time, and we are offering those families and those local schools the important support they need for local education. paying for every dime of it. and we are supporting those local education decisions by local school trustees to achieve quality education free of interference from the state. we are demanding accountability from the state of texas. for some reason accountability seems like a good concept for everyone except some republican leaders and some international corporate tax avoiders. i want to be sure that there's a level playing field for taxpayers so that the small business down the street that could face a property tax increase if we don't have adequate support for education, that that business isn't -- doesn't continue to have to pay a much higher rate than some international corporate tax group that has all the fancy

c.p.a.'s to avoid paying its fair share. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognid. mr. camp: i yield on minute to the distinguished member from tennessee. the eaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam speaker. i think it is important for us to realize what is happening here today. i do oppose the legislation that the majority is bringing forward today. today we are being asked to raise taxes for 10 years in order to pay for medicaid for six months. now, think about that. only here in washington would an action like that seem to make sense or even be thought to be sustainable. 10 years to pay for six months. now, this is why the people across this natio oppose this type action. and i think if my friends were home listening instead of here in d.c. spending some more, that what they would hear from people is they are sick and tired, they have really gotten

their fill of continuing to tax, continuing to spend, robbing peter to pay paul, and going through this process of kicking the can down the road but not addressing the problem. the spending is out of control. the american ople are overtaxed, this government is overspent and it is time that we demand accountability. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: it's now my true pleasure to yield one minute to our very distinguished majority leader, the colleague from the great state omaryland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. hoyer: i thank my friend for yielding. the hour is late. members have come back, properly so, to address an issue that we addressed months ago. the senate sent it to us. and we were gone. we thought it our responsibility to ask members

to come back because if we hadn't come back, if we didn't pass this bill, what would happen? 160,000 teachers would be at risk of being laid off and probably would be laid off. what would that mean? it would mean larger class sizes for teachers to deal with. children not receiving the kind of education that they need. they need to be competitive in the global marketpce. what might have also happened? some 160,000 police and fire personnel, emergency response teams may have had to be laid off. that's why we came back. that's why we believe this is so important. and how have we paid for this? because we do not add a nickel to the national debt, notwithstanding the previous speaker. we paid for this because we believe if we are going to invest in our future, we also are going to pay for it. not ask our grandchildren to pay for it. now that's a concept that was

jettisoned under republican leadership but we re-established it. so we pay for this. one of the ways we pay for it is to ask people, look, if you are going to send jobs overseas, we are not going to give you a tax break. i know there's some apparently not for that and they are going to vote against this bill. my view is what we are doing is making sure that our children have the proper education that they need. making sure that our communities are safe and, yes, making sure that we try to keep every job in america so that we can continue to make things in america so people can make it in america. that's what this bill is all about. the hour's late. i think everyone knows the issue. and i ask my colleagues vote for this critical piece of legislation. keep our teachers, our police, our fire personnel on the job.

that's why the senate passed this bill with over 60% majority in a bipartisan vote. let's foow suit. pass this bill. make america better. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: at this time i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman fm florida. the speaker prtempore: the gentlewoman from florida is recognized for two minutes. ms. brown-waite: i thank the gentleman. madam speaker, congress adjourned without doing anything useful over the last year and a half to get this economy turned around. america knows it. sadly this bill isn't going to change that fact. my colleagues know that they bankrupted the states with obamacare and they know full well this won't be the last time the federal government borrows money to bail out the states. as for the education jobs

funding, the money provided in the stimulus, the $54 billion, provided in the stimulus was supposed to do the trick,but like the stimulus as a whole, it just didn't work, did it? this $10 billion is a transparent handout to the teacher's union who, not only tip to insist on greater pay, but actually got their democrat buddies to put it in the bill. if states take the money, their hands are actually tied on making a tough budget decision choices. including pay. as a result, the states will be back here again and very soon asking for more federal bailouts. which the current majority will probably be very happy to give to them. . my docrat colleagues are incredibly generous when it comes to spending ofrpblt p.m.

that's other people's money. the problem is, the other people, the taxpers in our country, already owe $130,000 apiece in federal debt. that's why the american people are fed up. finally, any claim that the bill is paid for, and i'm putting that in quote, paid for is utterly nonsense. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle know that. this bill before us represents another $14 billion in sham accounting gimmicks that the majority cannot resist using. never mind that you used the money that tax revenues several times to pay for three different spending bills. we all know that the $14 billion in food stamp cuts will never actually -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. brown-waite: i thank the gentleman from michigan. we all know the $14 billion in food stamp cuts will never actually really take place so it is a sham, can't it, folks?

just like the doc fix and everything else you kick the can down the road far enough so far, in fact that it won't have to be counted in today's budget. the bailouts must end. the borrowing must end. the gimmicks must end. and if we are evergain to have a competitive country, the relentless tax increases on job creators also must end. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from ohio, ms. kilroy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. ms. kilroy: thank you. across america, summer is coming to an end and -- and parents are thinking about their children's return to the school. they have hopes and dreams for their children's future and

they want them to succeed in school, to be able to go to college and get a good job in a competitive global economy and they know they need a dedicated teach for the that classroom guiding their children's learning. but school boards across the country have been making cuts and laying off teachers. schools in ohio have been facing cuts. schools have seen their revenue decline. schools also rely in state assistance --' rely on steat assistance and ohio, like many states, has budget problems. in ohio that means 5,500 teachers. it will provide the necessary funding for medicaid assistance as well, responding to urgent requests from republican and democratic governors. in order to pay for this bill, we are closing tax loophole that was been abused that have sent jobs overseas. not only will it help pay to

keep teachers in the looseroom, wit ill end a job drain and help us keep jobs in america. why are my colleagues so opposed? they don't seem to understand that investing in our nation's future means investing in our nation's schools. they call it children's special interest. children don't have special lobbyists like wall street does they need us to stand up for them. but those who have been enjoying tax loopholes are special interests with those lobbyists. perhaps opponents of this bill are listening to them. that's the wrong way to go. that's the way of the past. it's time to end business as usual and politics as usual and stand up for america's workers and stand up for america to keep jobs here and it's time to stand for america's children and amica's teachers and america's schools. it's timto keep our communities safe and keep firefighters and police i -- i

thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman mr. camp is recognized. mr. camp: i'm prepeered to reserve or prepared to close if the gentleman has no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has the right to close. mr. levin: if the gentleman is inquirinwhether we have one more speaker other othan to close, the answer is no. mr. camp, why don't you close and then our speaker will close. mr. camp: thank you. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: i have before my letters from the chamber of commerce, the business round table as well as pace, promote america's competitive edge, and the u.s. chamber of commerce is the rld's largest business federation, representing more than three million business organizations of every size. they strongly support the

legislation because it would place draconian tax increases on the companies and deter economic growth in the jobs that come from that. likewise, the national association of manufacturers, the nation's largest industrial trade association, representing small and large manufacturers in every industrial sector in all 50 state they also oppose this legislation. they represent 22 million workers in the united states, more than 19% of the private sector work force. and 50% of -- and 53% of all manufacturing employees are employed by companies that have operations overseas and they oppose the tax increases because it will jeopardize the jobs of american manufacturing employees and stifle this very fragile economy. likewise the business round table, which again is an association that represents more than 12 million employees, has also sent a letter opposing

this legislation because they say that this legislation will again only make matters worse, make it more difficult for u.s. companies to compete in the world economy and then actually puts u.s. jobs at stake because of that. and again, pace, which represents more than 63 million american jobs that depend on the competitiveness of american employers worldwide says that at a time when other countries are taking steps to attract business, this legislation actually does -- sends the exact opposite message, discourages investment in the u.s. and job creation here in the u.s. i ask unanimous consent to submit these letters for the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. camp: i thank it's unfortunate that again here on the floor i'm having to submit these letters here when actually the appropriate place would be in the committee on ways and means. but unfortunately, the committee on ways and means has never had a hearing on these

provisions. never had a markup on this legislation. we've nod hat a process that's been open to employers to come forward before the committee and be heard on the record so that we might be able to adjust this or put this in context. as i said we need broad based international tax reform in the u.s. this piecemeal approach couldn't -- count work, hurt ours competitiveness and again, i think if we had a system where there was a committee hearing or mark yum, on review you might improve on this or find a way to address the serious issue that pretty soon our corporate tax rate will be the highest amon -- among all the industrialized nations and we could put on the record the deep flaws now intertional tax systems and the flaw nours tax coat. instead what we're doing today is rushing to the floor again without transparency, without hearings, certainly no opportunity for american employers to come forward and be heard on this issue.

we're putting them at a tremendous competitive disadvantage at a time when they need to be competing around the world for jobs. i urge opposition to this legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: t gentleman from mhigan. mr. levin: i yie the balance of the time to our distinguished speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. the speaker: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding and i thank the distinguished chairman of the ways and means committee for bringing this important legislation to the floor, working closely with the chair of the appropriations committee. this must be about the third time, mr. chairman, that we have brought this to the floor, the provision that repeals that provision of the law which rewards bunesses for sending jobs overseas. this is not a new subject to the congress. it is not a new subject to the

floor. thanks to your leadership. today, mr. speaker -- madam speaker, we have an opportunity to create jobs. the press of a button, each of us will play a role in creating over 300,000 jobs. saving over 300,000 jobs across the country. they're jobs, these people are consumers, it's important to our economy that they are employed. it goes well beyond that, to jobs for teachers, the education of our children, it's about the innovation of our nation, it's bigger than just a job. it's about the future. these are jobs that firefighters and police officers, about the safe i have to our neighborhoods and our communities. where our children can thrive. it's about nurses and health care providers to keep our country strong in terms of the health and well being of the

american people. it's about the stability of state budgets. economists have told us that if this legislation were not passed and these jobs are not saved and the budgets of the states were not stabilized, we would go into another deep cession like the one we herited from the previous administration and it would be a much longer path out of that recession. so i thank the distinguished chairman for bringing us to the floor with this legislation. i thank the members on both sides of the aisle for respond so quickly to the call to return to washington to save and create jobs for the american people. this is part -- this pay-for in this legislation which repeals the opportunity for businesses to get a tax break for sending jobs overseas is part of our make it in america agenda.

make it in america means manufacture it in america, it also enables people to make it in america. this is about innovation. innovation that's created here with our creativity and the benefit of our education system and our entrepreneurial spirit and the rest and then it says, when we have the idea and we create the innovation, that we create the jobs here to produce it to manufacture it and not to up-- to scale up overseas. invent here create the jobs overseas -- no. invent here, manufacture here, and market to the world. this is really important legislation also because of the way it is paid for. while i don't support all the provisions, i'm not happy about the taking money from our energy sector or from food stamps, but i hope we can, mr.

chairman, make that up in another way, i am very pleased about the funds that are obtained by repealing the provision to send jobs offshore. this legislation is fiscally responsible and fully paid for. it is -- it invests in america's communities, again by closing that tax loophole that allows corporations to ship jobs overseas. have i said that enough times? those who claim that the legislation will add to the deficit are simply wrong. in fact, according to the nonpartisan congressional budget office this bill reduces thdeficit by $1.4 billion. madam speaker, it's about time that we got this bill passed. we first passed itn the house last year, the end of last year. we passed it again, some features of it, in the spring, finally, the senate acted la week. finally, they were able to get

enough votes to pass it with a supermajority in the senate. the minute we anticipated that that would happen, the word went out that we called to the house to come back to washington so that not another day would go by without our, again, pressing that button for over 300,000 jobs. my grandchildren, ones who are in public school, went back to school yesterday. so this is -- it's about time, again, that we -- children in other parts of the country may be preparing to go back to school in another week or so, or the beginning of september. they cannot afford to wait for us to put teachers back into the classroom. that's why it was urgent that we act. communities struggling to keep police and firemen on the beat and firefighters on the job that were on the brink of

layoffs, this is good news for them. and tens of thousands of americans will not be joinin the ranks of thenemployed. so i thank the gentleman for -- again for his leadership, for making this part of what we have been doing for a matter of months, so we were ready, we were ready when the senate acted so that we an educate our children, innovate for our country prork tect our neighborhoods and our homes, as well as keep the american people healthy in a fiscally sound way. again, we are doing so in a way that helps people make it in america, and for that, i am grateful to the chairman and to my -- to the distinguished democratic leader, mr. hoyer, who coined the phrase, but for all of our members who work sod hard to make america -- to have america continue to be the

shining star, the lead competitor, the innovator, numberne, president kennedy when he launched a campaign to send a man to the moon and back safely, many, many decades ago, he said he would do so within 10 years and he did. but when he did it he said if we are to honor the vows of our founders, we must be first and therefore we intend to be first. this legislation is yet another piece of legislation that enables america to be first.

>> the house was called into special session to vote this week on the bill after it passed the senate last week. >> the vote was 247-161 with two republicans joining most democrats to vote in favor. this is about 20 minutes. >> this is really a very happy time for us because the house just passed legislation that has a direct relationship to the strength of our communities, to our children, the safety of our neighborhoods, the stability of the economy of our states and really points directly to our prospects for the future. and we voted to keep over 300,000 teachers, police officers, firefighters and private workers on the job. members of congress rushed here today as soon as we heard there was a prospect that the senate might be able to pass this

legislation this week, word went out, members were here in full force to press a button in support of those hundreds of thousands of jobs. [cheers and applause] >> we passed the bill in december, we passed it again in the spring and we're pleased the senate finally took the action that they did. this legislation was necessary, not just from a legislative standpoint, but because we heard from americans like those who join us here today, kathy johnson, a school board member from columbus, ohio, who knows the impact this investment will have on the education of the next generation of teachers,'s laurice royce from new jersey, she's worked on behalf of the children for the education of

our children for 24 users and understands the heartbreaking impact this economy had on teachers and students. stella edwards. raise your hand. stella edwards, president of the chesterfield virginia county council of p.t.a.'s and a powerful voice on behalf of keeping america's teachers in their classrooms. i know there are many p.t.a. families here, you can all wave so we can acknowledge the presence of some of our p.t.a. members here today. thank you, some in the audience. officer dave stokes of the annapolis police department understands what this investment will mean to the safety of our communities. and we're joined here today by children, our nation's future leaders and our innovators and most eloquent example of what we need to act, president kennedy called them our greatest resource and best hope for the future. i'd hike to thank all the advocates for children and

their families who are here today and why don't you give yourself a nice round of applause. today, again, we will create 300,000 jobs or save them, not just any jobs but jobs that are most significant in our country , a sense of community that our teachers, our police and firefighters, our health care workers bring and we will do it in a fiscally responsible way by closing costly tax loopholes that allow corporations to shift american jobs overseas. this is part of what our distinguished majority leader who calls the make it in america agenda, make it, manufacture it in america and make it so people can make it on their own in america, and we believe that repealing that provision that enables businesses to ship jobs overseas is a very important

step in that direction. i acknowledge mr. hoyer, our distinguished majority leader, the two chairmen who brought the bill to the floor today. chairman david obey, the chairman of the appropriations committee, thank you, mr. obey. then the bill was passed on to the ways and means committee chairman, chairman levin who brought this tax provision to the bill on a number of occasions, has mr. obey brought the education and first responders, and police a number of times as well and here joined by a chair of our policy committee but also the chair of the education and work force committee who's been a fighter for keeping these teachers on the job, chairman george miller. he is joined, before you aplayed for him, i want you to also acknowledge a member of this committee, the chairman of subcommittee on elementary, secondary and early childhood

education, elementary and secondary education, congressman -- chairman dale kildee of michigan. . now i'm pleased to introduce kathy johnson who will tell us what this legislation means to her school district in ohio. kathy? >> thank you. good afternoon. i am cathy johnson, a school board member from the southwestern city school district in ohio which educates nearly 21,000 students and is the sixth largest district in the state. in spite of a governor who champions education and a state legislature that worked with him to ps a comprehensive education reform law called the education opportunity act, the economy has forced school districts, including mine, to make budget cuts. in my case that includes two

school closures in the last school year and teacher and staff reductions for the current fiscal year. however, the house's passage of the education jobs fund today will enable school districts like southwestern city schools to maintain key services that help advance student achievement. for example, my district can benefit from today's legislation as we look to hire teachers and school personnel to implement intervention programs and other reforms for students who need added support to ensure they receive the help that will allow them to be successful. the education jobs fund will help my district maintain the continuity for core instruction that is needed with appropriate class sizes and an enriched curriculum with support services for reading, math and the language arts. other districts are finalizing budgets this month, so assurance of knowing that funding will be available soon at the beginning of the school year to help mitigate layoffs

and also reinstate teachers and staff in some communities is of significant importance. opportunities for students will not be lost. this legislation will also help a number of school districts avoid or reduce the cost of borrowing funds in order to sustain programs and faculty. so on behalf of the southwestern city school district, the ohio school board association and the national school board association, i convey our sincere appreciation to speaker pelosi, the members of the house of representatives and the united states senate for your action to help save thousands of jobs for teachers and staff throughout the country. the education jobs fund represents strong support for our students and our schools as a vital investment in the economic recovery and american competitiveness. thank you very much. and i would now -- i would now

like to turn it over to lois welch from perthth and newboy, new jersey. >> good afternoon, everyone. i'm a school teacher in new jersey, i teach at the high school and my focus is special education and english language. thank you, speaker pelosi, and all members of the house who took a stand for students and education. for 20 years i worked in the public school as a secretary in perth amboy, new jersey and loved my time there. however, a number of years ago i made the decision to return to school and gain experience and education i needed to serve the students of my community in a new capacity. after seven years of attending school at night, working full time and raising three

children, i fulfilled my dream of becoming a high school teacher of special education students and proudly accepted a position at the perth amboy high school. sadly, only after two years of teaching in the school, along with i, myself, along with six other teachers in the district were given pink slips not to return in september. when teachers are laid off, the class sizes and the -- grow, students get no one-on-one attention, schools go without librarians and school nurses, important programs are cut, school days and weeks are shortened. to date, i'm the only one of eight teachers in our district who received a pink slip in june that is record for

september. none of my colleagues at perth amboy high school have been so fortunate. for more than 75 of my colleagues, their future is in limbo and it's not just about them. that is,'s 5 fewer teachers -- that is, 75 fewer teachers will be available in the classroom when school reopens in september. it doesn't give our kids the fundamental skills they need to succeed in the global community. i'm here today to speak for them and the children that we love to teach. the money approved by the house today will allow our district to rehire and bring more of our colleagues back into the classroom where they actually belong. i am thankful to our representatives for passing this bill which is not -- which

is a shot in the arm for public education across the country. thank you for putting our children first. >> i would like to turn it over to stella edwards from chesterfield. >> thank you for allowing me to join you here today. hello, my name is stella edwards. i'm the president of the chesterfield county council of p.t.a.'s where i work with nearly 40,000 members and provide training on family engagement and education and advocate for our local school divisions on education reforms to ensure academic success. i have served the virginia p.t.a. for over 17 years and i'm also a proud member of the national p.t.a. the largest volunteer child

advocacy organization in this nation, the national p.t.a. was created to meet a profound challenge to better the lives of children, and today p.t.a. continues to flourish because we've never lost sight of our goal. to change the lives of children across this great nation to be a better place for them to live. my role in p.t.a. is informed by the many other hats i wear day to day as a mother, a wife, a substitute teacher, a community organizer and former united states army officer. each of these pages in my own personal history has led me to give a great understanding -- a better understanding to the unique and critical role that parents and teachers working together can have on the lives of our children. and that's why i'm here today. last week the senate passed a comprehensive job package that includes $10 billion in funding to prevent the layoffs of

approximate 10,000 teachers. today i'm proud to stand along with speaker pelosi and others that were vital in this effort in order to celebrate the passage in the house of representatives. i commend the members of the house for coming back into session to pass this education funding package and finish their unfinished business, the business of children's education. our children, my children, your child, and your neighbor's child. what does this all mean? over the last two years, chesterfield county public school division has laid off approximate 500 teachers and classroom support personnel. this law being signed today means that they and thousands of other teachers around this country will be able to step out of those unemployment lines and back into the classroom where they belong. we see that the national p.t.a.

has for a long, long time said families and teachers and school districts and communities all have a shared responsibility to work together to close the achievement gap that affects so many of our communities. it's simple, really, children benefit, as we all know, for having engaged families in their lives. in fact, we now know family involvement is one of the strongest predictors of children's school success and that families play a vital role in a child's cognitive, their social, and their emotional development. this is from birth to adolescence, and teachers. the very same teachers whose jobs need to be saved know and understand and continue to emphasize the importance of family engagement in education. i want to thank congress for protecting these teachers, for protecting the jobs and protecting our children from

overcrowded classrooms which we all know will negatively affect their learning. i want to thank you again for having me. >> in her remarks stella asked the question, what does this all mean? what this all means, as she described, is that this is good news for children. when people ask me what are the three most important issues facing the congress, i always say the same thing, our children, our children, our children. many of the leaders that you see here have been champions for our children, their health, and that is affected by the health care workers who we put back to work, their education, we've heard our distinguished speakers, cathy johnson and stella and others speak to what this will do to our children's education, safe and clean neighborhoods in which they can thrive.

i'm so pleased we have officer dave stokes here representing the first responders, the people who keep our neighborhoods safe and have us have an intact sense of community. for their health, education, the safety and security of their homes and neighborhoods and the economic security of their families. and by the -- by the offset that is in this bill to he peel a decision that en-- repeal a decision that enables businesses to send jobs overseas, we appeal that and as steny says, make it in america, and we want to manufacture it in america. let's bring those jobs home. while that speaks to the economic security of our children. i want to commend leader reid and members of the senate for the action that they took. i'm so proud of what the house

of representatives has done today and i'm very honored now to sign this important legislation so relevant to the lives of america's families, so important to our sense of community. i just want the children to know, after i sign the bill, our distinguished clerk of the house will make sure that the signatures are in order in the house and the senate and then she will personally deliver it to the president of the united states for his signature which will be later this afternoon. so before you probably get home this evening this will be the law of the land. cause for celebration. >> this is how it is. this is the bill. all of this is the bill.

it goes on and on. it's written on parchment special -- parchment paper, special punchment paper. i'll sign the bill here. >> you're so excited to sign this. >> i rushed right into it. then we'll send it over to the president and he will sign the bill. not yet because i have to use these pens here. just as in inauguration day, the president uses pennsylvania avenue to come to the capitol to be inaugurated, today we will send this bill up to

pennsylvania avenue back to the white house for our president barack obama to sign it into law. >> i just want to say something about the president because education has been such a key issue for the president that i want to thank him for his extraordinary leadership in making today possible as well, both with his vision, his leadership and now today with his signature. thank you all. >> thank you, folks.

>> thank you. >> did i give you one? all right. >> thank you all very much.

>> now house republicans speaking with reporters before the debate on the medicaid and education jobs bill. g.o.p. leaders talk about their -- >> good morning.

>> welcome back to washington. house republicans just completed a meeting of the house republican conference and we are prepared to go to the floor on behalf of the american people and house republicans will vigorously oppose this latest installment of the failed democratic policies of stimulus, bailouts, and higher taxes as a means of economic growth. on a personal level, i must tell you i'm deeply conflicted today. i know my duties are here in washington, and it's a privilege to discharge them, but today as we speak, hundreds of my constituents who are struggling in this economy are gathered at the sixth congressional district job fair. we have 65 employers of ball

state university campus, people are there looking for opportunities and it grieves my heart that i have to be here on the floor of the congress when i could be there encouraging hoosier families that are out of work and struggling. the truth is it i was walking in those hallways i would hear what i hear back home is that washington, d.c. just doesn't get it. the american people know we can't borrow and spin and -- spend and bail our way or tax our way back to a growing community. the people i serve in eastern indiana saw a 12% unemployment in muncie a year ago and it's 12% today. they're struggling under the weight of these failed policies and they long for leadership in washington, d.c. that will do something different. house republicans are determined to continue to oppose efforts to pass the national energy tax or to allow the largest tax increase in american history to take effect in january. determined to fight for fiscal discipline in washington, d.c.

and pro growth policies to put those indiana families back to works. >> in eastern washington, moms, dads, farmers, small businesses keep asking me, is anyone in d.c. listening? does anyone get it? and they're most angry and frustrated with the fact they continue to see washington wasting money and the continued bailouts. what are we doing today? we're continuing the bailouts. the leadership in congress seem to forget we have a $13 trillion federal debt, but american families don't forget that and they know in their own households and businesses they've had to tighten their belts and cut spending and make us to do likewise instead of continuing to add to the debt for our children and grandchildren. today is really demonstrative of the majority's priorities in governing this country.

you've got to ask why are we being brought back for this so-called emergency session. are we being brought back to cut taxes and ensure that those tax hikes don't go into effect? no. are we being brought back to ensure that we don't increase the federal deficit by jacking up spending? no. are we being brought back to maybe look at the success of a mission being executed in afghanistan and iraq? no. we're being brought back to essentially vote on the extension of the stimulus bill, which has been an utter failure even by the administration's own standards. so for the american people looking today as to what is going on in washington, i think this is clear evidence of the fact there is a huge divide in terms of the vision that belongs to each party. >> you know, the american people are speaking out in

record numbers. last week i had the opportunity to be in president district, to talk with my constituents and to listen to them, what they repeatedly say is the bailouts have to stop. no more bailouts. they want to make certain that congress is listening and that congress is taking action. they know what is required for jobs growth to take place and they know that what they're seeing coming from washington is the exact opposite. they do not want to see more government control, more government interference, higher taxes. they want the federal government spending to stop and they want the jobs growth to take place. >> you've already heard about this fiscal i had irresponsible bailout with another job killing tax increase. reportedly it's to help teachers but less than two years ago the democrats put

$100 billion in education to help teachers but that didn't create new permanent jobs and this additional $10 billion won't do it either. it will make the teachers unions happy but it won't make teaching in schools better. this does nothing to fix the staffing policies, which is last hired, first fired much supported by the teachers union. we ought to be improving education, not just dumping more .into it we don't have. >> i'll remind all of you that this year the federal government is going to borrow 43 cents for every dollar the federal government spends. think about that. almost half of the money that's going to be spent this year has to be borrowed from our kids and our grandkids. what are they going to do? they're going to make it worse. this bailout to the teachers unions is some of the most irresponsible policy that i've seen. the american people are screaming at the top of their

lunges, stop. and washington continues to spend, spend, spend. well, listen, now, i've been around my district and i can tell you -- i've been around a few other districts. the american people know that it's time for the spenders to go and to have real fiscal responsibility here in washington, d.c. >> i was wondering if the republicans are offering any kind of help to the states? is it just that they can cut their budgets, would you support new revenue sources? >> we are broke. we do not have the money to bail out the states. it's time for them to get their arms around their own problems and not look to washington to bail them out. thanks. >> you talking about a gambling tax or onlineup sales taxes? >> we don't have a revenue problem in washington, we have a spending problem and the american people know it. >> so this is the most urgent

-- >> i can't wait. >> so this is the most aggressive -- why did you guys even come back at all, why didn't you just boycott? >> because it's our responsibility to -- responsibility to come back here and fight against this irresponsible, fiscal policy. >> will you be able to stop it? >> thank you.

>> shockingly we heard the e.p.a. administrator say -- >> it would be outrageous for the congress to take up any major legislation during the lame duck session. >> look, the american people want us to use all our resources, they want -- [inaudible] >> this bill is paid for with

-- [inaudible] >> tax credits. how can republicans say it will add -- [inaudible] >> well, look, the bill today -- the suggestion that the bill today is paid for is tantamount to a family that has a certain amount of debt on one credit card and they transfer it to another credit card and say it's paid for. and to take what was already borrowed money in mnl spending and use borrowed money to pay for this is not fiscally responsible and it's just a continuation of the failed economic policies of this congress in the recent past and also, i hate to tell you that a $9 billion tax increase in the worst economy in 25 years is

just profoundly wrong. >> wasn't some of that emergency spending for food stamps promised on the idea there would be inflation -- [inaudible] >> apparently isn't going to happen. >> house republicans just simply believe that the jury is in on the failed economic policies of this administration and this congress. the american people know that the stimulus, the bailouts, the takeovers, the higher taxes have not resulted in economic growth or opportunities. the hallways at ball state university at this hour are filled with hundreds of hoosiers looking for jobs. the unemployment rate in muncie, indiana, today is the same as it was a year ago and yet congress is doing the same things they were doing a year and a half ago and the american people know what we've been doing isn't working and yet here we are again back on capitol hill doing more of the

same. >> you keep calling today's vote a vote for special interests. now, does the american public see teachers as special interests? >> well, look, i'm married to a school teacher who spent a lot of years in a public school classroom, so, look, the state bailout that's being considered on the floor today, benefiting teachers unions around the country, public employees around the country is what it is. but republicans are absolutely determined to stand against this more of the same stimulus spending, bailout approach of higher taxes and say enough is enough. >> you think the special session will -- [inaudible] >> i'll leave that to the public but i tell you what, calling us back to do one more bailout and one more tax increase might just be the

straw that breaks that majority of the camel's back. >> sir, is there a resolution on proposition 8, the proposition 8 resolution that -- >> on this morning's washington journal, we'll get an update on primary election results in colorado, connecticut and georgia. john mcardle of c.q. politics joins us and david wenhold talks about lobbying rules. and a conversation on u.s. energy policy with nicholas stavropoulos of the company washington grit. "washington journal" tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern. >> senator, not a bad desk either, daniel webster used to use it? >> daniel webster is not here. >> harry truman in 1939 saw this movie and hated this movie, just really despised it and at the time harry truman

was seen as from the spendergas machine and wonder if it was looking at him back at home. >> donald richie and his new book "the u.s. congress" sunday night on c-span's "q&a. >> i would tell you based on review of hundreds of tape, hundreds of hours, that they're not conspirators, they're not sitting there saying, you know, what do you think about this, how do you think that's going to play? they really don't know what's going on. >> this week marks the anniversary of the 1974 resignation of president richard nixon and almost 40 years later, watergate still resonates in american memory. a look back at the people, players and events that made history online in the c-span

video library, all free. it's history your way. >> new york democrat charlie rangel came to the house floor and asked members to expedite his ethics case. representative rangel was formally charged in july with 13 violations of house ethics rules. dia have indicated that t 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 anody that has encouraged me to speak here . and i 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 things, and somehow the chairman 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 congress with some degree of dignity. why, even some people said that the president had suggested that his life might be made easier if there was noharlie rangel, so-called, scandal. but i interpreted it another way. 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 house of 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 been offered 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 those of 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 explains that i think it's better at 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 judge if you're found guilty is going to send you away for 20 years. on the other hand you have no offenses, you're a first offender, and if you could just forget about this thg 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 wrg but i shouldn't have to -- anyway, he says, listen, we would never tell you to quit or resign. we are telling you that it would be easier for us that this is not an issue. but knowing the president, as i do, i think he believes dignity means that everybody is entitled to be judged for allegaons against them. we come back to this house because the speaker has called us here in order to make

certain that we provide resources for 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 cmittee, they work hard, it's a selfless job. god knows i wouldn't take it. i respect the time that they placed on this. and it's been almost 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 lawyer that 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, tho people that believe that their election is going to be dependent on me resigning, i like to encourage them to believe i think reblicans have given you enough reason to

get re-elected 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 can't get annoyed with them because there still may 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 a 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's going to rd the defense. and, of course, just the 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 a limit. so i told them, just put everything on hold. e what hpens when we meet here. and guess what? nothing happened. there's no agenda. so what they're saying is that, while 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 primary that 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 inteity of the congress with two years -- almost two years of investigation to say the miakes that rangel has made should be public and should have been public earlier than now. and i couldn'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 entitled to finding out who their congressman for 40 years is. who am i? am i corrupt? what did they offer me? and i want to be a role mol for new members and tell them the mistakes i made so they don't make.

and so there are a list of foundations that specialize in providing funds 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 that's there, almost by any means possible, 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 in 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 asking for a penny but still suggesting we should meet with these people because i knew that i would hope that they would convince them to provide money. now, a lot of people have done that. doesn't mean it's right. but the les have changed. and so there has to be a penalty for grabbing the wrong stationary and not really doing the right thing. but 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 legacyith your name up there well, we shoulgo 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 still there. then they say that i would

receive a luxurious offer. the sworn testiny was. they never told me. who in the heck needs an office with 40 years of service in the congress in a broken down building? and then they said, he we just put it in there so we encourage 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 can't imagine why in the cause of all of these things that governmt 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 made and they shouldn't have -- these things shouldn't have happened. but i can't walk away and have

you guys doing your campaign because i'm annoyed and the action is out there calling me corrupt and no ones coming forward saying rangel is not corrupt, rangel didn't make a nickel. no witness ever said there was eferential treatment given. and one guy that had an issue before the senate, staff, republicans, everybody said it never 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 with him 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 theconsidered two had 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 w york that there was no violation any law or rules. and what was the benefit? the benefit was that your colleague and friend was not sensitive to the fact th 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 isss, there's absolutely no excuse that's there. when accusations were made, i hired a forensic accountant and told them to check out what the heck is going on because i want to make certain that when i stand up and speak that it's true. well, after i found out it was far more serioushan 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 ody for not paying the attention to it 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 take the 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 charge me, and i

don't even know when the hearing's going to be, and i can't tell them i want one and t six lawyers, i don't want to offend the ethics committee. they are doing the best they can. but, hey, i'm in a position -- the speaker pro tempore: mbers and their staff will please take their conversations from the floor. the gentleman may resume. mr. rangel: that, hey, i'm 0 years old. all my 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 forhatever 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 going away. 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 tha 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 look at 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, if the newspers say anything, will have to wait two years before you can say, no comment. even in addition to that -- and in addition 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 darnest. i got papers where my lawyer tells me had ever reason 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 lawyers -- my friends say don't go to the floor. and i say what are you going to

do me? suppose i do get emotial? 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 raisinmoney, but that doesn't mean that i criticize you for 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 embarrassment, 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 partisanship is in the ethics committee? isn't historically the first time that the recommendations 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 rankg bipartisan guy to judge you? i don't expect answers today. and i know you're going home. 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 taed -- i mean in terms of settlement. my lawyers have. i haven't talked with any of the witnesses. and they had to expedite this case. in oth words, i have a

shorter time to prepare for reasons that they toll me challenge the ethics committee. 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 willing 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 because it's convenient that i disappear. because not all of you will be able 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 countor 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, especially newcomers, 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't have 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 hope some of you might

think if it doesn't work for me, that it may not work 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 would have a hearing. while you're saying i should resign, i do hope tha 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 wrong based on sworn testimony. 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 tng, 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 thugh 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 that 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 apologizing for it. and i don't think apologies mean this is a light matter.

it's very serious. but corruption? no evidence, nsuggestion 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 y 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 rangel against 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 sensitivto your feelings and the hard work by the ethics committee, but this has 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 wouldn'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 te 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 sorry, but that's one thing you can'take away from me. i hope you have a pleasant time while you're away. maybe, just 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 cntry. thank you for your attention.

the actions taken under the assumption that they will be tightening will actually make it easier for them to make their decision. it is complementary not competitive. there is a justifiable reason why they could be working against each other. >> i do not think so. to the extent that they take action, needed to improve the resilience of the financial system, it may make it possible

for the committee to make a decision. it would be removing the awkwardness of the trade-off. i do not think they will be unhappy with each other's decision. >> it is it right that you should share this? >> is it fair i should share it? i will not be making the decisions. they will be taken collectively by different bodies. i think there are different views on that. i think the government should share it. >> we will return to these issues in short. in addition to these, we also

have a european risk -- [unintelligible] these structures are very different. how can we negotiate with the u.k. and these other bodies? >> that is a very interesting question. i would expect to be on that we will debate and discuss the risks that in many ways are similar to the discussion we have been having national. we will issue certain actions

that will comply or explain. regulation, potential regulation of banks in the u.k., it will be embraced in the european directive and will not become binding in the u.k.. we have concerns about the way the debate is going. where i would be concerned is if there was an attempt to make this complete. they may adopt this approach, which is the purpose of these reports being introduced. consumer protection and market conduct -- they are naturally

very different. one should be in very close and careful look, which could result in decisions saying it needs more capital or liquidity. it has to be possible in our view. the framework enabled this. if we get to a point, where it is so great that the national regulator had a discussion removed. that would concern me. >> are you happy the bank -- [unintelligible]

>> happy could never be a word used. i am content that we are in a certain place. for debating this, not just at the european level, but also at the international level. be people are trying to get to an end point quickly. we are trying to get it right. we do not want to lose the momentum. we want to take our time to implement it over time.

>> the bank did not blow the whistle on this. >> they did not blow the whistle on it. we tried to get a financial stability report increase. we had a shudder ranking system. whether in this country or globally, there was a lack of a systemwide system. i do not think there is a lack of that action. it was more of a problem of under lap. this was replicated to a lesser

degree around the world. in many respects, the response has changed. we will establish a body. we look forward over time to ask the question, is it becoming stretch or is this something we are leaning against it? we are looking at policies and rules that would make it less will or will. and we are looking at over exuberant credit. they were lacking in the past. i do not doubt that there would have been a better job of

analysis had certain things been done. >> just an observation. [unintelligible] this is a question for you. economists and others are thinking about debts. how would you be taking them on? >> i am misunderstanding here. one of the things i did when i was appointed governor all of those years -- i said the day of become governor, is start

building a market intelligence function. i think they have been very successful. a very successful market intelligence. it informs the financial stability work as well as others. we have people with a great deal of knowledge and expertise. a look at our financial stability reports. they are written by people whose expertise is not only in macroeconomics. we have a team of people that understand banking and the professional commitment to a lifetime of public service as regulator. we need to move away from the idea of having people out and

going back. public service in the area of regulators. we will not focus our efforts -- making a detailed point here or there. someone who looks like a chief executive and say, i do not believe you understand the risk you are taking. people with the self-confidence and judgment to make that decision. >> what about two natural endowments. some are equipped with extraordinary analytical talent. the difference between the central bank and others is we have a balance sheet. we are in the market every day.

we are in the biggest capital markets in the world along with the new york fed. there are lots of things that we have to improve. i do not think anybody should be concerned as we start off. the central bank can afford to do that. >> that is a helpful classification. >> do you think your ability to do this will go up with the current changes? will it go down or stay the same? >> they would offer a wider careers and opportunities to move around. the younger in the bank, the greater the talent.

>> thanks. what keeps you awake at night? >> it is in the states and europe to put much more of this activity. one of the things we will do -- possibly through exchanges or with greater transparency. they want to net this $1.40 trillion down. the complexity of the over-the- counter derivative markets -- it could have been avoided. the industry and authorities had

they stepped in, it would have made a difference. i would like to think that in a five or 10 years' time ross -- the authorities have to be more determined about saying we are going to ensure that there is adequate in the structure in these markets. that is a challenge and it will never go away. >> thanks. i had the privilege of working with your predecessor. this was during the timeframe afterwards. i am not sure we're quite there as yet. when i had the pleasure, it was

apparent to me that one felt personally that it was up to him and him alone. du would consider the chancellor be the in tangible person? can you expand on that? else to look to than the governor o was it was n suggestion of public money being used. it was discussed. on the governor was convinced they were sorting it out. i would think we would have a better infrastructure involved

and it would be much easier n if they could tell us what happened, what discussions did they have, and a better infrastructure. . of what to do the things that are up to my responsibility. >> that is very comforting. do you think that the legislation is an opportunity for london as the legislation was for the stock exchange? >> i do not think we should see legislation being introduced as other countries as an opportunity to lower standards are get a bigger financial services sector. that led to the predicament that we are now in.

what is the right framework to have? there are different provisions. it reflects a very large amount of lobbying. i very much hope and i believe this committee will be able to lead parliament in resisting some of the excessive lobbying, which is weighing down on your heads. we look to you to ensure that we have a simpler tough but fair framework. >> we will do our best. >> would you agree that part of our problem is something that led to as having too big to fail? >> that problem is a very big and complex problem that has grown over many years.

governments feel they have to support those banks when they get into trouble. to get out of it, it is not easy. it will try a complex set of measures. we need to see a change in the whole liability sector so it will be possible to have a different recovery plans to work. we should not believe we can do that quickly. we must believe we can do better than what we were able to do in the recent crisis. >> it is important that bank of england helps us. >> indeed. what you considered to be

successful? >> i wanted to ask a couple of general things. q. did not want to expand your empire so that you would take charge of inflation? someone was surprised by the lack of interest in the market. there seems to be delivered policy to run down. would you like to take the opportunity to share your attitude that you wanted to take? >> i am very happy to live. clear that i supported the changes made. i felt it would be good to deal

with the contamination that could come. i've changed my mind after the crisis. we had no responsibility seemed to make no difference to the contamination. when big banks did get into trouble, it was inextricably drawn in to the idea the capital in those banks. i tend to form a different view than before. it would have been better for us to be closer to the system of regulation than we were. for me, the lessons of the crisis was luxury policy alone

was not sufficient. we needed more instruments through financial policy. the people running were under pressure to deal with conduct issues and did not have the time to vote to provincial regulation. the twin peaks approach was the right way to go. if there is a provincial regulatory authority, i am reluctant, because i have no interest in expanding my empire. it was probably a sensible to have provincial regulations inside of the bank. i have tried very hard to ensure that the regulations are

away. >> have you been overcharged century took the position? did the impact of the financial crisis -- could it have been avoided? >> i think the underlying causes mated the imbalances in the world economy -- we cannot have stopped that. i think the massive expansion of the financial sector would probably have taken place, but maybe to a lesser extent. the natural policy committee is key to enable us to focus. >> what was the point?

the bank of england separates itself from regulation? seems to be more reputation. >> it is having the instruments, a group of people that can say capital requirements as a whole will not be higher. it is very hard for regulators to make judgments. something that all capital requirements should go up. it is a judgment about the risks in the system as a whole.

[unintelligible] >> has the bank of england become too big for its own good? >> in the end, against my wishes, it is sensible and still have provincial authority for the bank of england. it is sensible to have a financial services committee. it is sensible for us to retain a larger policy. there is an acceptable package of responsibility. we will be creating a powerful institution that is very important. it must be counted. that means accountable to parliament, to you, and others.

>> the balance heavily favors one. [unintelligible] >> they are not fighting off competition. one of the great presence having clarity of responsibility was key. treasury withdrew monetary policy at one time. i think it is appropriate that it's not put consumer protections for market conduct, excuse me, with responsibilities that are prudential.

the clarity of responsibility, what it is asking the central bank to do is not as important. >> as you look, are there areas of concern? >> we are looking at this in the future. you will hold was accountable for the government will hold us accountable. look at the mechanism that is there. nothing can work unless it is close call it -- unless it is clear who is responsible for what. it does make clear who is responsible for what in this document.

i think it is clear. >> that is important for the accountability. not just in the wake of the crisis, but when things are calmer as well. you ask, could this have been avoided. in a way, it could have been avoided. the should have been public discussion about the stability of the system. >> is a clarity of responsibility is the key. [unintelligible] do you think the division of

responsibility has sufficient clarity on the bank? >> i think so. the chancellor and i will discuss this. any decisions are for the chancellor. his attitude toward the use of public money is important. we may be worth it with a course of action we may have to recommend. where their funding is not concerned, the responsibly -- responsibility lies with the banks. >> [unintelligible] them may be worried with the different components.

comment about the under lap. can you talk about those components? >> it would prevent any under lap. i think there is enough there. each of those bodies have independent members on it. no doubt, those appointments will be made in due course. neither will exist in statutory form until a few years. we need to make sure we get this. we have time. it depends on the legislation that will appear.

we are talking 2012. >> we have one quick for instance question. i am interested in the defense surrounding something else. it is in the middle of a developing crisis. when you have a bank like that, who is monitoring its the? how will we have that kind of failure in a more appropriate way? , the pra will be responsible for

monitoring individual institutions. that information would be conveyed to the spc to the extent that there was a suggestion that there may be underlying consequences. but one might have systemic consequences in a different situation. .

>> i think it gives to what the help we are doing. it is not big enough to run in the market authority.

it can clearly either go to some subsidiary of the bank, would you care to comment? >> you make a very good point. you could perfectly reasonably argue i don't disagree. market come back is a style of england. it is a style i don't think is appropriate to the central bank.

i think the actual regulation should not be in the bank of england. it would be sensible one of the things again noticeable in the crisis they announced themselves

heavy on the levee >> is it likely agreed to ourselves i have never asked you a question that you knew the

answer from our side, i would hope we could produce cost saveings that could be the challenge for us i don't know at all how they would be around all the costs of it we'll be able to make a reduction in the cost. we would be looking absolutely by the institutions whom we would regulate also in terms of

the bank the trading platform provided do you think that the approach to regulation which grew out into the world from there i think it is sensible

several systems involve luj, mind bolging amounts of credits bring all the rest together into one place. the fact that those parts worked well if it exchanges, i will be

interested in how the securities traded shading into the market contract. regulators monitor not just foreign suring the integrity and that's something of the commodity i think you would be very odd to leave them outside the central bank there's one

other question about the process which had a number of people

involved in this. do you think this is a work that could move on corporate intelligence not much that would make sense of enormous importance i'm delighted he had agreed to accept that and stay on we had transition teams already. a lot of organizations working on this already to ensure this as soon as possible.

there is some concern about the issues of the change and quantity with sense about this. we have strong people back together we have to work very hard on that. i'm sure we can.

it is going to be very much an issue. how do you seek to deal with the tricky issue as a way to deal with the attractive features? is that going to be a problem? you it is not imaginable i want to be clear that no transferring to the bank will be on the same terms and conditions. we will have to work in terms of harmonizingation we want to

create the charter of people with motivation in life. it's worked in other countries and i'm sure we can do it here fine. you mentioned about the state's bank sale you are talking about the culture. >> it was an important transition. we put what we call judgements into the system. the changes in the make up of the start it will be a

challenge. when we look back at the banks who were in trouble in this country. with the governor's point that

we need other ob stick wills. this is a transition over a period of years the response to that has been over the reason is when a bank gets into trouble and turns up at our door and says we need assistance we have to understand that bank. it isn't that i need $25 billion pounds tomorrow. we don't just shel out money without knowing what's going on that's a very about lesson it

was from the other side of barings. has it crossed your mind at all >> i have the slightest interest. i'm more concerned with what i'm earning than what other people are. what matters is the quality of job people are doing. we should pay that person more there is no reason at all why the governor of the bank should earn more than the staff he employees.

they will be rational men and women with equal pay how are you going to stop poaching with such people in certain years to the time the value goes overseas. pushing them about even further. we've learned what you have to offer is a combination going

with that is a desire to deal with the challenges and enjoy that with the challenges that enjoy the public services this is usually difficult work we do. we have enjoyment with that combined with remoon operation for me. it's going to be a bigger chance. the question now with this new strength is about you and the account ability.

four times in the last hour said to skam in. take the bank of england. it is interesting to see the internal solutions if the few weeks after the crisis hit you or what the descriptions were, what the different people in the bank thought when it comes to the mpc we then had a chance to

explore from the minutes. we can assist in these things rightly. there will be a published record of discussion that we sat down to discuss. the argues for or against what were made. you'll be able to ask us to explain those after the hearings before you. on the pra, clearly, what we cannot do is put into the public domain is what failed and almost didn't but whether our events

where we have to provide money with a chance of approval, again, you would be able to quiz us on the judgements. i think it would be transimportant when dealing with the cases. the mpc is never discussing ordealing with the information. all the information we have is available to you it is then a judge or debate in informing in the debate and assisting parliament and government clearly, they are not down and to feel because of that. there comes a time when the

production of historic information not necessarily and perhaps 5-10 years doesn't count bp sensitivity. including to be fair whether the bank or institution was on the job. whether that's a personality issue. it seems to me that's rather vital and lacking should that be made public. should allow that to be considered. it is to you and parliament to be seen that cannot be

unilaterally imposed by us. that was to put in our annual report that'sly what we did it is backed up by a clear

undertaking by the bank. when we feel it is possible without undermining the purposes we should give some thought in the near future. >> thank you. we've managed to get back on schedule. we'll be publishing later today for our inquiry for this whole new subject. we'll surely understand we won't see you again before we come to our conclusion. i note that we have time to make this through. i strongly agree with that. i also note there's a strong deadline. i think you'll need to send the

message to the government. i hope they are listening to you. we may take longer to find our reviews as the subject. you arrived as a governor and you are leaving as a governor but you have a new province. >> thank you, i look forward to coming to your future sessions. flu >> colorado senator michael bennett won his bit. then charlie wrangle talks about

the ethics charges brought against him. topics this morning on washington journal include u.s. energy policy. >> every weekend in august, book tv returns to book festivals we have been to around the country. the chicago tribune printer's broe bookfest and the harlem fume fair this week on c-span 2. go to book tv.org for the full lifting. >> available any time on c-span radio in the washington area at 90.1 fm, nationwide on sirius

channel 132. on your i phone or i pad. c-span radio is available any time call 202-626-8888. it's free but check with your phone service provider for any additional charges. even more available on your phone. >> linda mcman won her bid to be the republican party senate representative for connecticut. she spoke from cromwell, connecticut. this is about nine minutes.

>> thanks to my family and friends, my tireless staff and to all of the volunteers.

many of you. [applause] because without the efforts of all of our volunteers, i wouldn't be standing here tonight having completed two rounds of the three that we have to go. i also want to thank my opponents, they ran terrific races. their loyal supporters worked their hearts out for candidates for whom they really believed.