firsthand. and like someone else, i will not have to go to vancouver 3,000 miles away to know about them. [laughter] i understand that there are people who are hurting, because i see it all around our state. i know what that feels like because i had been there. he pulaski every day, linda, why would you decide not to run the united states senate? and i can tell you, it is because i had a great fear that the american dream was in the greatest jeopardy that it has ever been any in our lifetime, and i did not want to lose that opportunity of the american dream for our children and our grandchildren. fasi am alarmed by the reckless

spending, and tax increases coming from washington. it is suffocating our small businesses and it is killing our jobs. the direction i will leave us -- they are taking us is not only threatening our well-being but the well-being of the next generations to come. the answer is not a bigger government, it is smaller government. the answer is not another billion dollars in stimulus spending, it is less spending. the answer is taught higher taxes on job creators, it is lower taxes.

the great communicator ronald reagan had it right. this president and as congress had it wrong. that path which they are leading us is not working, and folks, i get it. i understand that experience because i have lived it. i understand the impact that higher taxes, increased regulation, and the continuing uncertainty the small businesses are trying to work within today, and i am understand how that is negatively impacting them. they're trying to keep their doors opening and having a difficult time of it. he that understanding is sorely lacking in washington, and we're going to send a senator to washington who understands that.

and for the first time in decades, we're going to send the republican senator to washington. >> linda, linda, linda! >> i pledge to you today that i will be a voice for change. i will work with republicans, democrats, and independents to drive a new direction. his campaign has never been about the establishment. this campaign is about you.

and i promise you, i will not ever forget that you hired me and that i worked for you. so thank you from the bottom of my heart for everything you have done so far this campaign, and our campaign starts tonight and it starts with all of you. thank you very much and god bless you. >> on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," we will get an update on primary election results in colorado,

connecticut, and george wrote. dave wenhold talks about lobbying disclosure rules. and later, a discussion on u.s. energy policy with a representative of the company national grid. "washington journal" each morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> we went through hundreds of tapes, and they are not "conspirators." they are not sitting there thinking what you think about this. they really do not know what is going on. >> this week to mark the anniversary of the 1974 resignation of president richard nixon. almost 40 years later, on washington -- watergate still resonates in the american memory. look back at the history online indices and video library, all free. it is history your way.

>> white house press secretary robert gibbs recently gave an interview taking on the obama administration's more liberal critics. it was a main topic today with the deputy press secretary. this as recorded shortly before it was reported that ted stevens had died in a plane crash in alaska. this is about 45 minutes. >> any update on the plane crash

in alaska? >> this is something that we're watching very closely. thatr's or with anyone -- families of anyone on the plan. under% sure on that. >> on another topic, on robert left, comments about the is it something the white house once, for him to be insulting them? >> i think what he was doing it is adding 1 conversation with one reporter who asked him some questions about frustrations. he answered honestly. i do not think it should be read as anything more than that. >> to the comments reflect the president's view? >> we will watch the coverage.

when you look at some of the things that this administration has been able to to from ending that combat mission in iraq to a comprehensive health care reform, he will pay the financial regulatory form, to what we're doing today to save 160,000 teacher jobs, is there ever some frustration from anyone who works in this building about the way it is a being covered? sure, but that does not distract us from the serious work that we need to do. i consider that our focus today is not one article in the publication. but the president is doing to strengthen the economy. >> but there had been a couple of comments during the campaign when he became president. how was that not what the left is doing? >> the president actually says

that he needs to be held accountable and at a high standard. yet they get the things that he is accomplished, he thinks that by any standard he has done a lot to a dance of the goals that americans as a whole have had for 100 years when it comes to comprehensive health care reform. having said the president -- i would say that the president does wish to be held to a high standard. >> as he reached out to anyone in the democratic party? >> not that i know of. >> [unintelligible]

>> there is not a person that this white house to what progress on the economy. today was an important step but there is a lot more that we need to do. we should be able to move forward with small business, cut taxes, so that businesses can create jobs. we need to extend the tax cuts for the middle class, put money into the pockets of people who like suspended. and we need to increase exports, which we have been able to make some progress on.

we were in a deep hole and we're taking our way out of it. and we're doing everything we can. hiwe're going to do everything that we can to make sure that we're in the best economic shape possible to make sure that we're not positions where teachers and firefighters and cops are being laid off. bashaw canada that what happened at the expense of our kids, it would happen at the expense of our communities, and it is the right path for.

>> following up on that, when the president promised in the rose garden that it would save hundreds of additional jobs in the next year, how can you back up that claim when even in the material about this event, the teacher said that they might have to get their jobs back. how can you back up that claim that hundreds of thousands of people he will get their jobs back? >> a lot a good economist work at this white house and they have taken a number state-by- state in order to avoid some of these stressed the cuts they would take to teachers at the classroom and cops off the street. >> didn't they white house economists say the pass stimulus could do that? >> economist for all of the country was saying that at the same time. not many people knew the extent

of the damage that was done to the economy and how deep the hole would get. we have been able to make progress since then. call off the pace is not been fast enough in the president will continue to work to make sure that we're strength in the economy recant. >> you do not seem to be backing away from it all all -- at all. >> i did not lack of of what he said. i think he was making all like a joke. i don't know if you have time later on today, or a syringe. he >> wikileaks -- daily beast is reporting that this administration is pushing other countries to open up

investigations of this organization and its founder. >> i am not familiar with the government press and other nations to question them. this is obviously -- i said i was not familiar with that. obviously this was a very serious breach, and as we've said before, we're conducting our own investigation. anything that is like that, i could check on that for you. >> charlie rangel complained that some democrats were trying to push him out of the four defendants of. he said that you could push for expulsion, but don't ask him to resign. the president seemed to be easing charlie rangel out in his comments. he regrets about trying to push charlie rangel well? >> i saw charlie rangel this weekend but i did not hear it in

that he had to say. but as the white house said before and as the president said a floor, it was a bipartisan process in place that is working its way forward, and we're not in that business of prejudging the process that they're going to. and they are some serious questions. " we're focused on today is how we're going to get those teachers back into the classrooms and keep cops and firefighters out on the street. >> what about the republican plan -- complaint that this is passing on a problem that is inevitable? >> i guess we disagree with the east his premise that we inevitably have to let these teachers go. yet we have to make our streets laissez by dropping fire fighters.

we cannot help some of the states to keep these jobs and keep our economy growing peace. this was done in the most fiscally responsible way, all paid for by tax cuts, and the president deal is that we have to do all we can to keep people in their jobs. we're in this economic mess. >> and never republican governors say that they may not take the money. he hit >> i would say that a task is to take any assistance that they can get to keep teachers in their classrooms. this is bigger than an ideological ally, then just right and left polities. when it comes to teaching our kids, it is about making our nation competitive in the long term. the president said something yesterday, we cannot have a situation where america continues to decline as a relates to math and science and all other aspects. if we're not continuing to sell,

if we're not graduating gets from college, we will be out competed in the future. the president does not think that that is right. >> at what point does it stop? there are other priorities that it be just as important. at some point you have to say, fiscal responsibility. >> he asked the president is for the fiscal responsibility and this is all paid for. does that add to the deficit. it is critical imports for people to understand that. his is a common-sense measure that will keep people in their jobs, keep teachers in the classroom, and help our economy. >> some of the money is coming from not fully funding through stamps. he couldn't when you look at how the money is broken down and where it goes, this money is going to go to the people who are affected the most by this

lag in the economy. he and the lion's share of how this is paid for are the tax cuts. >> illinois still has $176,000 of education stimulus money that it has outspent. >> what we did was we looked up what was the most responsible way to the purpose some of the stimulus money. in this specific case, there was an opportunity to pay for what we were doing with that money. the vast majority of the stimulus has already been spent. it is either out the door or it is allocated to a specific project, for it will go out in the form of a tax cut that people get in their paycheck. we don't think we should turn any of that around. we do not take one's job creation program and create it

had at the expense of another. we need to build on the progress that we're making. in this case, we found the right formula to do this in the most fiscally responsible way. [inaudible] i am not necessarily a student of those numbers. i have not seen specifically where those numbers come from but i will say he said in this specific case, what we're concerned about, what we're focused on is making sure that this money is being spent in the most responsible way, that we're making sure that we're not eliminating some programs at the expense of another. baucus said, i do not know yet as the city never. i do not necessarily doubt it. kishke we need to make sure that we're not eliminating something is just because he caught the money is still in the bank account but it has not been spent on a specific program or is allocated.

>> [inaudible] there been efforts to pay for unemployment benefits. >> i think i just address that. in this specific instance, we got a we found a way to spend this money that what the bill on the success that we have had. cut most of the money is either gone or allocated. there will not be a lot of opportunities for something like that. >> part of the reason the critics are saying that this money being appropriated -- it is to placate the teachers' unions. >> allen said that that is an awfully cynical take on what we're doing hicks -- on what we're doing. if teachers are being laid off,

it is not because there is extra money around the taken just put toward those teachers and stick them in those jobs. if teachers are being laid off because states are and economic crises. what the president is doing is everything that he can to stay in this classroom, and firefighters and caught stay on the streets, and that our economy keeps growing. how would urge you not to think that this is by any means anything other than exactly what it is. >> the president made a comment about charlie rangel and he did seem to be suggesting, and it was taken that way by many. does he have any further opinion that a mr. randall is ready to retire yet? >> i think the president's words speak for themselves.

and i talked about this right afterwards. not we said, we're prejudging the outcome of this bipartisan projects -- process. the president was asked a question and he answered it. we're not prejudging the process >> is the house passed a border security measure today. does the president made that this is the democratic commitment which mark >> what i can tell you is that there is nothing the president can do to silence all the critics. the president has put more assets on the border than have ever been there to more -- than have ever been there before. it is an issue that is to be addressed in a comprehensive fashion, and that is what he has been working to do with both

democrats and republicans, and unfortunately without the republican support that would be needed to move full work he -- to move forward. i think you have as republicans. >> on secretary state's announcement yesterday, will the president commit the savings to reducing the deficit, basically place the savings off limits? >> i did not know exactly how those moneys will be allocated. the president thinks that secretary gates has been pretty courageous and making tough choices as it relates to finding ways to modernize our nation's defenses, but doing it in the fiscally responsible ways. it is an effort that the president has started and is continuing, but on the specific

question, i do not know. >> it is in the spirit of fiscal responsibility, but i was asking whether he's -- >> i understand the question that you are asking. if there is something specific, we will get back to you. >> [inaudible] >> i take it was the way that i ticket. talk and cable tv. >> de want to talk to the conspiracy theorists' who will be considering this? >> data found a -- they have not found a sudafed strong enough for robert gibbs. >> going on detroit vehicles it was in, congressman frank "

directly quoted the president -- it was not so subtle or reference to the president. his congressman rangel interpreting the president wrong? >> i'm to not qualified to speak there. i appreciate that. he [laughter] >> i can think of at least two different interpretations of what the president said. he did he call on congressman rangel to resign?

>> i talked to some of this numerous times. there is a process here, and in that bipartisan process, ahim serious questions are being asked and answered about charges against congressman rangel. the president said we're not going to prejudge that process. >> i'll send the white house was not expecting congressman rangel is and in an hour and half on the house floor. he made a big deal about spending increases. you're going to push for the middle class tax cut. >> i did not have anything for you. i know this has been discussed. at length in this room, but i

don't have anything for you on that. >> extending the middle class tax cuts, should they be paid for customer >> and i have anything for you. >> on the professional level, if and boxing robert gibbs -- i had been watching robert gibbs' twitter feed and it is in pretty intense. >> i do not have anything on that. >> their issues like shirley's sherrod and others, the president seems to be more responsive to the professional

right in the professional level. >> the president is responsive to the needs of our country. i would say that that is not particularly right or left. >> is the president angry about the uproar over machel's trip to spain? >> not that i know of. [inaudible] >> what can you tell us about what the president and his and we will do later? >> i checked into the agenda to see if there's something new. i do not have anything. i hope to later in the week have more in and around panama city. [inaudible] i do not think it has changed but i do not have anything

specific. [inaudible] i do not know, i am not sure if they're back. >> what the president of the politicking and florida? >> on the 18th, he will be down there for the democratic party. >> just on the discussion on the teachers announcement, at what point does the credit say that the government cannot continue to inject money into the economy for propping up public- sector jobs? will there be a place where they draw the line? >> you catholic at a wide range of economic issues -- you have to look at a wide range of economic issues. it's a born to do this in a fiscally responsible way to

inject some money and save some dollars. the president will want to keep doing that it is possible. but people are promoting it says efforts that are not physically responsible, he he understands is that we're in an economic crisis right now and we need to create an environment where people are creating jobs. he also understands the we have some serious ethical issues in this country and that is something he is taking on as well. >> he could do that and reduce the deficit and make the choice here. >> you have to make some tough tauruses when you're the president of the united states. if there are dollars that could be fiscally spend to save or create jobs, if we can improve our economic outlook, if there are things can do to help an

industry be more successful, then we have to look and all of those means that our at our disposal to grow our economy. >> you danced around the question of the president himself and are there people in this building who are frustrated. do you think that the president is frustrated with people on the left not acknowledging how many accomplishments this president has made? >> for one, i think it is possible to overstate this conversation with the reporter. no. 2, to overstate the

importance of this conversation. sometimes, in this room, a lot of people ask questions and there is this upswell of interest or importance of an issue. but in this case, what i said in response to the question was that, yes, harris and a person in this building, including the one who lives here, at times, can be frustrated with the way things are covered here. but it is pretty minor compared to the hard work that we're actually doing and the commitment we have here at this white house, starting with the president of the united states, to stay focused on the things that are important to this country, namely, keeping the it people safe and building the economy. we're going to keep focused on

the things that are important to the american people. >> and a lot of us in this room have heard that kind of frustration expressed in this building before. is that frustration building as you get closer to the election? a string of things that you mentioned, the accomplishments, that that is not appreciated enough. >> any frustration in this building is minimal compared to the focus the people have to the work. >> how would like to turn to the fighting in afghanistan.

millions of people have been dislocated. what kind of affect those that have on the military campaign against the insurgents. >> we are monitoring the situation very closely and work with the pakistani government, giving them the assistance that they request. we hope to alleviate some of the terrible human tragedy that is happening over there. as it relates to the armed relationshipherour with pakistan is more than just what we do in the fight against insurgents. they're not using this opportunity to inflict more pain on the people of pakistan. the concern is that, every single day, you have people who

are intent on creating havoc in order to disrupt the democracy and harm their way of life. right now, we're worried about the floods, but the insurgents, and we're dealing with the issues as appropriate. it is a setback for the people of pakistan. they have lost so many people and so much of their country is flooded and underwater. we are continuing to remain committed to moving on the insurgency. >> [unintelligible] >> for any specific military questions, i would have you checked with the pentagon. >> could you tell us what is on the president's schedule for thursday and friday? >> not much.

>> what criteria is the administration going to used to count the number of jobless saved for renewed? >> i do not have the specific way by which they are counting saving jobs, but i am sure that any would enjoy talking with you afterwards. >> with a long been some of the numbers you have talked about -- will play long in some of the numbers you talk about in the job stimulus plan? >> -- will they lump in some of the numbers you talked about in the job stimulus plan? >> stock to mamie afterwards. >> -- talk to a meet afterwards.

-- talk to amy afterwards. >> the president has done quite a bit, including troops, technology and, and all sorts of other things. we're trying to make sure that the borders are as secure as possible. we are in constant consultation with the state governments along the border. we are working as we can to make sure we are doing what is necessary and making sure we are responsive to their requests. >> 1 not granted their request for additional troops? is it because they're not needed or they are not available? >> i don't think it is just as simple as looking at one request.

secretary napolitano and others are making sure that we are responsive and in doing what is necessary to secure the border. >> on their relationship with the progressive community, -- on the relationship with the progressive community, what do you think is the cause of the frustration of the people on the left. there have been -- i do think there is so much frustration. >> if you separate out what folks say on cable-tv from progressives around the country think about how things are -- this is not to

denigrate what people say on cable tv -- but there is a different way that people look at the issues. i think folks are pretty pleased that we were able to get health care reform done and it and the combat mission in iraq and all of these other things and take care of all these other things we did not know were coming, like pirates and the h1n1 pandemic. i think the premise of your question that the left is fundamentally unhappy, maybe we can look at the nuance that that are a lot of supporters of their. >> [unintelligible] .> no >> there is a united nations report out that talked about casualties in afghanistan and

the notion of that the casualties due to the taliban attacks are up. i wonder if the administration thinks that it will have any political repercussions. >> the taliban has been known to kill indiscriminately. when you look at the 10 aid workers that were killed, americans died, europeans died, and afghans died. it was a brutal and senseless attack. it is because of those sorts of attacks that the taliban does not have widespread support in the country of afghanistan. we're going to continue to do everything we can to reduce civilian casualties. this is something that is very

important to general petraeus. it has been important to our mission over there. we are glad to continue to make sure that the afghan people know that we are committed to moving out of the insurgency, dismantling al qaeda, and doing it in such a way that is as safe as possible for the people of afghanistan. >> the first family has called upon people to visit the gulf for vacation. are they taking their own advice? would a longer trip showed a deeper commitment to the region? >> i suppose a longer trip could show all sorts of things. the president has been down there. the vice-president has been down there. the first lady has been down there. they have been then there more than half a dozen times. we do everything we can to make

sure the people in the region are made whole again after a terrible catastrophe. no one should doubt the president's commitment to that. he looks forward to going down to florida, spending more time on the gulf, eating shrimp, and spending a good time with the good people of the area. >> [unintelligible] is she picking candidates she wants to support? >> there is no scheduling set for the first lady in conjunction with that. that is not put together quite just yet. >> i wanted to take one more crack at the rental ethics issue. senator riegle ethics

issue. -- the rangel ethics issue. as you know, they fear he will be a political liability and he is being socially and conversely. he believes that the democratic party is trying to force him out. what does the white house think of the democrats putting pressure on the other democrats? >> i am not in a position to prejudge the of, this process nor the people's reactions. >> do you feel the process should go forward? should other democrats take that position as well? >> we're the democratic party. other people have different

positions from also the time. >> you alluded to the fact that the left does not necessarily represent the entire left. is it safe to assume that, by attacking the professional left, you do not alienate the, for lack of a better word, amateur left? [laughter] >> this is kind of a smaller share. i don't think this is going to have a huge impact on the things that this administration has done and what the president is going to do going forward and his commitment to growing the economy. i don't think that will be obscured by those sorts of

arbitrary criticisms. >> a member of the professional left told my colleague that he thought it would be improper for robert gibbs to step down because of the comments. >> i don't think there's any danger of that. >> the democratic primary in colorado, if you were to lose tonight, how would that not be interpreted as -- >> hypothetical? >> you're shaking your head and i have not finished asking a question. >> [unintelligible] >> i guess i will go to a different comment. last week, robert gibbs said he did not want to weigh in on the mosque building in new york.

why are you so reluctant to offer an opinion on what is pretty much consuming cultural and religious debate? >> this is an issue that has been thought through. it has gone through the process in new york city. we're not one to be in a position where a local government is on to make a decision and we go in and rededicate. the president has made clear -- and readjudicate. the president has made clear his position. >> are you worried about the anti-muslim rhetoric that has been brought up by this debate?

>> president obama can make sure that we communicate exactly how we're feeling to the muslim world. but i do not think that the boundaries are shifting in such a way that [unintelligible] >> will the president have a message as they begin their holy month of ramadan? is this an opportunity for the white house for outreach? >> i believe there will be a message put out. >> given the criticism of the first lady about a lavish vacation, is there a problem with her only spending one day in the gulf? >> no. >> the drug cartels and the

communities of the southern border -- >> an important part of securing our borders making sure that drugs and guns are moving one way or another over the border. we will do whatever we can to make sure that that border is as secure as we can make it. >> to my partner sam's interviewer again. >> [unintelligible] [laughter] >> granted that there are many administrations for which the people on the left of not given sufficient recognition. however, there is some frustration on the left with issues like do not ask/don't tell. >> would you be a member of the

professional left? >> there is no public plan option in the health care bill. these are things that people talk about. you say that this is a smaller share. do you really think those are small issues are legitimate beefs? >> i think we can have a conversation about the progress we have made on important issues and the progress that still needs to be made. that the money we have not been able to effectively advance our ideals in this administration. the president spent the first 20 months doing exactly what you said he would do on a wide range of issues. and he is making quite a bit of progress. are people going to have disagreements about pace, about what those in what order? yes. of course they are. there's a strength and diversity of opinions that democrats have. that is not a problem. that is not an issue. that is something we are proud of. >> even from the left, there

since the -- there are some legitimate concerns. >> there legitimate disagreements. >> the congressman from california said today that the stimulus is not big enough, that it should have been over $1 trillion. has the president talked about stimulus? has there been any expression that they wish the stimulus would have been larger? >> at that time it was for -- the discussion is the white house is finding a fiscally responsible way to create jobs and save the jobs that we have. savannah. >> do you think the house tax cuts will create jobs? >> the administration's position

is that, a few extend tax cuts for middle-class families, you put money in the pockets of people who will spend that money in places where you are creating jobs. >> do you think the job-creation argument would extend to extending the tax cuts for the wealthy? >> no. independent economists have looked at this. extending those tax cuts deny guarantee the same kind of economic growth -- do not guarantee the same kind of economic growth. >> will be president -- if it were suggested to you that the president and the first lady are spending only the minimum amount of time they need to in the gulf to said they have credit for

being there, what would you say? >> there will be down there hanging out with the great folks who live there, eating the seafood, and taking a look at how things are going for those folks. >> can they do that in one day? >> it will be two days and the guests. -- and yes. >> this is an issue that is being worked out between bp and the trustees. >> are there any names you can tell us that you're considering to replace kristina romer? >> no. >> there was a report that senator stevens was killed in a plane crash. would you like to update your comments? >> we have to have some

information on that soon. narrett thoughts and prayers go up to all the families -- our hearts and prayers go out to all the families. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," we will see primary results for colorado and georgia. wenhold will talkl about lobbying disclosure rules. "washington journal" is on each morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> book tv has been finding out about the new books coming out this fall. >> it is a very interesting

memoir. how did a pigtailed young girl become the first black secretary of state? he is very politically savvy. he is telling usa very important event that came about to give us -- he is telling us a very important event that came about to give us health care reform. >> learn more about these and other books coming out in a 2010 fall book review this weekend. what book tv every weekend. get the whole schedule at booktv.org. >> charlie rangel came to the house floor and asked members to expedite his ethics case. he was formally charged in july for 13 violations of house ethics rules. was formally charged in july

with3 violations of house ethics rules. is a concern about some of the members in this house that are re-- i retire or remove myself from this body and i've always tried to play by the rules and i cannot think of anybody that has encouraged me to speak here . ani want to thank all of you who are concerned about me for saying that, you know, a guy's a fool to represent himself as some of the people have said. but i have been losing a lot of sleep over these allegations and my family and community. some of these rules that they have is that i'm restricted by confidentiality, but for years i have been saying no comment,

no comment, no comment to a lot of serious allegations because i could not comment and i would refer them to the ethics committee. and when the ethics committee finally brought out their statement of alleged violations, it was a long list of this, and somehow the chairm of the subcommittee of investigation indicated that i had received a lot of offers to settle this thing so that it would not cause embarrassment to my democratic friends. and that i'd been offered a reprimand. and a lot of people kind of felt that sounded like a wonderful opportunity to remove this so that i could leave the

ngress with some degree of dignity. why, even someeople said that the president had suggested that his life might be made easier if there was no charlie rangel, so-called, scandal. but i interpreted it another way. i think when the president said that he wanted me to end my career in dignity, he didn't put a time limit on it, and i would think that his concern would be that if any member of the housof representatives has been accused of serious crimes or allegations that somehow within the process, even though -- there has to be some process in which the member has an opportunity to tell his constituents, his family and his friends what he didn't believe. so when the chairman of the investigating committee said i have beeoffered a settlement

reminded me of something that i will devote my retiring years the science and education, which is the major thrust of my attempt here, is that thosof you that come anywhere near criminal court, we have a terrible thing that happens throughout these united states and that is that someone gets arrested for a very serious crime and they get their lawyer and the lawyer expins that think it's better that you plead guilty to a lesser crime. he says, well, i'm not only not guilty but i don't even know what's involved here. they said, listen, we're not suggesting if you plea guilty if you're innocent, but i think you ought to know this jge if you're found guilty is going to send you away for years. on the oer hand you have no offenses, you're a first offender, and if you could just forget about this thing and

explain later what happens. so he continues to tell the -- his lawyer that, hey, i'm willing to admit what i've done wrong and i've done some things wrong but i shouldn't have to -- anyway, he says, listen, we would never tell you to quit or resign. were telling you that it would be easier for us that this is not an issue. t knowing the president, as i do, i think he believesdignity means that everybody is entitled to be judged for allegations against them. we come back to this house because the speaker has called us here in order to make certain that we provide resources r governors and mayors to maintain our teachers and our firefighters, and rangel's not on the schedule for anything which is ok because i know that the members of the committee, they work hardit's a selfless job. god knows i wouldn't take it.

i respect the time that they placed on this. and it's been alst two years, but i have a primary that takes place a couple days before they even thought about meeting. and then i found out from my lawyerhat even when they meet on the 13th of september there is no trial date then. and so i don't want to embarrass anybody. as a matter of fact, those people that believe that their election is going to be dependent on me resigning, i like t encourage them to believe i think republicans have given you enough reason to get re-elect and they continue to do something. but quite frankly, i think -- a lot of people don't know but when the -- well, i don't want to be critical of the ethics committee because my lawyer said you can't make them -- you

cat get annoyed with them because there still y be room for a settlement. and i thought about it. and, well, when i found out that one of the republicans that will be sitting on what they call the adjudication committee had made remarks condemning me for my contributions to the city college that it was a rangel thing, an ego thing, and a corrupt thing, and he was going to judge me, i asked my lawyer. i said, how can they do that? he said, well, the ethics committee can do whatever they want. i said, well, do me a favor. i've paid close to $2 million. i continue to owe you money. and you're telling me that you have no idea when there's going to be a hearing. and every time i talk with you, i said, do me favor on

friday, let's see what happens today in terms of reaching out to settle this thing because i can't afford to be represented by counsel. each and every day the expenses build up, and i think that i have an obligation to younger members of congress to be able to tell them, if you couldn't raise the $2 million, you're out of business no matter what the allegations are. because no one'soing to read the defense. and,f course, justhe allegations by themselves with -- by themselves would be out of business. i am here because i could afford lawyers for close to two years, but everyone would know that there comes limit. so i told them, just put everything on hold. see what happens when we meet

here. anguess what? thing happened. there's no agenda. so what they're saying is that, whe the ethics committee will be leaving to -- for members to be able to work in their districts and to get re-elected and i'm having a primy at i have to wait until after my primary to find out when the ethics committee intends to have a hearing. and then that hearing comes just before, maybe, the general election. there must be something wrong with the rules because people would advise me that i could only hurt myself by coming before this committee. nobody has tried to protect the integrity of the congress with two years -- almost two years of investigation to say the mistakes that rangel has made

should be public and should have been public earlier than now. and i coul't say anything because i didn't want to offend and don't want to offend the ethics committee, but the ethics committee won't even tell me when i'm going to have a hearing. and, hey, people concerned about me, i'm 80 years old, i don't want to die before the hearing. and i think my electorate are entitl to finding outho their congressman for 40 years is. who am i? am i corrupt? what didheoffer me? and i want to be a role model for new members and tell them thmistakes i made so they don't make. and so there are a list of foundations that specialize in providing fun for education. so i'm convinced that the president wants some dignity in knowing that not only my -- am i one of his strongest supporters, but i know that you

know that unless we able to provide education for every child at's there, almost by any meansossible, that our nation's national security is being threatened by foreigners. that our ability to be ahead of the curve in terms of trade, and nobody is more supportive of the president i trade, clear up some of the things in the korean bill so you don't hurt us, clean up a little corruption and violence in colombia and move on with the thing. so the whole idea is really me trying to have some dignity in making certain that america is stronger. now, the thing is that in the haste of sending out hundreds of letters, never askingor a penny but still suggesting we should meet with these people because i knew that i wod hope that they would convince them to providmoney. no a lot of people have done that. doesn't mean it's right. but the rules have changed. and so there has to be a

penalty for grabbing the wrong stationary and not really doing the right thing. t it's not corrupt. it may be stupid or neglect but -- neglect but it's not corrupt. -- neglijent but it's not corrupt. the benefit is that you have a legacy with your name up there. well, we should go to my website to take a look at my answers. this is a broken down building that you have to run away from if someone's going to put your name on it. but it's stillhere. then they say that i would receive a luxurious offer. the sworn testimony was. they never told me. who in the heck needs an office with 40 years of service in the congress in a broken dn building? and then they said, hey, we just put it in there so we

encoage people to put it in there. they said the name. they thought was not a benefit to me, but a benefit in order for them to get money. so i cat imagine why in the cause of all of these things that government personnel didn't buy stamps -- well, if you think of them as official and you're wrong, then i violated the benefits. then at the end of the day the inferences are very serious and mistakes can be ma and they shouldn't have -- these things shoun't have happened. but i can't walk away and he you guys doing your campaign because i'm annoyed and the action is out there calling me corrupt and no one is coming forward saying rangel is not corrupt, rangel didn't make a nickel. no witness ever said there was preferential treatment given. and onguy that had an issue before the senate, staff, republicans, everybody said it

ver came before the house but they keep putting it down there. and guess what? it was the district attorney of new york for over 40 years that suggested that i meet withim because he was in the education fill an tropic business in addition to having business in the senate which republicans and democrats say never came to the ways and means committee. and staff certainly can prove it. i don't know how far they'd go in making a mistake, but you have to be very careful members making certain when they change the rules that you know what happens. and i'm prepared to say, i'm sorry for any embarrassment that has caused. another issue has to do with having an office, a congressional office in the building that i live in. . people say that's taking

advantage, rent control, stabilized apartment. nobody has said that the ethics committee never found for stabilized apartment no one said i broke any laws. no one said that the apartment that they considered twoad always been considered one at the least. no one said that 10 years ago there was an apartment, one bedroom apartment that i got from my family, political friends, i no longer have. but the concern was how do you explain the congressional office? let's read the lapped lord's testimony. he said he was 20% vacant. that he needed money. that he knew that the checks were paid by the congressional committee. that the mail came in rangel for congress. and that the lawyers have told him and the officials of the

city and state of new york that there was no violation of any law or rules. and what was the benefit? the benefit was that your colleague and friend was not sensitive to the fact that there was appearance as though i was being treated differently than anyone else. but the landlord said he didn't treat me any differently. no one said that they did treat me differently. but i have to admit that i wasn't sensitive to anything because i never felt then that i was treated any differently than anybody else. so that ends the apartment thing. but i plead guilty of not being sensitive. now when it comes to the negligence of the disclosures and the tax issues, there's

absolutely no excuse that's there. when accusations were made, i hired a forensic accountant and told them check out what the heck is going on because i want to make certain tt when i stand up and speak that it's true. well, after i found out it was r more serious than the accusations, i then referred it to the ethics committee. it wasn't as though someone tracked me down, the i.r.s. or the clerk of the house, i filed the correct papers. and the tax that is were paid -- taxes that were paid an accountant might say that had my accountant recognized that this 2,000 down payment for a house in the dominican republic that was promised to be paid off in seven years would be a complete failure, and if indeed they did not give me one nickel

but whenever they thought they were making a dollar or two they reduced the mortgage, then there's no question you don't have to be a tax expert to know that if you didn't report that income, that was -- notwithstanding the fact if you had done the right thing you had no liability bass the taxes that were paid -- because the tax that is were paid to the dominican republic would have been deducted and with depreciation i would have no liability. having said that, is that an excuse that's worthy? of course not. the fact that there was negligence on the part of the person that for 20 years did it and the fact that i signed it, does not really give an excuse as to why i should not apologize to this body for not paying the attention to i that i should have paid to it. but there is no, not one scintilla bit of evidence that the negligence involved in the

disclosures, that there was some way to hide from the public what i had. because the value of the property they would say was $25,000, 100,000, whatever it would be that it didn't make any sense that i was trying to disclose 2 -- it. why did i takehe floor today? i haven't found one lawyer that said i should do it. i haven't found one friend that said i should do it. but i thought about it. if the lawyers are going to continue to chge me, and i don't even know when the hearing's going to be, and i can't tell them i want one and not six lawyers, i don't want to offend the ethics committee. they are doing the best they n. but, hey, i'm in a position -- the speaker pro tempore: members and their staff will

please take their conversations from the floor. the gentlen may resume. mr. rangel: that, hey, i'm 0 years old. almy life has been from the beginning public service. that's all i have ever done. been in the army, been a state legislator, been a federal prosecutor, 40 years here. and all i'm saying is that if it is the judgment of people here for whatever reason that i resign, then have the ethics committee expedite this. don't leave me swinging in the wind until november. if this is an emergency and i think it is, to help our local and state governments out, what about me? i don't want anyone to feel embarrassed, awkward. if i was you i may want me to go away, too. i am not goingaway. i am here. and i do recognize that -- i'm

not saying there's any partisanship in this because if i do all the people that have been accused of accusations, i'm in a close district, and i -- they were republicans, i would give a couple of moments of thought to see whether or not, especially if i didn't have anything to work with to get re-elected, i would say, hey, take a lookat these republicans. they have been accused. but i don't really think that the unfairness of this is to me. i don't take it personally. i'm thinking about all of you. the president wants dignity. let's have dignity in this house where the ethics committee means something and that none of you,f the newspapers say anything, will ha to wait two years before you can say, no comment. even in addition to that -- and in additn to that, once they make the accusation, they have no business making any mistakes and saying that i didn't

cooperate. i got papers with my signature on it. i got papers that said i tried my darst. i got papershere my lawyer tells me had ever reas to believe that the full committee would sign on, that there was space for people to sign. i'm the only one -- i don't know what changed their minds about settling this case. but my lawys -- my friends say don't go to theloor. and i say what are you going to do me? suppose i do get emotional? suppose i do think of my life the beginning and end. are you going to expel me from this boddy? are you going to say while there is no evidence that i took a nickel, asked for a

nickel that there's no sworn testimony, no conflict that i have to leave here? as much as i love you, democrats are thinking it would be easy, i'm the guy that was raising money, but that doesn't mean that i criticize youor saying, hey, that's crate then but i'm running for re-election now. do what you have to do. and republicans, hey, you don't have much to run on, but you know, but what the hell, if rangel is an embarrassmt, based on newspaper articles, i can see why you would do it, but think, think. isn't this historically the first time that it appears as though partisahip is in the ethics committee? isn't historically the first time that the recomndations of the subcommittee of investigation is turned down? and darn, who in the heck would want somebody who politically

call you corrupt to be the ranking bipartisan guy to judge you? i don'txpect answers today. and i know you're going home. i wish all of you -- but at the end of the day somebody, somebody has to do more than wish i go away. somebody has to tell me, when does rangel get a chance to talk to witnesss? i haven't talked with any member of the ethics committee. i haven't talked -- i mean in terms of settlement. my lawyers have. i haven't talked with any of the witnesses. and they had to expede this case. in other words, i have a shorter time to prepare for reasons that they toll me challenge the ethics committe they make this stuff up i think all along. so my lawyer, i can understand how financially this thing can go on longer than i can afford. but she is wilng to assist me in working out something in pro

bono and i'll expect the leadership to help me. don't let this happen to you. don't walk away from here becausit's convenient that i disappear. because not all of you will be ab to withstand it as i have. if there's no issue of corruption, if everybody, including the leader over here, has to start off what a great american i am before he drops the bomb, well, i think that should count for something. i am not asking for leniency , i'm asking for exposure of the facts. they have made a decision. i want you to make a decision. i apologize to the leadership. i feel for those people, especiallyewcomers, that love this place so much that like someone said, charlie, they all love you. and i paused, but they love themselves better. i understand that.

but for god's sake, just don't believe that i don't have feelings, that i don'tave pride. that i do want the dignity that the president had said. and the dignity is that even if you see fit to cause me not to be able to come back because you're not going to do it in my district, but if there's some recommendation that i be expelled, for me, for me that would be dignity. because it shows openly that the system isn't working for me. and i ho some of you might think if it doesn't work for me, that it y not wk for you. so i know we are anxious to get home. i know i can't get on the agenda. i know that sometimes -- some time, somewhere i wld have a

hearing. while you're sayini should resign, i do hope that you might think about what happens if the whole country starts thinking it's better that you resign and don't make anyone feel uncomfortable than to have the truth at least, a person an opportunity to say, you have made alleged violations. i am saying that you're wrg based on sworn ttimony. and i want somebody, and i don't think it's going to be people who have been critical of me for doing the same thing, that's going to be the judge. i know outside doesn't count because we judge the conduct of our members. erer recall if i can't get my dignity back here, then fire your best shot in getting rid of me through expulsion.

now, i apologize for any embarrassment that i have caused. i'm prepared to admit and try to let young people know that you never get too big to recognize that these rules are for junior members as they are for senior members. and at you can't get so carried away with good intentions that you break the rules. the rules are there to make certain that we have some order, some discipline and respect for the rule. and i violated that. and i'm apologizinfor it. and i don't think apologies mean this is a light matter. it very serious. but corruption? no evidence, no suggestion that this was ever found. and lastly, i close by saying that there is an organization that some of you know, certainly national truth in

government, whatever, and the only thing i can say that some of my more important democrats on the list that sent out mail to listening money to get rid of me even before i became the chairman. and they have a website that i will be giving you because they got a lot of members, including bicaucus members on their list. what i do remember is send your money in now. we got rangelgainst the ropes and we got to get rid of him. much knows who they are. and they -- everyone knows who they are. they followed me on vacation. they followed me when i was doing business much the airport, outside where i live. it's kind of rough. i'm sensitive to your feelings and the hard work by the ethics committee, but thisas to stop sometime. .

one year, two years, primaries, elections. and all i'm saying is i deserve and demand the right to be heard. and if i hurt anybody's feeling, believe me, it's the equity and the fairness and the justice that i'm asking for and not your feelings. we are entitled to our political feelings and what we want done, but we have to respect each other, and this institution which i love. i love my country. i love my congress, and there's nothing i wodn't do to preserve this from going on. i love the disagreements. i love the debates. i love the arguments. but you're not going to tell me to resign to make you feel comfortable. so to awful those that helped me to help myself, let me appreciate it. and for those that disagree, i'm soy, but that's one thing you can't take away from me.

i hope you have a pleasant time while you're away. maybe, jt maybe, the members of the ethics committee might think about telling me when they think they might have a hearing so that whatever they decide i can let my constituents, my families, my friends know that i did the best i could as an american, as a patriot, and someone that loves this count. thank you for your attention. go home. >> he was the lingus servin republican senator in u.s. history. senator stevens lost a bid for reelection in 2008 after being convicted of federal corruption charges. in november of that year, ted

stevens said goodbye to his colleagues on the senate floor after losing re-election. this is over 10 minutes. >> before christmas in 1968, i was appointed to succeed alaskas first senator. next month will mark the 40th year have had the honor and privilege to serve here in this great chamber. first and most importantly, i want to thank my family. tragic death in 1978, i thought the end of my career had come. my dear wife catherine entered in 1980 and joined by my six children and my 11 grandchildren, my family has given me love, support, and sacrifice, which made my

continued career here in the senate possible and give it meaning. i dearly love each member of my family. 40 years. it's hard to believe that so much time could pass so quick it is hard to believe time could passed so quickly. it has. representing alaska and alaskans , the land and the people that i love. as a member of this body, and i served as whip from 1976 to 1984, as chair of the republican senatorial campaign committee, as chair of the aways control observer vote, as chairman of the ethics committee, as chair of the rules committee, chair of the government affairs committee, chair of the appropriations committee and chair of the commerce committee

and had functioned as the political changes took place back and forth across this aisle. now i have really a difficult time today articulating my feelings and i hope if i puddle up as an old friend used to say exile be excused, but when i came to the senate alaska has been a state for less than a decade. we were then more of an impoverished territory than a full-fledged state. the commitments made by the government on behalf of alaska were unfulfilled and some are still unfulfilled. alaska had not received things proposed and poverty ruled supreme and i remember when senator kennedy and i went to examine some of the villains in

the arctic -- villains in the arctic it was a disaster. our fisheries were this peril primarily from the intrusion of foreignselves anchored -- foreign vessels anchored a fuel miles offshore 12 months out of the year. many people doubted whether alaska had what it took to be a successful state. and they asked whether alaska was still seward's folly. mr. president, we proved that those doubters were wrong. working with one another as alaskans and with great friends here in the senate alaskans took control of our own destiny. in 1958 as legislative counsel for the department of interior i worked on the statehood act which committed congress to settle alaskan native lapped claims and in 1971 congress enacted the act settles claims

in our states. native corporations established add my request, to manage $1 billion paid to our state and federal government and 44 million acre land settlement are now driving forces in the alaskan economy. in 1973, after a dramatic tie-breaking vote by the vice president of this chamber an amendment which closed the courts of this country to further delay by extreme environmentalists the president signed into law the trans alaska pipeline authorization act which dramatically improved america's energy security and secured the economic future of alaska. in 1976 congress passed what became known as the magnus and stevens act to fight foreign fishing fleets which endangered america's fisheries. because of that act america's fisheries today are the most productive and the best managed

in the world. working within the framework of these basic laws, alaskans have labored in the appropriations and administrative process to make statehood a reality. where there was nothing but tundra and forest today there are now airports, roads, ports, water and sewer systems, hospitals, clinics, communications networks, research labs and much, much more. mr. president, alaska was not seward's folly. and is no longer an impoverished territory. alaska is a great state and an essential contributor to our energy security and national defense. i am proud to have had a role in this transformation helping achieve alaska's potential will be my life's work. my motto has been here "to held with -- to hell with politics,

just do what is right for alaska." i take great pride in the work of the defense appropriations subcommittee, the leadership of which i have shared for almost three decades with my brother, senator inouye and i thank him for being here. he is a great american patriot and a true friend. together we have worked to rebuild our armed forces to provide the support and training needed by our warfighters to meet the challenges of a rapidly changing word. world. i don't have time to recount the highlights of 40 years of work in this body. that will take a lot time. i will take time, however, for me to acknowledge the friendships i've enjoyed with so many of my colleagues and senate staffers. i really am grateful to every member of the senate for their friendship and i have no ill will toward any member. i am moment grateful for the

support and counsel of my colleagues in the alaska delegation and my old friend in the house, congressman young who has done so much for or state and my partner in the senate, senator murkowski to whom i owe so much and admire so much. she really has been a true friend and a true partner and i really wish her well in the future here. i also acknowledge the tremendous contribution made by hundreds of young alaskans who have come to washington, d.c., to serve on my staff and particularly, let me express my gratitude to my current staff, all of whom have worked hard for alaska during the toughest of times. i know all will go on to do great things for alaska and our country. mr. president, i feel blessed by god to have had the opportunity to serve in this body. i deeply appreciate the trust of alaska reposed in me for 40 years. when alaska needed a strong voice to speak up for its interests, i did my part to the

best of my ability. when an administration submitted legislation or a budget that ignored alaska's legislative concerns, i urged congress to exercise its constitutional power to redress the balance. when alaskan -- any alaskan entity needed help my office was ready and did help to the maximum extent possible. i feel the same way now that i did in 1968. i really must pinch myself to fully understand that i'm privileged to speak on the floor of the united states senate. coming from a boyhood i had i could never even have dreamed to be here today. and home is where the heart is, mr. president. if that is so, i have two homes: one is right here in this chamber; and the other is my beloved state of alaska. i must lebanese one -- leave one to return to the other. as i leave the senate and the

work that has given me so much happiness i know senators murkowski and congressman young will continue to be strong voices for our 49th state. this is the last frontier and i also pray for my successor's success as he joins in that effort. my mission in life is not completed. i believe god will give me more opportunities to be of service to alaska and to our nation and i look forward with a glad heart and with confidence in his justice and mercy. i look only forward and i still see the day when i can remove the cloud that currently surrounds me. that's it, mr. president: 40 years distilled into a few minutes. i close by saying and asking god bless alaska and our governor, goes bless the united states of america and our president, and god bless the senate and every member of this body. i yield the floor for the last

time. the presiding officer: the majority leader is recognized. >> in 2008, senator ted stevens

lost his seat to a democrat. this was his farewell speech to colleagues on the senate floor from november of 2008. former alaska senator ted stevens and died in a plane crash. he was 86. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] commerce secretary gary locke announced that they saved $1.6 billion on the 2010 census. he made the announcement with the director at a news conference. census operations will continue into september. they must double check the data before they report their results at the end of the year. this briefing is 50 minutes. >> good morning. i am chief of the census bureau publican formation office. i offer a warm welcome to media

and the room. it is good to have you here today. today is a good day. we have speakers for you today. we have department of commerce secretary gary locke and the census bureau director robert groves. there will speak about milestones and progress with the census. secretary gary locke will give his remarks at first. after his remarks, -- he has a tight schedule, so we will have one a question for reporter. we will take questions in the room. when you do it as your question, please give your name and your media affiliation. after the secretary finishes his remarks, robert groves will talk a little bit more about the progress of the 2010 census. so, with that, i would like to bring up dr. robert groves. >> thank you.

good morning. i am really happy to be here and i am happy to introduce commerce secretary gary locke. if for no other reason than to have a public reason to thank him for all of the help he has given to the 2010 census. he is here to make a special announcement that we are proud of. with no further ado, i introduce the secretary. introduce the secretary. >> thank you, dr. groves. it's a pleasure to be here. great to be here with so many of our colleagues that helped make the 2010 census a resounding success, especially dr. bob groves, the director of the census bureau. bob will be speaking to you in just a moment, as stan indicated. but bob and his team, working with the senior leadership achieved incredible results with

the 2010 census and substantially cost savings for the american taxpayer. the 2010 census is a textbook example of president obama's accountable government initiative which aims to cut waste, while delivering taxpayers better services at a very efficient price. the 2010 census has been a priorityf mine since my very first day as commercial secretary. i mean that literally. i remember in end of march, 2009, i took a sunday night red eye flight from seattle, to arrive in d.c., monday morning, at about 6:00 a.m. and after a quick hotel shower, i went straight to the national census partners kickoff event. i think it was at the willrd hotel. this is ever before setting foot in the commercial department building. the 2010 census has been a top priority of mine because a lot is riding on the 2010 census. the census will determine how more than $400 billion is allocated every single year and

the next ten, for everything from education, senior services to police and roads. the 2010 census will serve as the basis for the congressional redistricting that states will undertake in 2011. and the 2010 census is the largest civilian undertaking in u.s. history, with some 565,000 census workers conducting field operations in all 50 states and the territories. in the process, the census bureau has actually partnered with 255,000 community-based organizations, ranging from religious groups, nonprofit organizations to businesses. so i'm very, very proud to announce today that because of the exceptional efforts of our census bureau and partners and the cooperation of the american people, that the 2010 census is both on schedule and 22% underbudget for this fiscal year, where mt of the operations occurred. this did not happen by chance.

the senior management at the department of commerce and the census bureau leadership run a tight ship. we demanded accountability. and we made sure that we stretched every taxpayer dollar as far as it could go. before this census began, experts inside and outside the government predicted that longstanding operational and fiscal problems at the u.s. census bureau would doom the 2010 count to cost overruns and diminish participation by the american people. i remember during my confirmation process, that i was warned that expect a train wreck. in 2009, the commerce department's own inspector general, as well as the accountability office ranked the 2010 census as one of the federal government's programs most likely to fail. that did not happen. in fact, the 2010 census achieved a mailback response

rate of 22%, which defied the predictions of the experts. matched the 2000 response rate. anwe believe that when all the numbers are finally crunched may actually exceed the 2000 response rate. and this 72% mailback response reversed a decade-long decline in mailback response. there is no one silver bullet that created the success. the census bureau professionals developed a very strong operational design that included innovation, including a re-engineered address list and a short, ten-question questionnaire. other innovations were more mundane, but no less meaningful. for example, one of the strategies that the census bureau took to boost mailback response was to re-sentenced questionnaires to people in areas with low mailback rates in the year 2000. for the thinking that some people jt needed a simple reminder or may have thrown out their very first questionnaire.

this was a huge money saver for the american taxpayer. because every 1% increa in the mailback response rate saved $85 million by reducing the number of the expense of door-to-door canvassing. some of these adjustments were under way at the outset of president obama taking office. but the ultimate success was guaranteed by the commerce department's ethic of constant improvement and constant search for efficiencies over the last 17 months. the census bureau operation team held daily meetings to trouble shoot problems with the field's bureau operations field operation, which is a high-risk software operation to use for the census workers. this was an untested system, rushed into operation after the debacle with the handheld computers that never worked and that were abandoned in 2008, before president obama even took

office. as the entire census bureau and commerce department undertook these internal management reforms, we also revamped our public outreach efforts. the add obama administration budgeted more money for additional advertising in hard-to-count areas. advertising in more languages. and a four-fold increase in stf, supporting the 255,000-member partnership program. and our advertising was more targeted than ever before. in 2009, we created a media by reserve that permitted to us track lagging reonses in individual cities, and, thus, intervene in those areas with additional advertising. in march, march 30th of 2010, the census bureau senior leadership team identified some 23 media markets with the total population of 17.7 million households. now, that's households, that we believe seriously lagged in

response impaired to rest of the country. after intervening with more advertising in these media markets, the low performers were reduced by april 20th, less than a month later, to only ten communities with a total population of 1.6 million households. all of these specific measures were an outgrowth of the commerce department's compliment to the type of poor management principles that consult any challenge. relentless attention to detail, setting ambitious goals and then creating precise metrics to measure performance. these are the principles that i dended on during my two terms for the state of washington and those are the principles that helped to make the 2010 census a resounding success. also, these are the principles that we used to make 25% of the budget on the digital division conversion program. at least half of the savings that we achieved in the census

can be directly attributed to better management. better productivity among the census workers. and the fact that our impressive mail response rate reduced the number of census employees we had to send door to door coting households. the other half of the savings came from a reserve fund that we had set aside to deal with operational problems, as well as other unforeseen circumstances that never arose. so this is an accomplishment that we're very proud of. i'm especially proud of our work of the senior leadership team at the department of commercial. but most proud of the unbelievable leadership provided by dr. groves and his entire team at the census bureau. and i'm also proud of e american people for understanding the importance of the census to their communities and participating in the higher

numbers. we're appreciating that everything went on so well and on time and underbudget. for that, we bring on dr. groves. >> let me remine everyone, we'll have one question per reporter. when you do have a question, please give your name and affiliation. >> reporter: dan o'kee for "the washington post." one of the things that your colleagues mentioned last night, in addion to the high response rate and the other work you that guys have done in the last 18 mohs is the fact that you had a much more qualified experienced workforce than y did in previous years. i'm wondering if you could talk to that a little bid. and how that may have helped to keep the costdown. >> actually, i had several friends who are retired people from either police and some from state government who were part of the door-to-door operation who signed up to be a census worker.

and very proud to contribute to the civic underting. and they, and we've heard from others across the country with the highly skilled workforce, they themselves came up with innovations on how to be more efficient, and to speed up the process, there be saving the ceus bureau and the american taxpayers money. so we're really proud with the more highly skilled workforce that we had, a lot of people worked on campaigns, bh democratic and republican campaigns who worked on the address canvassing list who then signed up to go door to door on the enumeration. that highly skilled workforce came up with ideas on their own and then were incorporated community wide and even systemwide. >> reporter: hi, max kakas from federal radio in washington. i'm wondering if you could give

us your total for the savings you've realized? i understand at that census isn't complete yet. still have some other work to go. but what do you know about -- what kind of a figure do you have so far that you can report about how much you've saved so far? >> we believe that we've saved so far $1.6 billion. and while we still have a few months left to go, the operations are winding down. we're now focused on quality control measures. that's why there will be some triple checking. some households that will be resurveyed just to double-check. and dr. groves can talk a little bit about that. but we also have reserves set aside for those pgrams as well. as of now, operations to date, we've saved $1.6 billion. >> reporter: thanks, michael doyle. you've emphasized cost savings and efficiencies. what information, if any, do you

have on quality control efforts and the error rate compared to the previous census? >> actually, dr. groves has very interesting statistics on that. and he'll be happy to share that as parof his more detailed discussion. we're ver very proud of what the quality control measures are inditing. >> we have time for one more question. any other questions in the room? okay. thank you very much. >> with that, i'd like to turn it over to dr. groves. >> thank you very much. thank you for coming in. >> well, l me share with you the secretary's happiness at this event. and re-emphasize that there's some heros in this that created the savings. one, the american public, as our little sign behind us notes, really is to be thanked for what they did. they produced tha72% response rate that produced a smaller

workload for following up the smaller workload was created about $600 million of the savings that the secreta just reported. and i want to take a minute to thank the team at census. whether i came in in july 2009, it was an institution that had received a lot of criticism, mainly around the handheld computer development and the resulting expensive changes in design. the team that i've worked with over the past few months has been totally dedicated to doing a cost efficient census. we scrubbed budgets. we tried to find ways to get more efficient. and at every opportunity in the decisionmaking process, they were there on how to do things. we had a big contingency ready to spend if software systems didn't work. and for those of you who have been following this story for

sometie, you know that there were predictions all over the place that we had headed for a disaster on the software side. well, my colleagues at census figured out, work around after work around, we pieced together a software system that worked. it did its job on time and under budget. it took a lot of work. they worked really hard at that. so this is really a tribute to my new colleagues at census. as well as the american public. i want to give you an update on where we are, as i've done in these operational press briefingin the past. t me tell you what we've finished up. the nonresponse follow-up stage, where we called on 47 million households. we knocked on their doors, we've finished that. it was on time and $600 million under budget. the workers on this were more

productive than weimagined. this workforce that the secretary mentned, we now have empirical data. they were better than the workforce in 2000. they worked more hours. they needed the moy. they concentrated and focused on their tansk. and they proud a great nonresponse follow-up effort. for the first time, we have a quality control procedure checked every enumerator's work. checked a portion of their work. every enumerator has had some of their work completely redone. then we impaired their inteiew results th the new interview results. we now have data on how that turned out. only 0.2%. so one-fifth of the enumerators were found to have violating on

data collected. when we found a violation, we completely redid their work. that number, the that 0.2% is something we're proud of. on the other hand, as a result of something we now know is, this year, for about 22% of the households that we followed up on, 22% of the 47 million, after repeated efforts, we called six times over different days, different times of the day, we were not able to talk to a person in the housing unit themselves. and we sought population counts for that housing unit from a building manager, in an apartment building or multiunit structure. or a neighbor. 22% of the households had information on their populati fromhose kind of proxy reports. we call those proxy reports. last decade, that 22% was about

17%. so that's going on the negative side. we would have preferreto have interviewed every one of those, but the result is about 22% of them were interviewed through a proxy method. another operation we just finished up is calleded the coverage follow-up operation. in census bureau jargon. let me tell you why this is a cool thing to do. do you remember, on your forms, for every person, you were asked the questions are does this person sometimes live somewhere else? this is aew question. it was introduced in the 2010 census to counteract duplication. for houses that had those checks, we called back just to make sure we understood where the person should be counted. whether they might have been counted twice. that operation started in april. we finished that up recently. and that operation is a quality

input to the 2010 census that has made it better, we're confident. we are now at the tail end of another operation. for all of the housing units that we thought were vacant over the past few weeks, or we couldn't find them, we had an address on the list. we went out to the place, to the site. we couldn't even find the housing unit, we've double-checked those. we've sent out yet another person to make sure we got it right. that operation is finishing up. there were about 5.6 million addresses that were treated that way. and then in somethi we're really proud of, we got very late additions to the address list from the postal service, addresses that they just started delivering to. and we're going out to those. about 3 million of those. 3.1 million of those. now, what we're finding on this operation is that when you combine the 5.6 million that

were vacant or deletes when we went out there, with the 3.1 million new addresses, about 27% of the sum of those are occupied -- were occupied in april 1. we're picking up new folks. we're measuring new folks in this late oration because of the supplemental adds. didn't do this in the past, this, o, we're hopeful would make for a better census. we will start or we'vetarted already an operation called field operation. some of you may remember in the midst of the census, 7-elevens, libraries, were was a folder called "be counted." if for so reason you didn't receive a questionnaire in the mail, you could have picked up

that form and sent it in. we got a bunch of those. we're checking the addresses of those rit now because we want to make sure we can verify that the form that was filled out and mailed in can be associatedith the house we can find onsite. so we're checking those. we're at about 60% complete on those. we've added in another operation some new checks. again, for quality control procedures. you m have recalled that when we had a -- we cut off the mail returns at a certain point in late april. and then began the nonresponse follow-up prcedure. we continued to get some returns. we pcessed those returns, and if we got a late return, we attempted to avoid visiting that

house. we did that. then we processed those returns. and what we found was that some of them were actually blank returns. people mailed in a questionnaire, filled out nothing on the questionnaire. or filled out just the population count. post-processing, we have about 400,000 of those gone. 415,000 of those. we're going backs out to those houses right now, that's going to start tomorrow, just to make sure we get the best population count we can out of ose housing units. so that's a late addition. and then we have about 300,000 houses we're going out, at the same time, where t enumerator has information that the housing unit was occupied on april 1. but we don't know how many people live there. we're going to try one more time on those. these are all examples of something that we feel strongly about. wee going to stay out in the

field until we have a resolution on every address, and we understand the population characteristics of every address we can. the census is not over. even though we've made this announcement of cost savings. we're still plugging away, trying to improve the account as best we can. so, now, let me look forward. there's an operation that's going to start pretty soon. we call it "the coverage measurement" operation. what's that all about? that is a very large, highest quality survey we can possible do. the purpose of the survey is to estimate how good the census is. it is a sample o about187,000 housing units around the country. interviewers are going to start knocking on the door. you have a 1 in 7 chance of being in that sample.

the interviewers are going to look differently than the enumer rarities. we should alert the public when the enumerators kno on the door, they'll have a lop top computer. they'll have a black census bag that is not going to look like the census bag. they'll have a badge, and they're going to ask in-depth questions to make sure we know whether they have counted that house directly in the census. they are checking the census in a real way. the results of this work will be ready not until 2012. they do a whole lot of careful matching in ord to figure out how many people are missed, how many people are covered twice. we use this week, this coverage management survey to do that. there is one result of this already that's really cool. they went out and these interviewers went out and listed

a bunch of addresses. these interviewers are much more highly skilled in listing housing and addresses than we were able to afford for the gigantic address canvassing operation we did last year. we then matched the houses they found out there to our -- to the master of list that we had. it's sort of the first hint at how good our master universe list is. when we match it up, we get better match rates than we got in 2000 for the same time. this was the list as it was, before we began the entire census operation. this is real good news. it looks like the kwaumequalitye master address list is good for the 2010 census as measured by this tch. so we'll continue to do these sorts of small operations all aimed at either approving the quality or measuring the quali

of the census. let me just run through what's going to happen over the coming months with regard to data releases. we have a real, hard deadline of december 31st, to present to the country, to the president, the state level counts and we're tasked with the arithmetic of figuring out how many representatives each state gets. so by december 31st, that will be revealed. state level counts. house members per state. in february through march, we will start releasing state by state, data that will be used for redistricting in the states. this will be a file that has block level counts by race, ethnicity and housing unit counts by occupancy status. in april, we'll do -- release the population and housing counts for the u.s., for

regions, divisions broken by american-indian, alaska native, and native hawaiian areas. in may, we will release population and housing characteristics for areas including congressional districts for the 111th congress. and then in summer, and starting later, we will start issuing more and more detailed reports. so, again, to sum up, december is the big first date, where the reapportionment related data estimates or statistics will be released. then april is the deaine for all of the redistricting data. and thene'll start releasing more and more individual reports. so, that it's about where we are. and that's kind of a foreshadowing of what the data products willook like. in our next briefing which will be mid-september or so. i want to go into more depth into how we will impair the

census to other ways of measuring the population. demographic analysis and this verage measurement program. so we'll also be able to talk in much more detail about our data processing operations that are going on throughout the fall, just to give you a sense of where we aren those things. so, let me stop, i'm happy to field questions. >> okay. let me just remind everyone, that if you have a question, please give your name and your affiliation before you ask your qution. also, we have folks on the phone. let me remind them as well if you're on the phone and you have not yet let the operator know that you have a question, please do so now so you can be put back here. do we have a question in the room? yes, sir? >> mike doyle with mcclatchy newspapers. some former census workers in california who have been under the control of the los angeles office have filed complaints with the inspector general's

office alleng mismanagement. are you specifically aware of these complaints, and if you are, what are you doing about that? >> well, let me give a bigger picture on this. this is the time that two things are happening. for the last two weeks, two things have been happening. we've been finishing up the nonresponse follow-up. these are tough cases to work. if you imagine yourself an umerator for a minute. you've knocked on a door five time, six time, the operation is coming to an end, this is stressful for enumerators. in those kind of cases, to go back to that point, it's often that there are complicated judgments that have to be made by our field staffer. t is at this moment that complaints like the fresno

complaint coming up every census, if you study the history of cens, it's completely understandable because their work is much, more stressful. it's also the time, and i've done hundreds of surveys in my life. with temporary workers, and it's a happy and sad time at the end of an operation. people are losing their jobs. they know they're going to lose their job, yet, the work must be quinn initialled. the work environment gets complicated. i'm aware of the fresno incident. and there are other incidents like that around the country. let me tell you what we do on every one of those. as soon as we get word and the word comes in various ways, we alert the inspector general's office that does independent investigations of this. and then we do our own investigation. and we find out whether there's martin to the accusations.

when there is, i can tell you we completely redo work. so if we find that an accusation on the part of an enumerator about some inappropriate behavior going on with regard to handling the data, as occurred, and as a valid accusation, we will identify the seven cases that could have been affected. we go a little lighter than that and we completely redo that work. i don't know that today's status of fresno -- i know people are out there ing exactly what i just said. >> what's wrong -- is there something we need to repair and how can we repair it? we will repair every case that we see was handling improperly. that's the way we do it. >> okay. while we're still waiting to tee up questions on the phone, we'll take another question in the room. phil?

>> mcclatchy papers. >> reporter: do you take account for t spending the original fundg? would this be -- could this be consider considered less allocation funds, rather than savings since we can't use it? >> that's a great question. so the question is about the contingency funds and how should one think about the contingency funds. should we claim those as savings or not. those contingency funds were set up before i was here. in my professional opinion, it was a wise thing that the

congress did and omb did to have that contingency funding. my memory, by the way, is of the 1990 census that had no such contingency funding. and in late spring, the census ran out of money. it required a supplementary appropation, and a lot fear that the census is actually going to be damage by that. so i think it's a wise thing to have contingey funds. we were -- we had great good fortune this year. there were no major hurricanes that wiped out large portions of the populations. there weren't earthquakes. we had done censuses, hurricanes, earthquake, volcanos, all sorts of things, right? it wasn't -- we had some minor flooding in various areas -- in small numbers of areas that were tragedies in those local areas. but we evaded a large-scale national disaster.

i remind us that about a year ago, we were worried that the h1n1 epidemic might be a disaster for this country. we had preparations for that. we had to prepare for allf these possible horrible events. they didn't take place. we also had to prepare for what everyone was saying was a very high-risk software system. and as i said, in my openi remarks, the folk at census have been working around the clock to avoid those. and we pieced together that. so, that's the reason for the contingency. whether you call that a savings or not is up to you. that money is going back to the u.s. taxpayers, though, unambiguously. >> okay. now, i understand that we do have a question on the phone. operator, do we have a question on the phone? >> caller: yes. >> you can repeat your name and

affiliation. >> caller: deborah berry, with gannett's washington bureau. >> go ahead. >> caller: you talked last year about the special efforts in the gulf coast, particularly about the hurricane. can you talk a little bit about how does that go and the response rate in that area? >> there's a question about the gulf coast area, where some of you may remember, instead of mailing questionnaires to areas that in 2000 were mailed, because of the dynamic nature of the housing staff, we actually hand-delivered questionnaires. something that's much more expensive than the mail. the question is really about how did it go. one impacthat is, we now know, we dropped off questionnaires to a lot of units that in the judgment of our field workers could be inhabited, but weren't being inhanded. and that depressed the

participation rate in the gulf coast area, because there were a lot of questionnaires deliver to housing units that were completely vacate accountant. they weren't mailed back. so the participation rate figures that we were reporting are pressed by tht. we don't have the results yet, or i haven't seen the results yet of the nonresponse follow-up stage in those areas we'll have that over the coming weeks, and that would be a better answer to your question than i have now. i do know that i spent a lot of time in the gulf coast area, and also on the texas/mexico border. and in those areas, the partner activities that we had going were just heartwarming. people are working real hard to make sure their communities were counted accurately. and any success we've had had in that area is really due to their efforts, as well as ours. >> okay. questionn the room?

max? >> reporter: hi, dr. groves, max kakas. i'm wondering, sir, the couple times we talked, you discussed the possibility after the dust settles and you guys have had a chance to catch your breath a little bit. assessment of the technology is going to be part of the triage of the census after you've delivered your reports. and i'm wondering if one of the questions you're going to be asking will be sort of a "what if." what if the hand helds had worked? would they have made an impact on the parts that they were slated to have worked in? and do you have any feel right now about whether they would have mada difference for the enumerators in the field, their efficiency, land that be something that you'll be looking at? >> great question. so this is looking ahead now.

we are indeed dng these kind of leons learned and deep dives into review. this is both software systems and other field operations. we'd had to be wise readers of those, participants in those. we are heavily focused thinking ahead to 2020 on cost savings. we're asking ourselves the question, how can we radically reduce the cost of the census in the united states without harming the quality of the census? this is out of the box thinking. the handhelds are part of the most expensive component of the census. the heim resources required in this nonresponse follow-up, when people are knocking on doors, is really very expensive. so our focus is how to reduce

the number of people needed to follow up. the handhelds would make them more efficient in most of- most thinking, professionally. it would also permit us to send what we're starting to develop, and that is realtime monitoring of census activities in a way that you could have management interventions to save -- to become more efficient. so handhelds would permit immediate transfer of data to a central processing unit, a central office. downloading of new workloads to an enumerator, to deploy them in area where is they're needed. and that kind of constant feedback group about how you're doing. that could impro magement efficiency. but i think what we'd like to do is have fewer people out there, to begin with. if you really want to save money, increasing the ability of

people to self-respond in ways that fit their lifestyle is what we've got to focus on. >> okay. i understand that we do have a question from the phone lines. operator, do we have a question? >> yes. >> please give your name and immediate affiliation. >> caller: dawn smith. >> okay, your question, please. >> caller: this is john smith. and i'm just wondering, can you talk a little bit about the digital follow-up operation? >> i'm sorry, i couldn't understand your question. could you do it one more time. >> reporter: did you all follow up operation? >> somebody has to help me. can you repeat that bun more time, please? >> caller: apparently, there's a new operationalled nonresponse

follow-up residual operation. and i'm trying to determine what is this operation follow-up operation stefrl or the nonresponse reconciliation? >> caller: yes, the wreck s reconciliation residual follow-up. >> let me go through that again. there are about 7,000 households when we examined forms we received from them posed certain puzzles to us. about 400,000 came in with very little information on the form, some of them are totally blank. we doesn't know that immediately, we had to let it go through the processing machines to discover that. we're going back out to those houses to get personal information on the houses. so their returned a form but with insufficient information. and then we have other forms that were collected by our

enumerators during nonresponse follow-up where the enumerator judges the house was occupied on april 1 but we don't have a count of people who were living there and we are going back out to those. that's about 300,000. so both of these and some of these in prior censuses decades ago were just left as they were. we have enough time, we have enough money, we are going back out to see whether we can get good data from those 2 hundr700 households. >> we have to limit it to one question. do we have a question in the room, please? question in the room? yes? mike's coming. thank you. >> mike doyle, mcclatchey newspapers. you identified the thousand or so potential problem enumerators you're examining, do you find any trends or patterns in the

type of mistakes made or the regions where they were working? >> we don't, you know, it's only 1,000 spread over 500,000 or 600,000 so lookin for patterns is kind of tough and i haven't seen any. we do know a few things about the characteristics of the cases that failed this match. they tend to occur at the end of the operation. this fits actually the same -- the question you asked before. and this fits everything we know about surveys, too. when interviewers are enumerators get under stress at the tail end, when things have to be finished and they're dealing with a row luckettant respondent or a respondent who's never home. >> it is the those moments these sorts of breakdowns inraining procedures seem to break down. our data fits that.

so that's one answer to your question. that's a tail end phenomenon dispropoionately. now it's a tail-end phenomenon both because of the stress thing and also in addition to getting every enumerat's work, portion of their work checked our local census offices are observing and crew leaders are observing the interview everyday and if they begin to suspect that an enumerator is violating trning guideline, say, you're starting to turn in a whole lot of hours of work and there's not much output, then their work will be inspected and redone and that's--those tend to -- you tend get that kind of evidence towards the end of the operation, too. so those are kind of target inquiries into the work of an individual enumerator and that's another reason there's no back end. >> i under we ve no questions on the phone. we have time for just a couple

more questions. behind max. >> nicholas fallacy with cns news. i want to ask you if -- was the accuracy of the census overall affected at all by the i.t. issues in a were reported continuously by the inspector general? >> we don't have any evidence that there were quality impacts on this. i can tell you there were scary moments among the management team. this is a great team. we meet every day at 4:30 and it a room where decisions are made based on data. but there were moments when the software was fragile that those meetings were tension filled. i think if there are impacts on that, there's some cost impacts at the local census office level because we had to employ people in night thists at times to get

datachecked in. we don't have any evidence that it harmed the quality of the data we've received, the problem was really in throughput of getting completed forms into the processing centers that w the major concern. so we'll know. one of the things we're doing is a big analytic task of checking what happened to every case in the universe, basically. and it will be interesting to see -- this will take a while, many months of analysis, to ask the question about whether cases that were held up in this backlog that occurred early in the system have any different quality aspects than those that were handled the later. we'll know eventually but so far we have no signals that there was a big quality or any quality hit because of this. >> we have one final question.

you haven't asked a question yet, please. >> hi, i'm jessica redder from u.s. news. i'm just wondering if it's possible to get any preliminary estimates before the december 32 1st release date? >> you mean estimates of population count. >> reapportionate. >> no, i don't think so. this is a heavily guarded sret for a lot of different reasons. the next news conference will take you through all the things we do to make sure weot the data right. this is going to take all fall. you'll be astounded at how careful we are with every record. so when we release the counts, that will be the first release. we'll know the counts a little before you know the counts but we won't give you any early estimates despite great test in that. >> okay. thank you, with that, we'll call this to a close. let me remind everyone that you can get a media kit online at

www.census.g www.census.gov. you can also go to 2010census.gov for some information as well. you can call the public information. 301-763-3691. thank you for attending. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> and in the may and won her bid to give the republics send anonymous need -- 0 lead in the may and -- linda mcmahon won her bid to be the republican senate nominee in connecticut.

>> that really warms my heart because i am a sucker for kids. [laughter] how want to thank all of you for being here tonight, and a special thanks to my family, some of whom could not be here, my hands, my tireless staff, and

to all the volunteers, all of many of you and all of you. certainly without the efforts of all of our volunteers, i would not be standing here tonight having completed two rounds of the three that we have to go. i also tonight want to thank my opponents who ran a terrific races and their loyal supporters worked their hearts out for candidates in whom they really believed. it has this was a very competitive, compassionate, and heartfelt campaign, but at the end of the day we are all part of the republican family, the connecticut family.

as we all know, families to not always get along and they do not always agree. but in the end, they do stand together. whatever of our disagreements have been in this primary, i want to make one thing clear. our party, our state, and our country owes mr. simmons an enormous debt of gratitude for his service. he also allowed that to peter shift, who has brought enormous clarity and passion to the issues of the economy and individual rights. tonight i think i speak for

every the republican in this state in inviting robb and peter to join us as we fight to when he this seek all the people of connecticut -- to win this seat for all the people of connecticut. since the day we started this campaign, and the support of the voters of connecticut is not bestowed by the establishment or the pundits or the media. it is not a birthright. it cannot be bought. it needs to be earned. and i'm humble to have earned your support. honored to be your republican nomination for the united states senate from connecticut.

[linda, linda, linda! [laughter] >> we began this campaign almost 11 months ago today, and since then, have crisscrossed the state and then over to 650 events, i had been to many of the towns and cities, and had some of the most incredible experiences meeting and talking with all the people of connecticut. i have not been everywhere yet if but i hope in the next few weeks prior to the election in november that i will get you more and more cities and meet more and more of the wonderful people of connecticut.

i want to understand your problems and your concerns, and i want to hear about them firsthand. like someone else, i will not have to go to vancouver 3,000 miles away to know about it. i understand that there are people who are hurting, because i see it all around our state. i know what that feels like because i have been there. people ask me every day, linda, why did you decide to run for the united states senate? and i can tell you is because i had a great fear that the american dream was in the greatest jeopardy that he had ever been in our lifetime, and i did not want to lose that opportunity for the american dream for our children and our grandchildren.

i am alarmed by the reckless spending, massive debt, and tax increases coming in from washington. it is suffocating our small businesses and killing our jobs. i believe the direction in which our leaders are taking are threatening not only our well- being, but also the well being of those next generations to come. i did you agree with me the answer is not bigger government but smaller government. the answer is not another million dollars in stimulus spending, it is less spending. the answer is not higher taxes

on job creators, it is lower taxes. the great communicator ronald reagan had it right. but this president and this congress have it wrong. the path on which they are leading us is not working. folks, i get it. i understand that experience because i have lifted. i get the impact that higher taxes, increased regulation, and the continuing uncertainty that small businesses are trying to work within today, and i understand how that is negatively impacting them. they're trying to keep their doors open and having a difficult time of it.

that kind of experience is sorely lacking in washington and we're going to send the senator to washington who understands that. for the first time in decades, all we're going to send a republican senator to washington. >> linda, linda, linda! >> i pledge to you today that i will be a voice for change. i will work with republicans, democrats, an independent to forge consensus and drive a new direction.

his campaign has never been about the pundits how for the establishment. this campaign is about you. and i promise you, and i will not ever forget that you hired me and that i work for you. from the bottom of my heart for everything you have done in this campaign, but it starts tonight and it starts with all of you. thank you very much and god bless you.

>> on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," we would get an update on primary election results in connecticut and georgia. then dave wenhold talks about lobbying disclosure rules. and later, a conversation on u.s. energy policy. "washington journal" each morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> disease and networks provide coverage of politics, nonfiction books, and american history. it is all available to you on television, a radio, online, and on social media networking sites. get our content any time on our c-span video library. we bring our resources to your community. it is washington your way, the c-span network.

now available in more than 100 million homes, created by cable, provided as a public service. >> president obama signed a state aid package earlier after it cleared the house of representatives. it includes $10 billion to create an retained teacher jobs, and $16 million for medicaid. here is a portion of that house the day. -- that house debate. mr. obey: madam speaker, today we have heard from our friends on the minority side an ample amount of sarcasm and cynicism and partisan hyperbole mixed in with fiction. i hope we can cut through that today. today we can either sit frozen in the ice of our indifferences, franklin

roosevelt once said, or we can take action to help states meet their safety net obligations and to protect our children's education by keep teachers in the classroom while we continue to claw our way back from the most devastating economic crisis since the great depression. last year the first job recovery package we recognized two reasons for providing federal aid to states and school districts. the first was to reduce the human carnage that occurs when we take kids off health care coverage or let their education suffer because of teacher layoffs. the second was that standing by while states, localities and school boards cut essential investments and services and impose significant new taxes will cripple the ability of the economy to grow and cause additional job weakness in both private and public sectors. it is important, madam speaker, to remember how we got here.

the failed economic policies of the previous eight years obliterated budget surpluses inherited from president clinton. federal oversight, the wall street banks was gutted allowing them to morph into casinos and allowing the economy into catastrophic collapse. that produced monthly losses of 750,000 jobs in each of the last three months of the bush administration. we now know that the economic crisis was even deeper and more broad than we initially expected. while the economy has improved, the effect of the recession are not yet behind us. they are still affecting people's lives and livelihoods. three times before today in december, in may and in july we tried to take additional actions to help the problems and three times we were blocked. now today we have this much-reduced bill to provide

$10 billion in funding to save somewhere around 160,000 education jobs and $16 billion in health assistance to the states. our friends in the minority accuse us of including job-killing tax increases to pay for it. that's ridiculous. the bill closes a tax loophole that encourages companies to ship jobs overseas. not only will that help pay for this package, it will fix a hole in the tax code that is rewarding companies for sending american jobs elsewhere. still, others, including the leadership of the minority, call this a special interest bailout. too bad, i say. since when do we regard america's kids as a special interest group? i yield myself -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. obey: two additional minutes. you don't get a second chance to educate kids. we should not fool ourselves

into thinking that this package will do as much as we ought to be doing to ease the squeeze on the national economy. we will impartially offset with this bill the human wreckage caused by the recession, but we will have not done nothing to address the macroreality that the economy is still incredibly weak. this bill will soften the blow of state budget cutbacks, but these very cutbacks will have a negative and neutralizing effect on the federal fiscal stimulus in the first place. this is a far less dramatic action than that the nation needs to recover from the recession, but this aid is long overdue and the time for arguing has past. the cutback in food stamps in the bill are plain wrong, but face it, the minority party in the senate is using the rules of the senate to give them the functional equivalent of the

majority's ability to determine the agenda of that body. and they have decided to follow the rule over rule approach of governance blocking every action they can, and in this case, delaying action to the point of complete confusion. our nation's kids are getting ready to go back to school. they need this help now and adequate as it is, i urge all members to vote yes to give it to them. it's the least we should do. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. lewis: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, states across america have as their number one responsibility the education of our young. if the states cannot allocate their own spending in order to carry out that top responsibility we will never solve the problem of the bailout from uncle sam. a multibillion dollar bailout today will set the stage for

nationalized education tomorrow. that will surely push our economy over the cliff of bankruptcy. why are we talking with each other here today? we should be meeting with our constituents, holding town hall meetings and listening to what's on the hearts and minds of our voters. the folks in my district have made their concerns very clear. they're saying, jerry, tell those big spending politicians in washington to stop spending our money. but the democrat majority is so addicted to spending that they've called congress back just to vote on yet another multibillion dollar bailout. i'm scratching my head because in the past few -- the past few months this congress has done virtually none of the work that the voters sent us here to do. we haven't passed a budget. we haven't funded defense and

homeland security. we made our troops wait months before passing funds to support their fight against international terrorism. the majority leadership calls the bill before us a major accomplishment. they hope it will please teachers' unions and inspire the krattic base two months before the -- democratic base two months before the november election. i believe most voters will see it for what it is, further evidence that this congress has a spending problem. to the voters, the 111th congress will go down in history as the bailout congress . the congress has all right spent $75 billion in stimulus dollars to help states with education. that was supposed to be a one-time temporary bailout approved by the american reinvestment and recovery act. i am very proud of the fact

that three of my four children are teachers. they work very hard to provide quality education in the classroom. they know that schools should be run by parents, teachers and local communities. the more we approve these bailouts the more federal government takes over that role. mr. speaker, i know that my democrat colleagues say that this legislation is, quote, fully paid for. on the other hand, the bill spends the entire $26 billion in just two years while the offsets take place over 10 years. the so-called offsets in this legislation are produced by almost a $10 million billion increase in taxes, $13.4 billion in reductions and two programs that are popular with democrat leaders, that is the food stamp program and renewable energy projects. some democrat leaders have

already pledged to restore funding to these programs. some of these so-called cuts could be eliminated as soon as the member in a lame-duck session. mr. speaker, beware of a lame-duck session called by this congress. i want to emphasize this again to my colleagues. the voters do not want us to throw money, more money at our nation's problems. yet, that is exactly what this bill does. it's time, mr. speaker, to put uncle sam on a diet and put an end to the congressional spending spree. i urge a no vote on this legislation and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. obey: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for wo minutes. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding and i want to thank him for his persistence and pushing this legislation and finally to have this legislation back from the senate today so we can help school districts. mr. miller: the scandals that

were permitted under the bush administration cost middle-class families trillions of dollars in the loss of wealth, in their pension plans, in their jobs, in the value of their homes. now, the question is, were there not schoolchildren in this nation be victims of financial scandals that were tolerated and whether or not these school districts that have had the revenues that they rery on to fund the schools that -- rely on to fund the schools that have been ripped away because of the loss of sales tax, because of the loss of income tax, because of the results of those scandals? the answer to this bill is no, that in fact we should help school districts make sure that children can get a first-class education, that they don't lose a year of education, a year of education because of those financial scandals that happened on the watch of the past administration, as the banks on wall street ran amuck. so we should pass this bill and make sure those 160,000 teachers can return to the

classroom. i'd like to ask the gentleman a question. it's my understanding, chairman, under this legislation that when the governor makes application for these funds under the bill the governor -- the secretary can require the governor to choose one of two formulas, the state allocation formula or the title 1 formula and to post that formula so school districts would then be able to know their allocation as soon as possible so they can start to rehire people and start to reduce class sizes or other decisions that school boards hope to make to provide for that education, is that your understanding that that's permitted under this legislation? mr. obey: that's the committee's intent. mr. miller: so the governor would put that in the application to clear the formula and post that so school districts will be on the earliest possible -- mr. obey: that's the intent. mr. miller: thank you. you sent this bill to the house senate last year. you sent it three times last year. thank you again for your persistence and your work on

this issue. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. lewis: madam speaker, i'm proud to yield two minutes to the former chairman of the education committee, now the senior republican on our armed services, buck mckeon of california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. mckeon: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mckeon: i thank the gentleman for yielding. today i rise in opposition to this measure which will increase domestic spending at the expense of national security. specifically, the federal government will spend $10 billion for this teacher bailout paid in part with a $3.3 billion cut in defense programs. . i can assure you the department of defense has need of these funds, including unfunded requirements related to our operations in iraq and offing. i say this fully aware of the needs of our educational system. as the former chairman and ranking member of education and labor. those in favor of this bill

will say that this money was previously identified by the department of defense as unspent and available for higher priorities. but this argument misses two larger points. first, as yesterday's military times observed, diverting money from the defense budget to ed education-education programs would eliminate any opportunity for the defense department or congress to take unobligated money from one defense program to spend on another defense program. second, rescissions to the defense budget this late in the fiscal year are problematic and disruppive to operations. as the department of defense comp toller has told the armed services committee, this will require the defense restructure or postpone programs and in some cases the money is no longer available in these accounts. finally, i remain concerned that this is the beginning of a slippery slope. the secretary of defense has initiated an ongoing effort to generate $100 billion in

savings within the department of defense over the next five years. the only secretary that's been asked to do this. my ultimate concern is that these savings will not be reinvested into america's defense requirements but will be harvested by congressional democrats for new domestic spending and entitlement programs. we see today this is already happening. congressional democrats with the full support of the white house are taking critical defense funding to pay for a michigan, mr. camp, each for 10 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i yield myself two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: the minority comes here and talks about wishing to be back at a jobs fair for those who are unemployed looking for work. having voted against continuing unemployment compensation for those out of work and looking for it. the minority comes here talking about help for small business, having voted against democratic

bills to help small business. on this bill this is not an increase in taxes on job creation. what it is is closing a tax loophole, used by some, to escape taxes and thereby encoaging them to ship jobs overseas. purely and simply. this is the fact. u.s. companies that operate overseas owe taxes when they return that income to the u.s. they get a foreign tax credit for the tes they pay overseas. what some companies are doing is using those tax credits not against income brought back home but against income obtained elsewhere. this is a tax loophole, purely

and simply. in closing a tax loophole, used by a few, is fair taxation, policy for everybody else. that's what the people of this country demand. close tax loopholes that help shift jobs overseas. we are doing just that in this bill as we have done in several othe in the house of representatives. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. and ask unanimous consent to revise and exten the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. camp: last friday we learned th unemployment rate is still at 9.5%. and it would be much higher if the official calculations also looked at the growing number of americans who have become so discouraged they have given up looking for work.

so while congress should be here trying to find ways to g americans back to work, we are here instead to complete action on another extension of stimulus that will also do nothing to reduce the unemployment rate in this country. in fact, this bill and the tax increases in it will hurt job creation. according to the meth tholgi of dr. christina roemer, the president's chief economic advisor, the tax increases in this bill will destroy over 140,000 americans jobs. in an open letter to congress this week, the national association of manufacturers warned, and i quote, imposing $9.6 billion in tax increases on these companies will jeopardize theobf american manufacturing employees and stifle our fragile economy, end quote. similarly, the u.s. chamr of commerce warned they would impose draconian tax increases on american wordwide -- worldwide companies that would hinder job creation, decrease the competitiveness of american

businesses, and deter economic growth. these tax increases ar a mistake and as i noted during debate two weeks ago, most of these have never been the subject of any committee hearing or markup. it's impossible -- it is possible that upon review some of these provisions might make sense if packaged with other changes to address the facts that our corporate tax rate is soon-to-be the highest among all industrialized nations. our international tax system is deeply flawed and our tax code is increasingly putting our companies and their employees at a tremendous competitive disadvantage. but we never got the opportunity to hearrom the american employers or to offer any amendments. it's truly a disappointing breakdown of the committee system which is supposed to ensure that policies are vetted and reviewed before passage. i also want to mention the phantom tax increases that aren't in this bill but will soon see. the speaker has already

indicated she opposes two of the spending offsets included in this bill, one relates to food stamps, the other is a cut in funding for renewable energy spending programs. together those items total $13.4 billion, more than half the total offsets in the bill. next month when the house considers some other legislation, don't be surprised to see another $13 billion in higher taxes to preven those spending cuts. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from texas, who has been a champion on the issue of tax loopholes, mr. doggett, a member of the ways and means committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: today we close international tax loopholes and open more educational opportunity. last year in texas governor perry and his cohorts

misdirected $3.2 billion in federal aid to education simply to replace state education commitmes leaving our schools not one dime better off than if we never offered them that federal aid to education in the first place. given this very unfortunate history for our school children, and the many unique educational challenges that texas faces, we have good reason to include in this legislation texas specific safeguards to prevent more such shen nanny begans. with a formula that ensures that this year federal education aid will get directly to our local schools. our approach enjoys the support of school trustees, of superintendents, of principles, of teachers. we have been listening across texas to our parents at this time of excitement as so many young people are going back to young people are going back to school, some for the first