create and defund the job and take it away and indeed that is exactly what happened to him a few years later. the government decided to change courses and that job was no longer there. i thought it was very wise of him to recognize of those distinct possibilities and the federal government has two things, create jobs, which is temporary at best or create a climate or atmosphere that expands the private sector. and i think i would at least argue at this point that that would be the wiser approach for this government to take. i yield back to the the gentleman from texas. . mr. gohmert: when the federal government is moving toward a $1.3 trillion to $1.6 trillion deficit in one year, they're sucking the capital from every corner of the world, printing

some, and there's not money for the private sector. and we've had meetings with the federal reserve people, including chairman bernanke, we've had meetings with people in the o.c.c., and from the fdic , we've had a number of meetings. and what we hear from people who are trying to borrow money to stay in business or people that have had lines of credit at their local bank for 20 years are now being told, we're not going to continue your line of credit. and when they ask, have i ever been late, have i missed a payment? what is the problem? well, our banking regulators have told us that they're going to be all other our bank and we can't handle the pressure -- all over our bank and we can't handle the pressure. if we keep loaning you money, extending your line of credit.

when we versed that subject with chairman bernanke, that some of the regulators are requiring more capital and more money in reserve than is required under the law and they're putting pressure on the bank not to make loans that they've made for years and that it's loans that make banks most of their money and if you don't allow them to loan money then they're not going it make money and they're going to go under and then hevenen help us, then the fdic insurance account will be hit more and we'll have to bail out more banks and what not. all because we had some silly regulators who were concerned that a bank they were supervising might someday go under and it might look bad for their career advancement and so they put too much heat on a local bank. now, there is greed, there is --

greed that has gone on in some places but most of that was in the investment banks, not in the local community banks which were doing ok until chicken little paulson started running around screaming, the financial sky was falling. and the next month we went from selling more homes in any time in five years to selling no homes. we went from people buying cars to people not buying any cars. and it put us in a terrible funk and it was all because this so-called financial genius that was head of the chairman and his protege is now running treasury now, wasn't smart enough or educated enough in the ways of the world that when you go out and say, we're going to have a depression, banks are going to fail one after another, when you create panic yourself, it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. and that's why when they went out and he talked, bless his heart, talked president bush

into going out, joining ranks with him and getting on the chicken little brigade, that the financial sky was falling and scared america, when you go out and have the president and secretary of treasury saying that, if they don't pass this particular bill, whatever bill, it wouldn't matter, they don't pass this bill on monday in the house, the market's going to crash like worse than 1929. it's self-fulfilling prophecy. it fell, people panicked, many republicans got talked into voting for the people and joining most of the democrats that voted for the tarp bailout bill and it should have been ended long ago. it was a big mistake. but, boy, everybody needs to feel good, though, goldman sachs had their biggest profit year in their history last year so their jobs are scrure, they're doing good. but the -- secure, they're doing good. but for the rest of america, there's a problem with capital, there's a problem with too little regulation over the

investment banks, no reform over fannie mae and freddie mac, none, not even in this so-called financial reform that's really a financial deform bill. because it has a systemic risk council that allowed the federal government in complete abrogation of what my friends are talking about in the prior hour, about the 10th amendment and the power reserved to the states and people. just complete ignoring of all of that, they're going to pick and choose winners and losers. your company's too big to fail, we will never let it fail. that means they can run in the red, they can run their competition out of business, they'll be the last business standing in that particular area because our systemic risk council from washington, their lofty mount zion realm, said, we pick this one to be the systemic risk. the government was never supposed to have that kind of

power. this country never got to be the greatest country in the history of the world by having washington pick and choose winners and losers. and that's what that financial deform bill does and i hope that it doesn't come with many of the provisions that are in there now. it looks like that's what's going to happen. but, anyway, we're sucking the capital out, we're preventing the private sector from creating the jobs and then they saw this health care bill, they saw it passed and as our speaker point out, we had to pass the bill so we could find out what's in it. some of us actually read most of it. so we had a good idea of what was coming and that's why we fought so hard against it. they're going to be -- there are going to be more jobs lost. there's already been jobs lost because of that bill. there's going to be more jobs lost and when i hear people who

didn't read the bill and didn't know what all it did, but they just took the word of people pushing it, they really believed when they said here on the floor, it's going to help the working poor, it's going to help those rdworking folks that don't have enough money, they haven't read the bill. if you read the bill you find out that actually if you don't make enough money to buy as good a policy as the government is mandating, we know you're working poor, we know you're struggling, if you had the money you'd buy better health insurance, but since you don't we're going to pop you with another additional income tax. going to add a couple percent to your income tax, merry christmas. you don't have enough money to buy the insurance, bless your heart, you're the working poor,

you're qug it be -- you're going to be poor because of this health care bill. during the job bill last week i was talking to an employer who was saying, you know, we've got a number of jobs that are entry level, so they're making minimum wage but it's a good entry level place and we provide some good health insurance. so, it's minimum wage but we provide them health insurance. so it's a great place to be somebody young to start now, get their foot in the door, get experience, be able to advance up from there. guess what? understand under the health care bill -- under the health care bill that was passed and signed into law this spring, he can't do that for people that make 133% or less of the poverty level. so those people who would go take that job, because even though it's minimum wage, it provides health insurance, bad

news, under the bill they're going to have to go onto medicaid. not medicare but medicaid. now, some states have increased me of the reimbursement rates under medicaid, well, that's coming to an end real quick because of all the additional unfunded mandates on the states that's going to add billions to what they have to come up with. they're not going to be able to do that. and we already saw there was polling, "new england journal of medicine" and other doctor polling that indicates 35%, some as much as 55% of the current physicians, when this kicks in to law, will retire and quit practicing medicine. oh, well that's great. that's really going to be good for the working poor. and how about the president's own words when he said, on the day before the bill passed here, his own words, whereas in the past you went to the doctor and you got five tests, now you'll

go to the doctor and you'll get one test. well, wasn't that good news? some of us know that's not a good idea. in some cases there are tests that are given purely from the doctor's practice, defensive medicine, because of lawsuits that are threatening and that they worry about, but on the other hand, there are doctors who conduct tests because they know there's something there. they know there's something there and one test doesn't show it, let's try this, because i know there's something there. and that's what was the case with my mother in 1976. it took them six days to find her brain tumor. our local doctor, one of the local doctors where i grew up, had told my dad that, you know, if she gets much worse you may end up needing to commit her. well, it was very tough for a woman as brillyapt as my late mother -- brilliant as my late mother to think that she was

going crazy. but that's what the local doctor thought because he was a general practitioner, he did have the expertise of terrific experts. but after five or six days of testing, they found she had a little brain tumor. she wasn't going crazy. she had a brain tumor that was causing her problems. and because they found it when they did, we got to keep my mother for 15 more years. so, i would kind of have hated for my mother to have had one test, like that's some kind of good news, that meant she may well have been committed to an insane asylum on the recommendation of the general practitioner. but if you look at what the health care bill does, it pushes people more and more to general practitioners and thank god for them. some of my closest friendses are general practition, they do an incredible job. they have to know so much about so many different areas of

medicine and then they're able to figure out, ah, you've got that problem, let's get you over to the specialist. and then the specialist can hone in for their whole career on the specific problem. under this health care bill, that's not going to be the case. but, i got off on this from the job situation. well, you don't have to worry about your health care. we're going toix it to where we cut $500 billion out of medicare, you don't think that's going to help pay or be funded partially from what the president promised, you get one test instead of five. ok. and then, how about the $500 billion in new taxes? well, i've talked to employers, last week we were not in session, talked to employers that say, there is so much being

stacked on top of my head and i can't get my line of credit extended, you know, there's no sense in me continuing this. this is nuts. i'm not hollering, and then because of the provision in the bill, in the health care bill, which starts popping a tax, a certain level of employees, lots of employers that i've talked to are going to start making sure they don't go over that. they could use more people but they're not going to go over the limit because they don't want to start paying that 2ds,000 per employee tax that -- $2,000 per employee tax that you get popped with once you have too many employees. and you just wonder, do we not notice what kind of incentives we're putting in place? we're putting incentives in place to hire fewer people. we're eliminating capital, making it -- that would have

made it easier for the private sector to hire people than for congress and for the federal government. but these census jobs, as this headline in "the wall street journal" says, census jobs end all too soon and they will. it's going to be tough when they do. 411,000 temporary workers hired last month by the census. we're going the wrong direction. this this is not a good thing. we are doing more damage and even before republican lost the majority in 2006 -- republicans lost the a majority in 2006, there were so many of us who were pleading, we're in a hole, it's time to stop dicking -- dicking. and in november of 2006, because -- digging. and in november of 2006, because the republicans had the audacity to run up $200 billion deficit

in one year, it was outrageous, and democrats rightfully won the majority because republicans had not been as careful about making sure we didn't run this government into a ditch ourselves and with the promise that their majority would see there were no more deficit, we would get this country on track, we would stop the craziness that the republicans had in this deficit spending we now find this year -- spending, we now find this year a projection of $1.3 trillion to $1.6 trillion deficit in one year. it's just hard to get my mind around, not that i have much of a mind to get around anything. but that is such an extraordinary amount of money to be in the hole in one year, and i read an article somewhere

where around the world people are starting to say, well, one thing we know for sure, since the united states is willing to run up over $1 trillion deficit in one year, clearly, they're not serious about paying their debts. well, some people can't remember what happens when a government spends so much money that it doesn't have, that no one will loan them money again, and we've also, too many, forgotten the lesson from history of what happens if you try to print your way out of debt by printing money. germany tried that. it just created such runaway inflation, remember the cartoons, the wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of

bread. well, we're printing money at record rates. we are running a deficit that never even comp -- at never even comprehended rates. for those who can't remember, basically, the soviet leader had to stand up and say, this was basically the essence, we can't borrow enough money any more to stay in business we can't print enough money to stay in business, we're out of business, states are each on their own now. there are some in this country who think that might be a good idea. but this nation got to be the greatest in history because we worked together as a nation. all 50 states. fussing, disagrees among

ourselves as family, but never before in history have we come so close to voluntarily going over a cliff. world war ii, record amounts of money were being spent, we were fighting for our very lives. for liberty, for freedom. some don't remember, there were germans what came ashore, one american citizen was with them. of course they were captured, they were going to commit war crimes here in the united states, they were captured, tried by military commission, by the way. but under the rule of law, if you can hang onto them, as long as there's a war going on. that's a whole other issue, but it's a way in which we're not learning from history. we're thinking that when people are at war with you, you can treat them better than our own

soldiers are being treated in courts-martial, give them more rights than our own soldiers have. people don't understand the constitution, they don't understand that the constitution embraces the congressionally passed uniform code of military justice. it embraces, the supreme court announced, the military commission act of 2006 as amended last year. the amendment mainly just required us to quit calling them enemy belligerents and now -- or enemy combatants. now we call them unprivileged alien enemy belligerent, not combatants. we're not learning the lessons of history. when nations fail to do that, it becomes clear eventually

that they are well on the way to the dust bin of history. we don't have to do this. this couldn't arery could last 200 more years, 400 more years. but we have to learn the mistakes, the lessons of the past and grow and learn from them. we haven't done that. we are not going to see private sector jobs created as long as the federal government is sucking up all the money, sucking up all the capital. there's not much left to loan and the private sector can do so much more creating jobs than the federal government does because obviously, you know, the federal government itself is a giant ponzi scheme. adding 411,000 workers in one month? you can't keep doing that. and still pay for it. the ponzi scheme known as the soviet union went out of business. that's what will happen to us as well.

so anyway, one of the things that we have failed to learn from history, i wanted to talk about jobs a little bit, and then spend the remaining time talking about another area in which people just don't seem to be learning here in washington from history. it's not hard to find, it's more accessible than it's been in the history of man kind. you can find all kinds of incredible information. you know, you want to go back and read john quincy adams' incredible closing arguments that went on for over two days. you know. ed in the amistad case. you can get it. you want to read ben franklin's entire speech before the constitutional convention in 1787, where he said if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it possible an empire can rise without his, the lord's, aid?

he said, we're told in the sacred writing, unless the lord builds the house, they labor in vain that build it. i also firmly believe he said, without his, god's concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of babel. we shall be confounded bit bilocal, partial interests, and we ourselves shall become the byword of history. you can find that whole speech, the lessons learn through history. if you don't have a bible and you wonder what was the most quoted book here in the house of representatives, for the first 100-plus years of our history, the most quoted book here in the house of representatives, it may have been 150 years, most quoted book here on the house floor was the bible. have one right here. most quoted book in the house

of representatives for most of its history. you wanted a bill to be passed, you better find some wisdom in scripture and share it with people so they'd understand. we've had something last week that was called by some peace flotilla, but it was quite clear that there was a lot more to it than that. that this was a contrived plan, this was an effort to embarrass israel because the proponents knew that israel would have to defend itself. there was no question about that. they have been hit with so many thousands of rockets from the gaza strip, they had to eventually defend themselves. unless we -- and lest we

forget, the gaza strip was controlled as part of israel until israel's leaders thought, you know what, it's not part of any treaty, it's not part of any demand, but what if we gave the gaza strip to palestinians? what if we gave that unilaterally, not asking anything in return, what an incredible show of good faith that would be. that should surely provoke our adversaries into realizing we do want peace. so let's give away the gaza strip. now, they hadn't learned a whole lot. from the fact that you could give away part that was part of israel at the time, controlled by israel, give that to

southern lebanon and you know, they'll know that we are really interested in peace and things should really go well. continuing not to get the message that every time it seems that israel gives away land, even going back to its early inception, you know, centuries and centuries and centuries before there was mohammed or i islam, israel, if they gave away land, it was normally used as a staging area later to attack them because they'd given away something that was under their control and i wondered about the mentality, do you guys not get it you give away land, you get attacked from it. every time you give it away. until i made a couple of trips over and you begin to realize,

the mentality after years and years of suicide bombs, family members, just having coffee, at this restaurant, allow -- alive one minute, laughing, with their children, dead the next minute. walking down, a suicide bomber walking down into an area of schoolchildren so he can blow himself up and kill children. when you see and you understand there have been so many rockets flying into israel, and you find out the mentality apparently for so many israelis has been, look, we just want to be left alone. just want to be left alone. we will give you land, unilaterally give it away, just

please leave us alone. i was reminded of the routine bill cosby talked about, where, and i think out of the first six albums i ever had, three of them were bill cosby he had a way of taking life and helping you look at yourself and laugh, but he talked about as a parent, the youngest one screaming and hollering, he said, hey, stop. and the little girl screams, i want this. and the other kids -- the other kid is saying, it's ours, it's ours. the he says, i don't care, let her have it, got to stop the screening, she's got a lot of my stuff, too, just got to stop her screaming. i thought about that comment, the israelis were so tyre -- tired of death and suicide

bombings and rockets, grenades, look, we'll just give you land if you leave us alone, let us live in peace. so i understand better the mentality that says here, we'll unilaterally give away land that actually makes it harder for us to protect ourselves. they're thinking that that will bring about acts of kindness on the other side, not realizing when you're dealing with people who, because of religious zealotry, have made clear they want to see your nation wiped completely off the map, they're not really going to get all touchy-feely over some gift you make. and that's what's happened with gaza. they acted out of such wonderful intention, let's give this land to the palestinians, and after you've seen what was there, and you know there were

greenhouses, there were ways that people could make a living there, and there were ways that people could produce their own food there, and instead, once they gave the land away, the greenhouses were destroyed, so many were plundered, just acts of violence, well it was the israelis' we'll destroy it. these were ways they could have lived and eaten and made a good living and they destroyed it. hopefully people in israel are beginning to understand, you've got to defend yourself and acts of peacefulness are not going to be met with acts of peace in response. they're going to be met with flotillas and rockets and death in your own country because the idea is not to get a strip of land here at gaza, not to get a

strip of land here at the northern part of israel, not to get the go lan heights, not -- the golan height, not to get the west bank and enlarge that. not at all. it is to wipe israel off the map. it is interesting how -- it grieves me much, actually, to know that there are well-educated people who have gone through life thinking that the israelis, the jewish people, had no history prior to the palestinians. in that area. that their history was more in germany and poland and america. america -- nobody even had any idea that it was here other than the native americans. when israel existed.

and a tragic thing happened here just recently for the first time in the united states history, the united states decided to ignore thousands of years of lessons and to demand with israel's enemies that they let the world know exactly what weaponry they have, what nuclear weaponry they have, let everybody know exactly what you've got. well intentioned, i'm sure, on the part of this administration. but what a disastrous mistake. and i thought about, here's a guy, the king of israel, long before the days of muhammad, when israel was a nation in the

lands where they now are and the king, who was the son of ahas, for a little history, ahas, as king of israel, had seen the northern kingdom make an alliance with the -- with asyria and it made them a very powerful alliance in military and they were marching toward jerusalem and it appeared there was no way they could be stop and that's when, according to scripture, god told isiah, go find ahsa -- ahas and tell him, i'm not going to let that alliance take jerusalem. and isiah did that. and they did not take jerusalem.

and ahas changed his ways and israel was blessed, centuries before there was muhammad, they were greatly blessed and then his son came along and things went well for much of his reign. you know, there were ups and downs as any nation has, there were ups and downs in his private life, but in following the tradition that for most of this nation's history was a reading and quoting from the bible as most quoted book here in the house floor, second kings, chapter 20, verse 14, skipping a lot, but then he -- then isiah the profit came to the king and said to him, what

do these men say and from where have they come to you? and the king said, they've come from a far country, from babylon. and he said, isiah, he said, what did they see in your house? the king answered, they have seen all that is in my house. there is nothing among my treasuries that i have not shown them. and see, isiah knew, that was absolutely stupid, to bring in people who would like to see your country destroyed and gone, who would like to have your treary that you built and created and show them everything you've got? i mean, the like, for people that play poker, it's like saying, i'm such a benevolent poker player, let me show you my

cards and i'll take two cards and i'll show you what they are and now here's my five, ok, who wants to bet? you don't do that. it would be like playing chess. and say, now, i want to be benevolent and so i'm going to tell you, you're tempted to move here and if you do that i'm going to move here, here and here and then it's going to be checkmate. you can't do that. and that lesson should have been learned repeatedly and it was not and isiah foretold the king, continuing on, verse 16, hear the word of the lord. behold the days are coming when all that is in your house and all that is -- all that your fathers have laid up and stored to this day shall be carried to

babylon. nothing shall be left, says the lord. you fail to learn from history, i don't care whose history it is, you fail to learn from history, you're asking for disaster. and to borrow a line from proverbs that was later the title of a movie, you're going to inherit the wind. you can't do that. and for this great country of ours to now turn on israel and demand of israel now to make the disastrous, disastrous mistake that the king did, sure, we'll bring in, we'll show you everything we've got, and we're demanding that now with israel's enemies? that they've got to show everything they've got to those

who want to see them gone and people like ahmadinejad who have pledged that they will be wiped off the map and you got to let them -- and you're going to let them know every defense, everything that israel has? what kind of naivety is running the place? i know it's well intentioned. just like the health care bill. well intentioned. but as a result people are going to be put on lists like they have been in england and they have been in canada and they're going to die waiting for their treatment, their tests. here we are well intentioned, refusing to learn the clear lessons of history. so, what did we see last week? well, actually, we can go back to may 25, 2010. israel became aware that there was a free gaza flow tilla so

they advised turkey and other governments -- flotil, la so they advised turkey and others that israel could not allow the self-styled humanitarian mission to breach its defensive naval block aid of gaza. it would be like after 9/11, people who would like to see our country wiped off the map, like ahmadinejad, he's made that clear, he wants to see us gone, but it would have been like a group of peace loving people saying, we are coming onto an airplane and we are not going to let you check us. we're not going to go through your metal detectors, we are coming and there's lots of us and by the way we also have metal poles and knifes and we will shoot you, too, when you

try to stop us. we're going to get on those planes when you want it or not because we're going to style ourselves the free america flotilla. we're going to be airtilla the hundred. we're going to bring people into the airports and we're going to overwhelm the security and we're going to get on those airplanes without being checked. this is what's being done and israel, after thousands and thousands and thousands of rockets, have been launched from the gaza strips, the gaza strip into israel, killing israelis, naming -- maiming children, i mean, israel couldn't let that continue to go on. so, sure, we'll let the humanitarian aid through, they make that clear, but they made clear back as early as may 25, we're not going to allow anybody to breach the naval blockade.

and so apparently the nations that israel warned did not take it to heart and in fact one flotilla participant said on may 28, quote, this mission is not about delivering humanitarian supplies, it's about breaking israel's siege on 1.5 million palan -- palestinians. and that's the truth. and then may -- oh, and by the way, en route, an arab news channel broadcast interviews with passengers which exhausted jihadist martyrdom and sang palestinian intifada songs. 29, hamas broadcast on its state-controlled television in gaza an interview with a leading gaza professor calling on flow tita passengers to engage in

martyrdom with the people of gaza. may 30, despite repeated warnings from israel, defense forces -- israel defense forces, the six vessels continued their voyage toward the security zone and aboard one of the ships one person told turkish television, quote, we will definitely resist and we will not allow the israelis to enter here, unquote. another said, quote, if israel wants to board this ship, it will meet strong resistance, quote. israel's mistake was not taking those quotes to heart, not taking them literally. may 31, 2010, israeli navy personnel warned all six flotilla ships that they are about to enter restricted waters. again, israel offers to collect

humanitarian aid and have it zhriffered to gatza strip -- gaza strip by united states nations but the ship refused to comply. so now it's, quote, we're going to resist and resistance will win and militants on the ship begin yelling, quote, ind fat fada, int fad -- intifada, intifada. well, we know what happened from there. some don't, some haven't watched -- i mean, they've watched mainstream america and they haven't seen the israelis being beaten with metal pipes, being stabbed, israeli soldiers shot, thrown overboard, how would we react in america if people who decided to peacefully overwhelm security at our airport, to get on airplanes, for benevolent causes, and they stabbed or beat

security agents at our airports, we wouldn't put up with that. well, i don't know, maybe this administration would. hard to say. but we know from history that's a big mistake. and what really breaks my heart, some of us have been seeing this stuff coming and i wanted this to be a very bipartisan effort, so for some months i've been trying to get pro-israel group onboard, i've been trying to get friends across the aisle onboard with a resolution that would make very clear, we support israel defending itself, whatever it need -- whatever needs to be done. and if nothing else has worked then military means are

supported by this nation. and instead this administration has been snubbing israel, snubbing their prime minister previously, when he came to washington, i'm going to go have dinner with my family and why don't you just stay here in the white house for the night and so you can come around and do what i've demanded and can you -- you can let me know when you've decided to do what i demanded. prime minister netanyahu didn't stay, he went to the embassy. he didn't need to be blackmailed into anything. and i realized, we're all victims of the environment in which we grew up and if you grew up in an environment, say, for example, chicago, where you're used to snubbing folks and you do that to friends and it's no big deal, it's understandable that would be brought to the

white house. but the truble is, -- trouble is, when you're the most powerful executive in the world and you snub a friend, there are international implications. things likes that -- like that have been known to start wars and cost thousands and thousands of lives. activity like that has consequences. the world has been watching while we snub our ally who has more of the same rights in their nation that we have in this one than any nation in the middle east, and we're snubbing them? and we're trying to force them to do what they did in giving away land to southern lebanon, giving away the gaza strip. not defending itself.

now demanding that they show all of their weaponry. that has consequences. it can start wars. and the reason i've been working behind the scenes for so long, trying to get people on both sides of the aisle, i've got plenty on this side of the aisle support, and i have a few jewish friends on the other side of the aisle that are supportive but it wasn't enough but now i agree with some other friends that say, you can't keep this private. you've got to put the pressure on. publicly and hopefully, mr. speaker, people would contact their members of congress and let them know that they need to get on board with a resolution that says israel can defend itself. sanctions were a lovely thing to talk about and when you have years and years and years to work with, whether it's south africa or somewhere, that's one thing.

but when you've got centrifuges spinning and the iaea already tells us iran has probably enough enriched uranium for two nuclear weapons and the centrifuges are still spinning and we're still trying to talk to other nations in the world about getting onboard with our sanctions and israel is more at risk every day and not only have we not gotten other nations to get onboard with sanctions, russia has cut a deal, they're going to provide them their best antiaircraft weaponry, it's coming to iran. and the days are growing and building and we're putting all the wrong pressure on our dear ally. and some know that in this body that i've been pushing, all three terms i've been here, what i titled the u.n. voting

accountability act, one of these days i'm going to get it to the floor for a vote. i got it as an amendment. we had other 100 votes on it, that was in 2005, i'm hoping to get it to the floor as a bill, at some point to bring about sanity to our foreign assistance policy. but it says this, these actions around the world, you are sovereign nations, you can do whatever you want, as long as it doesn't hurt us because we'll defend ourselves but any country that votes against us more than half the time in the u.n. won't get any funding. march 31, every year, the list comes out of who voted which way. you say, fine, that's your position. we are not going to keep paying people to hate us. we found we can get people to hate us for free and we don't have to get tax payers to keep

paying taxes to get people to hate us when they'll do it for free. we're paying israel's enemies. about as much as we're supporting israel with. it's a big mistake. one thought i had that would be a clear image to the world and i appreciate the few friends across the aisle that have said they supported the idea and that is, we need an image of -- a visual image going to the rest of the world so they know, there may be bickering with our friend, our close ally, israel, but when people saw both sides of this congress applauding when addressed by prime minister netanyahu. there are some historians who

believe that when a secretary of state said, korea is beyond our sphere of influence, some people believe that's when the korean war started. you start wars oftentimes when the strongest friend snubs their ally, then enemies of that ally think they can act against that ally without the strong supporter stepping forward and we need to let everyone know israel is still our friend, they still vote with us way other 90% of the rest of the people in the u.n. and a friend like that is a friend we ought to support and you won't get peace until you show you're willing to stand up against the bad guys. then the bad guys understand that and you have peace for a while. but, mr. speaker, i see my time is expiring, so i appreciate

your indulgence tonight and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair would be pleased to entertain a motion to adjourn. mr. gohmert: i do move that the house hereby adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question son the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed. to accordingly, the house will stand adjourned until 10:00

admiral thad allen held this half-hour news briefing earlier in washington. >> good morning. this is the daily operations brief. i am joined by my partner in noaa. i will give you operational highlights and we will take questions you may have. in general, the weather may become a little bit of a factor in the next couple days. it has been out of the south- southeast at 10 to 15 knots for some time. it is moving the oil up into the panhandle of florida.

that will be slightly less and there is a current to the west that may hold it where it is and we're watching that closely. we had two flights yesterday. one of the west coast of florida and no sightings of oil were made. we have been reporting for week or so there has been an eddy that has separated the oil and we continue to watch them closely. regarding the content and operations, with the containment cap, in the last 24 hour period, we were able to recover 14,482 barrels. we went from 6,000 barrels to 15,000. we continue to optimize production and make sure we can take as much oil out of that stream as possible. we to new to moving -- monitor that moving forward.

-- continue to monitor that moving forward. we are taking a local water men out there and putting them to work. we have 23,000 -- enrolled. we are providing them equipment. they are scouting and skimming or supporting other operations. there will be a meeting with bp and my staff and the head of our integrated services team to talk about claims and business related claims. we will be meeting with british petroleum with that to make sure we are in line with the claims process and they provide the oversight. no other updates and that will turn the podium over and we will be glad to take questions. >> -- i will b>> thank you for g

the team. the oil spill is a human tragedy and an environmental disaster. noaa and the federal partners are concerned about what the oil spill means for the health of the gulf of mexico into the millions of people who depend on these waters. for their livelihood and their enjoyment. from day one, noaa has been tracking every aspect of this spill to help inform the federal response, to guide actions, to aggressively protect wildlife and critical habitat. we of been tracking also where the oil is going and where it is at the surface as well as where it might be below the surface. what the consequences of that oil will be to coastal communities as well as to the health of the gulf. we deeply understand the

public's need for answers and consider our responsibility to help provide those answers. our commitment is to provide the right answers and with that in mind we have deployed a wide range of tools. satellites, planes in the air, ship andon the water, scientists on the ground, and information online so people can understand the answers we're getting. we have always known that there is oil under the surface. the questions that noaa and its economic partners are pursuing is where is that oil, in what concentration, and what impact is it having on the ecosystem? today we are announcing findings from noaa's analysis from water samples that were taken from our partners at the university of south carolina aboard the

research vessel. we now have the results in hand from the water samples that were taken during those cruises and noaa is confirming the presence of concentrations of oil ranging from the surface to 3,300 feet applications 40 and 42 nautical miles northeast of the well site and another sampling station at 142 nautical miles southeast of the wellhead. our analysis of the presence of subsurface oil determined the concentrations of oil are in the range of less than 0.5 parts per million. along with the analysis of the concentrations, we have also been fingerprinting the oil. you can fingerprint it and

determined it -- whether it is from the mississippi canyon or the other oil that is in the gulf naturally. what we have found is the hydrocarbons in the surface samples taken 40 nautical miles northeast from the well had were indeed consistent with the bp oil spill. hydrocarbons found in the samples 42 nautical miles northeast from the wellhead at 4,500 feet were in concentrations too low to do the fingerprinting. hydrocarbons found in the samples 142 nautical miles southeast of the wellhead were not consistent with the oil spill. this research from the university of south florida contributes to the larger three- dimensional picture that we're in the process of constructing for the gulf. as admiral allen has suggested,

each of these research missions is doing an mri through the water column, tried to characterize what is there and eventually, we will have not just answers to what is the there and what concentrations, but what impact it's having. another noaa vessel is returning to complement the ships that were out there earlier. the noaa ship, thomas jefferson, is under way in a mission in the vicinity of the spill. i would -- i was down in the gulf last week and was on board the thomas jefferson with the crew of not only noaa scientists but academic scientists as they were preparing to embark and do some additional excellent work. the noaa ship, 2240-foot

research vessel returned in the vicinity of the wellhead. we are committed to sharing those results as soon as they're back. the results that are in hand can be seen at noaa.gov and we are committed to transparency and sharing that information as soon as we have done the appropriate checks and balances and make sure the information is accurate. we also are flying some planes, so-called hurricane hunters. i was up in one last week, flying over the gulf to deploy instruments to characterize what the surface flow and subsurface flow of the ocean is. all the scientific information is helping us understand the oil and where it is and what impact might be having. we remain concerned about the location of oil in the surface and under the sea.

we and our academic partners will remain vigilant in our search for answers. as i mentioned at the beginning, we consider this to be a human tragedy and environmental disaster. we're attacking it aggressively to mitigate the harm and to understand the impact. we continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with gulf coast communities during these incredibly challenging times. the admiral and i would be happy to answer any questions. >> how will you respond to deal with that? >> i will ask dr. lubchenco to respond. the term plume has been used. you have a source that is moving in some direction. a cloud is a better term. just to get it right on the terminology. >> i think that is right.

another useful analogy might be the volcanic ash emerging from a volcano. that is described as a plume. it is from a single source and it is being moved around by air currents or the ash would be moved around by air currents in the same way that the oil that is coming out of this spill is being dispersed and being moved around by some surface currents. we will continue to do research to understand where it is and in what concentrations and what impact it will have. >> in your briefing yesterday you mentioned bp is [unintelligible] for the site so you can close those vents. that seems to susut that the tabs remain open -- taps remain open. >> we have not reached the

capacity of the ship above, the discover enterprise. we want to make sure we have the capacity and that is why the vessel is being brought in. the reason is not being closed is to prevent the buildup of hydrates and thing called chatter. that could dislodged the containment cap and could not prevent the pressure. >> would be collecting the oil -- >> they are choking it consistent with the [unintelligible] they are not causing the cap to be dislodged. >> there is a second oil spill in the depwateepwater saratoga.

>> we have not heard recently but we will follow up. >> themany americans believe tht the response to katrina was better than this. what is your response? >> i was part of both of them. they're not come parable for a lot of different reasons. -- comparable for a lot of different reasons. we were involved in this from the start. i can give you an exhaustive list of what is like and not like and i do not think they are comparable. >> you discussed the 2600 vessels. of those vessells, only 126 are skimmers. ui was wondering what below.

>> we have very large skimming equipment offshore. other equipment is a combination of boom and catchment equipment that you towed behind a vessel and a vacuum in doubt. there are other skimming type vessels. it drops below the surface and oil comes in. it can operate vessels of opportunity by bringing in oil and telling nets. they can tow absorbent booms and some of the equipment is small equipment used in shallow water. you are what -- talking about [unintelligible] >> you discussed the inventory. are you considering bringing in different skimming vessels? >> they are used off shore in large concentrations.

>> [no aud[inaudible] >> there are several containment cap sitting on the bottom. depending on the circumstances, there will be used and it had to do with high ohow fine a cut thy could make. they went with a less perfect seal. there were several options. >> [inaudible] >> we are looking to bring larger facilities to process larger concentrations of product coming up but i am not sure i understand. we can follow-up. >> [inaudible] >> we have continued to work and

i asked them to go back and continue to refine in question their assumptions on those initial ranges which were from 12 to 19. i asked them to take a look at the implications of their first estimate that when we cut the pipe that could be as much as 20% increase over the flow rate. what i ask them to do is go over their assumptions prior to cutting the pipe and go back and question if we could get a final determination of what happened with the visuals we got when the pipe was cut and later this week or next week, give us a revised flow rate. we need that for two reasons. we need to assess the overall amount of oil and to assess the overall impact. we need to understand the rate of flow versus how much we're taking out in terms of production, to establish the oil budget. >> [inaudible]

e to high-resolution video that has not been made available. are you available of any video that is not being given to the government? >> there was some video owned by some contractors that we did not have access to. all the video we have we have released. there was some problems with access. i do not believe we have access to the video. you want to comment? >> what the admiral said is correct. there were problems early on and we have directed bp to give us everything they have and that is forthcoming. >> all of the imagery bp is getting you are getting?

>> to our knowledge. there were some issues early on. after we provided goguidance, there was concern about releasing the video real time for the top kill. they thought it might put pressure on the operators if they knew they were being watched and increase the risk. i think everyone thought it was better they had to be released to be transparent but that is -- that is the pressure replaced on bp that kept those videos coming. i do not know the subcontractor's name but we will provide that. >> [inaudible] >> there is oil subsurface. the earlier reports were looking at instruments that provided images in the water column that looked suspicious. the gold standard is the testing of water samples physically taken from the area.

the announcement of those water samples we have in hand indicate there is definitely oil subsurface. it is in very low concentrations. i mentioned 0.5 parts per million. that is form the three -- from the three sides that were sampled. there are other vessels out there. gordon gunter took additional samples. the thomas jefferson ship that is out there in the vicinity is taking additional samples. we will report on those as soon as we can. the bottom line is, yes, there is oil in the water column. that is confirmed at the sites for we have done those analyses. it is in low concentrations and we will continue to release those data as soon as they are available. and continue to do more mri

slices to construct this three- dimensional puzzle so we can have a better sense of what is where in what amounts and what impact is having. >> [inaudible] >> we look at the weather and the winds are out of the south. that tends to push the edge of the spill towards mississippi, alabama. there is a countervailing westerly current so it depends on where the oil is that and where the wind is coming from. it kind of resolve itself. we could see a slide holding of where it is that in relation to the coastline -- slate holding of where it is in reflection to the coastline. >> the national weather service is part of noaa. they provide twice daily weather reports to inform the actions

and the trajectory of where the surface oil will go and the shoreline impact maps that show where we think there are areas of the coast at risk, are all provided as part of this unified response that noaa is providing. >> let me restate what i said yesterday in the press briefing. we're not dealing with a monolithic spill. we're dealing with a 200 mile radius with hundreds of thousands of smaller patches of oil. they could be impacted by local currents or wins. it is a surveillance challenge to find out where the oil is at. they could be moving westward because of the oil and the oil toward the perimeter could be [unintelligible] so we are watching that.

. .

>> is oversight sufficient? and are you satisfied with the situation? >> as i stated earlier, we are convening a meeting later this week to look at the claims process. working claims is not something that is part of the bp's organizational competence or capacity. it is our responsibility to make sure that is being done effectively in the best interest of the american people. a team will be dispatched to

every state to deal with claims services so far and also to help individuals to deal with claims and business losses. we are dealing with feedback we have received and feedback that was provided to the president. we are reconciling any differences on that this week and will reporting on that in the future. >> good morning. two quick questions. how many birds or animals have been cleaned and treated so far? there are reports this morning that the cut and cap method made things worse. what is your observation on that? we will have to get you the exact data on the number of birds and wildlife.

the existing flow was modeled on 12,000-25,000 bottles -- barrels of oil per day. they're going to go back and refine the assumptions on the original flow rate and then give us the best estimate on the impact of the cut pipe. we will make that public in a very transparent way once we have a good feel for what the flow rate is for this bill. next question. >> there is a renewed report today of a second spill in the same general area. this was first reported in may but never confirmed. do you have any information on that? >> i have no personal knowledge, but we will check and make a public statement. >> my question has been covered,

thank you. >> thank you for taking my question. how far away, in days, are the next vessel or two debt -- two vessels to arrive on scene? >> the next bezel is being stage right now. i do not have the exact -- the next vessel is being staged right now. that should cover the rate of production we have right now. in the long term, we are asking british petroleum to give us a longer-term containment plan that will allow us to have a better understanding of the production capacity and any vulnerabilities we may have

going into the hurricane season. at this point, they are moving some very large vessels. one is from the north sea. they are going to create an underwater mooring, so the lines coming of the wellhead can go to that mooring, then through a flexible hose, then to production of vessels. that is a follow-on, a more permanent solution, a more durable solution for heavier whether then we have right now. -- a van we have right now. -- than we have right now. >> given the concentration in the areas that you reported, about how much oil do you think is represented in the water at this point? >> as we construct more and

more of these mri it slices, we will be able to put together a more comprehensive understanding of the entirety of the gulf, where the oil is and in what concentrations. at the present, all we have are the water samples returned from some initial research missions, and they provide us with just a couple of slices. so, what that information tells us is that there is definitely oil there. it is in a low concentrations, but that does not mean that it does not have significant impact. the impact we have yet to understand, and we are working aggressively to do just that. a more complete picture will require additional information, and we are in the process of getting that and will share that data as soon as it is available. >> let me just add a comment here. this gets back to the flow rate issue. one of the reasons it is very

important to establish the flow rate is to develop what i would call an overall "oiled budget," for lack of a better term. once we can establish a flow rate, we can assess the entire aggregate amount that has been discharged. then we can see how much has been dealt with by chemical dispersant and how much has been taken ashore. compare that to the discharge rate. whatever is not between there is not covered. that will give us some idea of what has not been accounted for. this is an imprecise way to deal with this, but the first thing we have to do is get that low rate protection -- a projection as precise as we can. >> i am curious.

everyone talks about how this is going so well but we do not have enough ships on scene to collect all of the oil and we do not know how much oil has spilled into the gulf. >> i have never said this is going well. we are throwing everything we've got. this is the largest oil spill response in history. we knew this was catastrophic as soon as the oil rig caught on fire. i have said time and time again that nothing good happens when oil is on the water. we have made no illusions that this is anything but a catastrophe, and we are treating it as such. >> when the queue-4000 -- q-four thousand gets there, you believe

you will be able to capture 35,000 bar. per day. is there some other jump that can happen? >> british petroleum will be providing direction on that in the next couple of days. we need to have the capacity we need. we need redundancy. it is nice to be able to handle the flow coming out right now, but we would like to have to toot redundant systems so that if we have a failure we can maintain production. we also need a system that can maintain during hurricane season. the flow being contained right now has not met the production limits of the vessels out there. we will have the q-4000 coming on. we're going to require british petroleum to create redundancy on production so that we can still produce at the same rate and then, at the same time, also

be able to account for operations and hire see state. >> last question please. >> this morning. i have two questions. this is the larger containment hurricaneart of bp's readiness proposal, and do you have any concerns about them changing out the current cap to a different path? >> it is hard to disaggregate the production system that we wind -- that we want, so they need to put in as much survivability and see keeping capabilities as we would say. the vessels they are bringing in will in fact do that. there is no guarantee that we can sustain production. there are going to be times when we may be forced to suspend

operations, remove the vessels for safety purposes, and at , we could have oil discharging. i do not think there is any way to avoid that. was there a second part to the question? >> are they going to put in a better cap to be hurricane ready? >> we have no recommendation or indication that they want to move from the current cap. should that become something they want to do, we would certainly make that public. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> we recently visited the bird

rehabilitation center in venice, louisiana, where birds caught in the oil spill are being treated and cleaned. >> right now we have about 151 birds. there are a few coming in right now. yesterday we received 44 brown pelicans and a couple of other birds. that was yesterday's intake. today, more are coming in. i will let you take pictures of them. when you see the ones outside, that is when they are clean. when we pull a few others off and put them in tin foil, that is for evidence. this is where they come to take a picture of the bird, take a

photograph that gets kept by the fish and wildlife service and used as evidence. later on, when they were cut the cost to the environment to charge bp, they use this as history and sampling. these birds are taking a really long time to clean, about one hour per bird, because this oil is really goofy -- gooey. we are using dawn dishwashing detergent and a light canola oil. it is an intensive process for these birds. we always tell people that we

washed these birds with the percentage of adana. we are dumping models of the don in. procter and gamble has been donating it -- we are dumping bottles dawn in. procter and gamble has been donating it to us. we started testing detergent in the 1970's. dawn was the wonder detergent. it was the best at cleaning things off. it does with these as well, but they take a lot of scrubbing. >> can i get some canola?

>> once we have removed all, or the vast majority of the oil, then we've rented the bird. we rinse them with high-pressure water that blast so away from the others, and as we rinse them, you can see their normal other structures start to appear again. -- in normal father is structured -- normal feather structure start to appear again. our job is to get the oil off the birds. after the bird is rinsed, it goes into a work group -- it goes into a room that is very warm and dry.

when birds starred preening, they started putting the microscopic structure of their offenders back together, and -- of their feathers back together, and that starts getting them back to normal. >> how many of these birds survive? >> with pelicans, we have a high success rate. it is hard to predict this early in this bill. we have had relatively few birds coming in compared to how much oil we know is out there. we are getting birds from a variety of people. most of the birds come from louisiana pelican fisheries or fish and wildlife. our search and collection folks are picking up some birds for us. we also have, occasionally, some boat operators or

contractors, at spill clean-up contractors to bring as the birds. >> where do you released the bird? >> we work with fish and wildlife service. they plan for the safest area to released birds based on their species, based on the oil trajectories, based on the time of year and the movement of populations. the u.s. fish and wildlife service is in charge of releases. we released some birds this morning at about 4:15 a.m. those birds were taken to florida. they were taken away from the oil. >> tell me about your group. >> i am with the international bird rescue research center. we are working under tri-state bird rescue and research from delaware. we have worked together for years.

tri-state is the lead, and we work under them. >> is a group of veterinarians? >> we are all people who work with these organizations either full-time, part-time, or on a temporary basis. some are veterinarians, some are wildlife rehabilitators, as summer biologists, and some have skills in construction and other areas that we need. >> inouye is funding these operations? >> bayh -- who is funding these operations? >> our operation is being funded by bp. >> tomorrow, we will bring u.s. senate hearing on the oil drilling. our live coverage begins at 9:30 a.m. eastern time on c-span-3

and c-span.org. >> they are the faces you see every day. see them on the c-span video library. you can search by name, title, at issue, committee, interest group and more. it is all available for free online. >> the white house budget director was at the center for american progress today to talk about the obama administration's efforts to make government more efficient. he was introduced by tom-all. this is 40 minutes. >> good morning. i am tom-all -- tom daschle.

i am privileged to introduce peter orszag. i want to speak about building more effective, efficient government agencies. government can produce better results and save money in two main ways. the first is by focusing on things in order of importance. the second is eliminating or reforming misguided spending programs. think about health care. we just enacted landmark legislation to bring affordable coverage to all americans. president barack obama and the congress deserve great credit for this. we should celebrate the accomplishment, but the legislation alone, as good as it may be, does not guarantee success. the policies may be smart and well crafted, but they will fall

short of the government is not ready to execute. the story of the veteran's health administration underscores this point. when president clinton took office, the v h a provided substandard, and some would say woeful care to our veterans. the administration quickly put in place reforms and adapted open source software to manage patient records. today, the veteran's health system is widely viewed as a model of efficiency and effectiveness, delivering superior care at a lower cost. no new legislation was adopted, it just betterment -- just better management practices. the health and human services administration and other federal agencies are just starting the long and difficult process of implementing health care reform. we must give as much attention to this process as we did to passing the legislation.

the same, of course, is also true of other important legislation, from the reform of financial legislation to energy and climate legislation, to infrastructure investments. if we are to reach our goals, we must give priority to improving government management and operations. we must be ready to execute. the center for american progress recently launched a new project called "doing what works," that aims to advance of this very objective. this project is identifying misguided spending programs and tax expenditures that should be reformed or actually eliminated. we are also exploring ways to improve policy decisions through better performance assessment and greater public engagement. we want government to be more effective, but we also undertake this work in recognition of our fiscal problems. now more than ever, it is

important that the federal government spends money wisely. the government needs to operate more intelligently and more efficiently, whether that be in health care, energy, education, defense, or other priority areas. our fiscal challenge demands that we direct resources where they are needed the most to efforts that generate the greatest return. peter orszag and the obama administration are working to build such of government. the administration has already taken a number of important steps to set high priority goals, strength and performance evaluation, cut waste in federal contracting and make better use of information technology. today, peter will discuss the next steps in the administration's effort to improve and modernize the way government does business. as director of the office of management and budget, he oversees the administration puts the budget and management agenda, and coordinate implementation of major policy

initiatives across the federal government. previously, peter served as the director of the congressional budget office from january 2007 to december, 2008. under his leadership, the congressional budget office significantly expanded its focus on areas such as health care and climate change. prior to cdo, peter was a senior fellow and deputy director of economic studies at the brookings institution. during the clinton administration, he served in several roles, including special assistant faugh for economic policy, and senior economist on the panel of economic advisers. his leadership, commitment to the president, and with the determination of many of you in this room, i believe we can make a profound and lasting change in the way government works. the american people see this change and tangibly benefit from it. we can then begin to earn back confidence in government, which

is so important for the health of our democracy. thank you, peter, for undertaking this important effort. the state is yours. -- the stage is yours. [applause] >> thank you. it's good to be back here. many of you may not know that my first experience working for the federal government occurred when i was a senior in high school when i got an internship with the senator i had never heard of from a state i had never been to. i was fortunate that spring, because the office, senator daschel's office was very much like the man who sit before you today, kind, and open to debate, and inclusive. my workspace has since been upgraded, and when i worked in to my office, i have to admit that i took down a portrait of general eisenhower, and put up portrait of alexander hamilton.

among his other accomplishments, hamilton wrote the first of the 85 federalist papers. in the first line of that document, he laid out why the united states needed a new form of government. it was not because the founders had any doubts about the basic idea of democracy. instead it was, as he put it, because of the "unequivocal experience of the inefficiency of the subsisting federal government." there it is in the very first line of our founding narrative, a practical concern about the inefficiency of the federal government. it is that enduring struggle to create a federal government that is of, by, and for the people, and that accomplishes its gold -- its goals in a cost- efficient, effective manner, that i want to talk about today. we spend too -- too often in washington, we spend time

debating a policy without thinking about how to implement it. but execution matters a lot. let's take the recovery act. this is one of the largest pieces of domestic legislation in recent memory. it was designed to jump-start economic activity and prevent another great depression -- great depression. it is as complex as it is large. evidence suggests that it has succeeded in reviving economic growth. we have seen as wing and a change in the gdp from an average decline of 6% on an annual basis to a growth rate of more than 4% a year later. that is the largest one-year swing in gdp in three decades. what has been most striking about this is that for an initiative this large and novel, there have been no significant instances of fraud or abuse. this, i believe, is to the

credit of sheriff joe, our vice president, who has made it his mission to ensure that the recovery act is implemented swiftly and efficiently. just as the dog that does not part does not get eight -- dog that does not embark does not get any attention, effective implementation of policy does not get many headlines. but from curbing the use of no- bid contracts, to reducing improper payments, to changing how we hire federal workers to how we adopt and use information technology, the president has undertaken a far reaching effort to modernize and reform government. we are lucky to have the nation's first chief performance officer overseeing this effort. the effort is necessary for three reasons. first, we have massive national challenges that require national

responses. laying the foundation for long- term economic growth, reducing the cost of an improving the quality of health care, improving the performance of our schools, protecting the homeland, and the list goes on and on. second, just as a the american people expect more to be done, they are skeptical that it can be done, at least by the government. thought according to the peace center, from 1987 until 2007, with one very brief exception following 9/11, for about two- thirds of americans believe that when something is run by government is inefficient and wasteful. in fact, americans have determined that their government cannot determine what they want, which is an unsustainable fact for the life of our democracy. third, and perhaps just as importantly, as a spirit of the american public opposed a tax

dollars, we cannot -- as stewards of the american public's tax dollars, we cannot afford to waste money on programs that do not work. right now, there are over 100 programs that support youth mentoring scattered across 13 different agencies and more than 40 programs located in 11 different departments with the responsibility for employment and training. this type of redundancy waste resources and makes it harder to act on each of the underlying, were the goals that they are in debt. that is one reason why the administration has put forward more than $20 billion in terminations, reductions and savings of in each of the fiscal year 2010 and 2011 budgets. while i know that other administrations have succeeded

in only obtaining about 15% of the discretionary reductions they proposed, in 2010, working with the congress, we achieved a 60% success rate in achieving the cuts we had put forward. this is also why the president, at two weeks ago, put forward a new proposal so that we can act quickly and efficiently to remove unnecessary and wasteful programs. let's be clear. reducing this waste will not close the significant budget gap we face. but that fact does not absolves of the responsibility and obligation we have to use funds wisely. what is driving the skepticism so many of us have about government? one important reason is that over the years americans have seen huge advances in efficiency and technology, both at work and in their daily lives at home. they have witnessed a move up

from one size fits all mass production and secretarial pools to just in time customized manufacturing and instant communications. organizations outside government have experienced impressive advances in productivity, and have become more responsive to their customers. the government has not kept pace. let's look at the facts. public severed -- public sector productivity it matched the private sector until about 1987. then something changed. from 1987 until 1995, private sector productivity rose by an average of 1.5% per year. meanwhile, public productivity rose by only about one-third as much. at that point, reliable data on public sector productivity becomes unavailable, because the bureau of labor statistics,

paradoxically, as part of a cost-cutting effort, stop collecting the numbers. but the best analysis we have, from a global institute, suggests that since 1995, it appears that the public sector continued to fall further and further behind the private sector, which by the way, productivity growth surge to something close to 3% per year. some of this increasing gap has to do with management techniques in the private sector. some has to do with the challenges the federal government has in hiring top talent. it takes an average of 140 days to hire a new employee in the federal government. by that time, understandably, many of the candidates have decided to go elsewhere. i believe the single biggest driver of this productivity divide is the information technology gap. at one time, a federal worker went to the office and had

access to cutting edge computer power and program. now, he often has more of both clipped to a device on his belt. closing the itc that is perhaps the single most important step -- the i.t. gap is perhaps the single most important step we can take in modernizing the government. it is also worth noting that while it would be better not to find ourselves in this position, because the gap is so big, the potential upside is substantial. our historical shortcomings in i.t. may ironically give us an advantage in being able to leapfrog past more expensive less efficient technologies to the less expensive more efficient ones.

consider the divergence in datacenter usage. in the private sector, ibm has reduced the number of data centers it uses from two hundred 35 to 12. hewlett-packard has consolidated four hundred 40 data centers into one, reducing energy consumption by 40%. what about the federal government? since 1998, we have gone from four hundred 30 two data centers to more than 1100. look how the federal government has tried to introduce systemic technological improvements to its own operations. earlier this year, we held a " modernizing government" forum with many leading ceo's. most told us that they terminate a substantial number of i.t. project right after they start.

the federal government, by and large, kills almost none. let's look at the census bureau, which in 2006 awarded a $595 million contract to develop a hand-held computer for census workers to use this year. third two years and $600 million later, the project -- two years and $600 million later, the project was cancelled with nothing to show for it. the census workers out there today are still using pen and paper. take another example, the patent office. they receive more than 80% of their applications electronically. that is great. the problem is that those applications are then manually printed out, scanned and entered into an outdated data management system. the average processing time for a patent is roughly three years. this is the opposite that deals with the most innovative and creative people and businesses in our country.

clearly, we have massive room for improvement. pursuing that improvement and closing the i.t gap will help us create a government that is more responsive and efficient. what specifically are we doing about it? first, we are using ip to identify waste and cut -- i.t. to identify waste and cut it. we have a portal that allows any member of the public to see how money is being spent. this-4 provides a transparent look into the approximately -- this provides a transparent look into the approximately $80 million being spent on projects.

this is same technology is used to track hospital spending and medical education, treating low- income patients and operating in a high-cost region. we are also using it to increase data sharing among agencies so that we can reduce the $100 million per year in an improper payments that go to the wrong person at the wrong time in the wrong amount. audits andding creating online board of key indicators and statistics about those improper payments, so the agencies can be accountable for how money is being spent. the president will be announcing that he has directed the department of health and human services to cut the improper payment rate within the fee-for- service component of medicare in

half by 2012. some of the largest problems with improper payments we have had have happened within the medicare program. similarly, as part of the administration's effort to save $40 billion in contrasting by 2011, which by the way, we are well on our way to treat, we have launched a system that takes data from government contractors on things such as if the contractors did their jobs, if they were suspended, and combines them into one data base so that the contractors can see how a specific contractor has performed in the past. this will dramatically reduced the chances that an underperforming contractor at one agency will keep winning business from another. second, we are boosting the efficiency of the government's on operations. the growth in the number of

federal data centers runs counter to the private sector. the private sector has moved toward a competing system where applications and data are centrally house. we're just beginning to take important steps toward that process. this will allow us to save substantial amounts on infrastructure and to bolster productivity. third, in addition to identifying and rooting out waste, we can use this technology to make government more open and responsive, delivering services in ways that are convenient and cost- effective. this should not be surprising. in almost every facet of our daily lives, whether it is arranging transportation, ordering birth biggest, managing money or paying a bill, -- ordering birthday gifts, managing money for paying the

bill, we can do so easily with on-line services. we should be able to do that with government services. the department of homeland security has created an online tracking service for the set chip applications, so you no longer have to -- for applications, you know lager have to send a letter and wait for a letter back. -- in no longer have to send a letter and wait for a letter back. the social security office is allowing people to make appointments online. that will make it more convenient for the individual involved and free up more social security personnel to actually help people. another way to develop better services is to empower people directly with information they need to better serve themselves. that is why, as part of our open government initiative, we have unlocked valuable data and put it out on so that it can be

leveraged for better -- put it out on data.gov so that it can be leveraged for better use. this can be is to check on the safety ratings of car seats for the safety of their workplaces. the data are also increasingly being used by outside developers to build new tools to help americans in their daily lives. take flyontime.us for example. this takes information from the aviation department and combines it with weather information and input about security to give travelers an accurate look about travel conditions. we will be using more of these technology driven solutions to bring the public sector more in line with the private sector

when it comes to government service. this is the promise of closing the gap, an increase -- an increase in productivity and responsiveness, efficiency, and customer service. that brings me to my final point. this will help agencies me what are increasingly tight fiscal constraints. as many of you know, the president proposed a three-year freeze on non security discretionary funding. this spending constraint complement other measures in the budget that together produce more deficit reduction over the next decade than any budget that has been put forward over the previous decade. in his state of the union address, the president was adamantly and abundantly clear to congress that he will use his veto pen to enforce the non- security discretionary freeze. in the budget guidance for the fiscal year 2012 issued two agencies this morning, the seriousness of purpose was

underscored yet again. we are asking each agency to develop a list of their bottom 5% performing discretionary programs, as measured by their impact in furthering the agency push a mission. this will include both security and non-security agencies. in addition, to ensure that we can meet the president's absolute insistence on this breeze while funding priorities, we are asking those in non- security agencies to specify how they would reduce their budgets by 5%, which would give us the ability to achieve the overall freeze, even while meeting inevitable new needs and priorities. the reform efforts by outlined above should make it easier for davis to identify their programs and live within the constraint. let's be clear. ultimately, our goal is not to cut for cutting at stake, but to modernize and reform government, to empower people with the

information they require to make choices about what is best for them, to make their voices heard by government officials, and to give the american people the data they need to bring about change. for the bottom line is that it can help us achieve this in a government that is increasingly complex, serving a nation of 300 million people. as a professor of political science at my alma mater once noted, there is scarcely a single d. of government which was one simple which is not now -- a single duty of a government which was once simple which is not now complex. those words are written by woodrow wilson well before he was the president of united states. they are no less true today than they were one century ago. implementation matters. it is our duty to continually strive to be improving the use

of tax dollars to create the government that is effective in the service of the public. thank you. i would be delighted to take some questions. >> is every non-security discretionary going to be cut by at least 5%? >> this happened last year too. when we send out budget guidance, what we are asking agencies to do is come back at the beginning of the process with a set of proposals that meet certain constraints. last year we also asked for a 5% reduction so that we could hit, which we succeeded in doing, hit an overall freeze in a non- security spending. it was not in the fiscal year

2011 budget. it will not be in the 2012 budget either. each agency will not be exactly at 0. some godown, some will go up. we are creating the room to push up some and reduce others, so that we can continue to hit the overall freeze. it is the second year. . .

>> there are many other things occupying the congress right now. no, we actually have a number of co-sponsors. i guess that's the right way to put it. we'd rather put our effort into the structural change of getting authority rather than sending up a package under existing authority that would go know where. >> thanks for being here and thank you for the focus on this. i wanted to ask you whether the same opportunity to look for programs that are less effective is also being applied to the

taxex pen ditures in the budget. are we looking for how they achieve public purposes or looking at that in the future? >> in the fiscal year 2011 we put a whole series of changes that cut back on things we think are unwarranted including eliminating tax subsidies fossil fuels which was a bold step. in addition to that, you also know the fiscal commission is examining a series of changes on the revenue side that could reexamine taxex pen ditures. there's a continuing effort to examine those on fossil fuels but also international transactions and others and that will occur in the fiscal year 2012 and layered on top of that

the fiscal commission is examining many similar issues. >> you didn't mention anything about the explosive growth and outsourcing in contracted by the government. it's just an enormous growth over the past decade and a lot of people seem to think there's tremendous weight and lack of effort in that area. why didn't you mention it? >> i didn't mention it because i was worried i was going on too long already. there's significant effort in contracted. one of the things that happened the last decade is dollar amount in federal contract doubled and the federal contracting officers numbers was flat. unless you think the contracting of those contracting officers also doubled there's not hard thing to conclude there would be problems. we're reexamining what should be

contracted out and not and to expand the number of contracted office issers to have sufficient oversight. it's definitely pound foolish and penny-wise to cut back on that in amiss guided attempt to save money when they've been shown to be very effective on saving money in the larger contracts they oversee. >> beneficiary of 5 point 97 million in stimulus money. that's maintaining three jobs and [inaudible] meanwhile obama administration is still paying hillary clinton's campaign debt. this from the same guy that

obama is not fundamentally un-american. why pay that there instead of the millions that are unemployed. >> i don't like to answer questions from pollsters but let me say this. i don't know the facts regarding recovery act funding. in general, again, i'm going to come back and say the recovery act has just to step back, has worked in terms of getting money out the door quickly. we're on-target for getting 70 percent of the money spent out by the end of the fiscal year with remarkably little - if you asked me if he or we would have a program that big on stories about out right fraud i thought that would be remarkable but that's what has occurred. we'll look into the specific example you sites but i'm not familiar with it. in general the recovery act has

successed to a much greater degree than i wouldn't bet on in 2009. >> names ken paris. want to ask about the relationships between deficits and jobs. said that one percent reduction in deficit would increase [inaudible] lot of pressure on congress to reduce the deficit in the midst of a job crisis would exacerbate the problem. wheres the focus? is it on job creation for long-term growth and have the economy increase in a long term sustained basis or on deficit reduction. >> well, look, i think what's very clear is we face two very substantial serious deficits in

near term job rates with an unemployment rate that is the unaccept bli high and causing a crisis if not addressed. i think we ignore either of the problems at our peril. we need to address aggressively both of them. in some cases i think the debate about job source deficit is a false choice. we have to be - it's a question of timing. we have to act aggressively to address job deficits now and to bring out the deficit if we don't do that we're going to create another crisis and no one wants that. >> on expediting position that has a long history of bipartisan support. passing the house in 06. john spratt supported it and still does. what's your ability to make

legislation progress on that. realizing it's early, say about the ability to change the way things work in this town? that your administration wanted to do? >> that we're not making legislative progress on that proposal so i think your discounting us too much. wait and see. >> are you willing to meet republican ideas to lock off the savings for deficit reduction? >> there's lots of different design items that go into the proposal. the one your mentioning is not included in the proposal but one is included in not only republican but some bipartisan and democrat as well. the reason we did not do that is similar to motivation that i gave for many of the steps we're taking. this is not just about - to your question also - it's not just about reducing the deficit. it's also about making sure that we have - we're being as

responsible we can spending taxpayers dollars wisely. money shifted from a less effective program to a more effective program is a good thing. we want to facilitate and a that in our proposal that's not the future of some other proposal? >> peter, you may have mentioned it but could you quantify how much of the savings your seeking that could be achieved through closing the i.t. gap? new mu maybe one way to put it is this. three year nonsecurity freeze saving 250 billion over the next decade. the better management of i.t. is one of the key steps that will facilitate those savings, so it investment and better ma'aming the i.t. we have, one of the key mechanisms to accomplish that

objective in an efficient way. >> i guess this is the last question. >> is there any new, you know specific guidance. talked a lot about i.t.. any policies for agencies that can go on to - that directs them to improve efficiency in i.t. or you know in their financial systems, for example? >> yes and yes. we'll have more to say about financial systems in the coming weeks and months. on i.t. specifically. we're now using i.t. dash board income beening with it with something we call tech sessions that are chief information officer and technology officers conduct. they go into the agency and say let's look at your i.t. dash board and all of you can go on-line and see the responsible federal official actually have a

person's photo up of the person responsible for that. we are sitting with them and saying why are you behind schedule? what specific steps will you take to get this thing back on track? those are proving to be success. let's remember we're talking about changing culture and 80 billion dollars a year in investments that have not been historically managed as well as they could be. there's a lot to change but we're making progress. i would use the example as a good one where they took a look at 40 projects and said these are in trouble, and ultimately terminateed a dozen. that's a lot of progress where no programs were being terminated. thanks for having me and thank you to those who hosted me. thank you. [applause]

>> 12 states are holding primaries or run off elections today. the poles have closed in several states and will be providing updates on results and the candidates speeches tonight. stay tubed for the 2010 election coverage here on c-span. >> no candidate in the race, democrat or republican has given the voter of new hampshire or america more opportunities to ask him questions. >> the faces you see every day. see some of their early television appearances at the c span library. it's a quarter century of political history you can search your way by name, title, issue, committee, interest group and more all available free, on-line. >> c-span our public affairs content is available on

television, radio and on-line and you can connect on twitter, facebook and you tube and sign up for the schedule alert e-mails at c-span.org. >> state department today confirmed that three americans are being contained in yemen on terrorism related charges. spokesman confirmed new sanctions against iran are expected tomorrow at the security council and talked about secretary of state clinton's visit to south america. this briefing is 45 minutes. >> this morning secretary ch clinton departed and will deliver at the metropolitan

culture center to a group of approximately 300 people including alumni of the embassy exchange programs and the youth and business leaders and members of the medias and academics and diplomats. major speech called, opportunity in the america's. she will then depart this evening for meeting with the president there and sign a technologyed a bilateral agreement with the government and meet with the two presidential candidates to succeed that president and then will stop with a usa vocational sponsored for at risk youth before proceeding on to bar bay dos. we have we released this on slovenia? good. you should be seeing in your blackberries of course you're not paying attention to them.

you're paying attention to the briefing. the united states released a statement that the united states congratulates the people of slovenia on the border arbitration agreement on june sixth. the people there help moved them closer to full european integration and we commend the leaders and governments of croatia and slovenia to agree to arbitration in the spirit of good neighborly relations. we believe the agreement is good for both. and good for the entire region. just to highlight a statement by secretary clinton last evening where she applauded the bill and be linda gates foundation for $1.5 million for women and children's health. we share her priority there and focusing on women is not only

the right thing to do but also the smart thing to do because investing in the health of women includes the health of their families and communities. turning to africa. united states government expresses concern over a pattern of increasing political repression and the deteriorating environment for civil and political rights including the arrest of oppositional leader as juaned lys and peaceful demonstrators. sudan authorities released one after several hours while continuing to hold the other in detention. we're troubled by the closure of the newspaper there and arrests and a ledged miss treatment ofural a shab treatments and they prevented several activists from departing the country to participate in the congress.

in june authorities arrested several individuals in connection with a doctors strike and police reportedly injured at least 12 persons violently dispersing a peaceful program. we want to ensure those in custody are afforded due process and receive medical access. and call for security agencies to seize any censorship of media. the united states is concerns by the continues of harass meant of journalists and nongovernment organizations and reminds the government of sudan of it's international recognition of rights. behind we're just for those that are fans of state.gov. the launch of a new mobile site. h tamberin

this site provide as collection of news releases from state.gov optimized for mobile phones and other hand held devices. top stories. secretary clinton. daily press briefings and more news. you know today for example on the site, you can highlight pod cast of a program we had, conversations with america where this morning bob blake and former ambassador had a nice 45 minute discussion of the implications of the u.s., india street dialogue completed last week. and then just a few cats and dogs before taking your questions. we're asked yesterday, when did we become aware of the leak of alleged leak of department cables and classified documents. that was on may 27th.

we're asked regarding potential requests extra diction involving a u.s. citizen and former executive of union care bid. has extra force and we do not comment on extra diction requests for any case. regarding canadian boom, we expect to see the first of somewhere around 9, 843 feet of boom arrive this evening by truck in alabama and we would expect to have two additional a rivals on wednesday and thursday. now you've been asking in recent days regarding extent of the assistance of human tear yen ate to gaza. in terms of the crept fiscal year, fiscal 2010, we estimate

we've appropriated roughly 400 million in assistance to the west bank and gaza and right now we estimate that 45 million is committed for humanitarian assistance activities there and west bank as 35 million dollars in support of the united nations relief and works agency for palestine refugees on the nearua. that commitment is 35 million if question go back last year, we committed both close to 200 million dollars in a variety of projects for gaza and refugee activity and 80 million of the previous year. we can go in greater detail the you wish. >> canadian boom, i think you

said delivery in alabama. do you have a more specific location? >> um... no. the trucks are coming from canada. all i have is alabama. >> yes. big state. >> actually relatively small coastline. >> it would be helpful. >> i understand. >> for the obvious reasons. >> i would probably send you down there and we'll find out if we can. we're - well where specifically the trucks are coming and finally, want to give you some additional clarity to topic of conversation you raised yesterday in terms of american citizens in kus to diin yemen. we gave you a figure of 12 yesterday. talking to the post today, actually that number fluctuates

from time-to-time. can be as high as 20, that number you know regards the total number of citizens we're aware of and have access regarding any crime committed - a ledge edly committed in yemen and we should note there may well be people who have dual citizenship and we may not know the entire population of people who are in custody in yemen at any particular time. - but, you know there was some suggestion that there had been new arrests regarded terrorism. we continue to check with the yemen government and we're not aware of any new arrests on terrorism charges at this point of the people that are currently in custody we can tell you there are three citizen. three u.s. citizens currently in custody we're aware of.

associated with charges of terrorism and we have access to each. the one caveat is those people have been arrested the last couple of months and so we're not at the present time aware of new arrests regarded terrorism in yemen. >> these three or perhaps if there's others released arrested, did the u.s. ask the yemen to arrest them on suspicions you had on terrorism? >> i'll repeat what i said yesterday. we have close cooperation with the government of yemen. mutual support regarding our concerns about al qaida and the arabian penninsula and beyond that i'll not comment. >> have the three citizens been integrated by the fbi. can you take the question? >> i don't know. you can ask the fbi. >> yesterday you were firm about the number.

you said 12 - and - where does that come from? 3 is different than 12. >> i have my sources. i was very careful yesterday to say i was not suggesting that the 12 we were aware of were all associated with terrorism. i said i'm not going into details. just in light of the converse we've seen, i can tell you that right now we're only aware of three american citizens in custody in yemen on terrorism charges. we're can wants to seek information and ask whether or not there are additional in custody we're not aware of. [inaudible] >> i guess that indicates they've been - you know, well, not to my

knowledge. i don't know. >> americans released recently in recent days in yemen that were associated with terrorism charges? >> how far do you want to go back? have people been detained and questions on a variety of issues? the answer is yes, but i couldn't tie that flow - to these three? they associated with the arrest of three individual use speak of now? >> try me again? >> i'm asking if any americans have been released around the same timeframe that these three individuals were or reed. >> i can't say when was the last time an american citizen in yemen was contained and questioning and released. i don't know. >> when you said there have been none recently. within your definition x have there been any released?

>> let me get to the more specific. there was some reporting in the star yesterday that there was a fresh - group of individuals arrested on terrorism charge. we're unaware of a new wave of arrests in recent days in yemen. >> let me ask this. those were part of a broader context reporting 50 westerners contained and there was those reported a among americans. >> i'm saying, at this point, you know, again there are three americans that we're aware of that are currently in yemen custody on terrorism charges. we're still seeking information from the yemen government as to whether or not there's been new arrests. we're not aware of any new arrests of americans. >> any other? >> that would be a question - there would not necessarily be a

reason for we at the state department to know if there's been arrests of citizens of other countries. we're cooperating intensively with yemen on counterterrorism matters and we have a mutual concern about al qaida and the arabian penninsula. we remain in contact with yemen and if we ascertain any additional americans we'll - i'm confused the three americans you are aware of were not arrests recently? >> correct. all since the first of the year. >> excuse me. >> we've had access to all three. >> and had counselor access to the three not arrests recently. now, in regards to the group reporting you referred to of arrest of a large group of

people from various nations. in your talking to the post, there's been - i mean what's the reaction to that story? >> what story? >> the story of the arrest of a large group of people involving as many as 12 americans? >> right. you know, this is what i want to get at. the reporting yesterday suggested that we were aware of a new arrest of 12 americans on terrorism related charges. we're not aware of a new arrest of any american citizen of terrorism related charges. there are a number of people in custody. 12 is a good number, but if we probably counted them up it could be actually higher than 12. they've been arrested on a wide range of charges. ordinary crimes. one is arrests for murder. three on terrorism related charges.

i'm trying camp down the idea that there's a fresh batch of 12 americans arrested in yemen on charges. we're asking them to clarify if they have additional in custody at the present time there's been no arrests of new american citizen to our knowledge. >> did they share the nature of the charges specifically? >> in that respect, you know, our post and there is doing what our post in any capital do. they look after the welfare of american citizens. we have had counselor access them and we're making sure their rights are fully protected. we're familiar with the charges against them and making sure they have full rights and going

forward. >> are these arrested in kind of the crack-down of yemen after the case. apparently they're connected the language schools and never - and failed to come show up to the schools and you had talked with yemen right after the case to cracking down on these people about you - that were suspect and didn't know their where about opportunities. is this connected with that? >> all i will say is the three in custody have been apprehended since the first of the year and i'll not go in further detail. >> correct the incorrect impression you left that there were 12 american citizens who were in custody as a result of recent arrests? >> i understand that was an impression that was left from yesterday's briefing and i had the opportunity to communicate

with post this morning and are clarifying for you. >> we take our reputations for getting things right very seriously. we quoted you on the record. i have the transcript and i don't think there's a lot of ambiguity and if you realize there's error this there's obligation to make that public and not wait 18 hours to fix something. >> okay. i take that responsibility seriously as well. and i'm fixing it at the first opportunity. i wasn't responsible for the reporting. >> you said i'm very happy to read you the transcript if you want. >> i never said - i never said that the 12 people that in custody were all on terrorism related charges. i specifically avoided that question. >> but there are you said there were 12 americans in

custody. so there's 12 in custody but three are terrorism related. >> yes. >> and as many as 20? >> the number goes up and down. it may have fluctuated over the past 24-hours. the reporting yesterday was focusing on the pros spenth of 12 new arrests based on terrorism charges and i wanted to make sure i put that in proper context. >> go ahead. >> showed you a video of a man yesterday of a man identified as a missing nuclear scientist that said he had been abducted and taken to the united states and said saudi arabia intelligence with [inaudible] have you seen this? >> in light of some of the coverage yesterday, a number of people reviewed that video and

we are unable to claim authenticity. >> you de no denying they abdua nuclear scientist? >> i'm not commenting on that. but i'm commenting on the particular video. >> did the americans and saudi arabians kidnap a nuclear scientist? >> we're not in the habit of doing that around the world. >> you mean under this administration? there's quite a history of the u.s. kidnapping people and taking them to various - are you saying - i will be a specific as i can. if the question is - have we kidnapped an iranian scientist the answer is, no.

asylum issue requests an advantage - you know - may be proper to the united states and those are confidential. >> let me check this for a minute. okay. you said you haven't kidnapped any iranian. what do you make of iran's claim that this man was kidnapped? is that simply false? >> as to the circumstances of that individuals, you know, as i understand it based on media reports and nut else, that individual made a pilgrimage to audi arabia and that was the last that iranians were aware of him. you know, can i tell you that did the united states kidnap him from saudi arabia? >> or anywhere else.

>> you made a categorical statement with saudi arabia. not with the entire world. >> based on the media reporting, this individual was in saudi arabia and the question is, did the united states kidnap him from saudi arabia. the answer is no. >> u did the u.s. kidnap him at all? >> no. i'm not going to comment further. i personally don't know where he is. >> for the meetings. first, the talks in geneva on security in the caucuses. assistant secretary gordan met with the russian for remember minister deputy. and secretary horns met with the president of american chamber of commerce in russia. presumably they discussed economic and trade works and to have

something on that? >> i'm not equipped to answer either of those. >> i just want to comment to the iran sanctions and security council. can you confirm on the record there's pretty much a clear shot at a vote tomorrow with no veto, and that the u.s. has a view on it or is on board with it? >> we expect that there will be a vote in the un security council tomorrow. >> can i follow up on that? >> you may. >> obviously on the record as well saying that this is not going to work. your forcing the issue, you in fact he's specifically quoted saying that the u.s. government is a lies are mistaken if they they think they can brannish the resolution and then sit down and talk with us?

is this going to work. even if you get it all passed, no vetos? where's it going? >> no one has kidnapped the diplomatic core of the government of iran. we had who we or what we thought was an encouraging meeting on october first of last year. and there has been no direct follow up since then. we have been encouraging through a variety of means. the united states, the eu. other countries to have a direct conversation about iran's nuclear program and encourage them to answer the questions that the international community has and to meet it's obligations under un security council resolutions and i.e.a obligations. is iran unwilling to follow up

on that conversation about october first and tomorrow, iran will understand there's consequences for it's failure to come forward. >> iran will not if you continue to sanction them iran will pull out of any hope of having these - party, whatever you want to call them, talks with the - well there's still six parties so whatever. will pull out of the talks. now turkey, prime minister there is trying convince him not to abandon talks whatsoever. do you think turkey has a roll to play here? >> of course. turkey has a direct neighbor of iran will be among the first countries to feel whatever the effects of international action are. turkey itself has been clear it does not desire to have an

nuclear iran right next door. we're all committed to diplomacy as united states has indicated strongly. we do not see that iran will change course based on word as loan. we're going to vote for the un security council resolution tomorrow. other members of the security council will have the opportunity to vote as well and we hope that will be a strong compelling direct international message to iran that it has to change course. as to what iran does in light of tomorrow's vote that will of course be up to iran. >> wait. let me follow up please. will you support turkeys continued mediation efforts after the council? >> we have two tracks. we have a diplomacy track and we've never closed to the door to further international engage meant. - i'm talking about turkey specifically. >> i understand. is the dip low materialic track

still available? of course. but at the same time we're going to apply greater pressure on iran to make clear it's failure to meet obligations does have consequences. >> new sanctions mean confrontation? >> this is iran's choice. i mean this is not about united states singling out iran. it's about iran as a signature to the nonproliferation treaty that is having a nuclear program that's failed a number of years to satisfy the international community that program is peaceful in nature. iran wants to portray it's self as vehicles a victim but it's victim. what we're saying is their failure has consequences.

we're not closing the door to any step beyond the sanctions vote tomorrow if iran after the vote tomorrow is willing to come forward and answer the international community's question and engage in the i.e.a, that would be a welcome step. if iran fails to engage, you know, then we'll take light of iran's response but tomorrow there's going to be a vote and every country in the security council will have to stand up and say, you know, this is what we think of the current situation and we expect to have a successful vote that makes clear there are consequences to iran for the failure to meet international obligations. >> follow up. is - don't you see it - why sort of put the breaks on the sanctions process when you talked about turkey being a very effective neighbor and yet in conjunction with brazil they're

fighting like cats and dogs to create mediation and a different track here. wouldn't it be wise to say, okay, let's pump the brakes on the sanctions and let turkey and brazil try their mediation track and see what happens because the sanctions regime clearly seems to be, you know, in the eyes of iran counterproductive. >> first of all, october, november, december, january, february, march, april, may, june. for nine months iran has had the opportunity to engage the international community following up on the meeting of october one and has failed do so. nobody prevents iran from calling the eu or the i.e.a and coming forward. only recently when they understood that a sanctions resolution was clearly going to be put on the table, they even bothered to respond formally to

the i.e.a on the proposal that they had in their hands from october one. the read sense is not the responsible of the independent i want community. this is about iran's failure to engage significantly. we're not ruling out mediation but this is not an either/or situation. these two tracks work in parallel. we'd like to see iran work and engage constructively. we believe putting additional pressure on iran is the right step to take at this time. >> the un security council president did announce the vote tomorrow as well, new york, can you tell us anything more about what's in the annex and some of the terms of the sanctions will be be? >> i'm not going to get in the particular resolutions or sanctions. they'll be voted on tomorrow and

i will assume some details will then become available. >> already reporting that annex is designate one individual and 41 entities. can you confirm that? >> i'm not talking at that. >> thus far the apex this year gathered 400 million dollars. can you tell us how much went to gaza? >> of the 400 million dollars proposed for 2010 roughly 45 million has gone to gaza for humanitarian assistance and to support theua. roughly total of 80 committed so far. >> does that go to gaza or through the, aid. >> i believe the aid goes to - which one? >> the refugee assistance? >> i think it goes to the

palestinian authority and then i believe to specific individuals working on aid projects in gaza. >> can i follow up on that. we put a question to you days ago about the 900 billion dollar figure given out by the president. the rest of the aid come in? and when? >> again, we got to be careful about - there's aid to palestinians including gaza and the west bank and there's a narrow slice of that focused on gaza. you know, we - you know the 2009 pledges have allowed the u.s. government to exceed it's $900 million dollar pledge made at the gaza donor conference. that goes to the palestinians

with large primarily through the palestinian authority but there's a slice of aid to palestinians that does go to gaza. >> ultimately is any of the aid getting on the ground? is this make together making it to the people? you have the humanitarian aid. >> is short answer is, yes. we have particular aid projects that are under way in gaza and we continue to evaluate how we can exspanned our own consistency and clearly channel it so that it gets to the people of gaza without benefitting hamas. >> can i ask you something theoretical? i know you know and the secretary said and everyone said the situation in gaza is unsustainable, but do you have a handle on the situation there considering no u.s. diplomats are allowed the territories?

do you rely or understand what the situation is on the ground or know it's just bad? >> we have dimro materials not in gaza but that's why we rely on others like tony blair. we are deeply involved and engaged with the un. they have people on the ground in gaza. yes, you're right. do we have diplomats in gaza. no. do we understand it, we clearly do, but more importantly as secretary indicated in virtually every conversation we have with a middle east leader the situation of gaza comes up, we share the concern about the humanitarian situation in gaza. we want to see aid expanded to the people of gaza and we're committed to that and working on how to expand the aid and making sure israel's interest

are indicated. >> as you work through a paradigm it's something you consider u.s. dimro materials should have on the ground there. >> i think we would welcome the opportunity to have a presence in gaza but that's not possible in the current situation. >> why? there's been senators and some that have been on the ground. >> on a case-by-case basis, you know, americans have set foot in gaza and we understand that. john kerry. jimmy carter is another. if i'm not mistaken but in order to have diplomats on the ground engage with authoritys in gaza, we need to have a different political situation there. >> well, as we've made clear. we will engage with any, you know political group that is willing to meet our basic you know, red lines for playing a

constructive role in the region. those lines are clear and hamas made clear they have no intention at the present time to agree to those and as a result, we do not have political relationship with with hamas. >> you expect - north korea [inaudible] you expect - you know, just to clarify to be sure that you didn't mishear me. we, the south korean government has sent a letter to the president of the security council. we do expect the material er to come up within the council in the next couple of weeks. we would expect to have you know per the south korean request an appropriate response from the un

security council but what that specific response is, we'll or will be part of upcoming debate. sorry. >> letter to secretary clinton calling for the passage of the free trade agreement. >> calling for the a same? >> of the u.s./korea free trade agreement and the special permit to burma as well as - an increase east asia bureau funding here. have you seen the letter or do you intend to respond to it? >> of course we'll respond it to. i'm not aware of the letter yet. >> can i just come back to gaza related issue? thank you. but about the turkish american that was shot in the know tila do you have further information whether or not an investigation

is underway or what the u.s. knows about this? et cetera? >> um... no change from what i have said before. >> so you don't know about the circumstances of the shooting and how? >> we, as we've said, we're ascertaining facts and want to have not only our concern about our citizens, but everyone who - we want a full understanding of what happened and we're talking to israel and others how to best accomplish that. >> speaking of which, there's the ideal investigation we all found out about last night. which again, seems to close the door on the notion of international participation. are you concerned that the notion of transparent international participation is not going to happen in terms of this? >> i think we understand that international participation in

investigating the matters will be important to the credibility that everybody wants to see as we understand fully what happened last week. >> you're going to have u.s. monitor? >> we're discussing with israel and others the perspective nature of international participation in the investigation, and you know, we're sharing different ideas on to how best accomplish that and that conversation is on-going. >> foreign ministry office germany and italy said today that, they believe that the quartet should be involved in the investigation to help it's credibility. do you like that idea? does that seem plausible? >> there's a variety of ways to accomplish this. i don't think we've centered on a particular way at this point?

no, i mean ultimately - the united states would like to see? >> we want to see an impartial, credible, prompt, thorough investigation and we're talking about the best way to get from here to there. and we recognize that international participation lends itself to, you know, countries and entities being able to voucher for the results of investigation and that's essential element inputting this tragedy mind us and hopefully creating additional trust and momentum to get to the ultimate destination that's agreement that hence the ending of the conflict once and for all. >> all over the air waves all but saying that everything is internal and there's nothing impartial but an internal investigation. >> we're in conversation about how to best accomplish this. >> there's still the possibility in the investigation

itself? >> yes. >> the beginning of the briefing to the - there's a new event today. croatia and serbia have signed agreements about the military operation. 15 years after they finished the brutal war. do you consider this positive, un's as a result of the stronger engagement of u.s. demonstration? >> i'll take that question i'm not familiar with the agreement. >> the same letter said the state department is not willing to share more information on obama's violation of 1874. >> i mean, that is something that we watch very carefully. we're talking to burma reminding

them about it's international obligations under 1874 and other resolutions. as to what with the nature of our conversations, we obviously senator webb we've had many conversations about burma and the country, he recognizes significance and i'm sure that we'll continue our conversations with him and others on the congress about the best way in regard. >> is appointment official in that situation. you consider it an available option. >> i'll take that question. >> and the prime minister of india offered peace talks and with two conditions. end in violence. how do you view the position there? >> i think all i would say is that we recognize this is a very, very important issue

between india and pakistan and as the dialogue between india and pakistan continues to expand, including at the leader level that we would hope that indian pakistan can make progress and understanding the issue moving forward. just as they did a few years ago. >> one small report in mexico report that's a u.s. border patrol off guard accidentally shot a 14-year-old mexican boy yesterday? juarez. you have anything on that? >> i don't. i'll see if we can find out. it may well be since, but dhs is a better source. >> the man that confessd for murdering a be roouf yen women.

it's opened to whether or not he'll be charged with the natalie hollowell murder and they've been notified to where her body is? i wonder if the u.s. embassy has been notified? >> we'll take that question as well. i'm not aware that we have but i'll take it. thank you. >> 12 states are holding primaries or run off elections today. the poles have closed in several states and will be providing up a dates on the candidates speeches as they happen tonight. stay tuned for the 2010 election coverage here on c-span. we've got three new c span books for you. abraham lincoln, supreme court and he's buried grand's tomb. perhaps something new to you about lincoln the nation's

highest court and grave sites and lives of american presidents. go to c-span.org/books. it's a great idea for father's day. >> now a discussion on the in nuance of the conservative movement and strategies for a progressive or liberal response motted rated by the president of media matters. hosted by the group called the campaign for america's future progressive advocacy organization. note to the viewers due to a technical problem we're unable to show you a brief portion of the beginning of this hour long event. >> i think that trend will increase moving forward. and in my mind that calls for a most robust engagement of the infrastructure built up over the last four or five years as they,

you know double down and reinvent themselves we have to be ready to match that threat and stop the lies and stop the smearing and stop the fear. that's what we're here to talk about today. we have a brief video and then because we have a very full panel i'll be asking theest steamed panelists one question and then we'll try to come to the audience for q & a so please get your questions ready and i'll see if i can play this video and not screw this up. ♪ >> crazy. ♪ this body will force the military to accept the disable on the front lines. what in we going to make our ejection seats wheelchairs so they roll when they hit? >> speciality care, is that abortion? does that mean