problems it would cause is a power grab. if you look at what the supreme court did recently where they basically recognized corporations as citizens to contribute as much money as they want, then you look at what wisconsin is trying to do and some other republicans break the backs of the unions, no one is trying to break the back of the corporations and how much money they are giving. if the unions are not around to support the democrats, you will see more and more money like from the two-party. dick armey and that lot. i wish the republicans controlled both houses because i wanted to shut down the government. host: silver spring, maryland, ken. caller: i bet the republicans would wish they were in charge of the senate as well and this would be a fight between the

republican congress and the president. that would actually be much more closely paralleled to 1995. i think they don't want to repeat that. what you are hearing from ken is a sense of what you are seeing in this two-week fight is about the larger issues of the country that in some ways we are not dealing with. the economy, how to revive the economy. is it going to be tax cuts or cuts in spending or incentives with stimulus spending? i think that discussion is probably coming in a larger way than we have seen, if we can manage to keep the government running while this emerges. host: james in southeast louisiana sends us this message. he writes that we need to get

this cr to the end of the year and then fundamental tax form, then completely rewrite the 2012 budget. which leads me to my next question, the other major consideration facing congress as a comeback this week is the various cabinet secretaries and agency heads coming up in a constant parade starting tomorrow who will make a case for the budgets of their particular departments or agencies. what can we expect from the agency heads, the cabinet heads, and what kind of response will they get from the congressman? guest: we start with the interior secretary. i think that's tomorrow. what is interesting about this is that this is what the process is supposed to look like. the executive branch, through the cabinet secretary, comes to the congress, makes a case for a budget, the president sends his budget proposal, which we have seen.

a lot of the interior budget in the president's proposal is significantly cut in some ways. and then that process is supposed to lead to some kind of orderly appropriations bill that goes through committee the add to that gets dealt with on the floor. it does not happen. at the breakdown in the process. in some ways this feels not on point. it would be interesting to see if it works this year. host: do you imagine it will be even less on the mark this year because the republicans control the house and the democrats control the senate? when the secretary of state goes in front of the house foreign affairs committee, the reception and the questioning will be significantly different than when he goes in front of the senate foreign relations? guest: that is correct. usually this process also becomes a discussion of policy.

yes, you want money to run this agency, but what policy are we trying to implement? how should be fixed this? i think the discussion, certainly on the house side, is not about policy, it is about spending and how to reduce it. host: albany, georgia, brian on our independent line, on with terrence samuel. caller: i'm a first-time caller. i appreciate you taking my call. thank you. basically, i have been a long time watcher a c-span and it's a great channel. i guarantee the entire country appreciates your being on tv all the time. basically, my concern is you have these rich congressmen and senators who are written before they even get in there. it is a millionaire's club near the average american cannot even get in there and help run this country. we have smart people.

i'm really nervous. we have smart people out here that could run this country just as well as these old farts in office. these guys get in there and get power. they never get voted out. people keep voting them in, republican or democrat. i don't trust either party. i think they are corrupt. they turn their backs on the american people for corporate america. when you run for office, it is not supposed to be about how much power or money or influence you can have in your time, it is about serving the country, making military stronger, looking out for the middle class working americans person, and making the military stronger. unfortunately, -- the unfortunate matter is that when

a politician is get in office, the longer they stay in office, the more corrupt they become. host: we will leave it there, brian. guest: this is a shameless plug, but " >> leaving this segment now to go to secretary general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief. this is live from the u.n. in new york. >> you will meet -- they will meet with president barack obama this afternoon and discuss further steps to deal with the situation in libya. the secretary-general will also visit the holocaust museum, where he will warn we will live up -- should live up to the words, never again. adopting a resolution placing

sanctions on muammar gaddafi and other key libyan officials as well as differing the matter to the international criminal courts. he says the resolution the council adopted sends a strong signal that gross violations of basic human rights will not be tolerated and those responsible for grave crimes will be held accountable. and he added he will continue to follow the situation closely and remained in close touch with the world and regional leaders to ensure their support for swift and concrete international action. someone else who is following the situation in libya extremely closely, of course, is valerie amos, who, as you can see, has joined me for the briefing. as you know, she is undersecretary general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief coordinator and she is here to talk about libya. i think time is pressing. we have until about 20 past with ms. amos and then i will continue. >> thank you very much. accurate information from the

u.n. and its partners about the situation on the ground is scarce bid to ongoing security concerns in the country. however, preliminary information from eastern libya suggest that it benghazi, normalcy is returning -- returning. in humanitarian arm of the united nations is taking all measures to make sure we are prepared for any eventuality. i am very concerned by the alarming reports of continued violence in the country. there are reports that civilians, including women and children, have been wounded and gravely injured. while there are no confirmed numbers of deaths and wounded, estimates range from hundreds to thousands. we appeal to all parties to refrain from violence against civilians. tens of thousands of people from within libya are crossing borders over land, mainly into egypt and tunisia. as of this morning, the estimated number of people will

have crossed into egypt since the beginning of the crisis is now over 61,000. while the numbers crossing the tunisian border may number up to 40,000 with another thousand two niger. the majority of the people entering to leave our migrant workers. the government has asked for how to respond to the needs of non- tunisian nationals. there are concerns given numbers about provisions of water and sanitation. we welcome the pockets of indications the united nations has received from tunisia and egypt that they will maintain open borders for those fleeing violence in libya. there is no clear information on internal population movements inside libya, but there are concerns that lydia's -- inside the country and in the capital are being prevented from fleeing. and enter agency assessment of

the egyptian-libyan border was completed on sunday. the border crossing is said to be well organized and humanitarian assistance provided by aid organizations was seen to be entering libya. in addition to participating in the event -- and enter agency assessments, my organization is rapidly deploying a team to cairo to reinforce the resident coordinator in tripoli and put in place immediately mechanisms for coordination, information management, reporting, and public information. the new director of the coordination and response division is now in cairo to oversee this process. efforts by humanitarian agencies so far have been focused mostly on the border areas between libya and tunisia and egypt unhcr has deployed teams to it -- and to -- to assist people coming across the border.

unhcr is focusing relief efforts on neighboring countries. governments have shown incredible generosity and ordinary people, particularly in geneva, have been hosting people in their homes. unhcr is working with the tunisian government establish a camp flying and 10,000 tents and other basic materials that are arrived over the weekend. according to the world health organization, the health situation is precarious. so far, trauma kits have been sent to libya and who has reached benghazi with medical supplies. dispatching staff to the egyptian and tunisian border and will assess needs and a contingency planning for food assistance for people affected by the violence inside libya. if there is a need and want the security situation allows. firsthand accounts from people

arriving at the borders mentioned shortages in food, petrol, and medical supplies. libya depends on food imports and could save a potential interruption in food and supply chain due to the unrest. we also remain concerned about the situation of migrant workers from sub-saharan african countries who have so far been unable to leave. thank you. >> thank you very much. questions, please? >> thank you very much. [inaudible] you have mentioned these concerns that you have. in your estimation, which is the most primary of concerns that you have. is it food, medical aid, how many people are being injured -- how you can get access to them? what are your primary concerns

at this point in time that you are not able to meet? >> the primary concern is getting access particularly to tripoli and the neighboring areas where the security situation is extremely volatile. all the reports are that through the east, supplies have managed to get in and the situation there has returned to almost normal according to reports we are getting. we want to do proper assessments. we are seeing, of course, terrible photographs on our television screens as people are fleeing, but we need to have a proper sense of what the needs are. other concerns are that countries do not close their borders. these are people in desperate need. and it applies not only to tunisia and egypt and niger,

that border libya, but also applies to european union countries. access is also a concern. with respect to medical supplies -- the information we are getting is that there are some shortages. we worry about the possibility of longer-term shortages with respect to food. but that is not necessarily the most critical issue at this point in time. >> my name is -- japanese public tv. first of all, thank you for your explanation. i have two simple questions. please specify again what is urgently needed for libyan people in the current situation? and the second question -- as you know, the security situation is very severe, very bad. how can you an organization supply needed materials -- the

u.n. organization supply needed materials? >> i understand second question. what was the first? >> let me clarify it again -- what is urgently most necessary for people in this situation in libya? what is needed urgently? >> i think the thing that people in libya probably most want is a degree of security. they are fleeing an extremely volatile, insecure situation. what you have is the eastern part of the country, which is being controlled by different elements. we are seeing reports of over 1000 people who are said to have died as a result of security problems in tripoli. but at the moment, we don't have any u.n. staff in the tripoli.

they have been taken out of the country because of security concerns. we have seen people go into benghazi, so that's how we have a much better sense of what is happening in the east. and of course, on the west, as people across the border into tunisia, we are hearing from them about concerns about the violence, concerned about supply is running out, particularly fuel. in turns up the security situation and what kind of material -- in terms of the security situation and what kind of material, medical supplies have gone into the east into benghazi, who, also icrc have managed to gain access, as have organization like islamic relief, other u.n. organizations

operating in the border areas, including unicef, unhcr have been extremely active. on the tunisian border, unhcr is setting up a transit camp. but we need to understand more about what is happening in country, and this is one of the things we are trying to resolve in the next day or so. >> we are running out of time. would you both, please, ask your questions question of matthew his first? >> it sounded like usa by land. france said it would fly in aid to the airport in benghazi. is it possible at this point? and what you think about a no- fly zone? both to get aid, to ensure aid can come and to protect people fleeing? >> i just ask you talk about european nations keeping borders

open -- the have a read of how many people are attempting to -- do you have a read of common people attempted to make the crossing? >> we do not have figures in relation to people fleeing into your -- europe. we have a sense that there is a mix of people, some of home who are economic migrants who are trying to reach -- some of whom will are economic migrants trying to reach a european country as a result of the ongoing volatility in the region as a whole. and libya is now added on to that. but the main problem has been people fleeing into tunisian and into egypt with rising numbers going into niger. we don't know how many people from sub-saharan africa, for example, are still in libya. you recall there was an issue of

about sub-saharan africans who have been released from those detention centers but we did not know where they have gone yet. -- we do not know where they have gone yet. probably getting to the border with niger. in terms of aid being flown in or going in overland, -- over land, obviously if we are able to get it in both routes, that is important. unhcr, for example, the tents that came in over the weekend, non-food items came in by cargo plane over the weekend. if member states are using air to get resources into the border areas or into libya itself, i don't see that as a problem. in terms of the issue of the no- fly zone, this is something that

is being discussed and debated at a political level, and i am not prepared to comment on that at this point in time. >> thank you very much, indeed. thank you, ms. a most -- amos. >> i apologize i have to run. >> i am sure we will be discussing this again. i have a few more items, and then i am happy to take questions. the undersecretary general for political affairs wrapped up a three-day visit as part of a u.n. team to -- yesterday and he spoke to reporters in cairo -- egypt. he said the team has, first and foremost to to listen to -- to listen. he said the government ministers seemed open and interested in the role the u.n. could play in the country. he added saying the team has

left absolutely no doubt that egyptians will continue the work i started. we have his press remarks. he has now begun a three-nation trip that will include the inauguration later this week of a united nations regional office for central africa. a new u.n. political mission based in gabon. he is currently in, front -- cameron, his first out, and will visit the central african republic to discuss the peace process there. the u.n. regional office of central africa is scheduled to open on the second of march. it would be in the third u.n. regional political office, along with those already operating in west africa and central asia. these secured -- the security council this morning adopted a presidential statement welcoming the first report by the armed person dealing with the sanctions placed on al qaeda --

ombudsperson. china will assume the council's rotating presidency tomorrow. at the u.n. african union mission in report civilians continue to arrive in large numbers in north and south darfur camps. fleeing clashes between government forces and rebel groups. aid agencies are now ready and supplies for the new arrivals at some of the largest camps. meanwhile, peacekeepers have discovered unexploded ordinance which was dropped in the course of the aerial bombardment on the 24th of february outside a village near -- in north darfur. a disposal team from the mission should be added to the area shortly. the leaders of the grease --

gregg said. and turkish-cypriot communities met and discussed a range of issues -- greek cypriots and turkish-cypriot communities met. the ad 1:45 p.m. today in this orbit -- auditorium there will be a press conference in parting with the philanthropic community to promote education for all. this is prior to a special event. more details available in my office on this online. >> is there anything further you can tell us about the substantiation of the report of attack helicopters from belarus? and where it is the source of information -- what source of information has the secretary general relied upon to put out the statement he did on his concern about that? >> what i can tell you is that the group of experts established

by the security council to monitor the arms embargo against cote d'ivoire reported that it had received information that three attack helicopters and related equipment were going to be delivered to the forces loyal to mr. bagbo. that is what i can tell you on that. >> just to follow. can you specify the nature -- intelligence from other governments? >> i don't think i am in the position to give you further details on that particular aspect of it. but what i can tell you is that a team made up of members of this group of experts and an officer from the u.n. mission's embargo sell traveled to the airport that we have been talking about but was unable to verify the information and indeed was forced to withdraw.

despite the severe restrictions on emissions freedom of movement, the mission continues to monitor activities at the airport in order to verify these reports. >> one more thing, if you will. we know only some of the -- parts putting together these helicopters arrived -- have all of them arrived or in the process? what do we know what status it is? >> at the moment, as i say, the mission is continuing to monitor the activities at the airport in order to try to verify these reports. and as i said, the group of experts which was established by the security council to monitor the embargo reported that it had received information that these three attack helicopters and related equipment were going to be delivered. so, that is where we are at the

moment. further questions? yes. it is this a follow-up? >> there are these reports of the peacekeepers saying that they were forced to return fire. i wanted to know, what is the status of that reported fighting between supporters of bagbo -- i guess, what can you say about that? it seems like a big development. >> there have been a number of developments, as you know, in recent days, simply because there has been a turn in the nature of the trading on the ground, as you will not seen and heard. the secretary general has made clear his concern about the threats that have been made again and repeatedly to the mission members carrying out the security council mandated and in of cote d'ivoire

that have been incidents, including where police, u.n. police or peacekeepers have been forced to fire into the air. if we have more details on that, we will be able to let me know. >> are those helicopters, and those ukrainian -- i guess there are ukrainian helicopters, have they arrived, the ones that were supposed to support? >> let me check on that. i think there was some movement, but let me check. yes. >> [inaudible] president obama -- discussing enforcement measures?

>> i am sure the secretary general will be discussing many aspects of this unfolding crisis involving libya -- whether it is in the borders or inside. obviously you had it is extremely significant development over the weekend with the security council adopted unanimously a resolution -- and clearly it will be important for the secretary general and the president of the united states to be able to talk about that and the ramifications. obviously there is a big focus now on the humanitarian aspects on this as well as the security dimension. i am sure that will be an important part of their discussions, and you will hear more from the secretary general

on this later today. yes. then i am coming back to you, bill. >> any more information regarding lithuanian violation of human rights -- >> i do not at the moment when i do i will be happy to share that with you. >> when do you went to the airport to verify, was there any exchange of fire? >> i need to check with my colleagues in peacekeeping operations on that. what i am told is they were forced to withdraw. that is what i can tell you. yes. >> you might have said is already. it does cst -- sg have plans to meet with congress? >> not on this trip. he does have plans to meet with members of congress and that i am sure will be taking place on -- in the not too distant future. but on this trip is not part of the program.

simply the focus is, as i mentioned, primarily on libya at this point. >> does the secretary general think the no-fly zone should be something -- [inaudible] there are reports that a libyan plane was shot down by the rebel forces. >> again, just to reiterate, the secretary general feels that the measures taken by the security council adopted in this resolution that the -- unanimously over the weekend represents a very tough signal, and not just a signal but tougher measures, and i am sure that everybody will be keeping a

close eye on that to make sure that that -- how that unfolds. further measures would really be for the security council to deliberate on. >> i want to ask about one aspect of the resolution this past saturday. there is a paragraph, paragraphs 6, where citizens of states not member of the icc are exempt from -- even if their attacks were in libya, they will not be pride -- tried or investigated. brazil was critical of it. some mothers have been critical. does ban ki-moon have a view of whether these exceptions and territorial jurisdictions of crimes committed in libya is a good thing or something you might raise to president obama? >> i will come back to you on that. as you know, there are two routes if a country it is not a state party to the statute

before action -- one is if the country concerned agrees to the jurisdiction and the second is, as we saw on saturday, by the security council to the international criminal court. >> this expressly excluded from the referral any citizens -- american, india -- it would also include algeria or various other ethiopian countries that are nine members but alleged to have some nationals fighting with khaddafi -- gaddafi. >> as i said, if i have anything further on that i will let you know. there is little doubt that the resolution that was passed on saturday evening was an extremely important one. and i think it sends a very clear message to people, not

just in libya about accountability and the need to ensure that, as i say, people are held accountable for their actions. you have a question? ok. let me just check if there are other questions before we return -- >> a report of those killed on the attack of and a police station. the government and the south is as the north is behind it and ap was not able to ask the u.n. >> the mission in sudan received reports of the clashes that you referred to. those clashes apparently took place in the early hours of yesterday morning. so, the mission immediately sent a joint military team to visit

the so-called joint integrated units campus to verify this report. and the joint military team was told there that unknown assailant apparently fired on a southern sudanese police camp at 6:00 in the morning for about 30 minutes and then again at 10:00 for about 10 minutes. and the team was told that during those clashes, seven police officers were killed and two others were wounded. it has not been possible to ascertain whether there have been any losses among those who carried out the attack. the team was also told that the attackers stole some weapons from the police and that the team continues to monitor closely what is going on in the area, and the mission will be

investigating the cause of the clashes. that is what i have. ok, thanks very much. >> secretary of state hillary clinton addressed the u.n. human rights council this morning on libyan sanctions. she called on the international community to speak with a single voice. she addressed the body after pressing america's allies in europe to sanction the government as it did earlier. we will show you the comments now. >> good afternoon. thank you, mr. president. i want to thank the high commissioner and all of my colleagues for their strong words here today as well as during the special session on friday. today the world's eyes are fixed on libya. we have seen colonel gaddafi's security forces opened fire on peaceful protesters again and

again. they have used heavy weapons on an armed civilians. mercenaries and thugs have been turned loose to attack demonstrators. there are reports of soldiers executed for refusing to turn their bonds on their fellow citizens, of indiscriminate killings, arbitrary arrests, and torture. colonel gaddafi and those are around him must be held accountable for these acts, which violate international legal obligations and common decency. through their actions, they have lost the legitimacy to govern, and the people of libya have made themselves clear -- it is time for gaddafi to go. now, without further violence and delay. the international community is speaking with one voice and our message is unmistakable.

these violations of universal rights are unacceptable and will not be tolerated. this council took an important first that toward accountability on friday by establishing an independent commission of inquiry. on saturday in new york, united nations security council unanimously adopted a resolution imposing an arms embargo on libya, freezing the assets of key human-rights violators and other members of the gaddafi family and referring the libyan case to the international criminal court. tomorrow, the united nations general assembly should vote to accept the -- to suspend the gaddafi government participation here on the human rights council. governments that turn their guns on their own people have no place in this chamber.

the arab league deserves our praise as the first multilateral organization to suspend libya's membership, despite the the fact that libya was serving as of the arab league chair. we hope to see our friends in the african union follow suit. we all need to work together on further steps to hold the gaddafi government accountable, provide humanitarian assistance to those in need, and to support the libyan people as they pursue a transition to democracy. today i have had the privilege of consulting with a wide range of colleagues here in geneva and president obama is meeting with you and secretary general ban ki-moon in washington. we will continue coordinating closely with our allies and partners. the united states has already imposed travel restrictions and financial sanctions on gaddafi

and senior libyan officials. we have frozen assets to ensure they are preserved for the libyan people. and we have halted our very limited defense trade with libya. and we are working with the united nations, partners, allies, the international committee of the red cross and crescent, and other ngo's to set up a robust humanitarian response to this crisis. as we move forward on these fronts, we will continue to explore all possible options for action. as we have said, nothing is off the table. so long as the libyan government continues to threaten and kill libyans. ultimately, the people of libya themselves will be the ones to chart their own destiny and shape their own new government. they are now braving the

dictators bullets and putting their lives on the line to enjoy the freedoms that are the birthright of every man, woman, and child on earth. like their neighbors in tunisia and egypt, they are asserting their rights and claiming their future. while the circumstances in egypt, to music, and libya, are each unique, in every case, the demand for change has come from within, with people calling for greater civil liberties, economic opportunities, and a stake in the governance of their own society. and the world has been inspired by their courage and their determination. we see in their struggles a universal yearning for dignity and respect and they remind us that the power of human dignity is always under estimated until the day it finally prevails be.

this moment's belongs to the people, particularly the young people, of the middle east. on behalf of president obama and the american people, let me say that we are inspired by what you are doing and heartened by what it means for your future. the united states supports orderly, peaceful, an irreversible transitions to real democracy that deliver results for their citizens. on this, our values and interests converge because supporting these transitions is not simply a matter of ideals -- it is also a strategic imperative. without meaningful steps toward representative, accountable, and transparent government and open economies, the gap between people and their leaders will only grow and instability will deepen. what might have been possible in

the 20th century, with a new technologies and the power that people now have to connect is no longer possible. and to hang on to systems that are unaccountable and that do not response to the legitimate needs of one's people poses a danger, not only a danger to leaders but also a danger to all of our interests. by contrast, history has shown that democracies tend to be more stable, more peaceful, and ultimately more prosperous. democratic trained -- change must grow from within. it cannot be implanted from the outside -- and let me be among the first of many to say -- the west certainly does not have all of the answers. the first steps of change have come quickly and dramatically. it is, however, approving tragically difficulty in bolivia.

in other nations, change it is -- in libya. and other nations, change is likely to be more deliberate and methodical. and all cases the united states will support citizens and governments as they worked for progress. we are well aware of the challenges that come with these types of transitions. you cannot create jobs or economic opportunities overnight. these changes can be chaotic. and in the short term, there will be no voices and political competitions emerging for the first time -- new voices and political competitions but as history has shown, these new births of democracy, freedom, and human rights can be derailed by autocrats that use violence, deception, and rigged elections to stay in power or to advance an undemocratic agenda. but like colonel gaddafi, leaders to deny their people freedom and opportunity will in

the end fuel the very end disability -- varied as the bloody they fear. it must be protected by an anti -- from anti-democratic influences. political participation must be open to all people across the spectrum who reject violence, uphold a quality, and agreed to play by the rules of democracy. those who refuse should not be allowed to subvert the aspirations of the people. and leaders cannot claim democratic legitimacy if they abandoned these principles once they are in power. free and fair elections are essential to building and maintaining democracies but elections alone are not sufficient. sustainable democracies are built on strong institutions, including independent judiciary that promotes the rule of law and helps ensure official accountability and transparency

and stance against corruption. recent days have under is scored the importance of freedom of expression, whether the public square, the press, or the internet. brave journalists have broadcast images of repression around the world and the young people of tunisia and egypt have shown everyone what a force of democracy the open exchange of ideas can be. a vibrant civil society is also an indispensable building block of democracy. and not only in the middle east but around the world, citizen activists and civic organizations are emerging as strong voices for progress. they help develop solutions to tough problems. they hold governments accountable. they empower and protect women and minorities. the united states is committed to broadening our own engagement with a civil society, and we urge leaders and governments to treat civil society as partners

-- not adversaries. there also must be, for transitions to thrive, a commitment to make economic opportunity available to all. human rights, democracy, and development, are inextricably linked and mutually reinforcing. we have seen how in equity and lack of economic opportunities drive people into the streets. so, to earn the confidence of one's own people, governments have to deliver on the promise of improved lives. there is no doubt that the most important goal for most people in the world today is a decent life for themselves and their families. at the very least, that must be the goal that we bill lebron. it is also particularly important that women and minorities have access to opportunity and participation. nations cannot flourish it have population is consigned to the margins or denied their rights.

we have seen how women play a vital role in driving social and economic progress when they are accorded their rights and afforded equal opportunity, and in so doing, they lift up not only themselves but their families and their societies. these are not western principles for american ideals. they are truly universal. lessons learned by people all over the world who have made the difficult transition to sustainable democracy. and as we look at what is happening now in the middle east, of course, those changes will be shaved by local circumstances and led by local leaders. and people themselves will determine whether or not the change has worked. but universal principles will be important touchstones along the way. that is why as we watch what is happening in egypt, we hope there will be a broad array of opposition voices and

representatives to ensure that the reform process is inclusive. we want to see concrete steps taken, including enacting constitutional reforms, releasing political basic dg detainees and the thing the state of emergency. the united states stands ready to assist out whether a program, especially economic assistance that helps promote reform and create greater opportunity. in tunisia we welcome the interim leadership's efforts to form an enclosed a broadbased government, and its desire to hold elections as soon as possible. and we were heartened to to live this morning from tunisia posses the secretary for foreign affairs that it will welcome the opening of a u.n. human rights office and open doors to all u.n. special repertoires. we are supporting the tunisian people on this long and difficult road ahead. and as other important partners such as jordan and bahrain take

steps, sometimes very difficult steps, to open their political space, we will stand behind them and support their efforts because we are convinced that they will help the demands all of the shared interest. but now there is an alternative vision for the future of the region that only promises more frustration and discord. extremists and rejectionists across from the least argue that they are the ones to champion the rights of the downtrodden. for decades, they have claimed that the only way to achieve changes through violence and conflict. but all they have accomplished is to undermine peace and progress. the success of peaceful protests has discredited the extremists and exposed their bankrupt arguments. iran, for example, has consistently pursued policies of violence abroad and tyranny at home.

in tirana, security forces have beaten, detain, and in several recent cases, kelpies protesters even as iran's president -- helpless protesters even as iran that the president denounced violence and libya. it targeted human-rights defenders and political activists, ex-government officials and families, clerics and their children, student leaders and the professors, as well as journalists and bloggers. last week the united states impose new sanctions on iranian officials for serious human rights abuses. here at the human rights council we are proud to be working with sweden and other partners to establish a special rapid tour on iran. the mandate would be to investigate and report on abuses in iran and to speak out when the government there does not meet the human rights obligations. iranian human rights advocates have demanded this step to raise

international pressure on their government. this will be a seminal moment for this council and a test of our ability to work together to advance the goals that it represents. indeed, every member of this council should ask him or herself a simple question -- why do people have the right to live free from fear in tripoli but not tehran question of the denial of human dignity in iran is an outrage that deserves condemnation of all those who speak out for freedom and justice. the human rights council was founded because the international community has ever spawned ability to protect universal right and to hold my leaders accountable, both in fast breaking emergencies such as libya and called devoir --

cote d'ivoire or slow-motion tragedies such as burma and north korea. we saw the council at its best on friday when it took decisive action on libya. we saw it in december prices special session on " devoir -- " the bar where the situation is increasingly dire and has been a large spike in violence. we must continue to stand -- send a strong message to bagbo that his actions are unacceptable. last fall discounts also took the important decision to create a special -- for freedom of assembly and association. and we have likely seen a strengthening in the council's approach to freedom of expression. but too often still we are not seeing a serious enough response -- to use this institution to advance human rights. sometimes the council does not act and its integrity is undermined because it the first

to regional relations, diplomatic niceties, and cynical politics. membership on this council should be earned through respect for him and rights. that is the standard laid out by the general assembly. this council that a predecessor, the human rights commission, lost its credibility in part because libya was allowed to serve as its president. it should not take blood shed for us to agree that such regimes have no place here. and i must add, the structural bias against israel, including a standing agenda item for israel where as all other countries are treated under a common item is wrong and it undermines the important work we are trying to do together. as member states we can take this council and a better, stronger direction. in 2009 the united states joined the human rights council because

president obama and i believe the we could make a difference by working with you on the inside rather than standing on the outside merely as a critic. of the past 18 months, we have worked together. we have reached across regional lines in an attempt to overcome what hobbles this country more than anything else -- are divisions as member states. the unity of purpose we forged with respect to libya offers us an opportunity to continue that progress. as we look ahead, and as the council completes a review of its own operations, we hope to help set a new agenda based on three principles -- first, the council must have the capacity to respond to armored disease and real-time. and it must demonstrate clearly that it possesses the will -- possesses the will to address gross abuses, hold violators accountable, and work with the government, citizens, and civil

society organizations genuinely committed to reform. second, the council must apply a single standard to all countries based on the universal declaration of human rights. it cannot continue to single out and devote disproportionate attention to any one country. and third, the council must -- needs to abandon tired rhetorical debates and focus instead on making tangible improvement in people's lives. for example, in this session, we have an opportunity to move beyond a decade-long debate over whether insults' to religion should be banned or criminalize. it is time to overcome the false the abide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of expression and pursue a new approach based on concrete

steps to fight intolerance wherever it occurs. together we can and must help this council led ups -- live up to its mission and insure it plays a constructive role in the days and months ahead. we will face no problems and challenges, but if we had a firm -- will face new problems and challenges but if we are firmly rooted in but declaration of human rights. megna mistake, this popular wave of reform is spreading, not receiving. each country is unique but many of the concerns that drove people into the streets and squares of the middle east are shared by citizens in other parts of the world. too many governments are hobbled by corruption and fearful of change. to many young people cannot find jobs or opportunities. their prospects are shaped more by who they know than by what

they know or what they can dream. but it is not my mother's or even my world anymore -- what has happened with new technologies of the 21st century means that young people know everything that is going on everywhere and they no longer will tolerate the status quo that blocks their aspirations. young people in the middle least have inspired millions around the world and the celebrate what some are rightly calling the air of spring. this is a hopeful season -- arabic spring. this is a hopeful season because the cause of human rights and dignity belongs to us all. four leaders on every continent, the choice becomes clearer day- by-day -- embrace your people's aspirations, have confidence in their potential, help them sees it, or they will lose confidence in you. those of you who were here on

friday, and many of us watching on our television screens, saw the libyan representative renounce gaddafi's violent roll. he said young people in my country today are with their blood writing a new chapter in the history of struggle and resistance. wheat and the libyan mission have categorically decided to serve as representative of the libyan people and their free will. this is a call we should heed. this is a time for action. now is the opportunity for us to support all who are willing to stand up on behalf of the right we claim to cherish. so, let us do that and let us do it with the sounds of the young people from the streets of tripoli to of the markets and squares of cairo at going into our ears. thank you very much.

>> i think her excellency. >> secretary of state clinton earlier today. the house will be meeting at 2:00 eastern in debating four bills. later this week it will be 2011 but rose spending. the senate also meets at 2:00 this afternoon, considering judicial nominations. it will make changes for a federal patent law later this week. coming up live today at 2:30 eastern, the closing session of the national governors' association winter meeting. the governors will hear from bill gates. his remarks will center on efforts by the bill and linda --

indicates foundation. that is live on c-span 3. -- his remarks will center on efforts by the bill and linda gates foundation. >> it is when your mom takes it for granted that she can make a video and upload it to youtube. >> the future of the internet tonight on "the communicators" on c-span 2. >> coming up tuesday morning, but a reserve chairman ben bernanke will appear before the senate banking committee. but coverage on c-span 3. tuesday morning on c-span. >> the c-span networks provide coverage of politics, public affairs, non-fiction books and

american history. it is all available to you on television, radio, on line, and social media networking sites. find are content in the time through the c-span video library. and we take c-span on the road. britain and resources to your community. it is washington your way, the c-span networks. now available in more than 100 million homes. >> president obama today said he supports allowing states to present alternative plans of the health-care law by 2014. the original date was 2017. the president defended the health-care law and the rights of a public employee health association. from the white house, this is

about half an hour. [applause] >> good afternoon. i'm joe biden, joe biden's husband. welcome and congratulations on your elections. -- i am joe biden, jill biden's husband. i was on the phone with you all so often during the recovery act. i know none of you liked the recovery act much. [laughter] but i want to start off by fore governor's

the way in which you implemented it. there were a total of 250,000 of ford's. we had a check that needed to be cut to 250,000 different entities. there were a group of ig's and examiners of pointed out fraud or less.1 there will be continued relationships between befuddled and state and local government. we plan on trying to use that as a template as to how to move forward so we save taxpayers money. the recovery is under way, although i am sure a lot of you having to cut your budgets do not feel it. it is a very difficult time for you all. i just want you to know that i think we can all agree on the the major initiatives we know we

have to do something about the long-term debt. we know we have to do something about preparing ourselves to compete in the future in terms of education, innovation, and infrastructure, but i want to remind you all that i know you well know, but sometimes our constituents when you look at the polling, they think we ever lost the future to china. they think we have lost the future to india. we are still better position than any country in the world. our gdp is bigger than that of china, japan, and germany combined. we're in a situation where here in the united states the median income is close to $50,000. in china is $4,500. we wish them better, but to put this in perspective, it is important to understand where we are now. the platform of which we

operate, and why if we do the right things, we have an overwhelming prospect of not only recovery in the united states, but leading the world of the 21st century. the man i am introducing to you shares your view. it is not one of the chauvinistic things. we have the most freest enterprise system in the world.

by 2020, we will in fact be once again leading the world as we did in the past. that is a goal, a goal we will meet. as my wife was just saying, in the nation that out educates us will out compete as. it is that simple. finally, we cannot have it 21st century infrastructure for the 20th-century. it is already in some areas teetering on needing major repairs. we mean ports, roads, airports. we also need a modern infrastructure from broad band to the new changes that what to take place to make american business more competitive, to make american employees more hirable. there is no such word, but able to be hired.

in the neighborhood i come from, people understand what i say. i just want to introduce you to the guy who will disagree with the details, but i am sure you share this man's view. there is no, no, acceptable rationale for america being anything other than number one in the world. ladies and gentlemen, the president of united states of america. [applause] thank you. thank you very much. thank you, everybody. thank you so much. think yank you, joe. dinky to the members of my cabinet and administrators that are here. -- thank you to the members of

my cabinet and administrators that are here. there he is. he has been nga's executive director for 20 years, and this is his final meeting. thank you. [applause] so i hope everyone had fun last night. i know that you had a wonderful time listening to michelle and jill. jill's main function is to provide a buffer between us. they're really good in care deeply about what is happening with military families. i hope today all of you feel free to make yourself at home. for those of you with a particular interest in the next election, i do not mean that

literally. [laughter] we meet at a moment when all of us, democrats and republicans come up leaders at the national and state levels, face some very big challenges. our country has come through a long recession, and as we recover, the question we will have to answer is, where will the new jobs come from? what will the new resources of economic growth be? and how can we make sure the american dream remains a reality into the 21st century? on the short-term, we came together here in washington and enacted tax cuts that are already american -- making americans' paychecks bigger and allowing businesses to write off major investments.

these are tax cuts, changes in the tax credit system that will spur job creation and economic growth, and i am proud the democrats and republicans work together to get it done. in the long-term, however, we need to address a set of economic challenges that frankly the housing bubble, largely papered over for a decade. we now live in a world that is more connected and more competitive than ever before. when each of you tries to bring new jobs and industries to your state, you are not just competing with each other come up your competing with china, india, brazil, countries all around the world. that means that we as a nation need to make sure that we are the best place on earth to tdo business. we need a skilled and educated workforce and the fast and

reliable transportation communications network. that is how we will bring new jobs to america, and that is how we will win the future. making these necessary investments would be hard at any time, but it is that much harder at the time when resources are scarce. after living through a decade of deficits and a historic recession that made them worse, we cannot afford to kick the can down the road any longer. so the budget debate that we're having is going to be critical here in washington, and so far, most of it has been focused almost entirely on how much of annual domestic spending, what is called domestic discretionary spending, that we should cut. there is no doubt that cuts in discretionary spending must be part of the answer for deficit reduction. that is why as a start i have proposed a five-year spending

freeze that will reduce the deficit by $400 billion. the budget that i sent to congress cuts or eliminates more than 200 several programs. and the reforms dozens of others from health care to homeland security to education, so that rather than throwing money with programs with no measured results, we are committed to funding only the things that work. all told, the budget cuts will bring annual domestic spending to the low share of the economy since dwight eisenhower. under my budget, if it were to be adopted, discretionary spending would be lower as a percentage of gdp than it was under the nine previous administrations, including under ronald reagan's. we know that this kind of spending, domestic discretionary spending, which has been the focus of complaints about how to

federal spending makes up with 12% of the but the budget. if we truly want to get the that is under control, we want to cut excess of spending wherever it is. in defense spending. i have to say robert gates has aen a good of stuareward taxpayer dollars is just about anybody out there, but we will have to do more. in spending through tax breaks and loopholes. it will be a tough conversation to have, but it is one that we need to have it and what i expect to have with congressional leaders in the weeks to come. those of you who are in this room obviously are on the front lines of this budget debate. as the recovery act funds that went through many states are phasing out, it is undeniable that the recovery act helps

every single state represented in this room at manage your budgets, whether you admit it or not. atu face tough choices o this point. i also know many of your making decisions regarding your public workforce, and i know how difficult that can be. i recently froze the salaries of federal employees for two years. it was not something i wanted to do, but i did it because of the tough fiscal situation we are in. i believe that everybody should be prepared to give up something in order to solve the budget challenges. i think most public servants agree with that. democrats and republicans agree with that. in fact, many public employees in your respective states have already agreed to cut its. let me also say this, i does not think it does anybody could when public employees are denigrated

or vilified for their rights are infringed upon. and-- or their rights are infri nged upon. we will not attract the best teachers for our kids if they only make a fraction of what other professionals make. we will not convince the bravest americans to put their lives on the lines as police officers or firefighters if we do not properly reward the bravery. yes, we need a conversation about pensions, medicare, medicaid and other promises we have made as a nation, and those will be tapped conversations but necessary conversations. as we make the decisions about the budget's going forward, i believe everyone should be at the table. the cuts of shared sacrifice should prevail. if all the pain is borne by one group, whether it is workers, seniors, or the poor or the wealthiest among us get to keep

or get more tax breaks, we're not doing the right thing. i think that is something democrats and republicans should be able to agree on. as we begin to get our budget under control, the of the thing we cannot do is sacrifice our future. even as we cut back on those things that do not add to growth or opportunity for our people, we have to keep investing in those things that are absolutely necessary to american's success. education come innovation, and infrastructure. -- education, innovation, and infrastructure. more flexibility in exchange for better standards, to lift the cap on charter schools, spur reform not by imposing it from washington but by asking you to come up with some of the best ways for your state to succeed. that was the idea behind race to the top. you show was the best plans for reform, we will show you the

money. we are also working with you and congress to fix no trail left behind with a focus on reform, responsibility, and most importantly, results. we're trying to give states and schools more flexibility to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad teachers, because we know the single most important factor of a child's success other than the parents are the man or woman at the front of the classroom. i had a chance to see this recently. i went over to park built little school in maryland where engineering is now the most popular subject, mainly thanks to some outstanding teachers to have inspired students to focus on their math and science skills. -- parkville middle school in maryland. we also have to invest in innovation and research and technology in the work of our scientists, engineers, and in

sparking the creativity and imagination of our people. now, a lot of this obviously is done in the private sector, but as much of the private sector -- is the private-sector the principle of innovation, it is often hesitant to invest in the unknown, especially when it comes to basic research. historically that has been a federal responsibility. it is how we ended up with things like the computer and gps and internet. it is also helped a lot of your states are already attracting jobs in industries of the future. and i went to wisconsin, for example, a few weeks ago and visited a small company called o'brierien. they benefited from federal research. in ohio and pennsylvania, thanks in part to federal grants, i saw

businesses and universities working together to make america leader in biotechnology and clean energy. if you have any doubt about the importance of the federal investment in research and development, i would suggest you talk to the cutting edge businesses in your own state. they will tell you that if we want the next big breakthrough, the next big industry to be an american breakthrough in american industry, then we cannot sacrifice these investments in research and technology. in the third wave that we need to invest is an infrastructure. everything from new roads and bridges to high-speed rail and high-speed internet. projects that create hundreds of thousands of private-sector jobs. i know that in some of your state's infrastructure project at bernard controversy. sometimes they have got caught up in partisan politics. this has not traditionally been a partisan issue.

link and laid the rails -- lincoln laid the rails during the course of the civil war. both parties have always believed that americans should have the best of everything. we do not have third-rate bridges and airports and highways. that is not who we are. we should not start going down that path. new companies will seek out the fastest most reliable ways to move people, goods, and information, whether they are in chicago or shanghai, and i want them to be here in the united states. to those who say we cannot afford to make investments in say we cannote, i can s afford not to make investments in infrastructure. the notion that somehow we would give up the leadership of this critical juncture in our history makes no sense.

just ask folks that i met up in michigan. , a town of 20,000 people. far away from the hustle and bustle of places like the tree or grand rapids. -- like detroit or grand rapids. they now have the local department stores, a third- generation department stores, have been able to hook up with the university of have access to wireless and now selling two- thirds of their goods on line. they are one of the 5000 fastest-growing companies in the united states. we have kids in school houses and even more remote areas that are able to plug into lectioures and science bears anywhere in

america because of the infrastructure that will set up. that is a smart investment for anyone to make. the federal government wants to be your partner in making those investments. these of the kinds of investments that pay huge dividends in terms of jobs and growth. they are the fundamentals that allows some states to whether economic storms better than others. they are the fundamentals that will make some states better position to win the future than others. these investments are not as critical for your state success, they are critical for america's success, and i want to be a partner in helping you make that happen, which brings me to the final topic that will help determine our ability to win the future, and that is getting control of our health care costs. i am aware i have not convinced everybody here to be a member of the affordable care act fan club. [laughter] but surely we can agree that for

decades our governments, families, businesses, watched as health-care costs ate up more and more of their bottom line. there is no disputing that. it did not just happen last year, two years ago. it has been going on for years now. we know that the biggest driver of federal debt is medicaid costs. -- medicare costs. nothing else comes close. we know it is one of the biggest drains in your state budgets, and medicaid. for years politicians of both parties promised one thing -- real reform. everyone talked about it. we decided to finally do something about it. to create a structure that would

preserve the system of private health insurance, would protect consumers from the worst abuses of insurance companies, would create competition and lower costs by putting in place new exchanges run by the state's were americans could pull together to increase purchasing power and select from various plans to choose what is best for them. the same way that members of congress do. the same way that those were lucky enough to work for big employers do. the fact is the affordable care act has done more to rein in rising costs, make sure everyone can bite insurance, and attacked the federal deficit than we have seen in years. that is not just my opinion. that is the opinion of the congressional budget office, non-partisan, the same one that put some numbers that when it is handy to go after me, people say look at these numbers.

if they are saying we're saving one trillion dollars because of this act on our health care costs. otherwise it would be one trillion dollars more in the red. that is something we should build on, not break down. that does not mean that the job of health care reform is complete. we still have to implement the law. we have to implement it in a smart and non-bureaucratic way. i know that many of you have asked for flexibility for states under this law. in fact, i agree with ms. romnitt romney if the city is pd of what he achieved on health care and giving the states the power to determine their own health care solutions. he is right. alabama will not have exactly the same needs as massachusetts or california or north dakota.

right now under the law, under the affordable health care act, massachusetts and utah already operate exchanges of their own that are very different. operate them in their own way, and we made sure the law of love that. -- allowed that. for allowing for consumer- driven plans and health savings accounts. this recognition that states need flexibility to tailor their approach to their unique needs is why part of the law says that beginning in 2017, if you can come up with a better system for your state to provide coverage of the same quality and affordability as the affordable care act, you can take that route instead. that portion of the law has not been remarked on much. it says by 2017, if you have a

better way of doing it, help yourself, go ahead. take that route. some folks have said that is not soon enough, so a few weeks ago the oregon senator, a democrat, and massachusetts senator, scott brown, republican, and the louisiana senator, they proposed legislation that would accelerate that provision so it would allow states to apply for such a waiver by 2014. i think that is a reasonable proposal. i support it. it will give you flexibility more quickly, while still guaranteeing the american people reform. if your state can create a plan that covers as many people as affordably and comprehensively as the affordable care at those, without increasing the deficit, you can implement that plan, and we will or which you to do it.

i have said before, i do not believe any single party has a monopoly on good ideas, and i will go to bat for whatever works, no matter who or where it comes from. i also share your concern about medicaid costs. i know this is been a topic of significant conversation over the past few days. we know that over half of all medicaid costs come from just 5% of enrollees. many of whom are called dual eligibles. the affordable care act helps address this by changing the incentives for providers so they start adopting best practices that will work to reduce costs . we understand the pressure you're under and understand we have to do more. so today i am asking you to name a bipartisan group of

governors to work with secretary kathleen sibelius. if you can come up with more ways to reduce medicaid costs, while still providing quality care to those who need it, i will support those proposals as well. so here is the bottom line, once fully implemented, i am convinced affordable care act will do what it was designed to do, cut costs, cover everybody, in the worst abuses in the insurance industry and bring down the long-term deficits. i am not open to every fighting -- to refighting the bottles of the past few years. but i am willing to work with anyone, it democrat or republican, governors or members of congress, to make this wall even better, to make care even better, to make it more affordable and fix what needs fixing.

part of the genius of the founders was the establishment of a federal system in which each of our state serves as a laboratory for our democracy. through this process, some of the best they'd ideas became some of america's best ideas. whether it is race to the top or ct, oving the health care a our approach has been to give you the flexibility that you need to find your own innovative ways forward. this week i am issuing a presidential memorandum that instructs all government agencies to follow this flexible approach wherever the law allows. even as we approach the diversity, let's remember we are one nation, we are one people, our economy is national, are states are intertwined -- our

states are intertwined. i am confident we will win this competition. as long as we're fighting together. i know that whatever our differences, you share that goal. you have a partner -- you have to partner with the white house to make this happens. i hope this becomes the start of a productive and serious conversation going forward. >> the president earlier today speaking to the national governors' association. they will close out their session today at 2:30 eastern. we will have live coverage of the closing of the winter meeting. they will hear from bill gates who will talk about improving education and u.s. competitiveness in the global market. it will be live on c-span 3 starting at 2:30 eastern. as the nation's governors meet here in washington, use the c-

span video library to learn more about the chief executives. watch their speeches and appearances and your state of the state addresses all free online. search, watch, a clip and share any time. >> congress returns from the week-long president's break this afternoon. the house meeting at 2:00 eastern to debate four bills. later this week, a 2011 federal spending. the senate also means that 2:00 eastern to consider judicial nominations and the changes for the federal patent law later this week. you can see the senate live on c-span to. -- cpspan 2. ." the effects of the internet on society and where the future may take us. >> not the moment when the shiny new tool shows up in the hands

of the world's 15-year olds, it is when your mom takes it for granted that she can take a video and upload it to youtube. >> tonight "the communicators" on cspan2. >> a look at their role of the importance in children's hospitals and health care system. host: john local -- john lauck is here to talk to us about children's hospitals and the funding, or lack thereof, that will be coming to those hospitals in the upcoming budgets. welcome to the program. guest: thank you. host: in particular is your children's medical graduate program. tell us what that is.

and why is it so vital to the treatment of children's hospitals? guest: the graduate medical education program was put into effect in 1999 and was geared at training our pediatric specialists and journalists here in the usa that time there was roughly about a 19% decline in these pediatric specialties. in these children's hospitals, which represents about 1% of total hospitals in america, these medical students are trained under this funding to become some of our pediatric specialists today. since the year 2000, there has been about a 35% increase because of the program in the specialties. even today we have a shortfall. we still do not have enough pediatric specialists and all of the pediatric generalist's that we need, and that is a

concern for us because we are in the business of making sure that our kids have great health care. host: would you say to people that say, if it only affects 1% of all of the hospitals, will there be other places where doctors who are training in pediatric specialties and children who need those specialists, there will be other places they can go? guest: not really, because these 60 children's hospitals train about half of all of our pediatric specialists. they are some of the key training hospitals of their training our pediatric specialists today. host: is there any funding for the children's hospital graduate medical education in the current continuing resolution that is being discussed in the 2012 budget that the president set up last week? guest: no, not specifically for

his graduate education program. of course, having this shortfall will create a problem for our hospitals, will -- to do some of the training that they do today will have to shift from equipment and uninsured care and child care programs that we are committed to funding. these are the things that make a difference for children's health care in america. host: according to the office of management and budget in the president's fiscal year 2012 budget for children's hospital, it eliminates funding for the hospital's graduate medical education programs and programs that were reauthorize in 2006 for five years. that has been cut down to $330 million. how much of a cut is that? where did it start? guest: it started originally a little under that, but today's requirements -- i mean, this

program trades above 5600 of these specialists per year. -- trains about 5600 of these specialists per year. and as this incentive goes down, it is a disincentive for medical students looking for a specialty because the funding will not be there to go into pediatrics, but potentially some other form of health care specialty, whether it is a cardiologists or whatever. that means our kids will get less care. host: we are talking about childrens' hospitals and federal funding for the training of pediatric specialists with john lauck, president and ceo of the children's miracle network hospitals. if you like to get involved in the conversation, give us a call. the numbers are on the screen.

also, we will be taking messages on twitter and e-mails as well. in the washington post this morning, they talk about the governor's association, which is in town this weekend. the headline is, the governor seeks to adapt medicaid. have your word any -- heard any changes in funding that will not be coming in through the previous funding that came in through the hospital graduate medical education program? hosguest: medicaid really does t cover any of this graduate training. that is what is the key to us. it concerns us, the fact that some of the key programs that the hospitals are trying to fund this year and through the next couple of years, particularly with increasing needs. one thing people may not be

aware of is the increase in the number of underweight babies that are born. if you talk to the neonatal care physicians they do not understand exactly why, but we have a dramatic increase in the number of premature babies that are born. 10 years ago, 90% of these children died. today, most of them are being saved because of an investment in this education act that has helped train these physicians. we have more neonatal specialists. we have also been able to raise a lot of funds that have been successful in paying for the equipment and programs that help make the difference between life or death for some of these babies. host: tell me more about the equipment and the training that you are talking about. that they get at these facilities at that they would not get at other facilities. guest: for example, at a nicu

and, or in the don't -- neonatal intensive care unit, they get a bed that cost thousands of dollars that enables them to be put on heart and lung support while they're waiting for surgery. one thing we pride ourselves on at the juror -- children's miracle network hospitals is to raise the funds to pay for this type of equipment. we work through sponsors, like ihop tomorrow. you can help raise money if you read their tomorrow. -- eat there tomorrow. but there is a shift in training about how to train doctors. do you pay for the doctors or the equipment. it is kind of a chicken or egg

situation and our answer is that you need to do both. host: we are discussing the world of children's hospitals and their importance in the health care system. massachusetts, on the line for democrats, maureen. caller: are we on the air? host: yes, we are. please turn down your television so you will not get the feedback, all right? caller: yeah. i am kind of concerned about health care because i was watching a program give a day where they are talking about rationing to older people and people that are near my age, 59 to 60. i felt that the obama health care is working for some people

in massachusetts, but not everybody. thank you. guest: i hear you concerned, obviously, with how these can -- these cuts would affect health care for older americans. i think what is important is that what we're talking about today is that the cuts that are being proposed for the chgme are not coming out of -- the desire to cut this program will not come out of money that will then be appropriated to adult health care. it is strictly to balance the budget. it does not affect the dole health care, but really, the health care for our children. -- it does not affect adults but really, the, health care for children. and we have got to take care of them. host: next call from kentucky on the line for republicans. caller: are the privately-owned

children's hospitals? guest: if the question is whether it will affect privately owned hospitals, certainly, in the fact that privately-owned children's hospitals also benefit from these doctors who are also coming out from medical training who will receive, or not receive, funding for their special training. it is about three to eight years after medical school that a specialist need to complete a residency program and for their education to become a specialist. pediatric cardiologists, endocrinologist, neonatal care. attritions -- neonatal care pediatricians will be affected. but only in private hospitals, but public hospitals as well. host: section 5503 of the affordable care act provides for reductions in the direction

gme and the indirect caps for certain hospitals. these cuts have already started taking place. are their doctors that are in residency programs now that are starting to look for places that may be getting what money is left over to try to move around and continue their residencies? guest: correct, or they're looking at another specialty. and if they cannot get the training they need to become a

pediatric specialists, they may need to become an adult health care specialist. host: how many doctors with these kinds of specialties do you figure you will you -- you will lose over the next couple of years if the this program is not funded? guest: it is difficult to quantify the number, but how much can be made up from the valuable funding that is out there? it is going to have to come if we're going to continue to train doctors. it is going to have to come from covering the uninsured. last year, we provided a little over $230 million in funding for 170 of our local children's hospitals. all of that money stayed local. it went to those hospitals and a lot of that when to pay for uninsured care. as this shift over to may be having to pay for some training,

it means unless funds available for covering the uninsured. host: minnesota, you are on the line. caller: thank you, for c-span. i am in -- i am from puerto rico. my question is, how is puerto rico fairing in this graduate training? we have one of the demographic numbers in the country and i wonder if these things are taken into consideration. guest: i think the question is, are we taking into consideration the ethnic opportunities? and in this specific case, board of regents -- puerto ricans for

raising funds. as we see an increase in the hispanic population, that is one of our target areas, raising funds for the benefit of the hispanic community. we actually have a hispanic radio fund. we have about 300 radio phones per year that can raise a considerable amount of money. they can raise anywhere from $100,000 of two $1 million. we actually have radio funds in these hispanic communities to benefit those hospitals the serve those populations. a very important demographic for us and part of our future here in america. host: from a daily news on-line publication for health care executives, they write that eliminating the program would narrow the pediatric workforce

pipeline at a time when children's timely access to care is already impaired. according to the national association of children's hospitals, the chgme program helps train 1600 residents per year. how does the obama administration justifies cutting out funding for a program that seems so important, especially for young children? >guest: obviously, the pressure to balance the budget. we are not a political organization, so it is tough to say where you cut the budget. but anything that impact the well-being of our children, this is a life-and-death matter. i would suggest that we are to start first with our future, which are our children, and that which benefits them. we have to make sure that the health care for them is

absolutely the best we can give them. one of the concerns with this bill today, even with the chgma in effect, we are able to train these roughly, 1600 physicians per year. if you're a parent with a child in some of these specialities, it can take up to three months before you can get the care you need. even today there is still a deficit. there is a deficit in terms of the number of doctors and in terms of the health care we would like to give the children. that is why we are so involved in raising these funds to give our children the best care possible. host: next up in california, cynthia on the line for democrats. caller: i am so glad to be on the call today and i am so glad to hear what is being done for the children in the country. but i was more impressed with a

statement that you made, sir, about the fact that the children are the future in this country. what i want to ask you, how do you feel about the fact that the new congress just voted to cut wic, the women, infants and children program in this country, and how important is that for the survivability for low-income parents, whose mothers i know personally and whose children benefit from the program? guest: thank you for your question. again, we do not comment on any programs that are not involved

other than our child health care. while that is an important issue and something for congress to address, to the degree that it has any impact on health care is where we get involved. it is important that we look at, first, the life and death issues with the children and their families. something important obviously for congress to consider and obviously a very difficult issue that they are wrestling with as they try to balance the budget. host: besides the pancakes at ihop, tell us some of the other things that the children's miracle network hospitals are involved in to raise money or make people aware of of this situation and get more money into the pipeline so that we can contribute -- continue training sapediatric specialist. guest: we are working with corporate sponsors, and our corporations have a community

obligation. they have -- they need to give back to the community. i hop will have a pancake day tomorrow, but we also work with target, marriot and other organizations. you have probably seen this paper: before. we just updated our logo, but you can go into a wal-mart or cosco or any of our 90 different partners and donate $1 and the time. we raised over $111 million last year, most of its $1 at a time with the paper balloons. it does not require much of the customers and it gives our corporate partners a tremendous opportunity to give back to the community. all of these funds as a locally and go 100% to the hospital

where they are collected. host: next up, the texas. caller: my daughter is a pediatrician here in texas and one of the concerns that she has is the increasing service required of her on children that are born from illegal aliens. in her view, when she has to provide this service should does not get reimbursed for it and she sees it as an increasing area with in her field and there is concern about what will happen in the future when pediatrician's begin to basically back out of the profession. i will take your answer on the air. thank you. guest: this is one of the areas that we are concerned in. i will not comment on the politics of it, but i will comment on the great need of america's hospitals to cover uninsured health care. a big portion of the funds that

we raised go to pay for an insured health care. 170 local hospitals, will the one thing they like about what we do is that the funds are under strict -- unrestricted. they can use these dollars for whenever they see fit. if the greatest need is uninsured health care, they can put it there. if the grid is needed equipment, they can put it there. if it is training, they can put it to training. a good portion of what we raise goes to covering the peace. host: i know you say you are not a political organization, but we find ourselves now in the budget season where various committee -- various cabinet secretaries, including secretary sebelius of dhhs, coming to the hill.

is there any lobbying or pressure that an organization like yours is putting on.com was or on senators to put this back in the budget -- on congress or on senators to put this back in the budget? guest: we are not a lobbying group, so we do not do that. but there is the national association of children's hospitals that is a lobby group and is providing perspective on the hill and the impact that some of these cuts would have on our children's hospitals. children's hospitals are fairly new. it has only been in the last several decades. for many years we treated them as little adults. the fascinating thing that you learn when you tore our children's hospitals -- when you to work our children's hospitals it is a radically different health care.

host: nyc, new york, on our line , go ahead.dencts turn down your television, ok? caller: thank you for having me on. my cousin is a pediatrician in india and she is now and in -- an anesthesiologist. i cannot believe how funding could get cut in a country where health care should be free for everyone. you go to places like europe or canada and you have health care for free. my cousin serves millions and millions of people.

i am pretty puzzled why the budget would be cut at all. guest: it is obvious the puzzling since it impacts our future and our children. one of the things i find is almost anybody i come in contact with within the inner circle, either their own children or their relatives or their friends, there is a child that is impacted by the need for a children's hospital. until we have free health care in america, it is important that we fulfill the deficit that is out there, and the need. in america we have a rich tradition of giving, which i am very proud to be a part of. i'm very proud to be a part of an organization that capitalizes on the opportunities to support the local children's hospitals. in a perfect world of kupka -- of health care, if such a world exists, we have an opportunity to give to everybody.

i would urge everyone who is listening to me to consider giving to your local children's hospital. help train your local doctors and specialists that are needed to treat our children. is the children's hospital graduate medical and -- host: is the children's hospital grudge toward medical education program unique to the united states, or will we lose this program to similar types of programs overseas? guest: i'm not sure if it is unique to the u.s., but there's no question that we will lose some of these specialists, wherever they go. there are medical students going into other specialties. we certainly could lose these specialties to overseas hospitals that would provide the training or the grants or the funding and scholarships to be able to do that. host: >> the u.s. house is doubling in

in a minute. we are going to leave this to go to the house. -- is gaveling in a minute. the senate is also battling in. they are spending the afternoon on judicial nominations. later in the week, the senate takes up changes to federal patmos. now the house.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c., february 28, 2011. i fesh apoint the honorable robert e. latta to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain. the chaplain: lord, throughout the country and the world, may we bring to those who seek peace a loving, uplifting heart that rings through the prayer of st. francis, lord, make me an instrument of your peace,

where there is hatred let me sew love. where there is injury, pardon. where there is doubt, faith. where there is despair, hope. where there is darkness, light. and where there is sadness, joy. oh, divine master, grant that i may so much seek to be consoled as to console, to be understood, as to understand, to be loved as to love. for it is in giving that we receive, it is in pardoning that we are pardoned. and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlewoman from

minnesota, ms. mccollum. ms. mccollum: 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 pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, last week i participated in a congressional delegation to visit troops and fact find in kuwait, iraq, bahrain, and afghanistan. immediately upon arrival, we were given an optimistic assessment of democracy in the region by the ambassador.

america's team in baghdad confirmed the transition to an iraqi lead is working. with the professionalism of the iraqi army and police. a highlight for me was to meet with the 151st expeditionary signal battalion led by lieutenant colonel richard holy of the south carolina national guard. to thank them and their families for their service. 234 bahrain we met top officials who assured us the crown prince is leading negotiations to reduce conflict in this dynamic persian gulf ally where we visited u.s.s. champlain's capable sailors. in afghanistan we saw firsthand in kandahar the success of president obama's surge where surge of 30,000 u.s. troops last year motivated a surge of an additional 70,000 afghans to fight terrorism. the team of general ba trayous and ambassador iraqen berry are successfully denying terrorist as safe haven.

godspeed to danielle, a washington lee graduate as she departs from house service for a new career. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. mccollum: mr. speaker, i stand today in solidarity with the working men and women of america. there should be no doubt that there's a war going on right now against workers and unions and middle class americans who want more jobs. wisconsin and ohio and here in congress workers' rights are under attack by union-busting politicians. it's time for americans to stand up and fight for the rights of workers to organize and negotiate for safe working conditions, living wages, and basic benefits. it's time to stand up and fight against the attacks launched by union busting republican resumesforamerica@mail.house.go vs and their corporate sponsors. the citizens and legislators of wisconsin and ohio who are standing up to the union

busters have the respect and appreciation of millions of americans. thank you for fighting for dignity and respect and freedom for the rights of american workers today and tomorrow. in minnesota and across america, there are free and loving citizens who stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters in wisconsin and ohio. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> request to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. chairman. today i rise to honor the life of frank buckles. mr. fitzpatrick: who was the last surviving veteran of world war i. frank buckles passed away this weekend and he was 100 years -- 110 years old. i'm particularly proud to pay tribute to him today because of his deep roots in connection to bucks county, pennsylvania, located in my congressional district, pennsylvania's 8th.

frank buckles' ancestors first arrived in 1702. they settled in family and in 1732 the same year that george washington was born, frank's ancestors moved -- married into a quaker family and moved into buck's county. with the passing of frank buckles we mourn not just the man who served this country honorably, but the passing an of much an era. his death reminds those of us who served and those who continue to serve their country in the armed forces and we honor their sacrifices in the name of frank buckles. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. garamendi: mr. speaker and members of the house, eight days ago, nine days ago now there was a frenzy of budget

culting here on -- cutting here on the floor and we are going to resume that process probably tomorrow. i would urge caution for all of us. the unintended consequences ever those budget cuts will come back in many, many ways to harm this nation. it was estimated that the c.r. that was voted out of this house nine days ago would reduce employment by over 800,000 in the next six months. not a good result. we have to think long term here. we need to be wise. definitely we have to deal with the deficit and we shall. but we must not do so at the expense of jobs and employment today or at the future opportunities and specifically i speak to the issue of research, development, and demonstration. there are enormous cuts in that budget in the area of energy research, other necessary research that this country has to have if we are going to stay ahead in the race for the

economy and for the future. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. burgess: to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. burgess: thank you, mr. speaker. just before we left on break, francis collins came and talked to a small group of us at the health caucus one morning. francis collins, dr. collins, director of the national institutes and health and the lead in the human genomic project at the national institutes much health when the human genome was finally solved a little less than a decade ago. the advances have been startling and the project continues to provide much excitement. over 1,800 genes that cause disease have been discovered. whole genomes for cancer cells have been mapped. that's remarkable. the promise this research holds to help those suffering or likely to suffer from those diseases is very real. cannot overstate the significance of these advances and i have no doubt that the

field of medicine will be revolutionized. the technology has certainly evolved since i was a medical student some 40 years ago. i think i would never thought imaginable are now clearly within the grasp, reach and grasp of today's practitioner. in fact, the young men and women who are medical students and residents today, what a world they will live in. the science is going to be absolutely fantastic. and indeed their ability to relieve human suffering is going to be unlike anything that has been known by any generation of physicians that has preceded them. i thank the speaker for the inindulgence. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, last year we were told that obamacare would create 400,000 jobs, quote, almost immediately. end quote. we were further told that in the coming years obamacare would create 10 times that

amount, four million jobs. a year later, we see that those promises are truly hollow. in his testimony before the house budget committee. said the new health care low will reduce employment by 800,000 jobs by the end of the decade. obamacare will take away the current insurance plan for millions of americans, especially those who buy in the individual market or who are in the medicare advantage plan. all of these people were promised, quote, if you like it, you can keep t. end quote. on the campaign trail, the president said he would save every american family $2,500 a year. now we know that some american families will be paying an additional $2,100 a year. additional. how can the congress stand for this? the only sensible option is to fully repeal obamacare and put forward better solutions that don't destroy jobs and health care. real reform for health

insurance. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lungren: mr. speaker, while we were gone for the last week, the united states, the department of justice made an unfortunate decision announcement. that is they announced they would no longer defend an act of congress that was signed into law by president clinton. that is the defense of marriage act. the statement that came out of the justice department said they could find no constitutional basis for defending that law. i recall we had the same thing happen in my home state where then attorney general jerry brown said he could not defend proposition 8 which dealt with the definition of marriage. having served in that office in california, i can tell you, i defended laws i disagreed with. i defended laws i had voted

against. and i thought it was my solemn obligation to uphold the constitution and the laws duel enacted in my state just as i believe the attorney general of the united states has that obligation. i believe it is a dereliction of duty. to somehow now find that there is no constitutional basis for defending that law is incredible. i think regrettable. i think we ought to look into it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair lay b.c.s. the house a communication. -- the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, this is to notify you formally pure suent to rule 8 of the rules of the house of representatives that i, in my capacity as custodian of records for the office of chief administrative officer has been served a

subpoena in the county of new york. after consultation with the office of general counsel, i have determined compliance with the subpoena is consistent with the privilege and rights of the house. signed, sincerely, daniel, j., strodel. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. prayed -- pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rule on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 much rule 20. -- of rule 20. the postponed questions will be taken after 6:30 p.m. today. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. smith: i move the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 394, the federal courts and venue clarification act of 2011, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 394, a bill to amend title 28 united states code to clarify the jurisdiction of the federal

courts and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. smith, and the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. smith. mr. smith: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 394, currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. smith: first, mr. speaker, i'd like to thank ranking minority member connors, courts ranking member cohen,' subcommittee chairman hank johnson for sponsoring the bill. this act brings more clarity to the operation of jurisdictional statutes and facilitates the identification of the appropriate state or federal court where actions should be brought. .

judges believe the curn rule force them to waste time determining jurisdiction in cases. these are based on guidelines approved by the united states judicial conference. this legislation contains a number of revisions to federal jurisdictional and venue law. among the change the bill clarifies the definition of citizenship for foreign corporations and domestic corporations doing business abrd, separates the rules governing civil cases and other cases into two statutes and unifies the approach to venue and diversity in federal cases while maintaining current venue standards. i urge members to support h.r. 394 and i reserve the plans of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. scott: h.r. 394 is intended

to clarify a number of uncertainties an technical flaw in statutory provisions governing federal court jures dixes and venue that have come to light in recent years. it brings up inefficient rules judges have identified, these rules require judges to spend considerable time deliberating jurisdictional issues rather than analyzing cases facts and applicable laws. in the 111th we passed similar legislation in the house on a bipartisan basis. unfortunately, the senate was unable to pass it before the end of the 111th congress this legislation is based on study witness the judiciary and consultation from academics and legal organizations, including the american bar association, lawyer for civil justice, the federal bar association, the american association for justice and the chamber of

commerce. additionally the judicial conference of the united states has endorsed this legislation. mr. johnson: i want to thank my friend and sponsor of this bill, chairman lamar smith, for his continued efforts to strengthen the operations and efficiencies of the federal judiciary and urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation and i -- and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. smith: i have no further speakers on this side, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. johnson: i have no further witnesses, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 394 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules --

mr. smith: i ask for the yeas and nays on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until downed. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. thank you. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i move that the house suspend the rules -- mr. lungren: i move that the house suspend the rules and pass hmpt r. 386, protecting cockpits against laser pointers act, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the bill. the clerk: h.r. 386, a bill to

provide pents for pointing laser pointers at airplanes and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. lungren and the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, each will control 20 minutes this echeer recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. lungren: i ask that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on h.r. 386 currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, soed or ered. the gentleman is -- so ordered. the gentleman is recognized. mr. lungren: the danger of shining a laser beams into one's eyes is not news. what is news is the ever increasing number of ince dens of laser pointers being directed at the pilots of commercial and law ens forment aircraft. in 2005 when a similar measure was passed by this body, the emerging threat was estimated at 400 reported incidents over the previous 15 years. by contrast, in 2009, there

were almost 1,600 episodes reported. in 2010, there were over 2,800 i want dents reported. as the airline pilots association has stated in their letter of support for this legislation, quote, the inappropriate use of widely available laser pointers against airborne flight crews represents a genuine and growing safety and curt concern. at a minimum, the laser illumination of a cockpit creates a flight crew distraction and in more serious cases can result in eye daniel and temporary incapacitation, end quote. the danger from shining a laser into the cockpit of any aircraft is truly a tragedy waiting to happen. the ominous prospect of a catastrophe is particularly high during the takeoff and landing stages. emergency maneuvers to prevent the misperception of mid air

collisions have also occurred. in one instance, the pilot thought he was about to strike the warning light on a tower. in another case, the laser beam was thought to be the lights of an approaching flight. law enforcement pilots, unfortunately, are frequently targeted. they have to consider the possibility that they are being illuminated by a laser scope attached to a lifle. law enforcement pilots have on occasion been required to discontinue a response to crime, a crime in progress, due to being hit by a laser. at the same time, it is an unfortunate fact that some federal prosecutors have declined to pursue cases, believing the current destruction of aircraft statute does not fit the facts of their particular laser case. some states have statutes that have been successfully used to address this problem but many more do nottle h.r. 386 specifically addresses shining a laser pointer into an

aircraft cockpit and will make aircraft travel safer for pilots and the public. it is not only the number of laser pointers being aimed at cockpits that's dramatically increased in the past several years. the power of the current generation of laser pointer devices has also increased. their cost, on the other hand, has gone down, making them much more available. the problem of lasers being shown into cockpits is so prevlebt in that in the sacramento area, the f.b.i., the f.a.a. and the federal air marshal service have joined with state and local law enforcement in creating a laser strike working group. these have expanded into other areas of the country. h.r. 386 provides an important tool for our efforts to enhance the safety of air cravel this body passed identical language

by voice vote at the close of the 111th congress. it is my hope all members will join me in supporting this important legislation and i would reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to support h.r. 386. this bill establishes criminal penalties for knowingly aiming a laser pointer at an aircraft or in its flight path. incidents involving lasers aimed at aircraft have raised concerns over the potential threat to aviation safety and national security. some are concerned that terrorists might use high powered lasers to, among other things, incapacitate pilots. there's also concern that the lasers could distract or temporarily incapacitate pilots in flight. they pez a safety hazard to flight operations. even brief exposure to a

relatively low powered laser beam can cause discomfort and temporary visual impairment. the visual distractions of a laser can cause a pilot to become disoriented or to lose situational awareness while flying. higher powered laser device can incapacitate pilots and inflict eye damages and injuries when viewed at closer ranges. in fact, the national transportation safety board documented two cases in which pilots sustained eye injuries and were incapacitated in critical phases of flight. in one of these cases, after a laser was pointed at the pilot's plane, he experienced a burning sensation and a tearing in his eyes. a subsequent eye examination revealed multiple flash burns in the pilot's cornea. these type of incidents happen more and more each year. there were over 2 rblings 800

reported incidents of this happening last year, more than double the number of reported incidents from the previous year. because this is a documented and growing problem and because of the federal interest in maintaining the safety of our air space, this bill is unfortunately quite necessary and i commend the gentleman from california, representative dan lungren, for his work on this bill and i urge my colleagues to support the legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the quelt from california is recognized. mr. lungren: i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker, this is a timely matter. there's a press report just this week that police are trying to find the person who pointed a green laser beam both at an airplane and a news helicopter in the phoenix area at -- on friday morning. there have been incidents all around the country.

this is not just something that is peculiar to my area, it is something that is increasing in terms of severity and number of incidents. so we need to pass this legislation as soon as possible. mr. speaker, i have no other speakers and i would yield back the balance of my time as i urge my members, my fellow members to support this bill. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of of -- of his time. the gentleman from fwea. mr. johnson: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 386 as amended? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended tpwhirbling is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. lungren: i move that the house suspend the rules and

pass h.r. 368, the removal clarification act as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 268, to clarify code relating to the removal of federal officers or agencies to the federal courts and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from kale, mr. lungren, and the gentleman from ge, mr. johnson, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. lungren: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on h.r. 368 currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized. mr. lungren: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lungren: mr. speaker, the removal clarification act of 2011 sponsored by the gentleman

from georgia, mr. johnson, is a -- amends section 1422 of title 28 of the u.s. code this is a statute that allows officers under limited conditions to remove cases filed against them in state court to u.s. district court for disposition. the purpose of section 1442 is to deny state courts the power to hold a federal officer criminally or civilly liable for an act allegedly performed in the execution of their federal duties. this doesn't mean federal officers can break the law. rather, it just means these cases are transfered to u.s. district court for consideration. congress wrote this statute because it deemed the right to remove under these conditions essential to the pre-eminence of the -- preeminence of the federal government. federal officers or members of

congress should not be asked to nance a state forum for conduct asserted in performance of federal duties. the supreme court weighed in on this long ago. as the court explained in willingham vs. morgan, the federal court can only act through its officers and agents and they must act within the states. state court for an alleged offense against the law of the state yet warranted by the federal authority they possess and if the general government is powerless to interfere at once for their protection, the operations of the federal government may at any time be arrested at the will of one of its members. u.s. district court judge incost sin tently interpret the statute. most recently in march of 2010, the court of arpeals for the fifth district upheld a district court ruling in texas that the federal removal statute does not apply to a federal law involving presuit

discovery. because 46 other states have similar laws, the house general counsel's office is concerned that more federal courts will adopt this logic. the problem occurs when a plaintiff who contemplates suit against a federal officer petitions for discovery without actually filing suit in state court. many federal courts now assert that this conduct only anticipates a suit. it is, therefore, not a cause of action as contemplated by the federal removal statute. this problem is compounded because of a separate federal statute, section 1447 of title 28, therein it requires u.s. district courts to remand any case back to a state court if, quote, at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, end quote. judicial review of remand orders under section 1447 is limited. and has no application to suits involving federal officers and section 1442.

so this means remanded cases brought against federal officers under these conditions cannot find their way back to federal court. a result that conflicts with the history of the federal removal and remand statutes. while we passed a predecessor bill last july, the other body developed minor amendments to clarify the text. these changes were vetted with house judiciary, within house judiciary, and we endorse them. the provisions improve the bill. first, only federal issues are removalable to federal court. second, the text provides a 30-day removal clock is triggered either by a request for testimony or documents or an order of forcing such a request. in addition, the floor version strikes section 3 of h.r. 368. this is superfluous language that has a c.b.o. score inserted into the record. section 3 isn't needed because

we have an updated c.b.o. score also favorable that applies to this year's bill. in closing i'd like to thank congressman johnson for his hard work on this project and i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 368. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: i thank the gentleman from georgia. mr. speaker, h.r. 368, the removal clarification act of 2011, will enable federal officials to remove cases to federal court in accordance with the spirit and intend of the federal officer removal statute at 28 u.s.c. section 1442-a. this is a noncontroversial bipartisan bill in the 111th congress a nearly identical version passed the house under suspension of the rules and passed the senate with an amendment by a unanimous consent. under the federal officer

removal statute, federal officer should be able to remove a case from state court to federal court when it involves the federal officer's exercise of his or her official responsibility. the purpose of the underlying federal officer removal statute is to prevent state litigants from interfering with the federal government operations. there is, however, some ambiguity as to whether the federal officer removal statute applies to presuit or state presuit discovery procedures. more than 40 states have such procedures which require individuals to be deposed or respond to discovery requests even when a civil action has not yet been filed. this means that federal officials can be forced to litigate in state court undermining the purpose and intent of the federal officer removal statute. courts are split on whether the removal statute applies to

presuit discovery. some courts have found that federal officers cannot remove a proceeding to federal court when these presuit discovery motions are at issue while others have found that such proceedings could be removed. this bill will clarify that all federal officers should be able to remove proceedings to federal courtney time a legal demand is made for a federal official's testimony or document if the officers exercise of his or her official responsibilities is at issue. the legislation would allow a federal officer to appeal a district court's decision to remand the matter back to the state court pursuant to 28 u.s.c. 1447. this bill will not result in the removal of the entire state case when a federal officer is served with a discovery request when the only hook is that a federal officer has been served with such a discovery request.

rather the bill we consider today makes clear that, quote, if there is no other basis for removal, only that the discovery proceeding may be removed to the district court. finally, the bill makes clear that the timing requirements under 28 u.s.c. section 1446 will not be changed, restating the 30-day requirement for removing the case when federal -- when the judicial order is sought. as well as when the judicial order is enforced. in closing, i'd like to thank chairman smith and ranking member conyers for working with me on this bill. i urge my colleagues to support this important bipartisan piece of legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: jrt. -- the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. lungren: mr. speaker, once again i'd like to thank the gentleman from georgia for bringing this bill to the committee anti-floor.

and i urge my colleagues to support this bill. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. johnson: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 368 as amended. 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 -- mr. lungren: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. lungren: on that 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 california seek recognition? mr. lungren: i move the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 347. the federal restricted buildings and grounds improvement act of 2011, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 347, a bill to address and simplify the drafting of section 1752 relating to restricted buildings or grounds of title 18 united states code. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. lungren, and the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. lungren: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 347, currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized. mr. lungren: mr. speaker, at this time i would like to yield five minutes to the gentleman from florida, the author of this bill, a distinguished former member of our judiciary committee and one who just

gotten over the mourning period because of his beloved pittsburgh steelers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for five minutes. mr. rooney: i thank the gentleman from california. mr. speaker, the united states secret service began providing protective services following the assassination of president mckinley in 1901. the services protection responsibilities have since expanded to include the first family, the vice president, former presidents, heads of state, and others. the service also provides protection at special events of national significance. to address this vital responsibility, the secret service must anticipate, recognize, and assess threat situations and initiate strategies to eliminate and reduce threats for security vulnerabilities. a key component to the services protection mission is securing the buildings and grounds where

those protected work or visit. from the white house to a hotel ballroom, the secret service must provide a secure environment for the president and other protectees. h.r. 347 ensures that the secret service has the ability to secure all necessary areas surrounding restricted buildings and grounds that house or leaders, their families, and foreign heads of state. this bill clarifies section 1752 of title 18 which sets penalties for knowingly entering or remaining in a restricted building or grounds without the lawful authority to do so. currently written the code does not distinguish between those who are there lawfully such as secret service agents and other authorized staff and those who are there without permission. this bill does not create any new authorities for the secret service and does not restrict the liberties of american

citizens. h.r. 347 simply clarifies and improves existing criminal statutes that are necessary for the secret service to resolve security issues and implement prevention strategy before tragedy strikes. this bill will enable the united states secret service to continue to deliver the highest level of protection -- protective services, consistent with their proud tradition. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. i support h.r. 347, which will assist the secret service in performing their protective duties. it does include the pittsburgh steelers' organization within the confines of this legislation. the role of the secret service

is expanded greatly since it was created in 1865 to fight the counterfeiting ever u.s. currency. the secret service became part of the treasury department in 1883 and took on many additional investigative responsibilities with respect to safeguarding the payment and financial systems of the united states. it wasn't until 1894 that the secret service first started protecting our president and that protective role with respect to the president, vice president, and other dignitaries has grown substantially since that time. the bill before us today will help the social security carry out this protective function. current federal law prohibits individuals from entering or remaining in crowded areas cordoned off as restricted because of protection being provided by secret service. this bill would simply clarify the prohibition under the

existing statute -- this bill would simply clarify that the prohibition under the existing statute only applies to those who have not lawful authority to be in those areas. the bill also would add the white house and the vice president's residence to the definition of restricted areas protected under current law. the men and women of the secret service conduct themselves with valor and professionalism while carrying out the protective function of their agencies. they provide protection for a variety of people and events, including the president and national special security events. the secret service has other important function which also deserve recognition. for example, the investigative role of the secret service has expanded greatly from protecting the currency against counterfeiting to investigating a wide variety of crimes

related to this country's financial institutions and credit systems. i commend the gentleman from florida, representative tim rooney, for his work on this bill. i do sympathize with him in his loss. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 347. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. lungren: mr. speaker, i would ask all members to support this reasonable legislation. having no further speakers, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. johnson: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 347, as amended. 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 -- mr. lungren: mr. speaker, 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. . pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 -- pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1rk the house will stand in recess subject to the call. chair.

committee. you can see it live at 10 eastern on c-span 3. >> i am excited about what happens to society when it gets boring. >> a study of the effects of the internet on society and where the future may take us. >> up the moment when a shiny new tool shows up in the hands of the world's 15-year-old said that changes the world. it is when your mom takes it for granted that she can make a video and uploaded to youtube. >> that is tonight on "the communicators" on c-span2.

>> the house to accept temporary spending tomorrow while negotiations continue on spending for the rest of this budget year through october. "washington journal" spoke with a journalist following this. we will show you as much of this is again until today's white house briefing scheduled for 3:00 p.m. eastern. host: terence samuel is here to talk about congress returning and if they will keep the government from shutting down. from where you have been reporting, is that going to happen? or are people packing their desks? guest: it looks like a done deal. the potential for a government shutdown looked inevitable at one point. in reality it seems that no one thought that it would happen and over the last week, particularly starting friday, esstially by

sundayemocrats called and we could be back to the same problem in a few weeks. host: take us back to the problem from friday and work us through theeekend. what does the announcement mean? guest: coming io last week you essentially had house republican proposals to cut $61 billion. in the middle of the week democrats were saying that that could not be wkable. friday, republicans said that they would do 82 weeks continuing resolution. but it must include -- over that

period. looking at what they have proposed in the middle of the week, as a result you had senator conrad on sunday saying that that was acceptable to him how the democratic congress works the senator reid talks to every senator going on television on sunday. that was not just senator conrad talking for himself. i think that we will see a deal this week. host: also talking on sunday was chris van pollan. he was talking about congress and whetr we will be able to avoid a deficit. this is what we ha-- what he had to say. >> we are very focused on avoiding a shut down. it appears to be the case for

now. of month's republican leadership and democrats in congress. --mongst republican leadership and democrats in congress. there is a lot of pressure from new republicans in the house to have their way or shut down the government, if that is the consequence. there remains a real danger that it will do that. that cooler heads will not prevail at the end of the day. host: will they be able to get this done in two weeks? orpen have they kicked the can downhe road foa couple of -- or have they kick the can down the road for a couple weeks? guest: there is clearly a willingness on both sides to have a republican shut down. republicans are clearly scarred from the 1995-1996 shut down

where they took bath. everyone is saying that things are not the same and that this is different. which is true. senate democrats have a lot of political exposure here. 23 members up for election with 10 republicans. i think that we see that it has been called over and over again. i think it is a game of chicken and on either side there are political coequences to what people see as the government's inability to function on even the smallest things. shut down the government, i think that people are shaking their heads and walking away. i do not think that anyone wants to deal with those consequences. host: house republicans attempted a conference call on friday.

this is what rep. eric canr had to say. we will listen and get your response. >> yesterday there was a report that democrats might be willing to break and join us in cutting spending. an indicator that we might be moving in the right direction and a testament to the changing culture in washington. how rogers and his appropations committee are hard at work. they will post results later this afternoon. the two big messages being unveiled are the $4 million in spending cuts, comprise the determination reductions, and reductions from the president obama fiscal year 2012 budget

requests. funding that was locked into place that they have sworn off following the leadership of house republicans. host: terence samuel, your thoughts? guest: house republicans have to make the of this promise to cut spending. in some ways they have a tougher sell about how much a compromise. then you hear eric cantor saying that we need democrats to break and support some of this spending. he is not just playing partisan politics. he needs help from democratso sell some of the cuts to the very large republican majority in the house. tea party-inspired republicans are not saying when to this idea

of compromise -- saying when -- sanguine to this idea of compromise. i think that wt you are looking at is eventually one side or the otr is not going to be able to live with what the other side is suggesting. that is where you will see compromise. i think that the president in the white house so far has remained above the fray but some point they will have to engage. it will not necessarily be two weeks or three weeks from now, even months, b. host: here to make us sense of the returning congress this week, terence samuel, author of

"the upper house." if you would like to get involved in our conversation, for democrats, 202-737-0002. for republicans, 202-737-0001. for independents, 202-628-0205. you can also send us messages through e-mail and prepare -- twitter. our first call comes from melinda in texas. democratic line. caller: i am calling in regards to the compromise and that republicans have with democrats. this is about the fact that bill clinton had a really good administration. republicans are not going to want another democrat dennis successful in the demonstration.

i find it strange that everything that they have is directed to the working poor. right here in texas, we pay lot. i am proud to be a citizen. soldiers go on to fight in our wars. thank you to the tea party, republicans, and hypocrites. we are taking out the proposal on the backs of the working poor. guest: i think that the political arguments that over late this debate will become increasingly -- republicans are trying to address promises that were made during the last campaign and over the last two years. as we here in washington, everything is about the next

election. but you have seen from republicans in terms of cuts on spending and deficit reduction, it may not be in tune with what the american people want. democrats were so focused on health care when people talk about jobs, democrats are betting that republicans might be doing the same thing but spending reduction. host: ill., independent line, libya. caller: thank you. i am going to prize a couple of features. a timely historian identified this method of self destruction. the party that was once in power refuses to give up

control. through the process of destruction or not cooperating, there is entering into different groups, and one monthf seven ingredients -- the ultimate ingredients -- the barbarians coming into power. i read debt for about one year and half. -- i read that for one yr and a half. i thought that the methods of mitch mcconnell were methodical, based on this process already identified by arnold tonguebee. do not recognize this process as intentional

the president lost his opportunity to identify this process and show it for what it was. i hope you will follow through and that c-span will have some sort of program to build on this identification. i would appreciate that. host: she is given us a lot of stuff to tchew on. guest: you are hearing from her whatost americans say in this debate, are they just playing political games in congress? when we get into some of these debates about whether the government should shutdown over a few cuts here or there, the larger question is why can't

congress to stop pushing appropriations bills every year? in some ways, i think we have seen the government that is supposed to legislate and govern the country become a ki of reflective of this ideological divide in the country. more and more, that is what it is reflective of instead of doing the people's work. host: there is a cover story and the title is "ghosts of shutdowns past." it says the nation is engaged in a shooting war in iraq and afghanistan.

guest: what the we are seeing here is clearlyhe compunction at to make comparisons between 2011 and 1995. republicans like to say it is completely different. the government is not going to shut down and even if it does, it's not christmas time. you back to the 1995 shutdown which was december 16 through january 6. and 14, actually. i think nobody knows exactly how this plays out. that, i think, is wt is driving the game of chicken. people are not sure how the political consequences will flow from this. and so, even though everybody --

some people think republicans will not do it because they are afraid of a repeat of 1995. democrats will not do it because they have some stake in this in a different way because they control the senate. 23 democrats up for reelection next year. >> it is not like yogi berra would have us believe it is deja vu all over again. may guest: be if you need a passport and the government shutdown it would feel like deja vu. host: you are on the line from oklahoma. caller: it is kind of a double- edged sword for us as republicans because we voted in the election for these republican congressman because we were concerned about spending and we were concerned. there's no money left. but we don't want the government to shut down, but we did not vote for these guys to reach across the aisle. we voted for them to cut the

spending and get it under control. i don't know where people think this money is going to come from if we don't cut it. thanks for having me. host: who's your congressman? >> john sullivan. host: have you been pleased with his performance so far? caller: i have. host: what was one of the key items that made you vote for him? caller: he campaigned for cuts in spending. that was one of his biggest campaign items. host: if he turns on that promise in two years, would you vote for him? caller: i think i would be disappointed, but i would vote for him. a government set down, we've been through it before. none of us want that. ter a compromise with the democrats sometimes, but i don't see where they think the money is coming from. we are out of money. host: thanks.

terence samuels, go ahead. guest: 's a political dilemma that republicans face. you cannot campaign on an issue and then win and have a chance to govern and suddenly it is more complicated than the singular issue. what you have is how to keep your promise and not seem destructive and overly determined to keep the promise so that the consequences seem bad for the country? host: ken on the democrat line. caller: good monica. i will try to be quick about this. i wish there was theepublicans over the house and the senate so that they could do this shutdown and we could see how it turns out. i think this hold the party

thing and the shutdown and the problems it would cause is a power grab. if you look at what the supreme court did recently where they basically recognized corporations as citizens to contribute as much money as they want, then you look at what wisconsin is trying to do and some other replicans break the backs of the unions, no one is trying to break the back of the corporations and how much money they are giving. if the unions are not around to support the democrats, you will see more andore money like from the two-party. dickrmey and that lot. i wish the republicans controlled both houses because i wanted to shut down the government. host: silver spring, maryland, ken. caller: i bet the republicans would wish they were in charge of the senate as well and this

would be a fight between the republican congress and the president. that would actually be much more closely paralleled to 1995. i think they don't want to repeat that. what you are hearing from ken is a sense of what you are seeing in this two-week fight is about the larger issues of the country that in some ways we are not dealing with. the economy, how to revive the economy. is it going to be tax cuts or cuts in spending or incentives with stimulus spending? i think that discussion is obably coming in a larger way than we have seen, if we can manage to keep the government running while this emerges. host: james in southeast louisiana sends us this message.

he writes that we need to get this cr to the end of the year and then fundamental tax form, th completely rewrite the 2012 budget. which leads me to my next question, the other major consideration facing congress as a comeback this week is the various cabinet secretaries and agency heads coming up in a constant parade starting tomorrow who will make a case for the budgets of their particular departments or agencies. what can we expect from the agency heads, the cabinet heads, and what kind of response will they get from the congressman? gut: we start with the interior secretary. i think that's tomorrow. what is interesting about this is that this is what the process is supposed to look like. the executive branch, through the cabinet secretary, comes to the congress, makes a case for a budget, the president sends his budget proposal, which we have

seen. a lot of the interior budget in the president's proposal is significantly cut in some ways. and then that process is supposed to lead to some kind of orderly apppriations bill that goes through committee the add to that gets dealt with on the floor. it does not happen. at the breakdown in the process. in some ways this feels not on point. it would be interesting to see if it works this year. host: do you imagine it will be even less on the mark this year because the republicans control the house and the democrats control the senate? when the secretary of state goes in front of the house foreign affairs committee, the reception and the questioning will be significantly different than when he goes in front of the senate foreign relations? guest: that is correct. usually this process also

becomes a discussion of policy. yes, you want money to run this agency, but what policy are we trying to implement? how should be fixed this? i think the discussion, certainly on the house side, is not about policy, it is about spending and how to reduce it. host: alby, georgia, brian on our independent line, on with terrence samuel. caller: i'm a first-time caller. i appreciate you taking my call. thank you. basically, i have been a long time watcher a c-span and it's a great channel. i guarantee the entire country appreciates your being on tv all the time. basically, my concern is you have these rich congressmen and nators who are written before they even get in there. it is a millionaire's club near the average american cannot even

get in there and help run this country. we have smart people. i'm really nervous. we have smart people out here that could run this country just as well as these old farts in office. these guys get in there and get power. they never get voted out. people keep voting them in, republican or democrat. i don't trust either party. i think they are rrupt. they turn their backs on the americaneople for corporate america. when you run for office, it is not suppod to be about how much power or money or influence y can have in your time, it is about serving the country, making military stronger, looking out for the middle class working america person, and making the military stronger. unfortunately, -- the

unfortunate matter is that when a politician is get in office, the longer they stay in office, the more corrupt they become. host: we will leave it there, brian. guest: this is a shameless plug, t "national journal" has dealt with this. it is the most polarized congress ever since we have been keeping records. what we see is the most liberal republican is more conservative than the most conservative democrat. there's simply no overlap. i think what you are hearing -- i think that is a reflection of what the populace has become. expensive, meaning that you have to have some money or able to raise a lot of money to do it.

and what gets you elected is not so much ideals about serving the country or running the government, but does so much of this is based on ideology and people win o that and they go to the congress and that's reflected. it's a lesson about efficacy in governnt and ideology in party. host: aaron on the republican line. caller: good morning. i have to make a comment especially about republicans. there are republicans that are in the senate and they are willing and democrats secretly. they might as well be democrats. then there are democrats who will have republican uniforms on. these people keep getting voted into office because people do

not know exactly what the core issues are that they are voting , and that is an especially for republicans pretended to be democrats and pretended to state agendas. -- pertaining to state addendas. people locally and on state levels don't know the exact issues that democrats are voting on. there are democrats that are really republicans appear they votes and they side with republicans. these people need to be brought to the forefront. that's why we see the rise of the tea party. the fundamentals of the two- party are great. it sustains the constitutionality of america and that's good. but these republicans -- these they are whoo -- caing more trouble to america because they prey on minorities and they vote with the republican agenda. host: go ahead, sir.

guest: people think that their party representative should reflect a certain orthodoxy, whether it is a republican or democrat. when you don't do that, you face criticism like you just heard. you are republican and democrat clothing or vice versa. somebody voted on an issue that went against that orthodoxy, but represent a compromise. the tax deal during the end of the last session of congress being host: a prime example at to theinet headsecretaries, hill this week, what -- who will get the most attention? which topic will get the most focus either in the house or the

senate? guest: i think they health care still is a big deal for republicans in the use. you will see a lot of questions about that. the house will vote this week to repeal one provision of that, the 1099 tax reportingrovision that passed the senate, that should be interesting. i think you will see a lot of health care questions. host: back to the phones, san diego, california, democrat line, go ahead. caller: i'm sorry, yes. one issue tha i have is that i think that the banks should bail out the state's and that the world bank perhaps should bail out the u.s. banks and a lot of

these other countries that we supported and rebuilt could somehow come back and rebuild the u.s. thank you for c-span. know enough about that to have a thoughtful comment. it does suggest the reach of the issues when you get talking about what the congress is doing and what people expect of it. host: will there be much discussion in the coming weeks about tarp and whether or not it needs to be extended or rerouted? guest: yes, there will be a fair tarpt of talk amounttabout because there's money there that republicans see as a way to address their spending cuts and it is a big ideological issue that people think should not have happened.

what actually happens with tarp beyond the discussion, it's hard to predict or even imagined. much of that money is either no longer being request, not being spent, some of the money has been paid back. it's clearly a big political issue for republicans. host: james on our independent line out of new jersey. caller: good morning. i would like to read something and say this is the reason our forefathers came up with the declaration of independence. it says "whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these end which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles as organizing power is in such fm as to them shall seem most public to affect safety and happiness." what we need to do is all the american people, independents,

demoats, republicans, need to stand together and allow our government to know we're not going to stand for what you are doing to the people because you're not thinking about us. we are the ones suering. . host: a thank you. from take another call louisville, kentuckylouisvillepat. caller: thank you for taking my call. last year, 2010, president obama presented the budget that the republicans are working with right now. that is the continuation that ends on march 4. democrats have gotten really busy on this budget in january of 2011, 11 months after it was presented. since it is time for the 2012

budget to be presented by the president, a lot of people do not think that october, 2011, is where the congress, which the house of representatives was predominately democrat. all of a sudden they have this horrible feeling buchwald is going to fall apart -- that the world in the united stes is going to fall apart now the republicans 11 months later are dealing with it. now i's over one year. i find this -- and the media does not make much of this. democrats could have spudone something about it they wanted to guest: the democrats were not able to pass a budget last year. or the year before that.

it has not actually happens in a long time. at the we are looking at exactly that case playing out of this year. i cannot imagine what would be different in fiscal 2012. host: the congress conceivably would pass a continuing resolution to carry us through the end of the year? and at this time next year or in december or november of this year they will consider a continuing resolution for 2012? guest: host: exactly when do we exactly. the debate should be about how do you fund the government starting october 1 through september of 2012. we are not going to get to that because we're still talking about the current fiscal year. host: was it any easier for the

administration to get their budgets past when it was an all democratic congress or did they have similar problem as to the ones they are having now? guest: similar problems. whatever you pass in the house, the republicans will be able to pass a budget in the house, it will go to the senate, and the senate was set up to make things difficult and they lived up to. the to host: some of our callers have suggested, it would not be any easier, the budget process, if both chambers were of the same party. guest: not unless it was a big enough majority as president obama had during the health care debate. to be a will to overcome that 60 rule to kill

filibuster's which this budget will surely face. host: democrat line. caller: i would like to know when congress is going to do their job. when are they going to take a cut? these wars need to stop. that is a big problem. and they need to stop the lobbyists and all of the bailouts for these other countries. why don't we build our own oil? we have this. i agree with the man in georgia. i think we need bill clinton back in. host: thanks for your call. your thoughts? guest: that is the argument, where do you cut it? intoar's certainly factor

the decision, voters' decisions at the end of the bush administration, in some ways punishing the administration for those wars, not just the cost, but the situation we found ourselves in. then we saw congress go from republican to democrat in 2006. and very quickly the topic turned to the economy and the wars were not top of mind. people are clearly frustrated with whoever is in charge and what they are doing. the white house and the majority of different parties in both houses are dealing with that right now host: presenting the -- host: they are talking about cutting programs, but they are sort of staying away from

defense, medicare, and medicaid. most economists will tell you that unless you go and make drastic cuts in those areas, that you are really not going to have the kind of cuts in the deficit, in the debt, that people are looking for. is the anybody on capitol hill right now if that is willing to pick up that mantle and lead that charge and say let's cut some defense spending, let's cut the medicare, let's cuts in medicaid? guest: there are people that say they're willing to do it. there was the house budget committee chairman who was asked over and over again whether he would tackle entitlements in this budget that we will see some time in the next few weeks? eventually he said, yes. it's a big chunk of the money, a big chunk of the problem and, yes, we are going to do it. these are not just beloved and cherished progrs by american voters. they are protected by large

money interests and the fight to reform those is going to be a huge one. it is hard tsee how --one answer to your question of who is willing to tackle this is that the people who are not up for reelection. host: to that end, does chairman ryan have theupport of gop leaders like the speakerjohn boehner, the majority leader as well? mr. mccarthy to do something different in cutting these entitlement programs? question about whether he would include entitlements in his budget were addressed in cantor's announcement that house republicans were willing and

eager to do this. so, yes. what that actually looks like in terms of proposals and legislation is difficult to say. once you get into the debate about raising the retirement age and social security, cutting medicare, cutting medicaid, you are up against a huge lobby and a fierce group of people willing to defend it on the hill and off. host: bob in indianapolis, independent mind. caller: thank you very much for the opportunity to talk. i just wanted to say that congress cannot keep going on spending all their money and having the media say that it is spending. it is not spending. it is taxing us more money. i used to being a democrat from california. rush limbaugh's nightmare. now i am an independent.

the reason why i am an independent and not a democrat anymore is because the democrats, especially obama since he's been in office and the directn he's going, our taxes are goi up. 75% of all of my income. in my older years, how am i going to pay for my home i have been paying on for 30 years? the property taxes are sky high. it's not just what they are taking from me. now we have the state and local. and the democrats are the worst. host: we will leave it there, bob. guest: you could take issue with the 75% number, but people are concerned about spending. sufficiently concerned. i think you saw a certain amount of revolts in the last midterm. i think you can see carly that

the democrats get it. how they respond to it, how they deal with the perception that they are the party of tax and spend is something that i think they still need to manage, particularly going into 2012 and the president is looking to get reelected. host: the last call comes from union city, >> and now live to the white house for the daily press briefing and the treasury department announced it has frozen at least $30 billion in libyan government assets. that is the largest blocking and any sanctions program ever. the u.s. ambassador to the united nations is expected to join press secretary jay carney at this briefing, live on c- span.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> shortly here at the white house, we are expecting an update on the freezing of assets of the libyan government by the

united states, up to $30 billion in assets. secretary of state, hillary clinton, says the u.s. is sending assistance teams to libyans -- to libya's borders to help desperate refugees trying to flee a civil war. u.s. has pledged $10 million to help those refugees. that is from the associated press.

>> we are expecting the u.s. ambassador to the united nations, susan rice, to join press secretary jay carney, talking about the treasury department freezing $30 billion in libyan government assets. that is live on c-span.

>> good afternoon, ladies and gentleman. as i mentioned this morning, we have with us today the united

states ambassador to the united nations, susan rise. she was just in a meeting with the president and the un secretary general. i would like her to speak about that meeting and then she will take some questions from you and i will step aside. >> thank you very much. good afternoon. i want to start by giving you a brief readout of the president's meeting with the un secretary general. as you might expect, a significant portion of that meeting was devoted to discussing the situation in libya. the un has played a positive and important role in efforts to end the bloodshed and hold the gaddafi regime accountable. the united nations is demonstrating the indispensable role it can play in advancing our interests and defending our bodies. we'll come back to libya and just a few minutes but let me finish with a brief readout of

the president's meeting. the president and secretary general discussed the situation elsewhere in the middle east as well as this situation in the ivory coast. they expressed their concern about the escalation of violence there and the need to enable the legitimately elected president to be able to govern. they discuss the historic referendum that took place in the sudan where the people overwhelmingly voted for independence and they discussed the vital work the un and international community have still to do, along with the parties to the sudanese conflict to resolve outstanding issues and ensure lasting peace as the south gained its independence in july of this year. the president and secretary general also discussed their shared agenda is to build on the strength of the united nations while pursuing and implementing

a very important management reforms as well as budgetary discipline. finally, president obama reaffirmed the administration's strong belief that the united nations continues to play a vital role in addressing tough global and transnational threats. in doing so, it's working hanses the safety and well-being of the american people. coming back to libya, on saturday night in new york, the security council unanimously adopted a resolution 1970, a tough and binding setup sanctions aimed at stopping the libyan regime from killing its own people. as you know, from the very beginning of the crisis in libya that we have been clear it's vitally important for the international community to speak with one voice. it has done so with an unusual and important sense of urgency, determination and unity of purpose. this resolution we passed has

several important components. first, it refers the situation in libya directly to the international criminal court. this is the first time the security council has unanimously voted to refer a case of heinous human rights violations to the icc. it includes a travel ban and assets freeze on key libyan leaders. it imposes a complete arms embargo on libya and mechanisms to enforce it. finally, it takes new steps against the use of mercenaries by the libyan government to attack its own people. it facilitates the delivery of vital humanitarian assistance. these sanctions and accountability mechanisms should make all members of the libyan regime think about the choice they have before them. violate human rights and be held accountable. or stop the violence and respect the libyan people's call for change. there is no escaping that

critical choice. meanwhile, all members of the united nations security council are united in their determination that these sanctions work and work as quickly as possible. the security council as not finished its business and will continue to monitor the situation in libya quite closely. i will reiterate what the president said over the weekend -- now is the time for colonel gaddafi to step aside to prevent further bloodshed and allow the libyan people to have a government that is responsive to their aspirations. i'm happy to take a few of your questions. >> i would like to do all the questions for ambassador rice now and we can get to other issues after that. >> can you update us on the status of but talks [inaudible]

>> as secretary clinton said today in geneva, these talks are underway with our partners in nato and elsewhere. we have made clear its an option we are considering and considering actively and seriously. >> are you prepared to offer support to the anti-government rebels in libya? >> we are in communication with all sorts of elements of libyan society, civil society, leaders of all sorts to understand their perspectives and be able to be as supportive as we can of the libyan people's aspiration for freedom and justice. it is unclear at this point who will emerge as the critical opposition elements. we await to see how the opposition will coalesce. in that context, it is premature to begin to talk about any kind of military assistance.

>> in an interview with several reporters, mummar gaddafi says he is never going anywhere, he has never used force and all his people love them. he expressed surprise at the guided nations would impose sanctions and implement a travel ban based purely on media reports. i wonder if you have any response to any of the things he said? >> it sounds, frankly, delusional. when he can laugh and talk to an international journalist while he is slaughtering his own people, it only underscores how unfit he is to lead and how disconnected he is from reality. it makes all the more important the urgent steps we have taken over the course of last week on a national basis as well as the steps we've taken collectively through the united nations and the security council.

we are going to continue to keep the pressure on. you have seen reports about the massive quantity of resources from $30 billion the treasury department has seized since the asset freeze went into effect on friday. this is in light of the fact that colonel gaddafi and his sons say they have no assets to be seized. that they have led a clean and uncorrupted life. >> you talk about colonel gaddafi slaughtering his own people. he appears to have been doing that for a week or longer, yet the president stopped short of calling for regime change until this weekend. why did it take so long to take you to work -- to take you to call for regime change? he has been slaughtering his people for days. why did it take until this weekend to say he has to go? >> first of all, it is up to the libyan people and we will be

very supportive of their efforts to achieve the universal rights and freedoms and opportunity they are seeking. i think we have been very clear about what is right and what is moral in this situation and what has been unacceptable and an excusable violence. we have taken strong and swift action to confront that. on friday, we froze the assets of libyas leaders and on monday, $30 billion, an unprecedented quantity of resources have been seized in just the last several days. on saturday, the security council with the u.s. and the leadership of others moved with speed, which i can tell you in my experience is almost unheard of to pass a resolution unanimously to oppose a travel ban, assets freeze an arms embargo but refer the situation

by unanimous basis to the international criminal court. >> what changed from february 23rd -- >> the situation has evolved. as the president has said, we are focused urgently on the protection of americans and ensuring americans are saved. we have been actively working and planning to enact a swift and decisive response you seen from the u.s. government. >> does it talk about oil embargoes make any sense? >> from a sanctions point of view, at the united nations has his darkly in recent years moved away from the sweeping measures and focused precisely and targeted measures that go after the leadership of the country and isolate those that are responsible for atrocities. we are in a different world than

we were 15 or 20 years ago and learned some lessons from regimes like iraq and elsewhere that did not have the targetted effect that was desired and was more scattershot. in the context of the security council in new york, when we look at sanctions, whether iran, libya or north korea, we aim at targeted measures that go after those who are responsible for violence. we have not at active discussions on oil. >> can you walk us through what the process would be for the united nations to recognize the opposition in libya or recognize that eastern part? second, is there a message in there for the iranian government, the government of bahrain about how swiftly the un seemed to respond in this case and maybe the lack of quickness they responded to the iranian

uprising? >> the question of recognition is a very complicated one. to see a changed government requires a vote of the un to -- un credentials committee. that can be more or less complicated. we're dealing with their request to the secretary general from gaddafi to withdraw accreditation from his diplomats in new york who stood up to the regime and have been very clear in calling for the kinds of measures the security council took. it is too soon to say how issues of credentials and issues of recognition will be sorted out. unless and until there is an obvious alternative, it is hard

to give credentials -- it depends -- unless or until there is an obvious alternative, it's hard to take from one and give to another because there is not clear other to him recognition can be given. what enabled the security council to act so swiftly and decisively in this instance was there was an egregious and widely reported series of mass killings by security forces on innocents, not only those protesting, but those who stuck their heads out of windows, going into hospitals and shooting those who had already been wounded, shooting people as they came out of mosques. all of this served to galvanize a sense of outrage and determination on the part of the

security council and the rest of the international community that action had to be taken. quite and usually, the first calls came from the arab league and african union and it subsequently oic. the fact of libya's own diplomats in new york were purging decisive action was also an important factor. -- urging decisive action. >> the u.s. does not have significant contacts with the libyan opposition. if you were to get on a plane and go, [inaudible] >> the united states wants to see a responsible government emerge that respects the will of the libyan people. there is a serious institution- building challenge that exist in libya. but in libya as elsewhere in the region, we believe there are universal rights that need to be acknowledged and respected and process these determined by the people in each of these

countries that charts a specific course suitable to that country. it would be wrong of us to sit here with their roadmap for political transformation in libya -- in libya. but our message across the world is that the people deserve the right to chart their own future in a fashion that enables them to express themselves freely, assembled freely, select their leaders, and do so free of violence and intimidation. >> with regard to the up military question, i know you say it is premature, but is the u.s. position that it needs to be done through a nato commitment and not a u.s. military commitment? in conversations with the un secretary general, is the president discussing how to do a proactive strategy and how do

you get at that? >> let me come to your second question first. the president and secretary general discussed the region broadly. the antar national efforts, including those lead and coordinated by the un to be responsive to developments in each of those countries. the secretary general reported he has sent a high-level teams to egypt and tunisia to engage those governments about the process of transition and the political support the united nations and international community might be able to provide in support of this transition period with respect to libya, the secretary general indicated he intended to name a senior level person to coordinate the united nations humanitarian and political efforts. with respect to libya, that is something we encourage and welcome. there is a real effort,

discussed and agreed, that would help to coordinate and consolidate the humanitarian response, particularly with respect to libya and the political efforts to help support that democratic transformation we hope are under way. with respect to the military question, and we are in discussions with partners and allies in nato and elsewhere, we have been very clear we have arranged adoptions we are considering but it would be premature to say more than that. >> it seems like the u.s. does not want a u.s. stamp on any of this. >> i think it is quite premature to speculate about any potential military action. we are simply in the process of planning and discussing various contingencies.

>> you said something to the effect we have not actively discussed oil. are you talking about the libyan issue or the price of increasing -- >> i was talking about whether multilateral oil sanctions had been discussed actively in new york with regard to libya. the answer to that is no. it is not the kind of place for discussions like that would occur. >> can you talk about the $10 million in humanitarian efforts committed to the refugees who are fleeing into other countries? >> the u.s. government has begun to mount a very robust humanitarian response that will include resources to the

various concerned agencies like the high commissioner for refugees, like the international organization for migration. we will also look at other humanitarian needs. the secretary general explained to the president today that the un is quite concerned about the dearth of medical supplies in libya and the importance of urgent action been taking -- being taken to be supportive of those efforts as we always are. >> thank you very much. i have to let the ambassador go. ok, we will return to our regular programming. >> the governors have had meetings with the president. one of the requests they of made the administration seems

likely to comply with -- >> broadly speaking, i can give you a readout but i don't have any specific -- the president did announce today support for legislation that some senators have introduced that would speed at -- speed up the innovation waiver for states with ideas of their own to pursue health care reform in their states. that was obviously a major announcement. >> that would be along the lines of waiver on welfare a few years ago? >> i don't know how to compare to that but if you saw the announcement and i assure you have seen their remarks, the president is very interested in the very good ideas states might

have to achieve the goals set by the affordable care act in different ways. he now supports the legislation put forward. it was originally put out last weekend and it would allow the states three years earlier than planned to propose initiatives that can bring them to achieve the goals set by the affordable care act through the innovative ideas that they themselves come up with. that is the kind of flexibility the president thinks is important and he wants to give the states, when appropriate. >> did you ask republicans in congress or the republican governors [inaudible] >> if you needed the president

had any discussion -- >> [inaudible] >> we think that the state's will be and are interested in this kind of approach to implementing the affordable care act in that it gives them more flexibility to achieve the very important goals the act lays out in terms of coverage, no cost to the deficit, level of benefits, and the items that were laid out. we expect and hope there will be support in congress for this. it's already a bipartisan bill, as you noted, and the president supports it. >> has the -- the president has won the governor's not to vilify public employees. does he think that's what they're doing? >> the president said he is very sympathetic to the eight

governors and state legislators have in dealing with their budget issues, to have sacrifice at all levels, that everyone needs to come together, tighten their belts, and deal with their budget shortfalls. that includes public sector employees. but he does not believe it is helpful to denigrate or vilify public sector employees in a way that brings you know closer to resolving the problems and says division rather than creating the kind of unity you need when everyone sits at the table to solve the issues together. >> you would not characterize what has happened as a denigration of or vilification? >> i would refer you to his speech. he has said in the past that he does not think an assault on public sector employees or bargaining rights is the way to go, rather that everyone needs

to come together, share the sacrifice, and resolve the issues that have led to these budget shortfalls. >> you said a few times that the administration is in contact with leaders of various stripes. it's hard to see [inaudible] what are the organizations? >> you make a good point about the situation in libya and it goes to the broader point we have made about however country is different in the region. the country that experienced unrest. without specifying particular individuals or groups we are reaching out to and reaching out through diplomatic means, businesses and non-governmental organizations, i would say we are having those conversations,

finding out where those groups stand in terms of the desire for a process that is democratic, inclusive, and responsive to the desires and aspirations of the libyan people. but i am not prepared to identify this group or individual at this point. >> [inaudible] >> i am not able to specify individuals that we are in touch with and i want to emphasize the channels we're using are not just government channels. there also through the business community and non-governmental organizations and other channels we can use to talk to these groups who are interested in democratic reform and being

responsive to the aspirations of the libyan people. >> [inaudible] >> the president has made clear, the president has made -- we have made clear, colonel gaddafi needs to step aside, to step down. he has lost all legitimacy in the eyes of his people, most importantly. and in the eyes of the world community he is no longer in a position to credibly lead his nation. he is, as in the meantime, inflecting horrific violence on the people he claims to serve and the people he claimed love him. which is quite a claim in deed. i won't put a deadline on it

except to say now would be good. >> do you think this effort would be helped along by a strong statement from the president or like ambassador rice. she did not mince words. >> no, she did not, and neither did the president or neither has secretary of state clinton or other government officials. we have worked behind the scenes to bring about the kind of dramatic objectives in terms of the action at the united nations and the unilateral sanctions that are putting great pressure on not just colonel gaddafi, but the libyan regime. if you are a member of the libyan government, you have to think seriously about whose side you want to be on. if you stay with gaddafi and you

stay with this regime and you accept and act on orders to murder your own people, you will be held accountable. the action taken by the united nations to refer this to the icc is a demonstration of the accountability we expect as perpetrators to be held to. >> is one thing to say we will hold them accountable, but who is going to do it? >> bad actors to treat -- to treat people are in this matter can be held accountable. weekend make that beat -- this can be the case. >> [inaudible] or where they were positioned themselves to prepare for action against any possible military

action against libya? >> what i will say, the defense department has commented on that. the force is being positioned. this is part of making sure all options remain on the table for us. and positioning our assets in a way that can be helpful in the cause of bringing humanitarian relief to the libyan people. that does not necessarily signal an intent to use military force. we're leaving all options on the table. >> at what point would it be appropriate to hear from the president calling him to step down? [inaudible] >> i am sure the president will

address this again. presidential action comes in many ways and you just heard from our ambassador to the united nations. and the secretary general who discussed by in clear terms the president's position on the situation in libya on the regime. i am sure the president will address that again. i am not here to make announcements on future statements. you can be sure that he has been active in dealing with this and hands of the principal members of the national security team, secretary clinton was in geneva, i am sure you saw today and ambassador race here. let me get to the back. yes, sir. >> [inaudible]

is anyone considering to offer an easier way out? only an alternative to stay in power until he will be forced out by rebels. [inaudible] if he wants to stop the bn bloodshed, does he have an opportunity for exile? >> exile is an option. it would be a quick option and it would comport with our desire to see him step down and remove himself from power. we're most interested in the end of his treatment of his people. the end of the violence against the libyan people. if exile is a quick option, to make that happen, we would support that.

he and others will be held accountable for their actions regardless. >> the average general election -- irish general election, do you have the results [inaudible] and also, there are reports the president is going to add ireland to his visit in may. do you have any confirmation? >> i do not have any scheduling an absence to make from the presidential travels. i do not have a reaction to the elections for you. i am sure the state department will be one place you can go. >> i want to ask about something secretary gates said what he said the future -- he recommended [inaudible]

what does the president say to a parent of a soldier in battle who might be wondering, the secretary of defense says they need to get their head examined, is a time to start withdrawing sooner rather than later? >> i have not seen the comments or the context. what i would say is the president takes his responsibility as commander in and chief enormously seriously. -- commander-in-chief enormously seriously. that is why he engaged in this intense, delivered process to make sure it was the best policy toward the ames, the objectives he set out. -- the aims, the objectives he set out. asking our men and woman to serve in harm's way is a heavy-

duty that needs to be done with utmost seriousness and i cannot comment to the secretaries or more. >> the -- this is his secretary of defense the question the entire premise. >> i am not sure of the context of the comments and i think, i am sure the secretary feels that war is a terrible enterprise. you pursue only when your national interests demand you do it. beyond that, i do not have a comment. did you still want to ask me? >> how do you reason with a foreign leader who may be delusional? >> the devotional is a good word and that is the word embassador

rice used. i do not think we are attempting to reason with him beyond making the choices he faces a clear. that goes for not just khadafi -- gaddafi but those around him. the protection that keeps him in power. the support network is placing himself or herself a great risk of being held accountable in a serious way. many of them have a substantial amount of their assets frozen by the actions taken unilaterally by the united states, the announcement by the treasury and are continuinges to be felt. we ask them to reconsider their

position. >> if he is delusional, is he capable of understanding the magnitude of what is happening, what the world community is requiring and requesting of him? when >> i cannot psychoanalyzes colonel gaddafi. we in the community are making clear what he needs to do with what our position is. i am sure that he and those around him understand clearly what our position is and what choices they face with this kind of united international opposition to what he is doing with his government. >> the characterization of libya as suppressing his people, that sounds like iran.

you equivocate about calling for ouster. what would you? >> -- what would you? >> what i would say clearly about what we have seen in libya is on like we have seen -- anything we have seen in the middle east thus far with the best brutalization of people, the random killings of the ambassador and shooting people in windows in hospitals, under peaceful protesters, we have seen the violence that has been used in we do it again today. with continued astonishment. the hypocrisy of the iranian red has recently claimed there was no comparison between the

protests in iran, the peaceful, broadbased, pro-reform process that was suppressed and the protests they claim to support in other parts and countries in the region. the that hypocrisy is clear for everyone. >> [inaudible] >> i made clear what the situation on libya to read of the responses that we have given it. >> the the situation in iran come up and including the reactions against human rights activists and the garment segment? >> in the meeting with the un secretary general, i did not have read out the reflects they

discussed iran. they might have. i can say that we obviously are finding the tent -- detention of opposition leaders to be unacceptable and we called them to be treated well and release. >> is there concern that the turmoil in the middle east may be empowering iran? there is some talk that it may be doing that. what is the white house view? >> our view is that peaceful protests by populations in different countries that are representative, i and a demand

for peaceful democratic change -- in a tibet for peaceful democratic change are good things. the government is there to listen to their people and engage in the political process. when real democracy is strengthened in takes root, but that is good for the people of the region. it is good for the rest of the world and the united states. thank you.

>> the treasury department has frozen assets in the u.s. is sending aid teams to help refugees leaving libya. we will have more from british prime minister david cameron. a vote is expected at 630 p.m. members will consider a republican plan to spend on a timber bases until the house, senate, and white house cannot agree on a spending plan progress of the budget year. live coverage of the house here on c-span. a federal reserve chairman, been predicted, will be on capitol hill to report on the state of u.s. monetary policy. he will be live at 10 eastern. on cspan3.

." studies the effects of the internet of society. >> not until a shiny new tool shows up in the hands of it a 15 year-old that it changes the world. it is when your mom takes it for granted and makes a video that can be posted on youtube. c-span2.n the c-sp >> continue with elected officials, policy makers, and journalists. watch live coverage of the house and weakness, policy forms, supreme court oral arguments. on weekends, our signature interview programs. on saturday, "the communicator's." you can also watch our

programming in the time that c- span.org -- any time at c- span.org. a public service greeted by america's cable companies. -- created by america's cable companies. >> prime minister cameron said he did not "in any way rule out the use of military force." his comments are just over one hour. >> a statement from the prime minister. >> thank you. i would like to update the house on the evacuation of british nationals from libya. the actions we're pursuing at his of administration and developments in the region. we have been working intensively to get our people out. as of now, we have successfully

removed around 600 british nationals from libya. the evacuation has centered on three locations. tripoli airport, and the desert oil fields. at tripoli airport, a series of six aircraft have brought out more than 380 british nationals and a similar number of foreign citizens. hms cumberland has carried out to evacuations, taking out 290 british nationals at 343 foreign citizens. the first of these evacuations took place on a difficult see conditions and the second arrived earlier today. these regulations were assisted on the ground by five rapid deployment teams. nearly 30 extra staff in the foreign office helped marshall british citizens and to the airports and ports. the most challenging part of the evacuation has evolved as

british national scattered across 20 different locations in the oilfields the by of the desert. on friday evening, i authorized the military operation to bring as many as possible out of the desert. two raf aircraft flew into the desert and pick up some before pressure vessels, what mattered to foreign nationals at three different locations. the second mission to place yesterday. bringing out 21 nationals and 168 for the nationals. on the second missions, one of the aircraft suffered by the -- minor damage. this underlines the challenging and hard red under which the aircraft were operating. the equipment has taken on the leading role in coordinating the effort. our aircraft are directing international aircraft involved in bringing in a commander has helped to coordinate the efforts of many different countries.

i think the maltese prime minister. we should pay tribute to moll to enter people for the role they're playing. it come -- the number is difficult to ascertain. many of them will be dual nationals that not all will want to leave. on current indications, there are fewer than 150 remaining, of which only a small proportion which to lay. this can change at any time and we can keep you updated. we can do all you can -- weekend to ensure those who wish to leave can do so. hms cumberland and a to messrs. wilkes de vie. -- hms l [unintelligible]

i chaired three meetings over the weekend. there's a security is looking at a strategic picture. not least to look at other risks to british citizens in countries in the wider region. there will be lessons we wish to learn from this evacuation including hiring a charter aircraft to use of defense assets, and the need for greater redundancy. an important decision was when to extract our embassy. this was taken at the meeting on friday and carried out on saturday. after the remaining civilians have been extracted and in parallel with the start of the desert operations which were planned for multi, our judgment is the rest to british citizens has been growing and the americans, french, and germans

suspended operations of their embassies. britain retains the consul in tripoli and in benghazi. turkey will after british interests. the house will want to put on record thanks to all those who made the rescue effort possible, the skill of the pilots and the royal navy crews and diplomatic service and for those who put themselves in harm's way to help our people leave safely. this -- let me turn to the pressure we are putting on the regime. we should be clear. for the future of libya and its people, the regime last and that he must leave. we're taking every possible step to isolate the regime to deprive it of money, to shrink its power, and to assure anyone responsible for abuses will be held to account. we are taking the lead.

we secured agreements for a un security council resolution which we had drafted and which is unusually strong, unanimous, it includes our proposals. it condemns his actions and imposes a travel ban in assets freeze on those at the top of his regime. it demands an immediate end to violence and killing of protesters, access of human rights, lifting of internet restrictions and media and into intimidation of journalists. it refers the current leaders to the international criminal court to face the just as they deserve. we will also -- we were the driving force behind this special session on friday which started work to eject libya from the council. the foreign secretary is in geneva along with hillary clinton to see this work through. with our european partners, we have secured agreement on freezing the assets of a wider group of individuals and banning them from entering the u.s. also

imposing a wider arms embargo of the libyan regime. britain is leading and it lifting these measures. a council session was held during which we froze the assets of gaddafi and his family members and entities owned or controlled by them. the ship but was blocked of the billion pounds of fake notes destined for libya. his m.u.d. has been revoked for head of state so that neither he or his family kumi enter the u.k. -- his immunity has been revoked for head of state so that either he or his family can enter the u.k. further use of phrases that travel bans to give the message to those of the fringes that now is the time to deserve it. we do not rule out the use of

military assets. we must not tolerate this regime is using military force against its own people. i ask the ministry of defence and the chief of defence staff to work with our allies and plans for a military no-fly zone. it is clear this is an illegitimate regime that has lost the consent of its people and our message is simple. del. is will beopes th resolved quickly but there is danger of a humanitarian crisis. we have dispatched teams to beat at place. the most pressing need is to sift the large number of workers. britain will fly by intends = = --- tents and blankets.

we must deal with this but the clear about what these developments mean n have crittenden the west -- and hope that britain and the west will respond. people, especially young people are seeking their rights ed in the vast majority of cases they're doing so peacefully and bravely. the parallels with what happened in europe in 1989 are not precise. those of us who believe in democracy and open society should be clear. this is a precious little opportunity. while it is not for us to dictate how each country should meet the aspirations of its people, we must remain silent that freedom and the role of law or what best guarantee he would progress and economic success. freedom of expression, a free

press, assembly, the right to demonstrate peacefully, these are basic rights and they are much the rights of people in the square as they are in trafalgar square. they're not british or western values but the values of human beings everywhere. we need to take this opportunity to look at our relationship and the billions of euros the you funds and our trade relationships and ties. we need to be clear and talk for a leaking our systems to real progress in promoting more open and a more plural society and we need to dispense with the outdated notion that democracy has no place in the arab world. we have made a false choice between stability on the one hand and reform and openness of the other. as recent events have confirmed, denying people their rights does not provide stability. we should be clear that now was not the time to park the middle east peace process. quite the opposite. reform, not repression is the way to lasting stability.

no one pretends democracy and open societies can be built overnight. democracy is the work of patient craftsmanship. it takes time as we go to put its building blocks in place. what is happening is one of those once in a generation opportunities, but would history turns a page. the next page may not be written and offers a chance to fashion a future and build a better relationship between our peoples and make a new start. as a leader said, we have the opportunity of achieving freedoms that you in britain take for granted. i am determined we shall not let them down. i can read the statement to the house. -- commend the statement to the house. >> i would like to ask about the four areas he covered. the immediate safety of british natural -- officials at the lessons learned from this

crisis. can i join him in expressing deep and abiding gratitude to members of the british armed forces who have succeeded with such extraordinary courage and professionalism in evacuating 70 citizens and those of many other countries over the last week? these brave men and women are credit to our nation. our first concern must be the city of our people. i would not expect the prime minister to discuss future operations. can he reassure the house that all contingencies are looked at in relation to any remaining citizens stranded in libya? given that the the closure of the british embassy on saturday, can he assure that everyone is being done -- everything is being done to keep in contact and what means of communication are available to them? the whole house will endorse the

view that the only acceptable future is one without parole = gadafi. i welcome the international isolation of libya. the resolution imposes travel bans and asset freezes on a number of other individuals. do these go wide enough to cover his family who have made the decision to stand with him? the government will make full use of the resolution to nominate additional regime members who should be targeted by travel bans that asset freezes. there is a growing humanitarian

crisis and i welcome the steps that will be taken. the events unfolding across the middle east are a significant as the liberations' that liberated eastern europe. our response to the needs to be equally ambitious. this movement is in line with the values we share. does he agree that the way to approach the situation is we need to build a strategic response, including closer economic ties, an institution building? what he concedes that while there is much weekend in should do bilaterally, real progress including at the level of the european union. can i also share the sentiment that it would be a tragedy if

the opportunity was not grass to address israel and palestine. can i give my support for the rest of resumption of talks between israel and the palestinians and his decision to support the u.n. security council resolution settlement. can he say what steps will be taken to get resolution moving? can the prime minister confirm that the governor will work with the eu partners to strengthen guidelines and the operations of the rules of arms sales? can i ask about lessons to be learned from the immediate crisis? many members of the house have been dealing with constituents deeply anxious about their family members stranded in libya. should the foreign the office -- for office have done more to evacuate our citizens?

can he explain why this was not the case? given the scale of emergency in the transparency for coordination and a director, does he now great that the emergency committee should have been conveyed earlier than thursday? can he explain why that did not happen? can he share with the house the wider lessons he learned about the body of his government? i think the country has thankfully see the scale of response that can be mobilized to help our citizens, but can he promised british nationals abroad in the future will look be let down as they were by the chaos at the comments we saw last week? -- gas and in, but it's we saw last week? -- chaos and incompetency we saw last week? will the prime minister promised there will be a formal statement to report findings to the house

along with the conclusion of ? >> thank you. i thank him for his praise of the armed forces. they have done a big bet is a job. -- a magnificent job. doing what is extremely difficult. in terms of future operations, it is difficult to say too much more in the house but i have given these numbers about the number of british citizens we believe are still in their and who want to leave. we have the assets down where appropriate. we will be working with the turkish government. i have spoken to that turkish covered as well as many others.

you ask about whether the travel bans and the asset freeze as a wide enough. this is an important point. but we want to do is isolate and target key members of the regime with a clear warning. those close to the regime may have a choice. they can desert it and they can leave it, or they stay with it, there is a chance they can be hit by a travel ban said asset freezes. this is part of turning up the pressure. i agree with what he says about institution building and making sure they you sharpens up its act in terms of labor policy. there is room in terms of action. i hope we can do more in terms of political relations and building of also party to party relations to help build up the building blocks of democracy in those countries. i agree what he says about israel and palestine. i am proud of the fact we back the security council resolution. it meant a disagreement with our

oldest and strongest ally, the united states, but it was the this is -- a decision to make. he asked a number of questions about lessons to be learned. there are lessons to learn. what worked in respect to egypt, a combination of scheduled flights and charter flights did not work as well in the case of libya. i would make the point that it is not as easy. the more you rely on chances earlier, the more the scheduled airlines crops, and you can leave yourself with a bigger problem. he asked about learning lessons about the riding of everett. they're always lessons to be learned. if there is an apology, there would be what about the dodgy dealings with libya. >> i agree in light of the cable

loschaos. to create a post-gaddafi structure. waheed agreed that it was a complete list judgment to have entered into a defense cooperation agree with libya? >> we do think there are lessons to learn. what i would say is the last ever was correct to encourage the giving of weapons of mass destruction. more parameter should have been put on the relationship. parameters should have been put on the relationship in terms of the release of all look right. this should not been our position to facilitate that. >> could i echo the combination of our armed forces who worked hard to provide an adequate service for british citizens and others traded.

libya? and commend the other actions the risk-taking. could i ask him to expand on the point he made in the state about what he described as greater redundancy? for responding to a future crisis w, with greater resilience and resources. what he except that cutting the foreign office staff that a time when -- cannot but undermined the response of the office. >> the cuts to the foreign office are much less severe. i do not think that has had a material impact. the combination meant we led the pack.

the situation was difficult. we need to learn the lessons about what extra capacity you need to put in place. it is not as simple. you collapse the scheduled flights and land yourself with a bigger problem. the point of it now is as we stand, britain is doing a huge about to help other countries out of libya. over 32 nationalities. >> we're told we're no longer borrow powered weed older need a royal navy. we need one more than ever. further cuts to the royal navy? >> we are an exception is well served by the navy.

the point i would make is, obviously, we are making a reduction in the >> in all cases, it is a mixture of civilian and military assets to need to be brought to bear. >> the prime minister has my strong support. the less direct cast a similar boat with crossed party support. does he agree that the lesson of the last decade is of their own volition, the israelis and palestinians will not negotiate a solution between themselves and the international community needs to force the pace on the terms and timing of the resolutions of that dispute and that needs to be led from the un security council? >> i agree. it is good to see him in his place. i'll try to make sure there is a

real combination effort between britain, france, germany and the u.s. to provide that backing. the only problem is, it is difficult for us to what a solution or the parties what a solution. we should put every available pressure and we should be making the argue with the that the weakening of democracy is not a threat to the peace process but could be an opportunity. que>> president abbas has called for elections. hamas is refusing to allow such elections to take place. >> my friend makes a good point. the key things i in terms of our engagement is to ask those on the palestinian side to except the key principles of recognizing the state of israel and recognizing former reds. it is possible to hold proper

negotiations but we need that to happen to get both parties on the table properly. >> has he emphasized the urgency --[unintelligible] >> i have had frank conversations with president obama about this. when you do disagree, you should be frank in saying so. britain and america do not agree. we think the resolution was basically right. that is why we voted for it and we were disappointed it was vetoed. we had to persuade the americans that further investment is worth it. not just for its own sake but for the wider peace of the region and to remove the cause

of instability and extremism. quex the government has the right to support forces for democratic change but does my right hon. friend think that this support will have any affect on the future relationships with our friends in the region? >> i was struck how a number of strong yen old allies -- and old allies are in favor of taking steps toward more open societies. that democracy and freedom and that sort of progress is a good thing. did the prime minister

have discussed the t -- discusso fly zone? ensuret time to gaddafi's regime cannot use helicopters and aircraft to crush the opposition? >> there was an opportunity to commemorate the action he led in terms of the routing that country from saddam hussein. kuwait was a country where we risked lives. in terms of a no-fly zone, we must comply with international law. we need to do the preparation and planning bell or no one can

be sure that the the what col. gaddafi might do. >> the prime minister is right to praise the u.k. forces but given that many companies have lucrative business operations in libya, is the prime minister satisfied that working in these high risk and are reds in a country -- does business also need to learn the lessons of the future? >> this is the conversation we should be having with those oil companies. they do have security arrangements and have to transport arrangements and it is important to get our people out and make sure they are playing their part in delivering that. i am sure there is more they

could have done rather than [unintelligible] >> can i say -- i spent last week trying to speak to a foreign service minister without success. the international criminal court -- can i make it quite clear, this will apply to any would in libya who chooses to side with the regime? >> the only international criminal court analog does not just apply to people in the regime or those in the armed forces, who commit atrocities, it applies to any mercenary who goes to libya and who does those activities. as i said previously, the reach of the international law is long and its memory is 3 lodes and

quite right to. -- its memory is quite long and quite right to. >> you gave a robust message to colonel either gaddafi -- col. gaddafi. >> this is a test for everyone. it is a test for nato and the u.s. and the air play. it will be a test for the african union as well. the arab league has suspended libya in terms of its membership. we should be looking for the african union to take robust action as well. the point he makes about mercenaries as well made and we should make that clear. if african leaders are

contemplating that measure. >> all kinds of crowd control and sniper rifles were sold to the regime. isn't it time we stop selling arms to murdering bastards who terrorize their own people? >> what this government has done is revoke about 30 licenses covering a range of products to that regime and others in the region. are there further lessons to be learned? i am clear that we should be looking at those and say what they could be done. >> we are sure the house is

planning effectively for after regime change? >> we need to plan for every eventuality. that is why i mentioned it is important to plan for humanitarian crisis and we need to plan for what might happen should the regime fall or something we do not want to happen, we have a situation of virtual civil war in libya. we have to prepare for every eventuality and work with the international community to make sure we are ready. >> can i make the point that there was a certificate scheme, it is broken. it does not work. since the first half of last year, 31 million pounds worth were sold. water cannons, stun guns, grenades, tear gas, the whole

panoply of stuff which is used against civilians. >> when you look at the terms of the deed in the desert that was done, we asked ourselves some serious questions about how widely it went and what sort of equipment involved. i am pleased we put in place these revocation of licenses. this was about what was intended by what was agreed several years ago. >> the unanimous decision by the security council is of incredible importance. it demonstrates the first time that heads of state and government will be liable to prosecution if they commit human-rights offenses bid defenses against human rights. >> this is an extremely good point. when britain and it was britain drafted the text of this resolution, the advice this

would take days, probably weeks to get through the un security council, and it is remarkable that the have adopted this it at this late -- they have adopted it unanimously, it is a positive side and i hope it means that when we come forward with fresh security resolutions to tighten further this group of this dreadful regime, there will be similar support. >> talking about planning for the future. have you had discussions with nato in terms of should we require further rescue activities? have been discussing a range of things. what she discussed and no-fly zones. although there has been bilateral efforts of countries like britain to get into areas like the desert and rescue our people, there has been a huge

amount of coordination to make sure that whether it is driven planes or british or canadian planes, we are taking each other's dial. i have had a range of discussions and we're trying to help each other in this regard and that is what is being coordinated from malta. >> there is a concern about the the prospect of gaddafi unleashing his war machine against the people of libya. would he give thought to the the fact that those were resisting must be properly armed if necessary in order to ensure they are not wiped out as happened in sarajevo? >> this is an important point. we're trying to make a better contact, and established contact with the opposition to learn more about their intentions.

what we want, what is and our interests is the swift removal of colonel khadagaddafi. if helping the opposition would bring that about, it is something we should consider. >> is there is nothing new or of labour about dodgy relations between the british red and the murderous libyan regime? would he agree further that after i in april of 1984, metropolitan police constable fletcher was shot dead from the libyan embassy, the thatcher government humiliated the commissioner of the metropolitan police by requiring him to provide policeman to -- policemen to provide an escort to the airport for the murder so he could get back to libya?

>> i feel that was making a political point. i would make one in return. you have to comply with international rules. one simple point is under -- in the last parliament, there was a choice about whether to support the release of mccrary -- megrahi. >> my grandfather was one of .housands who was in libya he came to this country because of this democracy. he would have been shocked to have seen not just the close relations between this the the red and -- this government and khadafi -- gaddafi. could my friend take steps to

ensure this does not happen again? >> will have said, i do think it was right to bring that country in from the cold. of course it was. the question is whether parameters should have been put on their relationship. i heard the head of london's school of economics try to justify that this morning. could the money have been put to good use? difficult to explain the behavior of the u.k. special abbasid for trade who was not only a close friend of gaddafi but a friend of the gun smuggler? is it time we dispense with the services of the duke of york? >> i am not aware of the connections the hon. gentleman chooses to make. i am happy to look into them.

if we are disqualifying friends of gaddafi, we may be saying goodbye to what are two of his friends. >> references to members of the royal family should be very rare, very sparing, and very respectful. >> we have to be careful in our handling of these matters. >> thank you for congratulating the brave young men and women. in future, will not a greater role be played by contractors? we're saving risk to the armed forces lives? >> there needs to be putting

between government and companies. we need to make sure we get this right in the future. we're trying to bring people out of the desert and put 20 or more platforms. it is extremely complicated. i am sure we can learn some lessons about how to do better in future. >> my to read this admiration for the courage and tenacity of the libyan people. men, women, and children. fighting with their bare hands. can i say for looking at lessons learned, we should look at what happened when a no-fly zone was provided for the kurds of iraq. it meant that thousands of kurds were protected. there's not a lot we can do immediately but we should look at that as great importance. i do believe it could save thousands of lives if he is way

to babism people from the year. own people from the air. >> this is not a islamist revolution. this is the people's revolution. but what the source of freedoms we take for granted. it is not without its difficulties and problems. libya is an enormous country. it would take a serious about of military assets to achieve it. it does not stop all oppression. there are other ways to carry that out. i do think one thing we need to look at and plan for on a case we find, as we may well do, that he is taking further polling steps to press his people and that is why conversations are taking place today.

>> the prime minister rightly calls his role and illegitimate regime which has blocked the consent of its people. what does he consider it was anything but? >> i never supported gaddafi or his regime. it is illegitimate. it begs the question of how long we would go on recognizing the regime. that is another urgent piece of work i have requested to make sure we do everything to cut off the money, to cut off the supply, to cut off the oxygen to this regime so it falls as fast as it possibly can. >> you recall there was some question to my bag of the foreign secretary to suspend arms sales and to give a response. i am glad the prime minister -- can i welcome the last positive statement about building of this?

would you consider creating a british foundation to include businesses, trade unions, likke e the [unintelligible] and use development money elite? this way we can create something, we can help everyone in the future rather than incriminate about the past. >> this is one of those occasions i am in agreement. the idea of party to party contact, building up a building block of democracy in terms of civil society and political parties, this is something in which britain had expertise and excellence. we have the westminster foundation. we may need some other new mechanism. i am glad there is cross party

support. on thursday, u.s. journalists were pressing to explain why the u.s. is not able to match evacuation efforts. is the prime minister confident we can rely on the u.s. to deliver for us and others who would wish to help? >> this is a good question about the capability gap. i would argue that what this is demonstrating is the importance of flexibility. what has been necessary is having a good range of military assets, having a transport aircraft as we will with the future, having large numbers of highly trained special forces and we will have more of the defense review head being able to half the -- have the ability

to overfly. the u.s. has something like 12 aircraft carriers but not one in the mediterranean. it is more about the effect -- flexibility of forces. >> i thank the prime minister for his statement and the reconvening of the u.n. human rights council which i hope take center stage. is he not concerned that in every country in the region, the forces that have are using commitment made in britain, europe, or the united states? we have to look to our relationship and trying to demand what we want for ourselves.

>> i'll make two points. first of all, we revoked a large number of licenses, including for some of the countries that