve? i looked them up in a phone book. no special help, no special privileges. i joined the reserves by picking up the phone and signing up. unlike many of my peers, i chose to join the military and serve my country. [cheers and applause] >> as i joined the united states marine corps reserves, i was stationed at paris island and i served a six-year commitment in the reserves. i reached the rank of sergeant and i was honorably discharged. i am proud of my service in the

united states marine corps. [cheers and applause] >> i am prouder still that my oldest son matthew is now serving in the united states marine corps reserves. [cheers and applause] >> i am just one of thousands of people across connecticut and across the country that served in the national guard or the reserves or in active duty. in fact, thousands of members of the national guard and our united states marine corps reserves and members of other services are now sacrificing abroad in iraq and afghanistan as we speak. and throughout my time in public service, i have been proud to stand up for our veterans of all branches of the military. i am proud of the veterans who

are standing with me today. they know that i attend dozens of military and veterans' events every year. they know that i routinely describe my pride in having served in the united states marine corps reserves during the vietnam era. [cheers and applause] >> and they know that i always honor those who did far more than i did, men and women who never came back, those who returned only to be ignored by the government that sent them there. the veterans with me today also know that i believe our nation must do better to keep faith with our veterans and they have heard me again and again and again stand up for justice and fairness to our veterans and for

a program known as no veteran left behind. [applause] >> now, on a few occasions, i have misspoken about my service and i regret that and i take full responsibility. but i will not allow -- [applause] >> i will not allow anyone to take a few misplaced words and impugn my record of service to our country. [cheers and applause] >> i served in the united states marine corps reserve and i am proud of it. thank you. [cheers and applause]

>> i'm happy to take questions. [inaudible question] >> i may have misspoken -- i did misspeak on a few occasions out of hundreds that i have attended, whether events or ceremonies and i will not allow anyone to take a few of those misplaced words and impugn my record of service. i regret that i misspoke on those occasions. i take full responsibility for it, but i'm going to continue to fight for veterans because they have been disrespected and dishonored when they served in vietnam and then returned to this country. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by

national captioning institute] >> we are going to leave this program which you can see tonight. the house returns now for votes on bills debated earlier today. among the measures considered, a bill to protect some colorado fishing waters. live coverage of the house on c-span. colorado and san juan fih recovery progr year 2023. the speaker pro tempore: the questi is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. members will record their votes

the speaker pro tempore: members will please clear the well and take their conversations off the floor. the speaker pro tempore: members will please clear the well.

the speaker pro tempore: members will please take their conversations off the floor. the speaker pro tempore: members will please clear the well and take their conversations off the floor. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to be removed as a

co-sponsor of h.r. 5015. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that i may here after be considered as the first sponsor of h.r. 1508, a bill originally introduced by representative wexler of florida for the purposes of adding co-sponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule 12. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. nadler: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain one-minute requests. without objection, so ordered. members will please take their conversations off the floor.

the speaker pro tempore: members will please take their conversations off the floor. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i would like to recognize two outstanding constituents from my district in south florida, claria mckneel and her 9-year-old son, joshua williams, who founded joshua's heart foundation four years ago. next month joshua will be honored by the foundation at its annual dinner right here in washington, d.c. the joshua heart foundation's

mission is to work toward ending global hunger as part of an overall community effort. once a month joshua's organization distributes food in addition to feeding the homeless every week. they deliver food to the sick, the elderly and the helpless. currently food is provided for over 100 homeless people and about 450 families on a monthly basis. claudia and joshua, i would like to commend you for your service to our community and indeed our nation. thank you for your dedication and your commitment to improving the lives of south floridians in need. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> unanimous donent -- consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. paulsen: mr. speaker, the

medical device industry in minnesota is a success story. the innovation it foresters means longer lives, healthier patients, good-paying jobs and economic growth. just this morning i attended a town hall meeting in minnesota with the new head of the f.d.a.'s center for devices and radiological health. dr. jeffrey suren. dr. shuren and his team were in town to hear about device manufacturers, doctors and patients. i applaud his willingness and his team's willingness to listen. as the f.d.a. looks to the future, it's critical that it strikes to the right balance, protecting patients from harm while not behindering the availability of life-saving innovations. in uncertain and unpredictable approval for pro-sesses for devices could reduce options for patients down the road. we need to keep the innovation here, we need to keep the jobs here, we need to keep the technology and patient care here in the united states. that's why we need an effective process that protects patients while fostering the innovation and economic growth that this

industry provides. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: are there further one-minute requests? the chair lays before the house the following personal request. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. culberson of texas for today, mr. kirk of illinois for today and mr. bilbray of california for today and the balance of the week. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? mr. burton: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into the following members may be permitted to address the house, revise and extend their remarks and include therein extraneous material. mr. poe, may 21, 24 and 25 for five minutes, mr. jones may 21,

24 and 25 for five minutes each, mr. burton may 21, 24 and 25 five minutes each, mr. moran may 21, 24 and 25 for five minutes ooch each, mr. burgess today, dr. burgess, for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into, the following members maybe permitted to address the house for five minutes, to revise and extends their remarks and include therein extraneous material. ms. woolsey, california, mr. etheridge, north carolina, mrs. capps, california, mr. kline, -- klein, florida, mr. defazio, oregon, prosecute grayson, florida. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, and

under a previous order of the house, the following members are recognized for five minutes each. ms. woolsey of california. the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, last week's state visit did absolutely nothing to ease serious concerns -- mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is correct. please take your conversations off the floor. the gentlelady will resume. ms. woolsey: last week's state visit did absolutely nothing to ease serious concerns about the leadership of afghanistan president hamid karzai. our counterterrorism strategy is supposed to depend on having a stable responsive transparent democratic government that enjoys the confidence of the afghan people -- people. instead, mr. karzai's government has proven itself to be

irresponsible and infective in a way that jeopardizes his country's future and the safety of american troops. karzai has lashed out at the united states, even threatening at one point to join the taliban and our own ambassador to afghanistan has publicly questioned his reliability as a strategic partner. while we have no choice but to have a dialogue with president karzai, it is critical that our approach to this relationship involve at least as many sticks as carrots. we owe the american people some assurance that we are not letting the afghan government misuse our tax dollars with impunity. mr. speaker, the center for american progress has a new report that discusses the crisis of governance in afghanistan. the government, it says, operates on a highly centralized

patronnage mod until which power -- and resources are challenged and channeled to karzai's personal and political allies. the system lacks the connection, the rules and the checks and balances necessary to make leaders truly accountable to the domestic population. one of our allies, mr. speaker, referenced in the report is karzai's brother, a thuggish political boss who rules kandahar with an iron fist. there's evidence that he operates his own militia and is actively involved in the drug trade. the report goes on to note that our afghanistan strategy has overemphasized the military's pollution and neglected the critical task of helping build viable state or begans, especially at the local level -- organs especially at the local

level. in one place we left no government infrastructure behind after the military cleared out the taliban. our single-minded focus on using hard power to vanquish terrorists just isn't working. the taliban remains a potent political force and the more government fails to provide basic services the more likely are the afghan people to rush into the arms of the taliban. the answer, mr. speaker, is the smart security platform. i've been advocating the smart security platform for years. instead of military surge, which respects more of the same more of the same old failed policy, what we clearly need is an aggressive civilian surge. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. members will please take their conversations off the floor.

thank you, mr. speaker. ms. woolsey: we need to divert resources from troop deployment to those that will bolster the capacity of the afghan government a government that works for their people and with the international community. in his press conference with president karzai, president obama said afghans are a proud people who suffered and sacrificed greatlyecause of their determination to shape their own destiny. mr. speaker, that is undoubtedly true. that's why they deserve better than government by cronyism and american troops also deserve better than to shed blood for a corrupt and dysfunctional regime. mr. speaker, it's time to bring our troops home and launch a

smart security plan and it's important that we do it today. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: mr. poe of texas. without objection, the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. jones: there are not many members of congress that have the honor to wish a beautiful lady a happy 98th birth day, especially when the -- birthday, especially when the lady was present at his birth. ms. waugh tee nita williams lived in my hometown and she and her husband were good friends with my parents. she assisted her husband in delivering me on february 10, 1943. she's the daughter of lula

worstley and william worstley. they raised their children in farville and lived next door to my family for years. she was a good friend with my mother and i often played with her children. juanita and dr. roderick williams have three children. she also has eight grandchildren and 10 great grandchildren. when juanita's husband died in 1964, she began working at the bundy elementary school as a secretary. she loved her job and everyone loved her in return. friendship and community service has been important to ms. williams. she was very active statewide in the daughters of the american revolution and girl scouts. she also organized a car, children of the american

revolution in our hometown. because of the love for the youth and hometown of our community, she was a member of the first baptist church, participated in sunday school and vacation bible school and youth fellowship meetings. she just returned from a trip to the panama canal, where she visited with nieces and nephews. she is pleased the canal will be widened and not replaced. she's given her life to making her community a better place to live, whether by organizing the meals on wheels program or helping with the girl scouts. she's a true american who believes and lives the traditional values of placing god, home, and country first in her life. juanita williams always has two wonderful things to say to everyone -- i love you, and god bless you. she always says her secret for

longevity is love. love for others and love for god. i'm truly honored to know such a wonderful lady and have this opportunity to honor her on this special day. i want ms. williams to know how much she meant to the jones family and that we love her and may god continue to bless juanita williams and her family and our country and may god continue to bless america and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: mr. etheridge of north carolina. weather.

mr. etheridge: permission to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. etheridge: i rise in support of a resution on the floor earlier, which i introduced with my friend, congressman david price, which honors the historic and community significance of the chatham county courthouse in pittsboro, north carolina. i'd like to thank joirt leader hoyer, the judiciary committee chairman conyers, subcommittee chairman johnson and really the entire north carolina delegation. each of them helped bring this important resolution to the floor. on march 25 of this year a tragic fire struck and almost totally destroyed the chatham county courthouse, which has been a beacon of justice and the rule of law for over 100 year anyone who has ever driven through pittsboro, around the traffic circle, surrounding the courthouse, can attest to its

beauty and how central its presence has been to the pittsboro community, the country, the county and the state of north carolina. the entire community rose to its best as the fire blazed and even now is working to rebuild it. thanks to the heroic action of firefighters, first responders and community leaders, and the chatham county citizens, i'm confident that pittsboro will again have a courthouse that the town and county can be proud of. i'd like to particularly recognize some of the leaders who were instrumental in managing and alleviating this unexpected tragedy and really kept the building from being totally destroyed. thomas bender, the chatham county fire marshal. daryl grive, pittsboro fire chief. and -- daryl griffin, pittsboro fire chief.

david collins, pittsboro police chief. richard webster, sheriff of chatham county and randy boler, mayor of the town of pittsboro. larry chisholm, chatham county district attorney, allen bordeaux, superior court judge and the entire chatham county board of commissioners who rallied and brought the community together. i ask my colleagues as this resolution comes to the floor to join me in honoring north carolina leaders and those who love the community of pittsboro and the chatham county courthouse a cultural idon and a landmark that will not easily be forgotten. by supporting this resolution, it will be rebuilt by the people of chatham county. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, is recognized for five minutes. mr. poe: thank you, mr. speaker.

mr. speaker, mexican president felipe calderon says he thinks arizona's new illegal immigration enforcement law will open the door to, quote, intolerance, hate, discrimination, abuse in law enforcement, end of quote. calderon is coming to the white house to talk about it tomorrow. i wonder if they'll discuss whether calderon's supports his own country's immigration support. a writer recently published interesting research of mexican laws. mexico bars anyone from immigrating into mexico if they, quote, upset the background of mexico. immigrants are not welcome in mexico if they're not physically and mentally

healthy, or if they show contempt against mexico's national sovereignty or security. imagine that. immigrants to mexico must have squey clean criminal histories and to apply for mexican citizenship, immigrants have to show a birth certificate and must provide a bank statement to prove they are economically independent. in other words, you can't go to mexico and live off the mexican government. they also have to prove they can pay for their own private health care. part of -- what are the penalties for failure to comply with mexican immigration laws? illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years' imprisonment. document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment so is alien marriage fraud. evading deportation is a serious crime in mexico. illegal re-entry into mexico after deportation is punishable

by 10 years' imprisonment in a mexican jail. foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process, meaning without even being given a hearing. mexico kicks out illegals without a deportation trial. law enforcement officials in mexico at all levels, by national law, must cooperate tone force mexico's immigration laws, including illegal alien arrest and deportations. that means mexican states must enforce federal law. interesting enough, yet president calderon is a hypocrite and indignant that the state of arizona would enforce u.s. immigration laws. the mexican military is also required to assist in an immigration enforcement operation. imagine that. a native -- and native-born mexicans, this is interesting to me, are empowered to make citizens' arrest of illegals in

that country and turn them over to the government. in mexico, get ready to show your papers. mexico's national catalog of foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. a national population registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population who must carry a citizens' identify ty card. visitors who don't possess proper documents are subject to arrest as illegals. all these provisions are enshrined in mexico's general law of the population and were revealed for the world to see in 2006 in a research paper published by the washington, d.c. center for security policy. but there's been no public outrage from the open borders lobby for mexican comprehensive immigration reform. you see, pro-illegal alien free speech in mexico is illegal. under the mexican constitution, political free speech by foreigners doesn't happen

because it's banned. noncitizens cannot, quote, in any war pis tate in the political affairs of the country. th can't march in the streets in protest. foreigners are barred in mexico for participating in everything from education to even owning firearms. foreigners in mexico have severely limited private property and employment rights, if any. mexico has long been doing the job of illegal alien deportation. it's hip crate crith call of mexico and president -- hypocritical of mexico and president calderon for criticizing the united states and our immigration laws. they are far less severe than mexico's illegal immigration laws. when president calderon comes here tomorrow to complain about america and america's illegal immigration policy, perhaps he would prefer that america adopts mico's immigration policy. and that's just the way it is.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: mrs. capps of california is recognized for five minutes. mrs. capps: i rise this evening to speak about the unfolding catastrophe in the gulf of mexico. social security painfully clear that british petroleum's oil spill could dwarf any environmental disaster in our nation's history. it's claimed lives, contaminated millions of gallons of oil and is belching thousands of gallons of oil into the water every kay and now the oil has reached the shores of louisiana. it's impacting the livelihoods of millions in the gulf coast states and threatens more. the first step is to stop the leak and attend to the devastation on the people.

the obama administration deserves high marks for its swift response from day one to minimize the disaster. last week, the president sent to congress legislation that would do three things. first, provide additional resources to mitigate the damage caused by the spill. second, to provide assistance to the people and the businesses affected most by the crisis. and third, to ensure that companies like b.p. that are responsible for oil spills are the ones that pay for the harm they cause. not the taxpayers. in addition, interior secretary salazar is conducting a top-to-bottom reform of the minerals management service. he's proposed splitting the m.m.s. into two distinct agency, written responsible for leasing and collecting royalties and one responsible for inspections and safety he

ordered immediate inspections for all deep water operations in the gulf and announced no permits for new wells ill wil go forward uil a safety and environmental review is completed. finally the obama administration is closing loopholes that allows some oil companies to bypass critical environmental reviews and is examining all the environmental procedures on oil and gas activities. while these are important and necessary steps, i believe that more must be done and that's why i strongly support president obama's announcement that he will establish an independent commission to investigate the b.p. oil disaster. this commission, which we he will create by executive order, will mirror legislation that mr. markey and i introduced earlier this month, the b.p. deep water horizon inquiry commission act. i believe this commission should have four goals. first, it should examine the

causes of the current spill as well as the adequacy of oil spill containment and clean up measures. second, it should determine whether and how such spills can be avoided in the future. third, it should assess the implications of its findings for drilling in or adjacent to sensitive and ecologically important areas, including in the arctic. and, four, it should make recommendations on how to strengthen laws, regulations and reform agency oversight in order to keep this from happening again. this commission will serve as an important long-term addition to the obama administration's excellent short-term efforts to investigate and respond to the oil spill. mr. speaker, i have lived in santa baara, california, since 1964. i saw firsthand the devastating consequences of the blowout on platform a, just a few miles off

our coastline in 1969. that was 40 years ago. that spill dumped millions of gallons of oil into the santa barbara channel. it killed untold numbers of -- amounts of wildlife, it polluted our beaches for years. but it also galvanized a burgeoning environmental movement and it spurred the first earth day. it was as true then as it's true today, our response to this disaster cannot be that we simply have to keep drilling in the gulf and other offshore areas because we have no alternative. the truth is that we do have options that can move us much further and faster toward energy security. today our economy still relies on fossil fuels for energy. and every day we pay a price in volatile prices, in source instability and in unnecessary

pollution. the best way to beat this addiction is by reducing overall demand, by promoting renewables and developing alternatives. and since america is not exactly a -- awash in oil, reducing our dispence in it would be good not only four our -- dependence in it would be good for not only our environment but for our economy and more importantly for our national security. that's what democrats have done. we asked for the energy independence and security act and we've passed the recovery act to provide an immediate jolt to the clean energy economy. the house has also passed comprehensive legislation that caps global warming pollution and invests in clean energy solutions that create jobs here in america, developing clean power and energy efficient technologies while combating global warming. these are the initiatives that will meet our goals.

as bad as things are and may yet become, the disaster in the gulf will be even more tragic if we fail to learn from it. some of our colleagues continue to claim we have to choose between endangering our precious coasts and relying on oil imports for dangerous regimes. i believe it's time to reject that false choice. let's pass comprehensive energy legislation so america can take control of our energy situation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen, is now recognized for five minutes. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, this year americans worked almost 100 days, from january 1 to april 9, to pay taxes at the federal, state and local levels, which is more than 1/4 of their income. i believe that it is totally

unacceptable to require already stressed families to give up such a high share of their income while bloated federal bureaucracies continue to expand during a severe recession. to reduce this burden, congress should now focus on reforming the current complicated tax structure which makes it so much -- so much more difficult for families and small business owners to experience economic recovery. as i called for in my last speech on tax reform, the chairman of the house ways and means committee, the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, needs to schedule hearings on tax reform simplistic as soon as possible. the fair tax proposal is one of those ideas that i believe the committee must consider. the fair tax is definitely a serious proposal that is backed by many americans, including so many constituents of my

congressional district, and it deserves our full consideration. the fair tax would replace all federal income and payroll base taxes with a national retail sales tax and includes a rebate to ensure that no american below the poverty level pays federal xes. if enacted the fair tax proposal would provide a dollar for dollar federal revenue neutrality. according to the proposal's advocates, the fair tax would reform the current tax code. today's tax code is unfair, costly and confusing and is so complex that many of us pay more in taxes per year than we should. it is estimated that the present system costs taxpayers $265 billion for tax filing, tax record keeping, tax reduction advice, etc., which is $900 for every man, woman and child in

america. this is taxation without comprehension. the current income tax code, therefore, inhibits economic growth, it inhibits capital formation and most importantly it inhibits job creation. fair tax supporters believe it can correct -- that this tax reform can correct these problems by greatly reducing the high cost of compliance in the present system while lifting the income tax burden on production. i believe that a fair and balanced look at the fair tax should begin the conversation on tax reform and i encourage my colleagues who are serious about having this discussion to join me in contacting the chairman. congress needs to remember the sacrifices that are made by each american family, by making a real effort at tax reform this year. as the american economy

continues it to stagnate with a record 10% unemployment rate congress needs to respond by taking a close look at tax reform and, yes, the fair tax also. i thank the speaker for the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida, mr. klein, is now recognized for five minutes. mr. klein: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in strong support of h.res. 403, legislation i introduced calling for the establishment of a national teacher day. i believe it's important that we recognize the hard work of our nation's teachers who prepare our students for a stronger america. the education of our children is critical to the future success of our country and of global competitiveness. and despite limited compensation and increasingly high expectations, our teachers rise to the challenge each and every

day. as a son of an elementary school teacher, my mom taught second grade, i was proud to introduce this resolution. my mother and so many other teachers across the country spend their lives working to inspire children and open their minds to new ideas so that they can grow up to be successful in whatever path they choose. i'm sure that each and every one of my colleagues in congress can identify at least one teacher from their past who made a difference in their lives. i know that i wouldn't be where i am today without the motivation, encouragement of teachers who challenged me to pursue my dreams of public service. this legislation also comes at an extremely critical time for our nation's teachers. in this tough economy, state budgets are suffering. and it's important more than ever that we find solutions to budget challenges that threaten to cut academic programs and lay off good teachers to the detriment of our children and the future work force of our

country. rather than slash school budgets, increase classroom sizes and stretch our teacherser than we already have, we must -- teachers even thinner than we already have, we need to incentivize more people to enter the teacher work force. we cannot improve our education system in the united states if we don't invest in quality teaching as it is. that is why i have consistently voted to prevent massive statewide layoffs of our education professionals. i would also like to thank my distinguished colleague, congressman roskam from illinois, for joining me he in introducing this important piece of ledge -- me in introducing this important piece of legislation and thank the overwhelming number of members who have joined me in support of the establishment of a national teacher day. mr. speaker, when you get a chance, thank teachers for the great work that they do. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana, mr. burton, is now recognized for

five minutes. mr. burton: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extends my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. burton: you know, mr. speaker, one of the biggest threats to peace in the middle east and possibly the whole world is for the united states and our friends and allies around the world to stop iran's nuclear development program. we have been working for months and months to come up with a very, very strong iran sanctions bill. the bill has finally passed the house and the senate and because of the differences in the bill, we're in a conversation committee and we have a very strong -- conference committee and we have a very strong bill. one that will put extreme pressure on iran and possibly avert a war in the middle east. but now we're hearing that the bill's going to be watered down, it's going to be made weaker and if it's made weaker that means the pressure will not be put on iran that should be and they

will continue with their nuclear development program and we could be in a war in the middle east that will far exceed what we've seen in iran -- or in iraq and afghanistan. i want to read to you from a report that was issued just last week. quote, iran has set up new equipment that will allow it to boost its efficiency and en-- in enriching uranium at higher levels. iran's enrichment activities were discovered eight years ago and have expanded since to encompass thousands of centrifuges turning out material. but despite three sets of security council sanctions, meant to enforce demands of a freeze, tehran moved to a new level in february, when it set up a small program to produce material enriched to nearly 20% and 20% can be used for a nuclear weapon. the story continued. but the move has increased concerns because it brings the islamic republic closer to the

ability to produce warhead material. uranium at 3.5% can be used to fuel reactors, which is iran's avout purpose for enripment. if enriched to around 95%, however, it could be used in building a nuclear bomb and at 20% uranium can be turned into weapons grade material much more quickly than from lower levels. the 20% uranium is being produced by a cascade and the cascade is 164 centrifuges hooked up in a series. the diplomat said that iranian tech -- technicians had more and the throw of a switch appeared ready to activate it to support the machine's already turning out small amounts of near 20% uranium. we don't know how lo it's going to be before iran has nuclear weapons. but we know it's not going to be

too long. and every day we wait to put pressure on iran is a day they're closer to developing nuclear technology that could start a war over there, obliterate our friends in israel and cause a major war that we'll have to be involved with. we get about 40% of our energy from the middle east and if a war breaks out over there and in the gulf states, the persian gulf could be blocked and we would lose so much energy we wouldn't even be able to run the lights in this place. it's extremely important that we have a very strong iran sanctions bill. and i'm on the conference committee and i would just say to my colleagues who are conferees, let's make it tough, as tough as possible. because the one thing we want to do is avert a major war with iran in the middle east. and i can tell you, i know netanyahu, the prime minister of israel, and he's not going to stand by and watch a weapon that could obliterate, destroy israel could obliterate, destroy israel be produced right