but let us, when we do so, pledge that we will do better in the months and years to come. i yield back the balance of my time. >> in a few moments, today's headlines and your calls live on "washington journal" and the house is back in session at 9:00 a.m. eastern. and in about 45 minutes, we will discuss the administration's afghanistan strategy with andrew exum, former advisor to the general stanley mcchrystal. and at a 30 a.m. eastern, senator john isaacson of georgia and senator tom udall of new mexico. "washington journal" is next.

host: good morning. a very interesting day yesterday. the house and senate voting to extend the tax cuts -- the bush tax cuts until 2012. we will talk about the tax cut passes, the spending bill fails. here are the phone lines on the screen. the stick a look at the headlines this morning. all across the country -- let's

take a look at the headlines this morning. and all across the country you can see how the theme. "the denver post" house passes a tax package. " orange county register" "obama wins on tax deal." as we get ready for your phone calls we have russell berman online, congressional reporter from the hill. 1/2 mr. berman, thanks for being with us. guest: thanks for having me. host: you write that in the end only one democratic leadership, steny hoyer, supported the bill. talk about how the members of the house approached this and

what it was like for them. guest: he was deeply angered at house democrats because he thought the they pitched too early and got a bad deal. even nancy pelosi in a floor speech shortly before the vote, refused to endorse the underlying bill. and she urged the house to adopt an amendment to the state tax provision. that vote failed, which cleared the way for the house to approve the bill unchanged from the with the senate passed it. she said it was a difficult choice. she said that the president got a good deal from his side of the ledger, but he had "a king's ransom" for the elements in the package that the republicans insisted on, notably no estate tax and an extension on the bush era tax cuts for the top earning americans.

host: the price tag on the package, $858 billion. let's take a look at the 131 democrats and 68 republicans that voted against the deal. what do those, 131 democrats look like, in restaurants? guest: it was a cross section, -- in a broad terms? guest: it was a cross-section. there were a few blue dog democrats, most notably jean taylor, who said that it would be fiscally is irresponsible. host: and republicans include michelle bachmann and others. guest: where were some of the more conservative hardliners. conservative activists -- you

saw a few conservative activists, for example, sarah palin, mitt romney, coming out of this because they've wanted a permanent tax cut and not just a two-year extension. even though they felt it was the best deal that would get from democrats, some want a party to pull out for more. host: and nancy pelosi yourself did not lobby members on the bill. guest: that is correct, when the speaker comes to the floor she will with the votes for it. but she did not do that. the president was making calls leading up to the vote. and vice president biden came last week to the house democratic caucus to make the sales pitch from the white house for the bill. but nancy pelosi, by and large,

she schedule of a boat and tried to bring it to completion, but she did not go around -- she scheduled the vote and try to bring it to completion, but she did not call around and try to sway votes. the with of the democratic team voted against the bill, -- be minority whip of the democratic team voted against the bill, as did the chairman of the democratic caucus. host: let me move on to the other part, and that is the omnibus federal budget spending bill, which yesterday harry reid pulled from the senate floor. they will now look at a very short-term continuing resolution. let's move forward. what will that mean for the house of representatives and any passage of funding for the government? guest: in the next couple of days i think the house and is

going to wait for the senate to act. of that is what we heard late last night on this bill. it is funded through february, which, of course, would kick the spending decisions on, by and large, to the republican house majority and a slimmer democratic majority. late last night this all came together, of course, after harry reid poll the bigger omnibus bill from the senate floor. it all came together very quickly, but it did look as if a short-term continuing resolution to fund the government would go through. host: thank you very much for bringing us up today. house of representatives in at 9:00 a.m. eastern today. a number of suspension bills are on their docket and as they weigh in on the senate funding -- chief funding bill. a number of issues are on the

table, including the start treaty and the dream act he will see live coverage of the senate over the weekend. let's move to the senate and get your core telephone calls. the price tag on the $1.1 trillion -- let's listen to harry reid talking about his decision on the floor. >> i really tried to make this something before the congress. and i was elated. one of my republican sefrance said we are going to support you, of to nine -- one of my republican friends said we are going to support you, of 29. i have never publicly said do they are, but they know who they are. and in the last 24 hours they have walked away from the ability for us to complete this legislation.

i was told within the last 24 hours that we have bipartisan support to pass this bill. many told -- i should not say that. "many" is it worth that is too large. but a number of republican said that i had their support, and they could not vote for it. host: the omnibus bill covered galaviz and the areas -- cut covered all of the spending in areas. in the "wall street journal" it talks of the spending nine.

those are the nine referred to. and in the national review online today, a description of how the republican leader courted the nine to support the republican team. we have put the two issues on the table for you. we will show you more detail later on the senate failed to

find enough republican votes on the overall government spending on a bus and to now i opted for a more trim resolution that is narrower in scope. we would like to know what you think about this from a fiscal standpoint and a political standpoint. photographers to maryland. and jim, you are on the air. -- let's go first to maryland. caller: in 2009, president obama got a $787 billion stimulus package passed. about half of that consisted of tax cuts. in the last 20 months we have heard my party railed against the package and use it as a platform to gain power in the house and seats in the senate. yesterday, 20 months later, president obama got a -- got an

$858 billion stimulus package. again, even bigger than the first period and again, about half of it is the original tax cuts. and i am bewildered that my party can support something that they've railed against for the last two years. if that is where i am. and i do not think the deficit committee is being treated seriously because if that were serious, it would have been the first thing product. we cannot just keep adding to the dead, either with spending or tax cuts. -- adding to the debt, either with spending or tax cuts. host: thanks very much. let's move to diane next, a democrat in washington d.c.. caller: good morning, susan. how are you? host: i'm fine, thanks you have probably been watching all of this. and what is your reaction?

caller: first, let me say, i became unemployed in march of this year i started receiving unemployment benefits in april and i understood in april, because they send you a notice what cost of benefits -- that you get benefits for 26 weeks. when my benefits ran out in the first week of october, i had assumed that was the end of it for me. obviously, i was very upset about it. i kept hearing about the 99ers when did not understand what favre talking about. i called back to the unemployment office, to say, what does that mean for the 99ers. it turns out that not everyone is eligible for the 99 weeks. it action depends on the part of the country that you are from

hong and unemployment in those to to to their areas. and because i live in washington d.c. and we are not a state and all those the kings, we are not negligible off for the nyden -- all of those good things, we are not eligible for the 99. host: i need to interrupt you because so many people want to talk this morning. so, your own experience as you feeling what way about what happened in washington caller: -- in washington? caller: because i have a limited amount of time, i planned for this hamas. i save my money because i knew my -- are planned for this. i save my money to lend you my benefits for going to run out. it is so ridiculous -- i saved my money because i knew my benefits were going to run out.

it is so ridiculous, the amount of money. they get so caught up in what the polls say, and opinion pieces and they forget what spurred them to want to be in the congress and the first place. host: we have to move on. joyce is watching in ste. rahm, oregon. -- been at sweet home, oregon. of the first, i'm tired earmarks. $1 billion is now the new million and it is ridiculous. i do not think anything should go up over the amount of inflation. we do not get increases in the amount of our social security over inflation. on the tax bill, i'm ok with extending the tax cuts. and some of the other christmas

tree items i do not know much about. the unemployment, i think richard be extended, even though that will affect -- i do not think it should be extended, even though that will affect my husband. i do not think it should be extended unless it is paid for. everybody is saying, why not spend part of this stimulus that has already been appropriated, but not spent? pay for it with the stimulus money that is left over. host: in the new mexico, william is calling us on the republican line. caller: i live in a small town in southeastern new mexico of 15,000. in this area of the state we depend on the oil and gas industry. i am all for the tax cuts and i supported president bush, on most of his policies --

president bush on most of his policies and tax cuts betty came out with. people cannot continuously him.nue to blame they have a congress and pass policies also. host: cindy on twitter rights to this -- from the "washington post" this morning here is a chart that talks about what is included in this bill, which the president is expected to sign as early today -- as early as today.

for comments on the tax cut passed in last night's close to midnight, and also on the senate development that they pulled the omnibus spending bill from the floor and now will move to a

continuing resolution from the government, this is my out on the democrats line in santa ana, california. caller: thank you for taking my call. i really think that as americans, we need to find out if we stand for something anymore. each one of us had better take time to decide what we're really believe in. also, i feel that -- what are we willing to fight for now? i think most of our confusion now lies in the fact that whenever bother to define what we really have faith in. basically, there were probably millions of people -- -people when hitler began in the 1930's. it was -- of mindless people

when it began in the 1930's. in america, we've vedder true note from this bill what we are willing to stand for, if anything. -- we had better know from this bill we are willing to stand for, if anything. thank you. host: thank you. mike on the independent line. caller: i am an independent democrat. i am so proud of our president. i saw him get out there and yell his head off and try to get the right bill through before he made the compromise. he did not have the backing of his own party behind him. he was telling the story of about how the car went into the ditch and now that he is pulling it back upon ground again the

republicans want the keys back. i saw him yell himself hoarse trying to get their rights bill passed. -- get a the right bill passed. could democrats sat on their hands. they did not back him. and now they are accusing him of not trying hard enough to get the bill they wanted passed. as what did they do? cox -- what did they do? host: what does it mean to you to be an independent democrat? cazares are you describe yourself harris hawks -- about is how you describe yourself caught. coppnext is, in shreveport, andn

on the republican line. caller: had a point in time -- i think we need a statute of limitations on calling this a tax cut. it merely exists -- extended the tax cuts that existed for 10 years. at what point did it just become the tax rates? i am on social security and i find it interesting that the social security trust fund, which is gone, they actually cut the payments into a fund that is supposedly going bankrupt out of which we still have to pay people. it is almost insanity there on the potomac that we have here in the heartland watch each day.

but god bless c-span. if it was not for you, i do not think we would get these reward anywhere. host: thank you, john. from the "washington post" ireton siong another headline -- here is another headline. back to phone calls. " san diego, james -- san diego, james. in your on. caller: i am upset with obama because i believe he -- i do not

believe he should have put tax cuts with an extension of unemployment. why would he make a bill out of two bills? a lot of people would have been happy if they had been separate. because he put it together, that is why he has so many people upset right now. what they do not want to vote on one thing -- they do not want to vote on one thing. but they can pass the bill on the back of unemployment extensions. host: i referenced at the beginning that there were a number of analyses about what this means for president obama. let me start with the "baltimore sun."

let me move to some other pieces.

he concludes this way -- a very different opinion -- opinion from charles krauthammer of this morning.

two columnists looking at the same president and seen two very different things. let's go back to the phone calls. next is kathleen -- next is, from georgia, susan on the independent line. caller: i'm glad that it did pass and i'm glad that they ehrlich -- they only held the two-year limitation. however, i just heard a report the of the day -- the other day that these people made in the third quarter only $1.60 trillion -- for $1.6 trillion. if these corporations are not

going to hire and get the unemployment rate down 10% -- from 10%, we should be taxing them. we should have higher taxes. if they do not spend the money to create more jobs, more innovation, more jobs, they should be taxed. themould say, let's give six months to get machines in here. i am currently unemployed since september. it is bad down here. if you do not have a college degree, it is bad. host: what kind of job did you have before? caller: i was in furniture sales. host: what are your prospects? what you think the next year will bring? himal caller: the new will bring me some kind of caller: i am hoping it " -- caller: i am hoping it will bring me some kind of other jobs. people are just not hiring. and i have always worked with

small companies. i'm glad we will give small companies a break. but this is a $1.6 trillion in the third quarter. these companies need to say, ok, passed a law that if you are not going to no fayed kayaleh -- -- if you are not going to innovate, we've got to do something here. host: let's move on to jim other republican line. caller: i am pretty much in agreement with don from shreveport. i'm glad that the spending bill, the your market bill failed -- the earmark bill failed. that the currentth tax code -- tax rates were

extended, but afraid it will not get the job done. only two years, businesses have to worry from now that two years from now we will have huge democratic increases. and obama care -- they're not going to hire. as far as the unemployment extension to 99 weeks, that will at $58 billion to the deficit. i just read an article where over 3000 households that were millionaires collected unemployment in 2008. they will continue to get extensions now. it is just another welfare program now. host: thank you so much. the next comment comes from jackie in eastlake, ohio. she is a democrat. caller: got the best congress that money can buy. we've got the senators and congressmen that are being inundated -- inundated with the rich and powerful putting

coins in their pockets and they are urging going up and down the aisles. -- they are jingling up and down the aisles. come march or april, mark my words, the good old republicans are going to be moving to privatize social security again and we will see social security go down the tubes, as well as medicare. the other problem we will see is, you are not going to see any more jobs. we have had trickled down since the 1980's and all that has happened is that jobs were lost and wages have stagnated. to do the same thing over and over and over again is just insanity. that is what we have in washington, insane people. host: new hampshire is our next call and this is raw land, good morning. caller: i have been watching

this on the tv since 11:00 p.m. last night. it was rejected and i went to bed. i am furious because the democrats are going to be getting themselves a raise. social security and people on disability, they will not get nothing. they forgot us. obama forgot us. all of these companies giving tax breaks and shipping companies -- shipping jobs overseas, do we have to go to china to get a job? the democrats are not doing nothing because the republicans have all of the money. shame on them for getting all of the people who worked all their life and they are on social security and they have to give up their race because these greedy people need more money. shame on them again. host: roland from new hampshire. here is the "washington *"

headline from yesterday. earlier we hear from the democratic leader of, senator reid. let's hear what the republican leader, mitch mcconnell, had to save. " this is the first time in modern history that cannot -- >> this is the first time in modern history that not a single spending bill went across the floor of the senate. the appropriations committee members on a bipartisan basis and did do their job. the problem is, the full senate did not do its job.

what we ended up with, mr. president, is this, this almost 2000 page omnibus appropriation bill, which really got yesterday. yesterday. -- which we only got yesterday. yesterday. the problem is, the work that the appropriations committees did, in many respects, was squandered because the full senate did not do its job. this is precisely the kind of thing the american people have gotten tired of. host: mitch mcconnell yesterday. i "washington post" if you did not watch it, one of

the tactics was explained here. later on in our program we have two members of the senate joining us back to back. they will talk about the continuing negotiations of the major legislation there. back to your phone calls. in merced, calif., you are on,

then. caller: i am ever park -- a moderate republican and " we may have to say so, it is probably rich people that -- and although we may hate to say so, it is probably rich people that keep this economy afloat during a war. it is a war worth fighting. we are after al qaeda and we are after sitting civilization and humanity, particularly the women in afghanistan. with that, i will pay no further ado. thank you. host: thank you. in the next segment will be talking about the president's release of the afghan war strategy. it was a series of briefings yesterday. the president and the secretaries of defense and secretary of state of talking about allies there.

senator ron wyden has prostate cancer. we mention this specifically because he will miss late session votes at could include approval of the arms treaty with russia and repeal of the don't ask, don't tell law. he said on thursday that cancer is in its early stage. he had surgery preparations scheduled for friday, but would be available for votes on the weekend, according to a spokesperson. fort wayne, indiana, good morning to michelle, a democrat. caller: good morning. me and husband had been sitting here looking at the tv, glued to it because our unemployment benefits are really helping us. we are upset because 3% of this population are really strong on keeping their money and we are really just out here and struggling and broke.

i am just sick of it all. even listening to the comments of people and i was just wondering when they were sitting here watching this, whether they supported it or not, did they really get the impression that these republicans are listening to the issues of the democrats and the things they were bringing to the debate about the fact that there were no jobs created in the last few years. for these so-called tax increases have been prevented from going through and none of us have gotten a raise. even when i was working i did not get a raise. social security is not getting a raise. all of this is going on, but these people are so strong on keeping their jobs. host: how long have you and your husband in out of work? caller: since july, six months. host: did you work in the same place? caller: no, in the health-care industry and he's in the customer service industry. and we've lost our jobs run

around the same time. they cut additional hours for the pr people, which i can understand. host: what are you doing? caller: we are job hunting. and believe me, no christmas is going on over here. we are trying to pay bills and get by kendeigh. plain and simple, no christmas gifts. eat.nd eac plans of will, no christmas gives. i refuse to buy things from channel 1 -- from china when they have all of our money. i told my husband, if we owned wal-mart, cut the check because i know that they will be going out and buying christmas gifts

right in our store. where they so reluctant to give the money to the government when we -- but when they know that we are going to go right back and spend it to survive. host: thank you and good luck to you and your husband has you jobs surge. -- as you job search. in our last 10 minutes or so we will go to the congressman moving on with the personal. back to phone calls. next up is not a call from martinsville, west virginia.

-- is a call from martinsville, west virginia. caller: payroll reduction is a collusion between the president and the republicans to weaken social security so that intin 22 they can say that social security has an even bigger deficit. i wish my tea party friends will wake up and realize the republicans are going to eliminate their social security. i feel all working class americans and should go on strike ensure that we want to be taken seriously. host: thank you. it here is this view on twitter. from the a "washington times" this morning and others --

and plant has next. this is jonathon. good morning to you -- atlanta is next. this is jonathon. good morning to you on the republican line. caller: good morning. if we cut half across the board and through the social programs back to the states, they would probably be much more responsibly run by the states. most states have to balance a budget. the politicians are more directly beholden to the tpeopl. and given the track record of the government spending of the social security trust fund for the past 50 years -- there was actually a federal building in washington of four years ahead

biochemists full of iou's. they have shown themselves completely not responsible with the money. buttu ", john f. kennedy he said in 1962 that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low. we need to cut rates across the board on the wealthy and everybody else. and he did, and what happened? to years later we had a 3.9% unemployment. and we began to come out of a recession. host: from the "baltimore sun" this morning, mexico, 12 under 56 killed in the drug wars this year. back to phone calls -- 1256 killed in the drug wars this year. back to full calls. it warned in michigan.

caller: i was listening to dispel that was trying to pass -- i was listening to this bill they are trying to pass, it is a joke. what about those who have lost everything? everyone knows that for every dollar spent, you get $1.54 back and that makes more sense than anything. to me, it is just crazy. that is not going to happen. there will be nothing stimulated. it did not happen before and it will not happen again. and when it comes to the 9.8% unemployment, i would have to %uess about 13 unemployment because we are not counted. you know, we are off the grid. host: dallas streets -- -- dallas tweets --

change is on the viewer's mind this morning. also in the news this morning, the sale of blackwater is said to be near. if florida judge considers a state challenge of the health care law. the last call during this segment is from toledo. and independent. independen caller: thanks for taking my

call. i watch c-span every day when i get off we have two unfunded wars and we have unfunded health-care liabilities. then we go ahead and pass these unfunded tax cut. it makes no sense to me at all. if you have got the republicans and mcconnell. they want to cut the taxes for the wealthiest people. if it makes no sense to me. how are we going to pay for all of this? we have two wars that were really -- we are paying for with money from china. i do not know where we are going to go. it makes no sense.

i mean, it is all part -- it is all partisan. mcconnell even said the only reason they are going against all of these bills is to make obama a one-term president. host: thank you. he mentioned the wars and our next guest is going to be andrew exum, a -- and armor ranger -- army ranger and former adviser to general stanley mcchrystal. we will be talking about the review on the afghan-pakistan strategy. over the weekend we will be -- over the break we will be looking at an interview with justice elena kagan. her interview will air on this network this weekend. >> we are talking about argument and listening to the recordings of some of last year's cases.

it is interesting to hear your colloquies, i guess that is the right word, with the chief. i wonder about your interim -- intellectual relationship with chief justice robert because often your questions were very rapid fire. i wonder what you think of the intellectual relationship between the two of you. >> i have extraordinary respect for him. he was the great supreme court advocate of his time before he became a judge. i always felt as though he could do better what all of us as lawyers were trying to do. he did it as well as anybody has done it, to be at the podium and make an argument in the supreme court. that is a little bit intimidating, to know that the person questioning you has also stood in your shoes and has really done the job better than anyone else ever has. i listened to the chief arguments and talk to a lot of

people who saw his arguments and he was fabulous. if he is also a great, great questioner up there on the bench. he really challenges you, as he should. he does not let you get away with anything. he does not lead you -- if there is something you want to hide in your argument, he is probably pretty certain to find it. i tremendously enjoyed arguing in front of him because you had to be at the top of your game, and you should have to be. here is a little bit of a story. when i walked in from the swearing in over the summer -- this was the swearing-in that was the syria and over the summer for me to actually do the work of -- that was over the summer for madrak should do the

work of the court. i went into the conference room that the justices meet in how and in new robing room where they take on and put off their robes and the dining room. and on the tour he showed me the robing room and i looked and there were these wooden lockers. it goes from the chief justice and then it said, justice stevens and carried on down. and the last locker was justice sotomayor. and we walked around the building a little bit and he showed me around and maybe we took about 50 minutes and ended up back in the robing room again. and in that 15-minute time the name placed ahead come off and each of the nameplates havhad md over and there was a justice

kagan. it was a very effective way to say to me, you are here now. you are part of the community, part of the institution. it was a very powerful thing to see. economy >> "washington journal" continues. host: let me introduce you andrew exum, k fellow at the new american security. he is a former army ranger himself and served as a civilian adviser to retired general stanley mcchrystal. he served on the assessment team and was on active duty in the u.s. army from 2000-2004, leading a platoon of army rangers in 2002 in iraq -- and was in iraq in 2004. what did you hear, what do you think this recent report was

intended to signal? a guest: i think it was intended to signal that we need more time before we can determine whether or not we are having success, especially regarding afghanistan and pakistan. against al qaeda, it seems that the administration is pretty confident that they are having an affect on al qaeda, leadership. with afghanistan and pakistan, it is difficult to brave the administration's hallmark because so many of the important metrics -- to grade the administration's homework because so many of the import metrics are subjective. certainly, it is too soon to tell whether or not the administration has been able to make some headway. while we have seen some quite dramatic tactical successes on the ground in different provinces, will not know the full effect of those strategic operations until after the 40

fighting starts up again in the summer. -- after the fighting starts up again in the summer. host: a word that seems to pop up with regard to what we heard ail."rday repeatedly as "frie would you agree with that? that the congress is friel. guest: i would agree. right now, in the winter in canada more -- in the winter in kandahar and helmand, we have achieved what we intended this summer. having said that, we will not know whether that will endure until after the taliban tries to regain control over the terrain they had control over last summer. host: i wonder about public temperament overspending, and

also, the politics of the house to move into republican control. guest: on the one hand, i have sympathy with americans concerned with the cost of this war. and i think the president and democrats alike -- and republicans alike can move to a kind of counter terror campaign that would be much more limited in scope as well as cost. the difficulty is that you have to have a response will transition between the two and you have to build of certain key institutions within the afghan state, specifically security forces, in order for that to happen. on the other hand, if you look at the congressional elections of just a month ago, afghanistan was not really an issue. even though americans are concerned about the cost, that was not one of the priorities in the congressional elections.

host: our guest will be with us until about 20 minutes past the hour of 8:00 in washington. we will take your phone calls and e-mails and twitchell comments about the progress of the war in afghanistan. -- and twitter comments about the progress of the war in afghanistan. this was printed in the "usa today" -- but how capable are those soldiers? guest: that is the question to rest. it is difficult to gauge that. it is another thing to determine whether those are effective on the battlefield. one way to gauge whether they are effective is not just to focus on the size of the afghan security forces, but to look at how many noncommissioned officers are present for duty on any given day, or to look at the

attrition rates. over the past 18 months, the afghan army has been a bit of a success. it has always been stronger than the national police. and with general caldwell going in there about a year ago, we started taking bertran in the army much more seriously than we did previously -- taking the training of the army much more seriously than we did previously. host: the "new york times" chose this as its lead on the briefings yesterday --

give us more detail around those things. guest: i was just in afghanistan and spoke with everyone from general patraeus just to regular afghans on the street. one thing that everyone can agree on is that the current strategy has -- to borrow general patraeus his words, to devote a keyless heels. one is that we have -- two achilles' heels. we have an afghan government that is able to effectively cover the people and not act in a predatory way in other sections of afghanistan. they have to do their homework because i cannot determine the degree to which these sanctuaries in pakistan are having an effect on our operations in afghanistan. but as a social scientist commodified backup and look at the broad civil wars and a

insurgencies over time, it is very difficult to be successful in this type of counterinsurgency campaign if you have a across borders like we do with afghanistan and pakistan. i do not think we have a strategy within the u.s. government and within nato to do something about these sanctuaries in pakistan. pakistan is have been unwilling to go after -- pakistanis have been willing to go after the islamabad and other troops that are targeting their regime in kabul, but also those that are aiding and abetting those groups. and i'm not sure that we will achieve is strategy in pakistan in time. the pakistanis have been pursuing logical strategies. since 2004, 2005 they have been supported these groups because they want to make sure their interests are represented against, for double, india, and

afghanistan. -- for example, india and afghanistan. there is amount of monetary commitment that will be entering and their strategy of employing these parks the actors is ultimately doomed is the message we have to get across. -- these proxy factors is to ultimately doomed, is the message we have to get across. >> alternately, it is afghans who must secure their country. and it is not nation-building because it is afghans that must build their nation. whether we are focused on disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al qaeda in afghanistan and pakistan and preventing its capacity to threaten america and our allies in the future. host: with that strategy, how does governance in afghanistan lead into that?

guest: what the president is trying to accomplish as quite minimalist. we are trying to defeat al qaeda and target other transnational terror groups that threaten us. unfortunately, the neat -- the means that we need to do that are somewhat maximalist. to prevent them from returning to afghanistan, you have to have someone competent afghan security forces. when you talk about governance in pakistan and these forces in afghanistan, you are talking about the same problem. you can hit the haqqani network all you want, and we have decimated their leadership. but both of those groups will be resurgent if they are able to play on the grievances of the afghan people and rely on the sanctuary to rest, reset, and commit another offensive in the spring. host: in addition to military experience, here is our guest educational

master's degree from bear group. let's take some calls. beginning with pennsylvania. patrick, a democrat. caller: he keeps mentioning we have to stay longer. we have already been there 10 years. how much longer do we have to stay there? 101 years? -- 10 more years to get 20 more years? let's figure how long we're going to be there. guest: i take the caller's point . a went there just after the evasion. i was a light infantry platoon leader. i've been at this for a long time. i remember in 2003 we decided to shift a vast amount of resources over to iraq. that was

a blunder. we had to begin a new in 2008 and 2009. i share your frustrations. i've been fighting the talbot for a lot longer than i would have wanted to fight it -- i've been fighting the taliban. each trip costs about $1 million a year. -- each troop cost about $1 million a year. we have to let u.s. interest in the region. we have to think about these terror groups, such as al qaeda that are in afghanistan and pakistan. with the transition to a much more sustainable transition in afghanistan. we never truly left japan or germany. we left there and we remained there to keep the security presence.

i think we'll have to do the same thing in afghanistan. i think it will require an enduring u.s. presence, probably for 10 years. the key is to get it to a point where it is sustainable financially. host: will you respond to this twitter message? guest: it is difficult to measure the effects the drones are having. we learned about these attacks a year and a half ago. i worry that some of the tactics that we're using that are having a devastating affect on al qaeda's see your new ship and elsewhere, i worry there will be some blow back on the spirit we see folks being radicalized not just in the frontier areas of pakistan, but in london and paris and with the times where bonnember.

and in connecticut. with respect to the pakistani, we've been successful in supporters in sharing intelligence and allow these attacks -- we don't want to take responsibility. i think the pakistan's have to take responsibility for the flight of the militant groups in their territories. otherwise we will continue to see the kind of a pullback from the tactics we're using to achieve operational gains. host: next to bethlehem, pennsylvania. caller: i would like to think the judgment for his service to our country. what are -- i'm a vietnam person. what can we do currently, those of us who are civilians to

change the hearts and minds so that we are not schizophrenic with this war? what else does our government need to do to help you in the field? guest: thank you for your service. one of the things i would say is that there are a number of different things and i predict that washington can do to be supportive of the troops in the field. the enormous amount of money that we are sending to afghanistan right now with minimal supervision is feeling this conflict. the government of afghanistan and the taliban and other insurgent groups have an interest in this conflict continuing because they are making some much money from kickbacks and corruption. the arch american can lobby his congressman to creep a provision where the money that we're sending to afghanistan, if in oneot sspent it

fiscal year, it carries over to the next. that seems like a small thing. it addresses a larger problem, the enormous amount of money that we're putting into afghanistan that is distorting the economy as well as feeding a lot of the corruption that is proving so deadly to try to establish any kind of effective government. host: this goes back to the macro level, this tweet. guest: we have lots of interest in the region. vital interests. that extends blood and treasure. those interests are what the president said. we're trying to ensure that al qaeda does not reestablished safe havens. they have been denied safe havens in pakistan. pakistan has about 60 nuclear

weapons. those are the vital u.s. interests. ande trying to protect them building up security forces where we can fight for the denial of safe havens in afghanistan and try to increase the capacity of the pakistani government and the will of the pakistani government to go after a lot of the insurgent groups and terrorist networks that are in their. host: we will show you some of the headlines coming out of the report. this is from low rocked -- this is from little rock. caller: i want to thank your guest for his service. tell me why it is possible to pursue a different approach, such as what is that of engaging

in a nation building strategy in afghanistan, why can the u.s. not look at an option of pulling back to the relative safety of a neighboring country such as turkmenistan, operating out of a base of turkmenistan and instead of trying to create a functioning country out of afghanistan? guest: that is one of the comment frustrations you here. can we do this in a different way? may not turkmenistan but made from carrier groups, arabian peninsula appeared can wait attack these guys of tomahawk missiles? we tried that during the 1990's, and to attack al qaeda remotely. we did it during the clinton years and the first years of the bush white house. i have a little bit of experience doing this. direct action against terrorist

networks, one of the things you need is up to date intelligence. it is difficult to get that kind of human intelligence if you're not actually in proximity to the networks themselves. not we're trying to do is creep switzerland and central asia. we are trying to build up a reasonably competent afghan military where they can resist the taliban. in 2001 and 2002, the northern alliance, with some u.s. help, was able to roll back the taliban in relatively short order in 2001. we are having more difficulty doing that now because of the safe havens in pakistan. again, what we're trying to do is build up the security forces to some sort of reasonable compensation. i do not think any american wants to try to get afghanistan

to the point where it is first a country that takes too much time and investment. but trying a lot of those other strategies -- we try the mid- 1990s. it did not work. what we're doing is limiting counterinsurgency operations to buy time and space to build up certain institutions within the afghan state that will allow us to transition to the type of more limited counter a terror campaign that you and many other americans desire. host: this is from a twitter writer. guest: actually, i think the lady on twitter, we might disagree about a lot, but we

agree that al qaeda is trying to kill us by death by 1000 cuts. about $4,000 to recover some explosives and caused us to spend millions or maybe billions of dollars in airport security and it has had a disruptive effect on our economy. that is exactly what al qaeda is trying to do. they are trying to bankrupt us with death by 1000 cuts and disrupt our economy. the difficult thing is that in order for that not to happen, one of the things we have to do is get more comfortable with living with the terrorist threat. we cannot expect our government will be able to protect against every single threat from outside. we have to learn to be more resilient as a nation. the british public in the 1970's and 1980's and what the israeli public has done during the first and second intifadas.

host: this is from ""the wall street journal." guest: and from the new york times -- host: and from ""the new york times" -- and from "usa --

host: there is a bait and switch feel to it. host: i am going to go to the phones. i'm sure your comments on this. illinois is next. this is a democrat. caller: i have a question for you. they get funds from the poppy seed fields. why are we not destroying the poppyseed fields to destroy their money-supply? once that happens, we have a sharper defense against them. once we can move them out, from people to survive, then you can maybe start to regrow the poppy seeds or something and have the security forces be the ones to

guard over the poppy seeds. that is a huge -- they are making so much money from that. host: let's get a response. guest: you have put your finger on a policy problem that affects americans and nato officials since the early years of this war. one of the things that we come to the conclusion of, and this is the late ambassador holbrooke moved policy in this direction, is straight out eradication does not work. create positive incentives as far as alternate agricultural strategies and kandahar province is does work to a certain degree. you're exactly right to focus on the policies as a problem. again, we do not know that much about the talbot finances, or i do not. maybe people with higher security clearances know about

this. that is not exclusively for the taliban and other insurgent network get their support. it is one of the sources. we have through trial and error trying to figure out ways to reduce poppy cultivation in afghanistan. so far, we have a better solution now that we did two, three, four years ago. kudos to you for putting your finger on a key issue. host: next call from florida. ron, republican. caller: the big, bad american military cannot be if you guerrilla fighters stuck in caves. you have not done anything of it except kill some women and children and spend a bunch of money. this war is all a bunch of bull

shit spend money for the industrial complex and to keep feared going in this country so you can keep that industry going. host: to live. guest: -- host: thank you. guest: there were defeated in 2004 and 2005. they have been reconstituted in 2005 and 2006. second, unfortunately for u.s. industry, this war in afghanistan does not support the industrial complex in the way that a large industrial war like the second world war or the cold war did. the types of equipment they are using -- is a low-tech war. these dirty quillworts, and i have fought them and iraq, are

not the kind used planes and equipment that may be appreciated by the industrial complex. i would push back on new little there. speaking frankly, i think it is a slur against the american fighting men does it all his son is killed women and children in afghanistan. host: a passer, texas, is next -- el paso, texas, is next. are you there? moving on. joyce, a democrat. caller: you know for yourself that kashmir is one of the most beautiful places in the world. it was always don't to be pakistani territory -- it was always known to the pakistani

territory. help the indians to takeover and destroy and killed those pakistani that lived in kashmir. why should pakistan ever trust us when we treated them that way? we have then it almost totally out of the eyesight of the press. those of us who know what is going on and watch unit -- we're watching this carefully. thank you. guest: first off, i think the mountains of east tennessee of the most beautiful place on earth. i appreciate the call from my fellow volunteer state native. with respect to india and pakistan, there's a belief that you cannot get pakistani support in the war in

afghanistan until you somehow soft not just kashmir but the larger threat perception. they are overwhelming lead oriented to the east. you put your finger on this as well. they look at u.s. relations as a series of betrayals. cause of their nuclear programs, we cut off all ties to the pakistani military. that was in 1989. that has caused some consternation because one of the things we lost for a lot of those close contacts between the u.s. military and the pakistani military. i take your point. the problems of afghanistan are wrapped up in larger regional problems, including a rivalry between pakistan and india that we're not done a lot to address. the pakistanis have a reason to feel somewhat betrayed by the united states because there have

eriods we lostut thos interest or cut ties with the pakistanis that has been difficult to claw our way back from. thank you. go vols. i think in 2011, 2012, 2013, you'll start to see a gradual transition over to afghan control. president karzai has stated he wants full afghan sovereignty. all our nato allies have signed up to that. i think that is what you'll see. you'll see a transition over to afghan control. the trick is to see what we can arrest taliban momentum and buildup credible institutions to lawful and effective transition. host: our guest has been andrew

exum. if you're interested in this subject, we have went it on our website. mr. exum, thank you. we will return to domestic politics. joining us live from capitol hill is senator isakson. of so much to talk to about. let's talk about the decision to pull the omnibus spending bill off the floor of the senate. nine of your shoe colleagues so -- he has lost support of non gop colleagues. what is going on? guest: the weight at the late stages and the average of the american people after the november election that we would take up an omnibus bill. now with a short-term cr to take

us into next year. host: what can people expect? guest: what it will look like will be a very clean 1-page cr. may try to put a few pages in it. maybe the middle of february. very few exceptions. maybe because the could be some of the 1251 modernization money. host: tell us as the debate moves to the new congress, what do think that overall debate will look like? guest: i think what must happen is we have a short period of time to develop some absolute policy and absolute structure for debt reduction and spending reduction before we have a debt ceiling vote sometime in april

perdue think the entire first quarter of next year's session will be all about the debt and deficit. it will be all about spending and all about putting our past behind us, moving forward and doing what the american people have had to do the last three years, tighten their belts and cut wasteful spending. host: you voted in favor of the tax package. can you explain the support for that legislation? guest: i will take argument who say it was a $900 bill. that is static scoring. taxes to knock a lot -- it was a $900 billion bill. we actually had increased revenues, not decrease. there was some other unpaid for spending. when you get a bill like that, you have to take some of the

good with some of the band. the economy -- we did not have tax increases in a recession. host: senator isakson will be with us for the next 20 minutes per we want to take your calls. you have been involved in the debate over the new start treaty with russia. where do think "dancing with the stars? guest: tomorrow there will be two votes. one on the dream act. and we'll go right back to start. host: will you vote for it? guest: i voted for it in committee. ronald reagan rejected .orbachev'srecommendation ronald reagan said we need a strong defense but we need to trust and the verify. started the process in 1991.

we have had inspections and now the russian federation. since then, when the start treaty expired, the only thing we lack worse is not having human intelligence on the ground lurk. danger could russia is complying with terms of start i. our biggest threat in this world is a rogue nation or a rogue terrorist getting ahold of a nuclear weapon. the better control of we have, the better off we are. if we're going to get north korea and hold them accountable, if we walk away from the one nuclear trick that has worked for two decades, we set an example. host: can you explain the hesitation of some of your colleagues ta?

guest: senator kyl has done an outstanding job. if he did not do the work that he did and move for the modernization money to see that the laboratories and our arsenal is in good shape, i would not be supporting this bill. he has done a good job supporting this. host: let's hear your calls for senator johnny isakson. this is wrong, and independence anthis is wron, independent. caller: i am concerned about this hypocrisy about spending and earmarks. i was appalled yesterday when two members cannot and were answering a vague questions.

the questions were good, the answer is more vague. now there won't vote on the bill. what kind of hypocrisy is that? guest: the world changed. the budget process has been frozen. when things changed on november 2, i think the senators got the message that i got from the american people. on the one hand, they look like hypocrisy. i think it is a great credit to the american voter that their message was received. host: next is a republican from iowa. good morning. caller: i would like to know what the government keeps giving the people that are rich more money and taking away from people with social security and disability? to me, i put this people -- i put these people and office to stop the spirit not they are

giving the rich people more money. fire they should fuckin' everyone. host: let's stop there. guest: nobody is getting more and nobody is getting less. the house rates are staying where they are until the end of 2012. there is no more money going to a rich person and less money is not going to a poor person. the government is not taxing the american people anymore. host: we have a twitter question. guest: would repeat the question -- would you repeat that question? what happened with the threat initiative to help by sam nunn of georgia which came shortly after the initiation of start i

caused the cleanup of all of the old soviet satellite states which all had nuclear weapons. they all have been cleaned up. delaware expand under a new start treaty. host: writing, california -- california, is next. caller: you mentioned the dream act. intercounty i grove, we have been dealing with illegal aliens for about 40 years. -- in the county i grew up, we've been dealing with illegal aliens for about 40 years. people are here illegally. unless this aspect of the tree back is deregulating, which means there is an issue where you can make all kinds of tax money off of them being here. you're just making -- we're been complaining about this for 40

years. we cannot complain about this particular aspect of taking our tax dollars. guest: you're exactly right. the problem is getting our poor is out of order. our main part should be to secure the border to the southwest to stop the flow of illegal immigrants. u.s. border patrol officer was brutally murdered three there been callous murders and assaults all about border. it is a dangerous place. drug trafficking is at an all- time high. most of those drugs are coming to atlanta, georgia, where west point the was the largest bust of ecstasy. i don't think he should deal with the dream act one way or another and to the first deal with illegal immigration. instead of rewarding but illegal immigration, we should stop tit. host: earlier i showed a

statistic from mexico of the many thousands of deaths in the country related to the drug wars. what do think it will take to end the violence and make the border more secure? guest: first of all, it will take the mexican government doing what they have to do within their own borders to provide domestic tranquility and stop the violence. as long as entry into the united states is relatively easy, as long as those drugs can do to the east coast of the united states, you are not going to end of stopping the violence. the quicker we make the commitment to border patrol agents, the quicker we make the commitment to intelligence, the quicker we make the commitment to detention cells along the border, the quicker will stop the flow of illegals. host: our next question is from twitter about earmarks. would you explain your position about earmarking?

guest: there are constitutional responsibilities of a congress where you've got to designate funds. ports is a good example. the problem is that earmarking got distorted. it got abuse. it got into pet projects. that infuriated the american people. it did not spend more money because the direction of money was within budget allocations of the appropriations committee. it was looked upon as sort of a pot of money the politicians were just using for their whim and it should not be the test. i think you'll see this congress very quickly come up with absolute restrictions on federal direction of money by members of congress for projects that are not irresponsibly in the first place. host: this is a question about the balance of power.

guest: as i said, the budget allocations, which are set every year by congress, determines how much money will be in each of the 12 appropriations it is. then the question becomes how is that money spent to ask congress must have a say so. article one directs the covers to have a say so. if you take yourself out of that, you leave it to the bureaucracy or the executive branch of government. there should be a check and balance or the executive branch respects that. that's not include whistle spending and frivolous projects and spending money on things that the government does not have business doing. host: robert is on the line. caller: i have three questions. i realize if we had let the

taxes go back to the pre-push levels, we would have raised as much money as the entire debt commission proposals -- the pre- bush levels. i think the american people have told us and what of wanted to sacrifice to prevent our comet from becoming like greece. what about your marks in the tax code? when we stop having earmarks benefiting at specific pinnaces? if lowering x-rays raises revenue, which it continued down 1% and have revenues coming out of our ears. guest: questions 1 and two or antibody debt commission report. they dealt with the tax and spending aspects. they basically took away a lot of the deductions and the "

earmarks" o there was a flatter and fair tax. i think shared sacrifice has to take place in terms of lowering the debt and deficit. that is a combination of tax and spending. was the last question? host: the tax code -- more fairness in the tax code. and the gop tax spending. guest: the last one was if lowering spending increases revenues, what not cut it to 1% to lowering taxes restrict american capital investment is a good thing to do. lowering it so that you cannot pay for the response of government is not a good idea. there is a happy balance. reagan found it in 1996. george w. bush founded in 2003. there's a balance where you can adjust taxes and increase

revenues, in some cases lowering the tax in the first place. productivity goes up. host: this your on twitter goes back to the earmark discussion. -- this viewer and twitter -- on twitter prospective the earmark discussion. guest: the house originates the budget. the senate has to pass it. is a congressional responsibility -- is a congressional responsibility. er on twitterew we wants to go to strategy on the floor. guest: that is possible. my experience is when you of a closely divided government, which will have beginning in january, you have more

cooperation. everytime you have an absolute majority, as the democrats have had, as republicans have had some time back, you end up having this my way or the highway attitude. you and kept getting more filibusters, a lot more fair to get closure. you get a divided body. when the votes are closer, you tend to find common ground and move forward. i would think given the pressing issues of the day, which will have beginning in january of the deficit, given the fact we have a type/government and a presidential election in 2012, i'm optimistic that it will not be as recalcitrant as it has been the last couple of years. host: earlier and show in number of columnists who are writing about the tax package deal and what it meant for president obama. what are your thoughts on that and what that means for

cooperation with the gop going forward? guest: i was glad our leadership, and i commend mitch mcconnell and speaker boehner, but this is an important issue that -- texas work limit on the american people. uncertainty in the tax code. coming up with this tragic as to what to do with the tax question -- maxtor may bode well for other more cooperation and better corporate atmosphere. host: senator isakson is with us for a few more minutes. caller: good morning. my question has to do with the priorities of the senate. i'm pretty sure it does come up on the docket on "don't ask, don't tell" -- it is a non-

issue. however , in contrast, the republicans are blocking debate of the nine sides look first responders bill, which, you have -- 9/11 first responders bill. i was wondering what your opinion is on that allow the senate is blocking that? it doesn't matter right now. guest: i think i heard parts of that. it was all garbled. question was about the senate agenda and going back to "don't ask, don't tell" ban prohibiting debate. i think the primary reason is the message is very mixed from our commanders and our military. the, that of the marine corps has been quite clear about --

the commandant of the marine corps has been quite clear about "don't ask, don't tell." moving away from those issues to go to another issue to not make a lot of sense. i think that is one of the reasons of the debate has not come forward. i do not know whether cloture will be granted tomorrow. we have work to finish of the start treaty and work to finish on the cr go home. i think it will be on the top of the agenda will come back in january. host: the caller also ask about the first responders bill. guest: harry reid not mention it last night in his remarks on the floor. i mentioned it earlier in the day. the first responder bill may very well also,. i want to make this quite clear. once we got the taxes dealt with and wants to cut the spending dealt with, which would've done

taxes and are about to do spending, which they are off the table, it is for a possible we will do that before we get out of here. host: do support the legislation? guest: i want is people to be sponsored and helped and the get the treatment they need. money is been spent to see to it that we get to everybody that needs it. host: last call. kathleen, a democrat. caller: good morning. i have a statement. we're coming into the holidays. i want the american people to stop crying about money, money, a money. america was built on the fear of god. i want all these people to pick up one book, the holy bible, and deuteronomy.

guest: i think that is a great message. host: what is your prediction on how long the senate will be here? guest: guess is as good as anybody else's. i think we will publish finished tuesday of next week. host: not come back ever the holiday? guest: i hope not. host: we will be joined from the same location by senator tom udall from mexico. the switch will take a minute. we'll continue taking your phone calls. let me get a tweet up because we don't have a phone call ready. we will go -- this is from -- sorry. caught off guard. where are you calling from tax long island.

nick. good morning. you are on the air. caller: i am calling about the dream act. i think they should take care of the border before they get into anything else about the dream act. that is a serious situation. especially with the drug situation. you do not want this drug cartels in there because you don't want innocent people getting hurt. i think finally we should stop talking about the borders and it really take care of them. that is all i have to say. host: next telephone call is from california. you're on the air. good morning. caller: help. i was just calling for the senator from georgia. he seemed to know everything -- he is really good. he answers questions. i just agree with him, everything he says. he seems really bright currie i am happy. it makes me happy to hear we

have a senator like that. god bless everybody. have a merry christmas and happy new year. host: we are waiting for senator tom udall. i have word he is now available. oked up top -- all hoped upp and ready to join us. host: we have a bit of a laundry list to see where positions are. first of all, the tax cut package. you voted against it. guest: i voted against it because i am a believer that very soon we're going to have to prove it over to deficit reduction. us upnot believe this sets u to do that. when it comes to things like a payroll tax holiday, they keep getting extended. i also think the payroll tax

holiday is it real threat to social security if you keep extended it. moving to the stimulus side off the deficit side, i don't see any still live -- in the still- quality or character of bush as far as these tax cuts for people to make $1 million or more. i did not see what we're putting that in there and what we are continuing that when we have these huge deficits. those are a couple of the reasons that i think this was not a good compromise. i think we could have pulled together and done a number of things to have a good solid package that would have been similar tiff and also set aside for deficit reduction. that would have beentz stiglitz imulative.

unemployment compensation is one ative most stimulu things you can do. we have the ability to have one senator hold up the whole show. and one senator did that for several days when it came to the unemployment insurance benefits and the effect it has and people losing their jobs and wanting to support their family. they lose their jobs through no fault of their own and the want to support their families. one family was holding up the whole show. when we get to the next congress, that is our one shot to really take a look at the rules and see how we can be better institution and improved upon the way we do things. host: let me have you talk about the other big story, which was the decision to pull the omnibus

bill. were you in concert with that spending package to what to think about a concern resolution? guest: i am sad we cannot do the on this -- to do the omnibus. they should be done one at a time on the senate floor with an open process and have debates and amendments by everyone. unfortunate, we were not able to do that because of the obstruction. a -- i would prefer to them one at a time on the senate floor and work on the house to compromise. we were not able to do that. i hope we can put them all together. there's been a long process over the last year formulating this bill. i'm sad the nine republicans who senator reid said we had on got off the bill. a cr not a way to run

government. it is a straight jacket. it is a very bad solution. we're going to have to keep the lights on and keep the government going. we'll probably do a cr if we don't have the votes. host: is voter on twitter is aware of your rules proposal. guest: sure. proposal is that we should take advantage of the first legislative day under the constitution to take a look at our rules. that is the power and authority that is given to us. i'm not saying we wholesale changes the rules. i think is a healthy thing to

take a look at the rules and see if we can make the senate work better. everybody knows the senate is a broken institution. a large part of that has to do with the rules and the misuse of the rules. my proposal is on the first day, let's take a look at those rules and see if we can do a better job. just to tell you about some of the proposal that are out there that i think are good and have solid support. we should be able to get onto a bill without a filibuster. today we cannot do that. we cannot get onto a bill because there is an initial motion that is filibustered. so i would limit that initial motion, the motion to proceed that has bipartisan support to limit that motion and it directly on to the bill. the other thing that has significant support in our caucus is the idea of continuous debate. if you are going to be in opposition, then -- and this is

what i hear in the country all the time -- if people are going to oppose, let them come out of the shadows and stand up and debate. that is the essence, i think, of some of the strong, solid proposals that have consensus support. some of them have bipartisan support. host: 2 rules changes require a simple majority? guest: majority. the part about the constitution is that on the first day, you can cut off debate on any rules proposal and with 51 votes and you can adopt rules with 51 votes. it is the way since we have had this filibuster rule, which has been in place almost 100 years now. any change to the rule is always started with the constitutional option. what i'm trying to do is say this is the time because of unprecedented abuse of these

rules to take a hard look at the rules. hopefully we can get republican support for some of the proposals we have out there. that will be the best way. if not, to majority passed to govern. i think we have a situation now with the minority governments even though we have a majority. we do not want that to happen. that is not good for the democracy. supermajorities by the house or senate were never envisioned in the constitution. host: the senator will be with us for the last 10 minutes. next we go to florida, scott, a democrat. guest: scott, the morning. -- good morning. caller: making work pay tax breaks for households. i understand that is being replaced with a social security

pay cut. the newspaper today says the people between $40,000.50000 dollars would get approximate $707. it is a reduction. guest: let me stop you there. i support that. i think it should have been in the packers. the package i would have put together, i think we would have dropped the social security payroll tax holiday and we would have maintained making work pay tax cut. go ahead. caller: the second thing is the death tax. we're hearing republicans talk about death tax and now we're double taxation. the people that earned the money paid their taxes on it. they die, we'll not taxing them. if they want to take that money with them, they can.

we're taxing the new people that are getting that money. if i give some money to my family today, that is considered a gift. they may have to pay gift tax privileges explain to the american people that is not a death tax. the real death tax is the money that we're paying for health care. the rest of the world, health care is paid for by taxes. that is our death tax. thank you. guest: to like very much. i think you make a good point. i call it the estate tax -- thank you is very much. it is a tax on passing large amounts of wealth on to the next generation. there are a number of things that you can do now to prevent that from happening. you can give tax-free gifts under the current tax code. if you have because you care about, you can set up a foundation with germany. definition can be in existence over a long pull of time.

i believe like warren buffett and delegates and these multi- millionaires, that you should have spent the state tax and -- you should have an estate tax. i would go back to brooklyn -- to bill clinton's rate which is about 55% and a $5 million exemption. so that is in the range of where we should be pared unfortunate, we have lowered the rate much, much lower. and there is no real need to do that. in this time where we have deficits, we need to focus on areas of revenue to deal with the deficits and we also need to focus on spending. there is no doubt about that. host: reduce stan of fundamental

tax reform? -- where do you stand on fundamental tax reform? guest: i think our tax code is way too complicated. books are huge. we should move to simplify the tax code. president obama has called for that. i hope that is one of the areas that we can have common ground in this next session of congress. >> the next is upstate new york, aaron, an independent. caller: of the lawmakers doing for the estimated four million on employed americans -- unemployed americans? we need a voice. who will stand ups? millions are responsible.

hard working americans who cannot find jobs. host: tell us about your circumstance. how long have you been unemployed? are you still there? guest: i was in the military -- caller: i was in the military. host: 2 wife recall. -- thank you for your call. guest: thank you for your service. to do everything we can to get veterans employed. one of the biggest things was when all the veterans returned from world war ii. feel so much for a person in your situation who has returned and is not able to find work. that is what i have worked on the veterans committee when i was in the house and i have , rked with chairman of copakaka

especially in the small business area. i think we've done some good things. addressing your question with the other folks who are out there, other than veterans who have passed the deadline, unfortunate, we don't have the support today in the congress to extend unemployment benefits for them. i think in these economic times we iran, it would be wise to take a look at that. when we talk about 9%, 10% unemployment, if you add in the underemployed and you add in the people who've quit looking for work, we're at a much higher figure. there is a huge amount of job insecurity out there. people are feeling the pain. as the caller said, it is through no fault of their own. many of these people are looking hard and not able to find work.

host: we have a just a few minutes late. this viewer from dallas tweets about the rules discussion. what to think about the nine- hour effort last week -- what did you think about the nine- last week?t guest: that was the first time when i've seen an actual filibuster in the tradition of the all-time senate. what the tradition was is we had respect for each other. we have respect for senators who were in opposition to things we were going to do. those senators came to the floor. they debated and made their case. after they finish making their case, they let us get to an upper down vote on the bill. that is not what we have today. there are a shadow filibusters', phantom of

filibusters. is a serious situation that is deteriorated significantly -- is a serious situation that has deteriorated. one of the keys is exactly what your person mentioned. if you're going to be in opposition, come to the floor, talk about it. you can take as long as you want. at the end of the day, the american people are entitled to an upper down vote. host: next to michigan. guest: how were you today? -- how are you today? caller: fine. in dealing with the deficit, why is it we don't hear much about how the government operates as opposed to compare it with how business operates?

businesses are rewarded when they are run efficiently. government, from what i know is that they get rewarded for spending it all. they have to or they will not qualify for the same amount of for thef they neede it next budgetary period. host: 8 use it or lose it theory. guest: he has come up with a good idea. the idea was put in a book called "reinventing government." if you save money, half could go to the deficit. that is a great, creed of idea. i think you should be rewarded for advocating it. -- that is a great, creative idea. host: to the next couple of days look like for the senate -- what did the next couple of days look like for the senate?

guest: for the most part, we will be debating the start treaty. host: we will be debating the start treaty. -- guest: we will be debating the start treaty. we should stay until we finish it. this is the congress that has had the hearings. this is the congress that has full knowledge. this is the congress that should vote on the treaty. host: senator udall, thank you for being with us. we have live coverage of the house of representatives. the house is an early at 9:00. david full schedule of bills to consider. thank you for being with us. for you to fulfill your promises, we pray. when i call, answer me, o god

of justice, from anguish you release me. have mercy and hear me. my people, how long will your hearts be closed, and seek what is false? it is the lord who grants favors to those who he loves. lord hears when we call upon him. hear him. ponder his faithfulness and be still. make justice your sacrifice and trust in the lord. both now and forever. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the chamber her approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance lab led by the gentleman from texas, congressman cuellar.

mr. cuellar: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair lays before the house an enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 6516, an act to make technical corrections to provisions of law enacted by the coast guard authorization act of 2010. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one minutes from each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker: without objection. mr. baca: this week, our

colleagues in the senate have an opportunity to straighten our future economy and create an opportunity for american young people by recognizing students who want to contribute through military service or higher education. the american dream act has a positive impact on all of us. and if we remember the 10 commandants, honor thy father and mother, many of these children came to the united states without of respect for their parents. they had no choice to be here. they deserve the opportunity to have the same that other students have by attending our schools, going on to college, and then they also paint a lot of our churches. they deserve the same opportunities that others have. we all know that the dream act is one piece of a larger reform that is needed to fix our broken immigration system, but it is a critical first step. i urge the designate, and i state, i urge the senate to

pass the dream act as soon as possible so the president can quickly sign the bill into law and give many students to have the opportunities that many others have had in this country. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? willy brandt mr. speaker, i is -- mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. wilson: when americans are worried about the state of the economy, the senate tried to push a reckless $1.1 trillion spending bill. the omnibus contained over 6,000 earmarks costing taxpayers close to $8 billion. the 2,000-page bill took over two days to print. i agree with speaker-elect john boehner's statement, this bill represents exactly what the american people have rejected, more spending, more earmarks and more big government. senate liberals tried to bulldoze this legislation with pork-filled spending. for example, $1.8 million to

study swine odor and manure management in ames, iowa. $2.19 million for center of grapes genetics in new york. $1.76 million for honey bee lab in texas. withdrawing the bill shows the american people can make a difference. thanks to the tea party activists and radio talk show host such as mark levin. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? mr. pallone: to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. last night the house finally passed on a bipartisan basis and sent to the president a middle-class tax relief package which also included extending unemployment insurance. for the middle class it provides tax relief of $1,500 for income up to $75,000,

$1,000 for income at $50,000 and $500 for income of $25,000. it also includes extended unemployment insurance, a 13-month extension of federal support for 99 weeks of unemployment insurance for laid off workers. the package includes child tax credit, extends the child tax credit for two years. it's worth about $1,000, doubled from $500 for qualifying children under the age of 17. and a payroll tax cut. creates a $120 billion payroll tax cut that's worth about $1,400 for the average new jersey household of $71,000 in average income. alternative minimum tax tax relief. earned income tax credit, higher education tax credit to help afford sending your children to college. and also tax cuts for business investments. basically allowing businesses to expense all of their qualified investments in 2011. i think it was very important that we passed this, mr. speaker. i'm glad it's now going to the president.

the speaker pro tempore: are there further requests for one minutes? the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. recorded votes on postponed questions will be taken later today. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, i move that we suspend the rules

and pass senate bill 3592. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 3592, a bill to designate the facility of the united states postal service located at 100 commerce drive in tyrone, georgia, as the first lieutenant robert wilson collins post office building. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. cuellar, and the gentleman from south carolina, mr. wilson, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cuellar: and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, on behalf of the committee on oversight and government reform, i'm pleased to introduce s. 3592, a bill to designate the facility of the

united states postal service located at 100 commerce drive in tyrone, georgia, as the first lieutenant robert wilson collins post office building. introduced by senator chambliss of georgia, senate 3592 passed the senate unanimously yesterday, december 16, 2010. the first lieutenant robert wilson collins was assigned to the second brigade combat team out of georgia. a class of 2008 graduate of west point, he deployed in support of operation iraqi freedom in the fall of 2009 and served as a platoon leader while they provided support for the elections in iraq. in keeping them connected to family and friends at home, he made a facebook page allowing them to share photos and messages to loved ones. sadly, he was killed when enemy forces attacked his vehicle with an introadviced explosive device.

he was 24 years of age. lieutenant collins is survived by his parents, retired lieutenant collins and his mother and girlfriend of eight years. mr. speaker, let us pay tribute to the life of linet robert collins by designating this post office building in his hometown. i ask my colleagues to join me in supporting senate bill 3592. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves his time. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. wilson: thank you, mr. speaker. and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. wilson: i'm very honored to join in with my colleague, congressman cuellar, in support of this legislation which was introduced by senator saxby chambliss. i know it's been championed by lynn westmoreland. i particularly have an interest in recognizing lieutenant

collins. i am very grateful myself to be the son of a flying tiger. i'm very grateful to have served for 31 years in the army guard and reserve. in fact, i was stationed many summers at fort stewart, georgia. so i identify with the third infantry division. i am grateful that i have four sons currently serving in the military. two of my sons have served in iraq. and so i know of the great efforts of our troops and the sacrifices of military families. at this time i'd like to include the obituary from the "times herald" in noonan, georgia, dated april 15, 2010. and this truly indicates what an extraordinary young person lieutenant collins. first lieutenant robert wilson collins of tyrone, georgia, was killed in action on april 7, 2010, in iraq in support of

operation iraqi freedom. first lieutenant collins was born in 1985 in red bank, new jersey, and graduated from sandy creek high school, class of 2004. after high school he graduated from the united states military academy at west point, new york, class of 2008. first lieutenant collins was the first member of the united states military academy class of 2008 to die in combat. he was serving as a platoon leader of b company 164th armor battalion, second brigade combat team, third infantry division. he's survived by his parents, lieutenant retired berkette deacon collins and lieutenant sharon collins of tyrone, georgia. paternal grandmother, susan orr collins of mississippi, aunt, susan d. groff of pennsylvania.

susan g. stringfellow of pervis, mississippi. childhood sweetheart and girlfriend of eight years, nicole williams of tyrone, georgia. best friend, andrew gardner of florida. his banff brothers. first lieutenant shawn flacks, first lieutenant tim conns, first lieutenant dan mccloud, greg mcduringo. first lieutenant phil repuco. first lieutenant clifford walker. battle buddy first lieutenant john f. parsons and numerous friends, extended family members and comrades in arms. funeral services were held april 17 at new hope baptist church at 10:00. and it was conducted by reverend scott pickering, dr. rick long and chaplain mark fairbrother officiating.

internment followed at forest lawn memorial park in noonan, georgia. in lieu of flowers, there was request of donations to the first lieutenant robert wilson collins patriot spirit scholarship, chair of bank of georgia, 100 west park drive, peace tree city, georgia, 30269. again, it certainly -- obituary knowing this was such an extraordinary young person protecting our country and by defeating the terrorists overseas, i'm honored to join in urging support of the legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, i again urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass and pass senate bill 3592. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative -- mr. cuellar: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this motion are postponed. . for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. cuellar: i move the house suspend the rules and pass the bill house resolution 1733, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 17 p 3 -- 1733, resolution recognizing mark twain as one of america's most famous litterairey icons on the 175th anniversary of his birth and the 100th anniversary of his death. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. cuellar, and the gentleman from missouri, mr. luetkemeyer, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: thank you, mr. speaker.

i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cuellar: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, on behalf of the committee on government oversight and reform, i'm pleased to present house resolution 1733, a resolution recognizing mark twain as one of america's most famous icons on the 175th anniversary of his birth and 100th anniversary of his death. house resolution 1733 was introduced by our colleague, the gentleman from arkansas, representive vic snyder, on november 18, 2010. this measure enjoys the support of over 60 members of the house. mark twain was born samuel clemons in missouri on november 30, 1835. famously he was born two weeks after the closest approach to the earth of haley's comments and next closest on the day of

his death in 1910. a mississippi river town that would inspired most of his beloved works, at age 12 he became a printer's apprentice and age 16 he began working as a type setter and sketches for the han balance journal -- hanibel journal newspaper. he work in philadelphia, st. louis, cincinnati taking time to educate himself at public libraries in the evening. after returning to missouri at age 22, he was inspired to be a steamboat pilot, earning significant income, learning intimate details of the river and where he was inspired to give himself his pen name, mark twain, which refers to the depth of two fan thoms, or 12 feet, the safe passage for a riverboat. he worked on boats until 1861. when the civil war stopped traffic along the mississippi river. he worked for newspapers in

various towns. his first success as a writer came with "the celebrated jumping frog of calavera county." in november 18, 1865. this launched his renown as a writer in bringing attention across the country. after traveling to europe and the middle east on assignments from the local newspaper, he moved his family to buffalo, new york, and then to hartford, account k it was in hartford twain wrote his most famous work, "the adventures of tom sawyer," the "the adventures of huckleberry friend" and "connecticut yankee in king arthur's court." he developed a lasting friendship with one of history's most famous scientists and adventurers. he died at 74 on april 21, 1910, a year after making his most famous prediction. i came with haley's comment in 1835 and it's coming again next

year. i expect to go out with it. it will be the greatest disappointment in my life i don't go out with the haley's comet. now here are these two that came together and they must go out together. william faulkner called mark twain the father of american literature. we can also remember and honor him for his advocacy on behalf of emancipation and women's suffrage. in closing no study of american literature is complete without mark twain. let us honor this giant of american literature through the passage of house resolution 1733. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from missouri. mr. lute mike: -- mr. luetkemeyer: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. luetkemeyer: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of house resolution 1733. recognizing mark twain as one of

america's most famous litterairey icons on the 5th -- 175th anniversary of his birth and 100th anniversary of his death. he was born on november 30, 185. he left school at the age of 13 to work as a printer's apprentice. he went on to become an editorial assistant in a newspaper and river pilot where he gained his famous pseudonym. mark twain began writing for a newspaper in the civil war and his short story was published in 1869. twain would go on to author the adventures of tom sawyer, adventures of huckleberry finn and other short stories. it's altogether fitting and proper to recognize mark twain and his rich contributions to our literary history. this inspired me to read his

books to my granddaughter. it fostered a love of reading to my children and grandchildren because it's part of what makes our kids. i'm also extremely honored and fortunate to represent hani balance -- hannibal in congress and discover the inspiration for some of the greatest works in american history. mark twain, and the city, are an integral part of missouri's heritage and i'm proud to recognize him today. to that end mark twain, quote, 20 years from now you'll be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the things you did do. so throw out the bow lines, cast the trade winds in your sail, explore, dream, discover. i urge all members to support me. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: i yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from arkansas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. mr. snyder: thank you.

mr. speaker, the boy growing up in southern oregon, to be exact, i was blessed with a wonderful public school system. of course this is about a half century ago now. you only have a good school system if you had good teachers and i did. mr. merriman, and butler, and myrie and i do a disservice to all by naming a few. chuck was one of those teachers and he helped me explore america and humanity through the words of mark twain. for a boy growing up in 1950's america, the world of riverboat, scallywags, run away slaves, and sassy, independent bare footed boys was magical. and the world of mark twain taught readers universal truth about the human animal and some of those truths are not flattering. like all youngsters i imagined myself to be huckleberry finn and when huck choosing to be hell so his love and loyalty and

friendship with a run away slave will be preserved, for me being raised in a town of few minorities i learned about racism and the power of even young boys to find the real truth and confront confusing human institution that is allowed racism to persist. a few weeks ago i saw the news report of tina fey winning the mark twain prize for mesh humor and reminded me this year 2010 should be acknowledged, the 100th anniversary of mark twain's death and the 175th anniversary of his birth. so even though this session was late i filed this resolution on his birthday to honor mark twain. mr. speaker, when parents are away from their babies, particularly during these holidays, we talk about our kids and so i will. my 4-year-old and my three 2-year-olds are the four little boy huck finn's in our arkansas household, geographically not har from huck finn's world.

such a different one now one that sam clemons would not recognize. except for the insights into the strength and weaknesses of human nature. because of that genius, that genius expressed with humor, i hope my young boys, my young huck finn is learn to love the world and works of mark twain. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves his time. mr. cuellar: reserve at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri. mr. luetkemeyer: we yield back. no more speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri yields back his time. mr. cuellar: i thank my colleagues. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time having expired, the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1733, as amended. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the chair lays before the house the following enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 4853, an act to amend the internal revenue code of 1986 to extend the funding and expenditure authority of the airport and airway trust fund to amend title 49 united states code to extend authorizations for the airport improvement program, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. cuellar: i move that we suspend the rules and concur in senate amendment to h.r. 2142, the government efficiency, effectiveness, performance improvement act. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2142, an act to require quarterly performance assessments of government

programs for purposes of assessing agency performance and improvement, and to establish agency performance improvement officers and the performance improvement council. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. cuellar, and the gentleman from missouri, mr. luetkemeyer, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. cuellar: thank you, mr. speaker. first of all i want to thank the government oversight and chairman ed towns and the ranking member, mr. issa. we worked on this legislation together to address a bill that i believe will be important for the congress to strengthen its

oversight over the executive branch. if we don't pass this, then we will -- the congress will not be in a strong position to provide legislative oversight. this -- i think everybody agrees that every member of congress should do everything to stop unnecessary and wasteful spending in order to eliminate federal government waste, we must know which federal agencies have programs are working and which are not. we need to get data about performance and efficiencies at federal agencies in order to make responsible budgetary decisions. we need the senate amendment to h.r. 2142, the government performance modernization act of 2010. the concept is not complicated. we can come down on the debt by cutting down on waste and debt with greater government efficiency, we can produce cost savings for every american taxpayer. this bill will shine light on the ineffective federal programs to root out wasteful spending. federal agencies are clearly

supposed to identify ambitious high priority goals and assess the performance and effectiveness to evaluate its direct impact on american people and the government. this will provide the needed information to make informed budgetary decisions. it also eliminates duplicates, outdated, and unused reporting. in the first year all old-fashioned and effective reportings will be eliminated by 10% will continue to streamline across the board. it requires o.m.b. and agencies to submit recommendations to congress about how to um prove the reporting process. this eliminates stacks of unused performance reporting -- reports that nobody reads or uses at this time. it also has transparency to generate government credibility, the information generated will be accessible and be made publicly available to congress and the american people. it also increases government

accountability, federal agencies are held accountability by requiring all agencies to conduct quarterly performance reports on how effectively they are working to meet their goals and to make sure there is government accountability and therefore we have a government accountability this will lead to government credibility also. it elvailts the role of agencies who bring accountability. instead of paper pushing across government desks, secretary of chief operating officer is held accountable for effectiveness and success of the agency. this puts a face and a name to performance of agencies and programs. it creates a mechanism to penalize agencies that fail to meet goals. this was an amendment that was added over in the senate and on the senate side we worked with senator mark warner, certainly want to thank him, joe lieberman, senator akaka.

but we worked closely with senator collins, senator coburn who added an amendment, the amendment that creates this mechanism to penalize agencies that don't meet this goal, and we at the last minute we also spoke to senator jeff session abouts this particular bill and this bill got the support. as you know it was u.c., passed unanimously from the senate yesterday with the input of our republican colleagues on the senate side. . the amendment that they added would penalize agencies. if they have not met the performance goals for fiscal year this bill will require action and this will ensure the goals that are met -- are met and actively pursued throughout the year. bottom line is this will allow us to provide legislative oversight over the executive branch, whether it's a

democratic or republican president, this is something that we need to do. the american taxpayers deserves a government that's transparent, efficient and accountable. i ask members to support h.r. 2142. one more thing. we do have republican colleagues on the -- on the congress here on this side that when we pass this bill unanimously from the house floor some months ago, we have co-sponsors, republicans, that sponsor this. i ask members to support h.r. 2142, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. issa. mr. issa: thank you, mr. speaker. and i'll be brief. mr. cuellar, you've been a good member. you worked hard on this. we worked together on this.

when this number -- left the house, it was a different bill. in the 11th hour -- let me rephrase that. in the first hour of the new congress i intend to work hard to bring up a bill that looks more like your original bill, has some additional learning experiences and try to bring it back as quickly as possible. i cannot support your bill today. this is not the bill thatess left the house. this is a bill that still has $75 million not paid for. but it's not the $75 million. as much as we talk about pay-for and pay-go and offsets and how to do things, our real problem today is as it came back from the senate it looks a lot, an awful lot like somebody just picked up your number and redid your bill. now, i know you want this and you deserve it for the hard work that you did, but this bill is simply a series of mandates that codifies a

management style that needs no legislation. this legislation does not create something that the president cannot and is not already doing. we in congress want goal setting historically we look to o.m.b., and that goal setting is intended to be objective, to hold agencies to standards, determined not just by their own agency. as the bill is written today, basically an agency sets its own goals, announces its own goals and o.m.b. has a secondary role. this does not create a real requirement for performance-based program analysis. the bill that left was an amendment that you very much helped carve and we did it together would have done that. i don't like the idea that in the day after the, the day

after, the day after we probably should have long gone home but we're waiting for the c.r. that they bring something on suspension. given a few days of regular order, given one roundtrip to the committee, we could change this. but if we changed it, of course, we would be back to the senate who has a completely different bill. it may pass today. it will not have my support. i am urging both sides of the aisle to defeat the bill, not because you don't deserve a bill with your name on it on this subject. you worked hard. but because this isn't the bill that you deserve to have become law. i know you're leaving congress. you're a good member who worked hard on our committee. i thank you for that. i promise you starting january 5 we will work together with you, if you'll donate the time, to do the bill you wanted to do.

and that i guarantee you will be my first priority if it's not passed today. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves his time. the chair reminds all members to address their remarks to the chair. the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: thank you, mr. speaker. first of all, i want to thank the ranking member who will be the chairman of the government oversight. i want to thank him and his staff because we did work on this together. it went over to the senate. we were trying to move it over here as quickly as possible. the senators did make some changes, but the biggest change i believe was to reduce the cost -- because you recall it was an authorization of 150, it got cut in half, it's 75. it won't be a cost to any appropriation, number one. and number two, i believe one

of the major amendments was senator coburn of oklahoma who basically put the teeth on requiring congress and o.m.b. to take action in an agency, a program doesn't meet those performance goals. so, again, i respectful loedis agree with you on that, but i believe the amendment that coburn added is good because it actually adds the teeth or the mechanism to enforce if an agency doesn't do their job by meeting those goals. i do want to thank, again, the ranking member and the chairman, also, and his staff on both sides, the republican staff and our side worked on this bill because it's a believe that i believe mr. issa and i believe strongly in and todd platts also. i want to say thank you for the work we are doing. hopefully we can work on another item. if not we'll be working on this bill again. i want to say thank you to the work that members on both sides of the aisle have done.

mr. speaker, at this time i yield back the balance of my time and ask members to support this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas wishes to yield back his time. mr. cuellar: reserve. sorry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves his time. the gentleman from california. mr. issa: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. issa: mr. speaker, may i inquire as -- if the majority has any additional speakers at this time? is the gentleman prepared to close? mr. cuellar: i am prepared to close. mr. issa: mr. speaker, i think we both said what comes from our hearts. mr. speaker, we're losing a good member who worked hard on our committee. i respectfully ask all members to vote no on this. i will vote no not because of the author and not because of his effort but because it simply isn't good enough. if we're going to spend even $75 million on new mandates, we have a standard that has to be a standard of excellence, a

standard that truly makes improvements and a standard that in fact does not simply allow the president to do what he already has the power to do. we can do this in the next congress. we will do this. again, mr. speaker, i express my interest in working with members on the committee now and members in the committee in the future to fashion a bill with the same name, and if i'm allowed, even the same number, so we can pass it in its original improved form or an improved form in the next congress. and with that i reluctantly say we must oppose this bill, yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: again, i thank the ranking member, and at this time i urge members to support h.r. 2142, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time having expired, the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass and concur in the senate amendment

to h.r. 2142. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended -- mr. issa: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. issa: on this i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, i move that we suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1621. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1621, resolution recognizing the 100th anniversary of the historic founding of catholic charities u.s.a. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr.

cuellar, and the gentleman from california, mr. issa, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, i ask for unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cuellar: and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cuellar: mr. speaker, on behalf of the committee on government oversight and government reform, i am pleased to support h.r. 1621, a bill recognizing the 100th anniversary of the historic founding of catholic charities u.s.a., introduced by our colleague, the gentleman from new jersey, rush holt, on september 15, 2010. the measure enjoys support of over 70 co-sponsors. mr. speaker, catholic charities was founded in 1910 here in washington, d.c., on the campus of catholic university of america as the national conference of catholic charities. it was created for both the creation of catholic charities bureaus across the country, encourages professional social work, practice, brings solidarity to those in

charityible minute steers and cares for the poor. today they serve over nine million people of all faiths and backgrounds each year. they provide training and technical assistance to member organizations and maintain a range of networks with groups committed to social justice. mr. speaker, let us therefore congratulate the historic founding of the organization through the passage of h.r. 1621. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has passed s. 3874, an act to amend the safe drinking water act, to reduce lead in drinking water, in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. issa: thank you, mr. speaker. h.res. 1621 does what we should

do in recognizing really great organizations for the work they do. catholic charities for 100 years has represented the best in charity, not as it name might suggest, as catholics or for catholics, but catholics are people helping people regardless of their religion around this country. so i join with the majority in urging support for h.res. 1621. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield as much time as he may consume, the sponsor of the bill, the gentleman from new jersey, representative rush holt. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. holt: thank you, mr. speaker. and as this session of congress moves to an end, i'd also like to thank the gentleman from texas for his service and for

bringing this up now. we will recognize with this resolution and celebrate the 100th anniversary of this historic organization that is a force for good, a leading voice in the united states for compassionate service and care and for social reform. more than 1,700 local catholic charities, agencies and institutions nationwide carry out the mission to provide service to people in need, to advocate for justice and social structures, to call people of good will to do the same by working with individuals and families and communities, to help them meet their needs, address their issues, eliminate oppression and build a just and compassionate society. catholic charities focuses on poverty but has important work

in parenthood, in immigration, human trafficking, disaster response and relief, climate change and other such things. catholic charities provides health and hope for more than 8 1/2 million people each year. for example, provides food service to millions of people, immigration services, refugee services, addiction services, adoption services, temporary shelter, transitional housing and much, much more in a compassionate, nonsectarian way. this really is an example of what we can do together as a community. i see this in new jersey under

the auspices of the bishops of the diocese of mccutchin, bishop of trenton, bishop o'connell, dedicated people such as francis doland and joyce campbell, mary ann, and on the national scene, reverend schneider, the president, providing a fine example of how service and care and compassion that are motivated by faith and religious teachings are delivered in a nonsectarian way available to people of all faiths. . these people let their good works speak. communities that are marred by disasters such as hurricanes, fires, floods find catholic charities there as one of the greatest providers of financial and technical assistance and

training and most of all compassion and care. i ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing 100 years of good works of catholic charities u.s.a. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from -- the gentleman from texas reserves his time. the gentleman from california. mr. issa: thank you, mr. speaker. time is short. i believe this will be unanimously passed. whether it's father joe carroll in san diego or countless heads of various charities headed by clergymen or lay people around the country, catholic charities today after 100 years of being honored on behalf of the kind of outreach of people helping people that america does best. so with that, i thank the gentleman for bringing this bill

to our attention. i'm glad we were able to do this in the 11th hour. i urge its support and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: i want to say i am returning back to congress. i want to put that for the record. so i do look forward working with mr. holt and mr. issa and other members. again as this might be the last oversight bill that we have, again i want to thank the democrat staff, chairman towns, the ranking member and his staff also for working because i think this committee has done a lot of good work. i appreciate the work that they have done. all of us working together in a bipartisan way. at this time i will ask members to support this resolution and i yield back the balance of my time. yes. mr. issa: i join with the gentleman of course in supporting this bill. i, too, look forward to working with the gentleman as he returns to the next congress. my notes indicated he was

leaving the committee. if that is not true i truly look forward to working with him on the committee. if he is on another committee i look forward to working with him in the new role but on his legislation. i yield back. mr. cuellar: members, at this time i ask you to support the bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1621. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1767. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of

the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1767, resolution commending the wisconsin badger football team for an outstanding season and 2011 rose bowl bid. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt, and the gentleman from tennessee, mr. roe, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: mr. speaker, i request five legislative days during which members revise and extend and insterile extraneous material on house resolution 1767 for the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. health: i yield myself such time as i may consume. -- mr. holt: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. holt: i rise today in of house resolution 1767 which commends the wisconsin badger football team for an outstanding season and a 2011 rose bowl bid. i present this resolution on behalf of representative baldwin. representative baldwin introduced it and it is supported by others from the badger state. the wisconsin badgers just

completed a dominant regular season, winning the big ten title, finishing 11-1 in their record, earning a bid to the rose bowl game on new year's day, 2011. the rose bowl is the oldest of all college football bowl games. first played in 1902. and since 1945, it's been the most highly attended college football game in the country. i'd like to extend my congratulations to the university of wisconsin madison chancellor betty marton, three time rose bowl winning coach and athletic director, and head coach brett bulimia for their -- belima for their outstanding season. the badgers have achieved an outstanding overall 14-15 record . for the second consecutive season the badger football team

features 22 players selected to the academic all big ten team, surpassing the previous record of 19 set a few years ago. the team also, this is worth noting, is the least penalized team in the united states. displaying remarkable discipline and leadership on the field. mr. speaker, i'd like to thank representative baldwin for introducing this resolution and once again express my support for house res. -- house resolution 1767. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. roe: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. roe: thank you. i rise today in support of house resolution 1767, a resolution commending the wisconsin badger football team for an outstanding season and the 2011 rose bowl bid. the 2010 wisconsin badgers finished the regular season with a sterling 11-1 record, co-champions of the big ten conference and earned a trip to

the rose bowl. the path to the rose bowl started early with a victory over the number one ranked ohio state buckeyes in a nationally televised game and the season got better from there. the badgers were a prolific offensive machine, averaging 45.2 points per conference game. it was the second highest per game total in conference history. numerous players earned spots on the all american teams for their performances on the field this year, including gabe, lance, j.j., careme was named to an award given every year to the nation's best interior lineman. all these accomplishments would not have been possible without their head coach. his achievements have also been recognized as he was recently named a finalist for the bear bryant award, an award given to the top college football team in the country. we wish the badgers the best of luck on january 1. i urge my colleagues to support

this resolution. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to recognize the gentlewoman from wisconsin, the author of this resolution, ms. baldwin, for as much time as she may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from wisconsin is recognized. ms. baldwin: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from new jersey for yielding time. i rise today in strong support of h.res. 1767, a resolution commending the wisconsin badger football team for an outstanding season and for their 2011 rose bowl bid. the business business wadgers completed a terrific regular season and won the big ten title. they finished their season 11-1. and they are the least penalized team in the country. the badger offensive ranks in the top 20 nationally in scoring, rushing, and total offense. 22 badger players were selected to the academic all big ten

team. and even more exciting our wisconsin badgers earned a well deserved bid to the rose bowl on january 1, 2011. it has been a pleasure for me to watch our badger football team excel this season. i know i am joined by fans at home in wisconsin and indeed alumni and fans around the country in feeling great pride in the university of wisconsin, madison, and the stellar accomplishments. it is true our football team enjoys a very loyal and fervent support from fans and alumni. badger fans sold out camp randell stadium for the entire season. and what a season it was. my colleagues may remember a warm night in october when the badgers defeated the number one ranked ohio state buckeyes 31-18. it was really an incredible game. i'll never forget the opening kickoff return by david gilrich for a touchdown. after the game fans rushed to the field in a sea of red.

what a game. the following week the badgers barnstormed into iowa and beat a strong hawkeyes team in an inspiring comeback. the badger defense cemented the one-point win with a key defensive stand. the badgers' success on the field is guided by strong guidance from the university of wisconsin leaders. i'd like to acknowledge a few key folks who have contributed to this outstanding season. university of wisconsin, madison chancellor martin has exhibited incredibly strong leadership for the university of wisconsin. chancellor martin displays an unyielding commitment to academic excellence for wisconsin student athletes and is assuredly a big reason behind this great season. i also want to acknowledge athletic director barry alvarez, a three-time rose bowl winning coach. who had a strong hand in helping lead the badgers back to pasadena, california. and of course we are grateful to

the strong leadership of our head coach who showed tremendous resolve in guiding the badgers to an outstanding 11-1 season. indeed the badgers have achieved a stellar 49-15 record overall during the coach's tenure. and in addition to his prowess on the field, he's a leader in his commupet. he does tremendous work to promote breast cancer awareness and survival. in addition, our badger offensive coordinator, paul kris, is a finalist for the broils award as the nation's top assistant coach. football fans watch the game because of the skills and talent of the players. at wisconsin we are lucky enough to have the privilege of watching players on the field who also show exceptional leadership off the field. senior quarterback, scott tollson, the most accurate passer in college football, won the johnny unitas golden arm

award for his on-field performance as well as his character. senior defensive end, j.j. watt, is an all ack democrat inc., all big ten team selection and winner of the lott impact trophy awarded nationally to a defensive player for his athletic, academic, and community achievements. and senior offensive lineman gabe carimi won the outland trophy, an honor given to the best interior lineman in college football. in addition to being selected as the academic all big ten team as a civil engineering major. as my colleagues know, the annual rose bowl game is the oldest college bowl game and its history and prestige has earned it the title of the granddaddy of them all. this 2011 rose bowl bid is exciting for the wisconsin badgers as well as t.c.u., texas christian university, who we will meet in pasadena.

wisconsin looks forward to badgering the horned frogs on new year's day. i urge my colleagues to support h.res. 1767 which recognizes the achievements of the players, coaches, students, alumni, and staff who were instrumental in helping the wisconsin badgers make it to pasadena, california. regardless of your political affiliation or football allegiance, there is always an open invitation from the business which is -- from the wisconsin badgers. we'll see you in pasadena. on, wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey continues to reserve. mr. holt: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee. mr. roe: i have no further speakers, but i would like to congratulate the wisconsin football team. it's difficult for me to be here because they destroyed my small school this year, austin pea, we