you a few more slides pinhead what happens when people in america are registering with their mobile phones right now? this is how it breaks down by party. those are individuals with e- mail addresses. this is colorado. 20% has mobile phones, that as more people that watch television. this is how it breaks down by party. 2.1 million e-mail addresses, complete voter history, complete e-mail addresses this is how it breaks down by congressional district. all those numbers are large and big. this is the progression. the mobile phone channel is increasing from 2004 to 2008 to 2010. part of the new media technology

is you can call number. this is geofencing. if you call, i will know that you were in this room but i want to hear what you have to say. if you want to be part of this, call that number. if you want to be part of this in any way, shape, or form, i ask you to engage. you'll hear speaker after speaker tell you why we need to be involved. i wanted to talk to you. we can win this and we will. barack obama is the problem. thank you. [applause] >> and now, from terre haute indiana, the national committeman from indian. -- indiana.

[applause] >> thank you. how much is $1 billion? >> a lot. >> 1 billion minutes ago, jesus was alive. $1 billion in taxes is what you pay and 100,000 of your friends pay is $1 billion. if you decided to count to 1 billion, and you counted one number every minute, it would take you 31 years, 259 days, one hour, 46 minutes, and 40 seconds to count to 1 billion. we have a problem with $1

billion. that is because that is how much money barack obama will have on in his campaign account to defeat our republican nominee. $1 billion. in 2008, he raised $750 million as a rather obscure first time illinois center. how much can he raise as president of the united states when he began almost six months ago, announcing his candidacy and began raising money for his campaign? $1 billion. now, that is not it. you have all of his allies. you have the government unions. the stimulus package did not save any private sector jobs but it saved 500,000 government

jobs. all members of the union's who of course take that money cannot give it to the union who gives it to the democrats and barack obama. how about the trial lawyers? the largest contributors. how about george soros. how about cnn, cbs, pbs. how much money are they going to spend to elect barack obama? we're talking about billions of dollars. even if all of our presidential candidate to of all their assets and we threw in donald trump, it still would not be $1 billion. that is what we are facing in this general election.

where will we be then? that is the danger that we face in 2012. what it is our candidate going to do, faced with $1 broke -- $1 billion. he could do like john mccain did after he got nominated. he took $80 million in public funds to run his general election campaign. problem, $920 million, not enough. or, he could try it to raise private funds. what is the problem there? corporations are prohibited from contributing. individuals are limited to $2,500 and every individual is limited in the total amount they can give during an election cycle. we have to think outside the box. we have to think of something

new. we have to be innovative and we have to be courageous. we have to have a game changer. that is what brings me to the republican super papac. what is the republican superpac? it was started by roger villary. we are all members of the republican national committee and we thought we needed a game changer to change this election. many of you have heard about mccain negative fine gold. -- mccain-feingold. many laws have created 71

different entities that are each regulated in a unique and different way. one of those entities are called political action committees. in regular -- a regular pac is limited as far as what it can accept and no corporate contributions. there is a different kind of pac, an independent expert and expenditure pac. since it does not make contributions to candidates, it has no limits. no $5,000 limit that could take unlimited funds. it could take it from corporations. the trade-off is if you only do

independent spending, you get unlimited contributions. that is called being afraid. we are for freedom in america. so, we created this superpac for everyone. everyone could in your congressional district, you could start one, you could find a lawyer, get an account, and try to figure out how to comply with the campaign finance laws in washington, d.c., and you could do that in your state in presidential candidate -- people who support them could do this and create these organizations, do independent spending, and enjoy these unlimited contributions. we wanted to make it easy. we wanted to have a pac everyone

can use. all you have to do is raise money and have the donor earmark it to spend in favor of the candidate that the donors of hearts -- supports and we will spend that to support your candidate. this is the way to match the resources that we are going to be facing in 2012 from barack obama and the liberals and the media and the unions that are his support her. if you want more information about how you can join in this effort and use it to select your own candidates, here in louisiana and her of the united states, you need to come to our panel discussion at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning and we will be glad to tell you how you can become involved. this is the game changer that we all need. thank you.

[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the former chief investigator of congress, the president of citizens united. to help the supreme court changed the direction of america. [applause] >> thank you and good evening. i am president of citizens united. it is great to be here for the republican leadership conference. i want to thank roger and charlie and all those who put together this important conference so that all americans can hear from the man or woman

who will defeat barack obama next year. [cheers and applause] let me start by saying that after citizens united historic victory at the supreme court last year, president obama, nancy pelosi, harry reid, the liberal mainstream media made it a priority to attack citizens united at every turn. i am awfully proud of that fact. i wear it as a badge of honor. our win empowered all voters by giving them information going into the 2010 midterm elections and the results were evident. we were able to compete with the unions and the liberal special interest groups. the citizens united decision is a liberal incumbent --

incumbent's worst nightmare. not only do they have a monopoly over the money and information flow, with our first amendment rights established, americans have the tools necessary to defeat barack obama. he plans to raise $1 billion for his reelection effort. that is $1 billion. an unbelievable amount of money and when your record is as bad as barack obama's, you need it to destroy the republican nominee. because barack obama has nothing positive to talk about. unsustainable debt, deficits as far as the eye can see, inflation, record unemployment, that is the obama record. so we need to make sure we fight back with hard truths. even though democrats attacked

victoryitizens united they are taking advantage of it. imagine that, hypocrisy by the democrats. bill burton created his own superpac. president obama has railed against superpacs. if president obama believes that they're bad for america that as he has stated, white does he not pick up the phone and call bill and say, do not do it? but of course, he will not. because once again, he desperately wants to retain power. many people ask me how we can -- conservatives can defeat president obama next year. it is a simple answer. when barack obama came into

office, he had no record. he was elected on the ideas of hope and change. unfortunately, the american people felt for what barack obama was telling them. politico broke a story on how one-third of his [unintelligible] had joined the administration. 80%, those that raised over $500,000 for his election to a key administrative posts. i guess that is the chicago way. obama's change we can believe in has become obama's business as usual. to defeat barack obama, we must talk about his record. thankfully, with the help of the conservative movement. america understands what he

meant when he wanted to change america. when he said that in 2008. president obama is trying to institute a european socialist style government upon americans. chris matthews said msnbc believes what i said is a slur. i am not sure why because it is the truth. obama himself has said, "in america there is a failure to appreciate europe's leading role in the world." america fought two world wars to save europe from tyranny. president obama is flat wrong. i say it is europe who has failed to see the leading role of the united states. [applause] i believe that america is an exceptional nation. president obama does not. we do not have to copy the

failed socialist policies that have come out of these many european capitals to know that. the fact is, america is a center right nation and it will take an american pro negative free market policies to get our economy growing again. we're the last line of defense in the crypt that is obama's socialist agenda. to secure the economy, we must rein in our 14.5 trillion dollar debt. citizens united endorsed a bold plan by jack kingston that will stop the fiscal suicide if implemented that is being committed in washington. it limit spending to 18% of gnp -- gdp.

this will help rein in our paralyzing debt. by 2016 when the kingston plan is implemented, congress will no longer be able to look the other way. omb should cut spending across the board including entitlements and defense programs if congress cannot stay under the 18% threshold. [applause] now, back in 2006, then-senator barack obama said that raising the debt ceiling was "a sign of leadership failure." when the house of representatives voted no to raise the debt limit to over $16 trillion, the national debt was nearly 75% higher than when

president obama said those very words as a u.s. senator. president obama is not lead when it comes -- has not led when it comes to are out of control debt and out of control spending. the irresponsible policies that the obama administration has instituted over the last 2.5 years have hastened our descent toward bankruptcy. and put the physical well-being of future generations of americans in jeopardy. the madness must stop and real fiscal reforms must be allowed to take place. america must make painful cuts necessary or we will become a second-rate power. we will become reminiscent of the european model obama so cherishes. ladies and gentlemen, members of the conservative movement and tea party, we are the last line

of defense to stop him. admiral mike mullen was asked a question. what is the gravest threat to national security, and his answer was, our exploding $14 trillion debt. think about that. spawning out of that debt is a new, secret entitlement program that the obama administration does not want to talk about. this entitlement program does not help those on medicare or medicaid, it is not part of the social security program. this program has one function, paying interest to foreign governments that bankroll our debt. according to obama's own budget, which got zero boat in the

democratically controlled senate, interest payments for the national debt will cripple -- quadruple from $187 billion in 2009 to $768 billion in 20/20. that is $2,500 for every man, woman, and child in the u.s. that is to pay the interest in one year on the national debt. it is like those americans who are deep in credit-card debt and every month, they are able to pay off the interest. we know how the story's end. -- how those stories and. you cannot run a family like that long. we cannot run a country that way. and remember, the $768 billion

that we will be paying in 20/20 does not bring down our national debt $1. it only pays the interest. we need drastic reforms in this country. some of the cuts may be painful, but one thing we cannot do is continue the obama status quo. that is not an option. [applause] here on the gulf coast, you have learned the hard way that president obama does not have an energy policy. with record high gas present -- prices, he is slow-walking drilling. i guess president obama is taking his cues from al gore. president obama does not understand that americans are struggling. we just went through a cold winter of north and people are

struggling to pay off their home heating bills. sometimes, they have to choose between paying the heating bill and their mortgage because of the cost of oil. friends, some 50 miles south of here, there are great energy reserves that are not being fully explored. the republican nominee for president must pursue drilling safely in the gulf of mexico to bring back much-needed jobs to the gulf coast. [cheers and applause] we need a comprehensive energy policy in america to create jobs and not fund terrorism in the middle east. every time you fill your tank, every time you fill your tank, money is kicked back to our enemies in the middle east.

this must stop. [cheers and applause] president obama does not have a comprehensive american energy plan. we must create a dual, do it now plan to secure america's economic engine and not fuel radical islam. [applause] president obama's stance toward israel, our greatest ally in the middle east, shows the night the day -- the naivete. they have taken bold action not to protect israel but the world. last month, president obama said before the visit of israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu that israel should voluntarily returned to its 1967 borders. president obama must have taken

his nobel peace prize a little to her before those remarks. he worked so hard for it. [applause] stating that the borders of israel should be time warped back to 1967 as a non starter -- is a non negative starter for israel. prime minister benjamin netanyahu who was not to please come i think, said the 1967 borders work indefensible and a member of the israeli knesset said, and i quote, "israel will not pay president obama's tuition as he tries to understand the conflict." [applause] president obama and his team went into full-fledged damage

control trying to spin their way out of the mess they created. with radical muslims determined to wipe israel off the map, israel cannot begin to contemplate going back to the 1967 borders. terrorist organizations like hamas and others continue to call for israel's destruction. the next american president must ensure israel is protected. [applause] during the final debate, in the 1980 presidential campaign, ronald reagan so famously asked, are you better off now than you were four years ago? ladies and gentlemen, the latest right track wrong track

poll shows 64% of americans believe that we as a nation are on the wrong track. america's unemployment is at 9.1%. gas prices are record highs. the price of milk and other staples have gone up dramatically since president obama has been elected. i am the father of four children and i want to make sure america is a better place for them where they can prosper and have the same opportunities that i had growing up. americans deserve better than this. [applause] in june 2011 -- it feels to me all lot like june, 1979. when jimmy carter was president. america is a ship adrift in -- and the captain has gone a wall -- awol and it is because of

president obama's failed policies that america is in a rut. i would not be surprised if a few months from now, american and here's another presidential malaise speech. -- hears another presidential malaise speech. 2012, real change will come to america. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the founder and ceo of the academy of training skills. [applause]

>> thank you. i have the honor of introducing someone who has a lot of accomplishments which is rare for politicians today and he deserves the title of statesmen. that word does him justice. i had the opportunity to meet him the year ago at the meeting of the governors of louisiana. i was impressed with his knowledge and over the years i have watched him and i do not think we can find a man with more mallet -- knowledge when it comes to running this country. he has proven a leader when he served as speaker. he can take the country in the right direction. he is a man with tremendous potential and wants to be our president. he would be a good president. i have not known him long, but i am very impressed with him. he did things when he was

speaker that would -- we would be proud to see done again today if that could happen and that could happen again if we elect a man like newt gingrich. would you please join me in giving a warm welcome to newt gingrich. [applause] >> thank you very much. i am delighted to have a chance to be here. i am glad to have a chance to come back to new orleans.

my younger daughter was born here so we have many ties to the city. i want to cut through to the challenge we have as we look out over the next 18 months. how how many of you think america is on the wrong track? virtually all of you. how many of you believe that washington will fight very hard against getting back on the right track? i want for you to think about this. this is the key question about the 2011 campaign. i want to make this case to you. it is very important to defeat president obama, but that is not enough. we have to pick up 12 u.s.

senate seats, and we have to get 30 or 40 seats in the u.s. house. and we have to strengthen our position with state legislatures and governors, local city councils, because if we implement the 10th amendment and we have to return power back home, we have to operate in a fiscally sound manner, in order to make certain the power is an abuse back home. this may be the most important team election in our lifetime. we have been given -- a choice

that is so vivid, we have an 80 year -- we could give it -- we could end the 80-year rule of the left in the united states. it is fascinating to me as a historian and as a speaker of the house, as a candidate and as a citizen, that this is clearly a center-right country with a left-wing governing body. over 90% of the american people believe that students should be allowed to have a moment of silent prayer, and yet, we have a judge in the city taxes who said, this is a u.s. judge. he said, if any student at the high-school graduation uses the word, they could go to jail.

90% of the american people think it is perfectly reasonable if a student voluntarily wants to explain that their success came from god, then the very nature of freedom should give them the right. i thought that this is what free speech was about. but this judge is so anti- american that he says he will throw you in jail if you tell the truth. my answer to that requires a big majority in the house and senate. my answer is the judicial reform act of 18 02, this is a virtue of having a historian. thomas jefferson and james madison knew about the constitution. probably more than the current supreme court.

[laughter] [applause] they pass the judicial reform act of 18 02, which eliminated 18 at of 35 federal judges. think about this. over half of the federal judges. they did not do something complicated. they said, your office is not exist and you are not getting paid, go home. several of those judges tried to file suit and say that this was unconstitutional, and they went to the judges who were still in office, and they said, are you crazy? he said if i do this, they will abolish me. i want to make this clear. i do not want the news media to get confused. i am not as bold as thomas

jefferson and james madison. i am 9 recommending that we abolish half of the judges in the united states. -- i am not recommending that we abolish half of the judges in the united states. [applause] >> clearly a person who is an activist who may not be ready to be president. you have to be reasonable. i would limit this to the judge from the state of texas, who is so outrageously anti-religious, he does not understand america. we do not need to have judges who do not understand america. [applause] i would eliminate the ninth circuit.

and for my friends in the intellectual and news media community to fight -- to find this horrifying, i say that they should read the federalist papers, by james madison, hamilton, the most amazing campaign brochure ever written, 85 chapters, to explain the constitution so people would vote for this. they said the judicial branch is the weakest and not the strongest. jefferson wrote that the idea of a supreme court being supreme over the legislative and executive branches is an absurdity. we have to reset the judiciary, and explain the limits of the american constitution to prove to them that the judges who are appointed for life cannot be dictators and they cannot

threaten our children with jail for saying the word "prayer." [applause] >> the important thing i am saying here, is that you can achieve a positive outcome -- you cannot do this just by winning the presidency. we want to do this as a team, in which we have house and senate candidates going in the same direction. and we arrive in washington and on january 20, 2013, we began to change everything. [applause] you may say, how fast could you change things? let me suggest the following. immediately after the inaugural address, we will take a one-hour break.

during the one-hour break, we will go to an office in the capital, and on national television, we will start somewhere between 5200 executive orders, as effective as of that minute. [applause] at newt.org, we have "on the first day." we have the ability to submit we believe is an acceptable order. we have people from the bush administration and the reagan administration writing them, and we will post the executive orders to be signed on the inaugural list. they will be there for everyone and they will be part of the last 30 days of the campaign, and if we end up in a debate with barack obama, we will say,

here is the executive order. [applause] >> i do not know what most of these orders are going to be, but i know about the first four. the first executive order i will use to eliminate all of the white house czars as of that moment. >> the second executive order reinstates ronald reagan's mexico city policy, that no u.s. taxpayer pays for abortions overseas.

the third executive order reinstates the conscious provision from george w. bush, that shows that no person, no pharmacist or doctor can be forced to perform any medical procedure against their religious beliefs. [applause] >> the fourth thing that i would sign says that as of that day, the united states recognizes the capital of countries as described by their governments, and we will move the embassy -- the only place that this affects is israel. the u.s. state department has refused to move the embassy from

tel aviv to jerusalem. this is an insult to a country that is our allie. y. i give a speech last sunday night that you can find on my website, outlining nine major changes in the policy in the middle east. there is no moral equivalence between a self-governing rule of law, free society, and a terrorist organization that commits evil acts, and no american president should force israel to speak to people who are trying to kill them. [applause] being in new orleans, we should talk about jobs, housing,

energy, and the obama depression. i commend the democratic chairman, who said yesterday, that they own the economy. it was more honesty that we have gotten out of the white house in three years and she deserves credit before she is fired by obama. [laughter] how can the president of the united states say to the country that he is not concerned about a second recession? how can he not be concerned when 14 million americans are out of work? how can he not be concerned when one out of every four american families is in house that is worth less than the mortgage? how can he not be concerned with

the anti-american energy policies, this is driving up the cost of gasoline. this is killing jobs in louisiana. [applause] many of you saw the show could be made, it turns out that the show already projects were not ready for the shovel. mr. president, it was not very funny to the 14 million unemployed americans to learn that you did not know what you're doing and your plans did not work. [applause] >> we have been here before. jimmy carter made a total mass of the economy. ronald reagan carried more states in 1980 and franklin roosevelt carried in 1932. reagan so when your brother-in-

law is unemployed is a recession, and when you are unemployed is a recession. and when jimmy carter is unemployed is called a recovery. some of you may expect to hear this next year with one name changed. about how seriously destructive the obama admit -- energy policy is. we have 20% less production in the gulf of mexico because of his moratorium and his regulatory policies that are against american energy. he is killing jobs in louisiana. he is not just killing jobs in louisiana, he is forcing americans to send money overseas.

70 percent of the net deficit in trade is oil. the president goes to brazil. he says to the brazilians -- you will see this as a commercial. i know what you think i am in making this up. the president goes to brazil. he says to them -- i am happy that you are drilling offshore. he says i am happy we could guarantee $2 billion in loans for a company financed by george soros. the most amazing thing, he says to them, i want us to be your best customer. i want you to think about this. he has his job exactly backwards.

you don't hire the president of the nine states to go over the world being a purchasing agent. you want him to be a salesman for american products. [applause] when we get to the general election, won fame will be simple. if you like brazilian oil vote for obama. if you won a salesman president, but for us. let's make the choice very clear. and, by the way. i was criticized in the media who are not as fond of me as they could be. i said that obama is the most successful food stamp president in american history. obama is the most successful food stamp president in american

history. i would like to the most successful paycheck president in american history. i believe that you can go into every neighborhood of every ethnic background in every state in the united states and say to people which rather have food stamps or paychecks, and in virtually every neighborhood, they will say they want their children to have a job and not be dependent on washington for food stamp. and i want to suggest something to all of you. if we have the courage to run a campaign based on freedom, in turn a campaign that says, you should be free to work with your doctor, and you and your doctor should worry about your health, and we should repeal obama care.

a campaign that says freedom requires you to be able to work for a living and earn a paycheck, and servitude for the government allows it to depend on washington for food stamps. just go down the list. when i predict is that there is no state in the country that will be a lot for barack obama. everywhere in america, people will be aware of bad policies killing jobs and american energy, and we should have the courage as a party to say, no neighborhood will be off-limits. we will give every american a chance for a better future, by voting for freedom of the republican party rather than servitude and the democratic party.

in washington, people seem very confused. in washington, they don't understand what the problems of the country are. the only place where housing prices have gone up, where people are worried about unemployment. they cause your unemployment to make certain they have the money for their housing prices. i want to suggest why this would be an unusual campaign. if we have a contract with america next september, and if we are bold in our commitment to better policies and explaining our principles, as my good friend was just saying from cincinnati, what is american exceptional listen, why did the free markets work and why do -- wise patriotism important, what is said matter that you have been endowed with your creator certain inalienable rights.

this is a magic moment in american history. he will fail in practice and radicalism. we can say the reason the practice fails is because the radicalism is hopeless. and you would have fit -- a thought that people realize that socialism does not work. margaret thatcher said the problem with socialism is that you run out of other people's money to spend. we need to be prepared to go to the country, but with principles of freedom, principles of american exceptional as an and national safety, with their practical and specific proposals that grow out of those principles. they will enable us to have one of the great decisive elections, and to educate two generations of americans with the school systems have failed to educate.

margaret thatcher said, for she win the argument, and then you win the vote. the right kind of campaign is to have an argument. some people in politics find this very confusing. ira book called, a nation like none other, and the purpose is to describe american exceptional as an. this campaign will be about economics, which includes a 2 percent of health care, american exceptional listen, and about national security. this is the heart of the campaign. i will take a moment to talk about american exceptional listen. obama was asked, do you believe in american exceptional is a. he said, i believe americans are exceptional, but i am certain the greeks and the british think that they are exceptional.

american essentialism is not about us being there were stronger or smarter, it is about this unique magic moment, when the founding fathers met at independence hall, and wrote a declaration of independence, this is words that just alienate academic leftwingers, and much of the news media, and drive judges crazy. we hold these truths to be self evident. they did not say theory or ideology, they said truth, because they wanted to divine the heart of humans governing themselves. we are all created equal. and this is very important. this means that the rule of law matters, so you can have a centralized power in washington. this becomes the rule of bureaucrats. [applause] and then they said, we are

endowed by our creator, with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. this is the core of my argument, because he is a natural european socialist, and believes he is a politician who knows more than we do, and he should help us -- we should we design our lives. let me what this through it. this is the only country in history, which says, power comes from god to each one of you, personally. we are endowed by our creator. and furthermore, our rights are inalienable. by what right does a judge in texas tell an american that if

they use the word prayer, they will go to jail? no judge, no president, no politician will come between you and the rights that god gave you. [applause] and what does this say? among which are life, -- this is a straightforward message. liberty, which is what freedom is all about, and the right -- the right to pursue happiness. the first is, the word happiness.

happiness meant wisdom and virtue, it did not mean hedonism and acquisition. whatever the number of books on this topic. the founding fathers believed a wise people would remain free. i believe in the american people enough to believe that we can have the most educational, serious, thoughtful campaign in american history and we will have, the people of the united states look up and say, this is a discussion i want to be part of and i want to understand what makes america unique and how we apply this to our generation. and we want to list everyone in a discussion about what kind of america that we are. the right to pursue happiness. this is not the person -- this

is not happiness, this is the pursuit of happiness. this implies a work ethic. active, you have to do something. there is no right to happiness. it does not apply for federal department of happiness. [laughter] [applause] it does not suggest that we need happiness that -- stamps, it does not propose that lawyers have the right to sue on behalf of the unhappy. and if you had said to the house -- founding fathers, that some politician was so arrogant he would tell you -- i will take from the overly happy and distribute again to the utterly happy, -- underly happy.

[applause] >> they would have said that this was of fundamental violation of your rights as given to you by your creator, and that person should be fired for being out of touch with reality. by what right does a politician decide what you are allowed to do? this is the opposite of freedom. i have given you this big philosophical framework. this is going to surprise the news media. it will be longer than nine second sound bites. this will not be full of attack ads. you do not have to attack obama. you just say, look at reality, it attacks him every day. we have a chance to talk to the american people, and there were mass, can you turn this country

around. i actually had an argument. if we pick up 12 senate seats, and 30-40 house seats, this is what i do in the first week. the goal is to run the whole campaign so that you know what you will do in the first week. you are arriving to execute because you have had the conversation in the country knows what you are doing. [applause] this is a very brief overview over the next few weeks, and we will have a lot of material for people who want more details. first we'll start with a tax policy, because as a country that kills jobs. job killing policies kill jobs. i know this is complicated. job killing policies kill jobs.

all these liberals did mystified. i was in a group in the 1970's, and we developed supply-side economics. if you encourage people to create jobs, they will create jobs. reagan had tax cuts and deregulation, praising the entrepreneurs and the innovators and the job creators so that they felt good about this. if you translates to seven years of recovery from november of 1982 until the end of his term, if you translate this into the size of the current economy, and the size of the current population, it would mean seven years after we take over, and there was about a year of switching over, he did not pass

the tax cuts until the fourth week of august. we would create 25 million new jobs. the economy at the end of seven years would be $4 trillion becker, and federal revenue would be up $800 billion a year because so many more people will be at work paying taxes. and you have a huge step towards a balanced budget, and the sheer momentum of the economy would fix everything. this is a parallel from what happened in history. this is not an intellectual theory basedthis is what happen. how would you do that? it is a big deal. you have 14 million unemployed. you have an economy that is spending too much money on your enemies. president obama's model is

borrow from chinese to pay the brazilians. there is not a 16-year-old country that could not figure out that what it does not work. how could you do that? make permanent the current taxes so there are no tax increases in 2013. [applause] going to zero capital gains so everywhere on the planet will send money to the united states. the 28 12.5% corporate tax rate. you will bring home from overseas $1 trillion in capital which is locked up because -- we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. here is what is ironic. at 35%, general electric hires

tax lawyers and pays zero. we will get more money to the government out of general electorate than barack obama is getting at 35%. two other changes. 100% expensing for all new equipment so every american has the most modern e equipment in the world. [applause] i have been at two machine shops in new hampshire with multimillion-dollar pieces of equipment. i talked to owners, and they would have an explosion of productivity in the united states because our workers would be the most productive in the world. [applause] finally, permanently abolish the

death tax, which is anti-work, -- and it is immoral for the government as they could work on your life, save all your life, do everything right, and some politician can take half your money when you die. there is no right for a politician to take your money when you die. president obama may think it is ok for people to have to visit the undertaker and the irs the same week. i think it is profoundly wrong and we should permanently repealed it. so that is taces. the first week we should repeal

the sarbanes-oxley bill. we should repeal the dodd-frank bill. by the way, let me say if anybody is in doubt. if you are a conservative and i mention the phrase dodd-frank bill, you cannot figure out is automatically worth appealing just on principle -- we should replace the epa with a brand new environmental solutions agency that is fundamentally different. we should modernize the food and drug administration so it has the job of being in the laboratory cooperating in order to get new science all the way to the patient as rapidly as possible, not as slow as possible. [applause]

8 21st century food and drug administration means better health, lower-cost, longer lives, greater independence living, and better american jobs. it is a big deal. we should audit the federal gotrve movand figure out who our money. [applause] we should reform the federal reserve to take away the power to give money to banks and return it to the treasury where it could be expected and looked at in public, because no single person should have that level of power in a free society. in addition, we should amend law to say to the federal reserve, your job is to protect the value of the dollar. it is the president and congress that should focus on employment

and economic growth. you protect the dollar. inflation is a terrible tax on the middle class and on working, saving americans and is profoundly wrong for your government to cheat you by devaluing the dollar maright out from under you. finally, you want this economy to grow again. you want to grow rapidly. you need an american energy policy, and louisiana is the best case study. [applause] the obama administration is so anti american energy, the law and grassy and procedures are so anti-american that all around us there is increasing evidence of their effort to strangle the energy supply.

shell oil invested $3 billion in a legal developed right off of the last of which may be hayfield as the entire gulf of mexico, and they gave up because between the epa and the courts and the losses, they decided it was hopeless. there is an effort underway under the endangered species act to explore whether or not a desert blizzard in western texas is endangered and up to close down the largest on land will field in the united states. i just want to give this one a logical test. if there are enough lizards to be in an area the size of the entire oil field, they can not be endangered. if the lizards are so scarce that there are -- they are only in a tiny part of the oil field, why are we closing the entire oil field? they cannot have it both ways, accept the heat american energy.

we have gone from seven years' supply of natural gas and a growing idea that we would import liquid natural gas to discovering gas in shale new yves -- using new methods of drilling. we now have a 110-year supply of natural gas. we are getting ready now to ship natural gas to china, and epa wants to close down the technique by week -- by way we get -- we are down 8,000 feet below the service. the bureaucrats are anxiety written because they did not know what is happening. if we had modern attitudes of 1903, the wright brothers would never have been able to fly. you would not have cars because ford would not have been allowed to build a car. he would have to come here by stagecoach, accept courses have a substantial environmental impact. [laughter] let me close with this,.

the one thing that struck me tonight, and i want to write a paper, people ask a question at the new hampshire debate. their premise was since we are adults society, we cannot expect to get 5% a year growth. i want to take his head on. we are not a developed society. we are at the beginning of the new era. we have an entire world market compete in. we have the opportunity to be the supplier of all sorts of things in the planet. jimmy carter once gave a speech where he said we are going to have to be miserable, but at least we are going to be fair, and we will pass out misery stamps. rohr reagan said the only reason we are miserable is because of

jakarta. -- jimmy carter. with your help we are going to run the most ideal-oriented, the most philosophical make clear, the most educational, the most positive campaign in modern american history. we will develop a clear understanding of why we are americans and what it means to be american. why it would be foolish to give up on the declaration of independence, and the constitution, to adopt some weird european socialist bureaucratic model. when we are done we are going to sweep the senate, the house, we're going to win the white house, and then we are going to clean out washington. thank you.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> now, ladies and gentlemen, the former chairman -- [unintelligible]

>> it is a pleasure to be with you. i am reminded of the question that was asked a great american writer. mr. healey, what gave you the inspiration right "roots"? when you go about your business, he should find each and every day some good. i came here to praise some good, that could that is sitting right here in these seats, some fine republican conservative folks who understand in the core of their soul that they were created in the image of the likeness of god, and it is from him that their rights come. folks will understand what we do is loan power to the government for what purpose -- to protect, preserve, and defend individual

liberty. friends, i came to praise the folks who know that with government -- when government expands, freedom contracts. quite frankly, folks that heard president obama a couple years ago, he was for hope and change, those of us in this room, we hope he hopes and changes. we heard him say that yes, we can, and now we know that what he really meant was, no, you can, but the government with the winfrey. we are in this from st. we are now in a colossal conflict of competing visions, a bishop of those who want the government to do for each and every all things, and those of us who know that with private initiative and personal

responsibility, america can be as great as she has ever bet. we see it in so many different ways. we see it in energy policy that says ad agency should be worried about greenhouse gases as opposed to creating jobs. we see it in an agency that it is going to be more concerned about a three-inch sand dune lizards than jobs in texas. you see any health care policy that says we are going to put government bureaucrats and interests between us and our docs. we see it in the headlines every morning and talk about around our coffee tables about the spending we have been engaged in this country, and we recognize we have to cut spending, and your marks, and stop this slide

socialism.-slotyle you cannot sustain a $14 trillion debt, a $1.70 trillion debt. we know every five minutes, 67 new americans are born in this country. and what did the parents get? they get a birth certificate in one hand and a $46,000 debt bill in the other, because we're spending money we do not have anbar money that we cannot pay back. we know we have to cut, and i find it interesting that i know some of you i know you -- all just talk about it. when i had the honor to become a statewide elected official in texas and run the texas energy

commission, the worst kiagency in the country -- had 852 employees. when i resigned on april 2, we have reduced it down to 660. even though the number of wells in the state was 350,000, over for the 10,000. i was trying -- as we were cutting spending and reducing the size, we will try to make a statement, that i could put the words public and servant in the same phrase. they keep us in the executive branch in 2005 a $45,000 per year pay raise. they gave it to the governor, the attorney general, the comptroller, land commissioner, or road commissioners. i never took one penny of it.

not in 2005. not in 2006. not in 2008, not in 2009, not in 2010, and not in 2011. you friends in texas know that i am blessed to be married to an absolutely gorgeous and extremely talented woman, and it is fair for me to say that even if i had taken that $45,000 per year the race i would not be the breadwinner of my family. i prefer to be kept in the lifestyle of which i had become accustomed. we have got to cut. it is going to be somewhere in the range of $150 billion a year for the next eight years. we will have to defund and p r, planned parenthood. i spent 2.5 years at the u.s. department of education under president bush. we did not at the u.s. department of education in 1979, and we will not need one in 2013.

my friends, we did not have -- that the last 12 years to make sure that americans had an abundant supply of energy, and we did not have a department of energy. we will not need that in 2013, either. my friends, what we got to be more about that austerity. we got to create jobs, create wealth and prosperity. i am the son of a retired high school math and football teacher -- coach. my dad was inducted into the coach's holophane in 2000. dad said your team is not playing well and many, you might want to look at other teams and see who is winning and do what they are doing. before we got into this global recession, we would look around the world and seek countries that were bringing capital to their shores.

cree jobs within their boundaries. one of the things they did was move to a simple flat tax. my friends, i know that some of you are -- and if we did not have a 16th amendment, i might be one, too. i wish somebody would give me a national retail sales tax and take money out of both my pockets. just as i good friend he said, we have to eliminate the death tax, reduce the corporate gains tax, and i do agree dramatically provide for expenses. just part of creating economic growth. we have to have a national energy policy. we should be drilling and exploring for american energy every single place there is an american energy. we should be drilling off the

east, west coast, the gulf of mexico, and anwar. friends, the barren land in the anwr, the caribou are running, and the alaskans are demanding an asking for us to be exploring for american oral there, we should answer the question with a yes. my friends, to keep the lights on, we should use american natural gas, american clean coal, and bring back the -- 75% of the nuclear power is nuclear firecrackers if the french can figure out, surely we can. in order to move our cars, trucks, and buses, i do not know what a technologist orc and

richard is going to design for the brave new world more, i have to believe that the week from to their today is an american natural gas. we cannot continue to spend $42 illion a month to fouoreign countries. my friends, cutting spending and creating wealth developing, a natural energy policy has become extremely important, for those of us who are on the southern border. pope john paul ii said we america are a conscience of hope because we are created with a unique idea that all men are created equal. we want people to come to america. part of what has made as great

as we are is the confluence of all those flavors and a variety of people that have come from all on the world. there is a way to come to america. it is consistent with the rule of law. my friends, we should control the border with a fence in places where works and a virtual fence and others and an additional boost on the ground. because that is an international border, some of are military boots. if you hire people that you know to be illegal, the prosecutor in the city should get your day in court. we should say no to amnesty and a great more -- we should say that coming to america is more than coming to get a job. coming to america is like coming to be an american.

part of being an american -- part of being an american is learning english. if you do that and if you do that you will not see people walking down american streets carrying somebody else's flag. my friends, i started telling you this is a time where we are having a conflict of visions of the notion of individual liberty. we in this room recognize that is the core of who we are. i would like to think that the notion of individual liberty runs in the dna of the williams family. my grandfather was a unique man for his generation. one of the few black men of his generation that has earned a high-school degree. one is my mother and my uncle did the same thing. the school in west texas only

went to the ninth grade. they said my mother to a catholic boarding school. she graduated from high school, went to college, and with the graduate school. when i came along my parents wanted the same thing for me. i went to catholic school k through 8. we still had segregated schools at the time. they sent me to a catholic boarding school in colorado. mom and dad had started classes -and the-cannot drive me up there. they put me on a bus. 602 miles away. they gave me a map and took out a marker and put the route of the bus on the mat. they put circles where the boss would stop. they put x's some of those circles.

they gave me quarters and said call your grandmother when you get there. my friends, you cannot send a 13-year-old on a bus 600 miles away to school and not in greinke in his spirit the notion of individual liberty and personal responsibility. my friends, and you get ready -- as you get ready to return to your house, to get ready for this election cycle, i would ask you to do one thing -- look in your own community and around the country for people who can meet the job description that you are setting up. it is a description that says you are looking for people who have a proven record as a consistent constitutional conservative, people who have courage to stand up to the washington elite. my friends, " would not be seduced by "the washington post" and "the new york times" and

people who can rally americans in the next generation for solutions. i think you for allowing me to participate with you for a short period of time. may god bless you. may god bless america. thank you. [unintelligible]

about receiving contributions from industries he would rally -- regulate. we should be better than that. i am dale peterson. let's show alabama we mean business. [unintelligible] >> here's dale peterson. >> hello. it is good to be here. it is could almost see you out

there. it is good to be here celebrating ronald reagan's birthday, and thanks to roger and charlie and the whole bunch putting this together that has taken care of you guys. it is good for you to show up to listen to someone like me. ike and the guy you have been waiting to see tonight. i and the last guy. that is the last guy you have been waiting to see. i tell you, what is really funny about this his that this conference have speaking tomorrow the next president of the united states. and we will talk about that a little bit later on in the speech here. alabama is number one now.

we are not talking football. arizona is number two, ok? alabama now has, as he sought out there, busting those illegals by the thousands. we now have the toughest immigration law in the nation. the illegal immigration law. has been a long time coming, hard to pull off, maybe even harder to keep on the books, but maybe what we can do is get more and more of these dates on board with this. but some of these states on board with this. you know, i was talking to someone that state and i said the best thing that happened to me was that i did not get elected commissioner of

agriculture in alabama. had i, i probably would not be here tonight. i probably would not have been at cpac early on where i'm at the folks at the leadership institute. i have been working with them and a program they have called college reform, and traveling all over this great country and talking to college students, republicans, conservative students, and you know something? they get hiit. to them, we are not talking the future. we are talking now. they understand about jobs because -- you know, that was

another promise that we did not see. so when you get talking about jobs, and i am just an old, and god, just like everybody up there, up until two years ago, i did not want have anything to do with politicians. they made my skin crawl. but everything got so bad off that i told cathy we have to do something. i am no livestock judge, and but was agriculture. when you look at things, you say how are we going to get jobs back? just like it is miraculous just like you hear those pundits and

they say, what is the one thing we can do to get jobs in this country? it is not just one thing to get jobs. one thing did not just cause them to leave. there is a lot of things, and you cannot make this work trying to focus and hone in on one thing. jobs we need, but there is about one -- for things that make jobs gel this country. by that, i mean they have to happen simultaneously. why is it that we need taxes in america? to run government? about the only thing, isn't it? all right, if we shrink

government a little but we do not need as much taxes, do we? well, it is not hard if you get to thinking about how to shrink government to you think there would be a department or two there that just needs to go way prove me education, something like that, comes to mind. what about consolidating some agencies and departments. do you think there is redundancy going on in d.c. with our dollars? people say if we did that we shrink the government, all those people are are to be walking the streets. well, it is time to get off that government thumb, " sucking it, don't you think? the second thing you can do is urce.otso

don't you think they're private industries out there that can do a better job than government? i do. if we outsource, we might get an audit or two. as you look to the job situation, all that has to happen at the same time. you look at us some other things. had you ever heard of ambulance chasers? businesses are under this thing right here. it is called the government thumb. businesses are either under it or sucking it. get rid of this thumb we will have a lot of things happening here in america.

i am not saying less regulations, and i am not saying get rid of all regulations, but we need to cut back just a tad. cut a fingernail or two off the epa. that would be good start. we do that, but not accountability, because we have to maintain accountability, but we take that off of businesses, and businesses that can read, they need tax reform help, and those jobs that just left? they can hire some of those folks. now we hired the folks and we shrink government at the same time we are paying more taxes. we are not paying more taxes, just more is coming in the kitty. well, when we have more coming into the kitty, we can do more with. on the other hand, you look at

the other part that we have to do, how about returning the power back to the states? [applause] i got a good seeing here. it is a little bit of government goes along way. -- a long way. have tried and tried and tried to make government and entitled nation. you are entitled to this. how many times on tv have you heard, you deserve this? we are not entitled nation. we are a privileged nation. i have been focusing -- and i do not like to use the word for

reucareer -- at the time i have been involved with politics, i have understood a little bit of the way that it works. einer is gone, by the way. could happen to a nicer guy. don't you think it is a little bit past time that we got more and more business minded men and women up to this political plate and a little bit of these professional politicians. i was talking to lawyer, and i said no places for lawyers and politics anymore. they got to go. let's run this corporation called america like a business. you and i -- we cannot exist the

way they are existing, $14 trillion, i'm going to add another $10 trillion down the road. my energy policy is great. it sure is. we are getting it from overseas when we have more energy here in this country than any place in the world. we do not want to use it up. well, let's say that, ok? we have 400 years or better from what i understand. oil, gas, and coal, but we just covered a stream of natural gas from pennsylvania all through kentucky down to number tennessee that has trillions of cubic feet of natural gas. don't you think we can turn that a little bit to a dollar and a

half of gasoline? i bet we could. i bet we could drill somewhere and you could see everything go down. we need somebody to do that. we need someone that has the guts to stand up and be counted and say here is what we need to do for america. i'm talking a lot of tea parties, speak to a lot of folks. and it is time for action now. well, guys, i said earlier on the i was going to make an announcement when i got here. and i am. i am going to tell you something -- someone has talked me into writing a book.

hear this -- and we're going to have them back at the back for everyone to see and i will be signing it. the title of the book is "i get about america." thank you, guys. if you have not declared that you are going to run for president by now, comes across to me being a little bit indecisive, doesn't it? and if we haven't declared that you are right to run for president, then that tells me i will tell you next week, next month. that tells me he cannot make a decision. we do not need any more non decision makers. you see the debate the other night? boy, that boring. one thing came out of it.

when you call someone out at high noon in the middle of the street to draw, better not say, i was talking about somebody else. that lets you know how strong that a candidate may be. it also lets you know how week that candidate is. most people know that i understand agenda 21. most people know that i understand where the federal reserve started and why. people also understand that i understand about one of world order and socialism.

and if any of you out there know about this, you would know exactly what path we are heading down. i do not know about you. i like things just the way they are. i do not like socialism. it has not worked anywhere in the world. it is not going to work in america, i guarantee, if i have anything to do about it. i told you guys that i would be endorsing who i thought should be the next president of the united states. i have talked to all of them. i have been with all of them. i have listened to all of them. i know what is real and what is not real. i know how when you are in the back room you come out front and it turns this way. i am not a politician. i do not know how to answer a direct question with an answer

to another question. i do not know. guys.ke you well, we need business people. we do not need any more professional politicians. who'd d u thing got us in this mess the start with? professional politicians, and want is that, the meaning of insanity? we are right to keep on electing a professional politician over and over again, hoping for a different result? it ain't going to happen. with that, i am looking for business people. i'm looking for business people in the cabinet. i'm looking for people who have been in the trenches, who have

written the check and sign it and did not eat said they pay their employees. i'm looking for someone who understands us. and understands the drive and grit and determination. i also look for somebody who will off hold what i carry in my pocket everywhere i go -- the constitution of the united states. and i can believe that they will actually do what they tell us they will do. look them in the eye, and if they look back, you will know. with that, guys, i'm looking for a ceo of america. and that ceo of america just happened to have been a ceo all his life, married to the same

womam for 42 years, has raised a wonderful family, and has drive and determination by cannot imagine. that man is herman cain. [applause] herman will do what he says he discusses -- what he says he will do. i believe in my heart -- you know me, if i did not believe that i would not say. i am looking forward. when i did not make it in my race, i supported another candidate, and i worked for him six months, and he got elected by a landslide. everybody you endorse, you did not say you endorse him and go back to the house. go out there and work for him. go out there and do some good.

i'm looking forward to traveling all over the country and working for herman cain and america because he will take care of america. if you come on back to the back back there, my wife, kathy, is there. we have a book a you can read more about what i am talking about. they told me to wrap up 15 times, ok? it was a pleasure being here. i enjoyed seeing all of you, and i will be here all weekend, and if you want to chat, just stop me. all right, guys? thanks a lot. ♪

>> hi, everybody. before we head out, i want to thank you for coming. i hope you had a good time today. >> we will have more coverage from new orleans tomorrow. speakers include michele bachmann, rick santorum, and herman cain. >> span has launched a new website for politics and the 2012 presidential race. bio information on the candidate, twitter feeds, and links to c-span2 media partners in the early primary and caucus states.

visit us at c-span.org o gn2012.pai >> keefe in a few minutes, robert gates talks about libya and pakistan and gives his assessment of the new head of al qaeda. and a recent report criticizes the head of the nuclear regulatory commission's handling of the yucca mountain closure. that is coming up later. >> the times have ordered the world. >> the changing newspaper industry and takes an inside look at the "the new york times" through the eyes of the staff. >> i came in with a desire to

observe. >> he will talk about his documentary sunday night. >> new york congressman anthony wiener announcing his resignation from congress after pictures surfaced and he lied about it. he spoke from his district in brooklyn. >> good afternoon. about 20 years ago, i stood in this very same room here and asked my neighbors for their help to take a chance on me in electing me to the city council.

seven years later i asked the same people to join with people in queens in sending me to congress. there is no higher honor in democracy than being sent by your neighbors to represent them in the united states house of representatives. it is humbling to represent this district committees and families of the ninth congressional district are hard working, a adriatic, opinionated, they are authentic. i have never forgot my neighbors because they represent the same middle class story as mine. i went to public schools my whole life. my mother was a schoolteacher for 32 years. my father went to law school on the gi bill. the middle class story of new york is my story, and i am very proud of that. i'm here today to again apologize for the personal

mistakes i have made and the embarrassment i have caused. i make this apology to my neighbors and my constituents, but i make it particularly to my wife huma. a had hoped to be able to convey the work that might citizens elected me to do. the fight for the middle-class and those struggling to make it. unfortunately the distractions that i have created has made that impossible. today i am announcing my resignation from congress. my colleagues can get back to work, my neighbors can choose a new representative, and most importantly, my wife and i can continue to heal from the damage i have caused.

chirpy, most importantly, -- to repeat, most importantly so i can continue to heal from the damage i have caused. i want to thank my colleagues in the house of representatives, democrats and republicans alike. they come from different places around the country, but fundamentally we all agree, they are all patriots. thank you. i also want to express my gratitude to members of my staff, and people who are not paver much, people who work very hard and very long hours, and ultimately those people to find the notion of service. i want to thank the many people who have helped me, the people who have volunteered, given the advice, and many of my constituents who have offered me good ideas. i want to express my gratitude to my family, to my mother and

father, who is still with me that i use that have carried me this far, to my brother, jason, and of course, to my wife, huma, who has stood with me to this entire difficult period. i got into politics to give voice to those who did not have one. now i will look for other ways to the jury might talent so that we can live up to that ideal, the idea that family, community, and the country is the one thing that all unites us, the one we are all focused on. with god's help and hard work, we will all be successful. thank you, and good afternoon.

>> now we get to that began the quest to the pentagon. this is supposed to be the last press conference before secretary gates steps down. >> i will begin with a brief personal announcement. we thought about a lectern. i have recommended to the

president that he nominate an admiral to become the next chief of naval operations. the admiral is the current vice- ceo of the navy. following two decades of submariner, he commanded the seventh fleet in the pacific and later the command. if nominated and confirmed, the admiral will succeed an admiral who will retire this fall. later on, the department of leadership will have the opportunity to pay a full tribute to for his four decades of service. i would say i would have very much enjoyed working with gary and had doubted his counsel and wisdom. that is my only news today, but since this will be my final press conference, i would like

to take this opportunity to say a few words to the pentagon press corps. cannot worry. it is all good. these past few weeks have been a long goodbye, particularly for the traveling press, so i will keep it a short. although i held senior jobs in the u.s. government and was president of a major university, before becoming secretary of defense, had never sustained a regular on the record interaction with the news media. when i first took office, a word that relations between the pentagon and the military and the press mostly characterized by mutual suspicion and resentment. i made it a point of speaking to military officers from cadets to generals to remind them that a vigorous and inquisitive and skeptical press was a critically important guarantor of freedom under the constitution and not to be treated otherwise.

i deemed it an important appreciation for the accountability of the press in my tenure, when reports exposed bureaucratic shortcomings, the outpatient treatment of wounded warriors at walter reed. responding to both of these critical issues, which only came to my attention through the media, became my top priority, and two of my earliest decisions. over the past four and a half years, i have not only liked what i read, and i hate leaks, maybe more than most. i have great respect for your role as a watchdog on behalf of the american people, and as a means for me to learn of problems the building was not telling me about. we do not always make it easy to do your jobs here, gaining timely and usable information out of the bureaucracy.

it is a challenge i share with you on occasion. thanks again for your professionalism and tough questions and hard work. i will close by saying a few words about the man seated next to me, admiral mullen. chairman has spent four years as the military's most senior officer. he played an instrumental role in developing and executing a new strategy in afghanistan, where we are seeing the said sister progress. beyond the wars, mike's fogh this has been a people, and his concern about the stress on the ground forces and their families. men and women in uniform could have no more affected advocate and they will be sorry to see and go. serving alongside the averell has been general cartwright. bring to that office his chichi

skills that have made him a transformational leader in the military and an instrumental figure in a difficult and complex precision's -- decisions in the past three years. i consider both general cartwright and admiral mullen as friends. our country owes them a great debt and i will be grateful for their wise counsel and leadership. mike? >> only thing i would like to say with respect to the recommendation for john. i've known john for a long time. he is an exceptional officer, and if confirmed, will be an exceptional nco. he has wonderful operational experience. he is terrific with people and has extensive experience. in the money world, which is now facing all of us. i strongly concur with the

secretary's recommendation. >> at me start by saying we appreciate the fact that you have kept your promise to appear regularly in this room to take questions. >> was a little joking about that in the situation room yesterday. several commented that we made it difficult for them. on the u.s.-pakistan relationship, did you have any regrets about the way the relationship has been handled? do you see anything that will stop the downward spiral? admiral mullen, you have developed a personal relationship with the general. what was the meaning for the

u.s. operation in pakistan? >> first of all, the long history of u.s.-pakistan relationship stems and flows. they have not regarded over the decades that we have abandoned them on at least four occasions -- two wars with india, when the soviets left afghanistan, and after the enforcement of the amendment. it is a relationship that both sides have to work on. it is complicated, but as i said yesterday in the hearing and as i have said often before, we need each other. we need each other more than in just the context of afghanistan. pakistan is an important player in terms of regional stability and in terms of central asia.

my view is that this is a relationship that we need to keep working at. >> is anything in the near future that could change the relationship? >> just as the have come -- ebbs have come in surprising ways, it is hard to predict right now. the key is to keep the lines of communication between our governments open and continue communicating with each other as openly and honestly as we can. >> from my perspective nothing has changed in terms of the criticality of the relationship. i have a very strong personal relationship with the general. i consider him a friend. but it is not just a personal

relationship because i have a strong professional relationship with him. nor is mine at the only relationship between the two countries. what he is going through right now and what the military is going through right now is at a intersection based on recent events. they have some questions. in the end -- and i know the general well enough to know what he cares about the most is not himself, what he cares about the most is his institution. leaders of throughout the world -- we share that with him. i think we need to give him a little time and space as they go through this introspection. i agree with what the secretary said. and a lot of opportunities come up and we had some very

difficult times. i think it will be opportunities for the relationship to improve. certainly, the challenges will not go away. as i said yesterday on capitol hill, i believe we have to be very careful now in terms of the relationship. were we to walk away, i think it is a matter of time before the region is that much more dangerous and there would be a huge pool for us to return to protect our national interest. >> following up yesterday on your testimony and some of the questions asked by some of the senators -- what specifically would be the threat if the u.s. were to cut off funding? can the u.s. strategy in afghanistan succeed without pakistan? >> first of all, i would say

that our strategy is succeeding and pakistan is planning a contributory role to that. it is important to remember that they have 140,000 troops on the border that, at a minimum, or stirring things up. -- are stirring things up. there is some indication that al qaeda is worried that because of the way we went after bin laden, there suspicion is that the pakistanis may have been involved and are worried that they may betrayed them as well. clearly, the lines of communication are critical for our operations in afghanistan. i think all of these things are

important. just in terms of regional stability, the reality is that pakistan has a number of nuclear weapons. again, keeping those lines of communication open, it seems to me, are very important. >> i would reemphasize the last point. there are terrorists on that border. the link that we have got with -- in the afghanistan-pakistan campaign, if you will, which is what it has been from the beginning. it is not about one country or the other, it is about the region. those things that i fear in the future is the proliferation of that technology and the opportunity and potential that it could fall into the hands of terrorists. many of whom or alive and well and say that in that region.

that is a great interest to our country and certainly to the rest of the world. >> what is your reaction to the fact that al-zawahiri is in the top position of al qaeda? >> i do not think that is something to aspire to. i think he will face some challenges. bin laden has been the leader of al qaeda is essentially since its inception. in that particular context, he has a peculiar charisma that al- zawahiri does not have. i think he was much more operationally engaged than al- zawahiri has been. i have read that there is some suspicion within al qaeda because al-zawahiri is egyptian. first of all, i think we should

be mindful that this announcement by al qaeda it reminds us that despite having suffered a huge loss with the killing of bin laden and a number of others, that al qaeda seeks to perpetuate itself, seeks to find replacements for those who have been killed, and it remains committed to the agenda at that bin laden put before them. i think he has some challenges, but i think it is a reminder that they are still out there and we still need to keep after them. >> david, it is not a surprise, from our perspective, that he moved into that position. he and his organization still threatens us. as we sought to seek, capture, and succeed in killing bin laden, we certainly will do the

same thing with al-zawahiri. >> is it evidence of logistical problems? >> from my perspective, i do not take it that way. i think they are just working their way to the process and had not made the decision. >> it is hard to count votes when you are in a cave. [laughter] >> there is growing anti-war sentiment in congress because of the cost of the war -- does this frustrate you anymore than recently? hal is the country going to feel about pressing on with that commitment?

>> one of the interesting challenges about this job has been the responsibility of waging two wars, neither of which i had anything to do with starting. i saw in 2007 and 2008 how popular what we were doing in iraq was and how popular the surge was. i had to cancel a trip to latin america in the fall of 2007 because it looked like republican support was crumbling and that it might end up with congressional action to stop the surge. for me, it is the reality that, as a historian, i like to remind people of this -- with the exception of the first couple of years of world war ii, there has

not been a popular war in the united states in our whole history. he had all been controversy all. in each case, it has required the leadership of the president -- president truman in korea, president wilson in world war roman one -- world war i, and certainly the first president bush with the gulf war. we forget that when the president said he was going to reverse said tom's invasion of invasion ofaddam's kuwait, there was 15% public support. it weighs heavily on all of us, i think. the key is, how do we complete our mission as we have largely done in iraq in a way that

protects american national security interest, the american people, and contribute to stability? i think most people would say we have been largely successful in iraq. i think we are on the path to do that in afghanistan. the cost of the war is huge, but it is declining. the cost of these wars will go down between fiscal year 2011 and fiscal year 2012 by $40 billion. we have every reason to believe that between fiscal year 12 and fiscal year 2013, there will be another significant reduction. the size of our forces left in afghanistan in december of 2014 would be a small fraction of what they are today. i think i understand the

impatience. i understand the concern, especially in hard economic times. we also have to think about the long-term security interests of the country. that is where i come out on that. >> let me ask you about the current situation in syria. it seems that imposing sanctions is the appropriate tool. do you think having a humanitarian intervention similar to what was done in libya could be an option? >> i do not know. again, i think we have certain overarching principles and values that apply everywhere. but we have to take the situation in each individual country one at a time. i have seen at the libyan -- the libyan intervention started with a resolution from the arab

league. ultimately, a u.n. security council resolution. i see no appetite for any of that with respect to syria. in terms of sanctions and so on, that is more in the secretary of state's lane, but i think there is to be some pressure on syria to stop the kind of killing we have seen. it would have to come to some kind of sanctions like that. >> a bunch of us were in the room when you were asked the shortest question ever asked at a congressional hearing about iraq. as he began to wind down, i'll ask you the same question about afghanistan. fundamentally do you believe we are winning in afghanistan? >> i have learned a few things in 4.5 years.

one of them is to try to stay away from the polluted words like "winning" and "losing." in the we are successful in implementing the president's strategy. we have denied the taliban control of populated areas, degraded their capabilities, and improved the capabilities of the afghan national security forces. we did what the president laid out for us in december 2009. the other was reversing the momentum of the taliban. i think in all four of those cases, we are succeeding. >> secretary gates and admiral mullen, there has been concern expressed about 800 members of two units to were redeployed at

the last moment. they're supposed to go to afghanistan, now they are going to kuwait. these were trainers that were supposed to go to afghanistan. why were they reassigned? can you assure the american people the drawdown has not already begun? >> the recommendation came from both general petraeus and with respectmattis to their arrival time, if you will, which was beyond july. they were in final training, headed to afghanistan. the recommendation came in in light of the fact that we were going to start with drawling troops this summer, that we would have to make decisions. they were in a good position for us to make a decision, based on conditions on the ground with

respect to where general petraeus was. general mattis endorsed the recommendation. the units were diverted in a timely way. it was to take care of them, not to get them headed in one direction and then have to rehead them in another direction. based on the overall plan, which was to which all troops, even though that drawdown has not started because the decision has not been made, but certainly with the expectation that there would be some troops that would come out. given that, they would be a part of that. >> the with -- the drawdown has not started, but 800 troops had

been with john. >> the president said he would begin drawing down our forces in july 2011 based on conditions on the ground. as general petraeus was looking across afghanistan and beginning to identify different options, it was pretty clear that these two units would probably be on that list. we took the decision here as the chairman has just said to divert them so that we did not end up putting them someplace and pulling them back out again. the decision was made here. we were aware of the president's direction of what would happen in july. >> used a lot of time yesterday explaining the process by which we would assess the $400 billion goal. you have never been asked -- at

that -- is that goal too big a number? in other words, no matter how you get there, can you take the reduction and not seriously degrade national security? it is a minor cut when you looked at a 12-year plan. >> i do not think it is a minor cut. i think it is important to remember, we did not start this yesterday. the decisions that we took to cap or cut 30-something programs in april 2009, is essentially took a lot of low hanging fruit and, a lot of people would say, some more valuable stuff as well. but the total value of those programs had they been built to completion was about $330 billion.

we said at the time that some of those cuts were going to have to go back and do some other types of programs. one of the cuts was a presidential helicopter. we still have to do that. it is not a net cut of $330 billion. we then did a $178 billion worth of inefficiency. $100 billion was reinvested by the services. halfway through the fiscal year of 2011, our budget was cut $20 billion. it does not like we're starting from scratch on this, but this department has been dealing with these issues for at least the past two years. the question that you asked is one that has been answered by the comprehensive review. if you look at the different options that are available, once you take into account the things i talked about yesterday -- more

efficiency, marginal programs and capabilities, and tackling some of the politically sensitive issues -- you are left with four structure. what are the options in terms of getting to that number? we are mindful that there are numbers out there that are bigger than that. some are substantially bigger. i think it is our responsibility to lay before the president and before congress what the consequences are of cuts at different levels and what changes have to be made in strategy and what the implications are in terms of capability. that is what we are going to do. that work will be done. i think a lot of it is well under way. later this summer, we will be in a position to inform you about those decisions. the president was clout -- quite clear in his public announcement that no specific

budget decisions would be made with respect to the $400 billion until we had looked at and completed this review. >> i want to switch to emit -- yemen for a moment. the violence there has been disruptive to our attempts at counter-terrorism. what has that direction denmark den? what is the connection between al qaeda in yemen [unintelligible] >> yemen has been a focus for us for several years now. it is very hard because the al qaeda branch that is there is a deadly, deadly cell. al-awlaqi least that group. he is focused on the whole land

threat to us. we have worked hard to provide the kind of training support that the yemenese government has asked to -- has asked of us. our relationship has gotten pretty strong. the turmoil the country is again right now -- that training has been impacted. we are watching how this plays out while, at the same time, being focused very much on al qaeda, on this group of al qaeda leaders. i worry a great deal about them continuing to grow in becoming more violent overtime. i certainly would say that it

has gotten in the way of the training and with what has been going on there. the yemenese forces are focused on what is going on in the country. we remain committed to that. we are watching very carefully how all this comes out. >> concerning aid to yemen and pakistan, can the united states really dispersed new aid to yemen given what is going on in the country? in pakistan, have you communicated any warning, or will you come up to islamabad that reducing the training mission may have an impact on the amount of military aid the country might provide? >> i am provided new wording whatsoever specifically to pakistan in that regard. we have had discussions recently -- very frank and open discussions about where we were.

we covered a broad range of issues both military and civil. do you mean physically or legally in yemen? could we physically do it? >> [unintelligible] >> there is a -- obviously, an aid program that has been interrupted by the current chaos in that country. we will get on the downside of that chaos and look at what the next steps will be. >> thank you all very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] lastat was robert gates' scheduled news conference. he steps down on june 30. president's obama -- president

obama's choice to replace gates is leon panetta. the nomination will be voted on by the full senate on tuesday. live coverage of that on c- span2. journal,'s washington a conversation on the role unions will play in the 2012 election. mary kay henry joins us. after that, more about the 2012 campaign with matt kibbe. later, the head of amtrak joins us. a committee unveiled a measure to allow private companies to compete with amtrak to provide high-speed rail service on the northeast corridor. washington journal each morning at 7:00 eastern. >> blackberry users, you can access our program with the c- span radio application.

all commercial free. you can also listen to our signature interview programs each week. it is available around the clock wherever you are. download it free from blackberry app world. >> we will hear from members of the nuclear regulatory commission. the state chairman is questioned by state environment and public works committee's about the handling of yucca mountain. barbara boxer chairs this 2.5 at our meeting.

>> let me begin. it has been over three months since japan was hit by devastating earthquake and tsunami. it is expected to take additional time before a cold shutdown of all reactors at the fukushima nuclear power plant will be achieved. the emergency in japan served as an important wake-up call for the united states and the rest of the world. we cannot afford to ignore it. if there is one lesson to be learned, and this is the lesson i think is the most important, we must plan for the unexpected because as the japanese told us, they planned for the expected, not for the unexpected.

i am pleased to see that the n.r.c. is reevaluating the safety and security of nuclear power plants in the u.s. in light of what has happened in japan. these are the things i am pleased about -- inspectors have inspected and issued reports on the 104 operating nuclear reactors and their readiness to address power losses or damage following an extreme event and the n.r.c. is reviewing its processes and regulations in light of the situation in japan. i want to talk about the two nuclear power plants in california. the most recent inspections of california's two nuclear power plants turned up numerous problems that need to be corrected. among other things, the

inspections at diablo canyon found that state highways and access roads needed to reach be sold fuel and an alternative seawater's source may be inaccessible after an earthquake. pose is needed to get cooling water from the reservoir to the plant were blocked by a security fence. i want to correct myself. diablo i have not visited in a while. the other a recently visited. i met one of the commissioners there, who was extremely helpful. at thatspections station, a plant surrounded by millions of people within 50 miles -- what did we say? 7 million? 7.4 million within 50 miles. this is what we found -- a lack

of a written agreement for a fuel oil supply to support emergency diesel generators for more than seven days. and we found some firefighting equipment was stored in locations that could be impacted by an earthquake. firefighting equipment that is stored in a place that cannot be located and if there is an earthquake does not do us any good. i have additional questions about the seismic studies at diablo. they need to be considered. it is very important. i find it strange they would try to get a license but for the have the latest information. -- a license before they have the latest information.

the latest information will be part of the 3 d seismic studies. and also, three d seismic studies should be part of nrc's review, once it is submitted by [unintelligible] it has not been submitted. i loaded them for that. i think there is more work that needs to be done. i expect the nrc to examine the results of these inspections in california and across the country, as well as we examine current regulations such as what is in the nrc's review license application. and i expect the commission to implement the task force recommendations. it does not help us to have these recommendations if you do not implement them. the health and safety of all americans things in the balance. i applaud the commission for making the results of its inspections available to the public immediately after compilation by nrc staff in may

and june. i believe it is critical for public confidence and the safety of our nuclear facilities that the task force report be available to the study predicted the public as soon as it is compiled in july. complete openness, transparency, and prompt disclosure are vital to maintaining credibility and confidence of the american people. i want to thank the members of the commission for being here to provide us with preliminary results of the nuclear review that is under way. as chairman of this committee, i will continue to provide vigorous oversight, to make sure we learn all we can from the fukushima emergency. the safety of the american people above all is our number one priority. i look forward to working with each of you to make sure the united states of america has taken every appropriate precaution to ensure our nuclear power plants are managed in the safest possible manner.

>> thank you very much. i appreciated your comments about the safety of the american people being a number one priority, because the storage of nuclear waste should be a top priority for congress and the administration in the wake of japan's nuclear disaster. as you know, spent fuel rods stored at fukushima overheated, causing explosions, fires, and radiation leaks. this occurred when the power was knocked out and backup generators failed at the plant. the american people who watched the coverage of the nuclear crisis in japan are looking to congress and the nuclear regulatory commission to prevent similar instances from happening here. congress took action years ago to begin addressing the problem of buildup of nuclear waste stored throughout the united states. the nuclear waste policy act designated yucca mountain as the only candidate site for a national repository of nuclear

waste. congress has voted a number of times to retain of the mountain as the national repository. $15 billion -- $15 billion has been spent on the project. but this administration has seen fit to walk away from the project. as "the washington post" points out in an article entitled "at yucca mountain -- money down the hall" -- this was yesterday's paper. when barack obama ran for president and sought electoral votes in the swing state of nevada, he bowed to kill yucca mountain. in early 2009, steven chu, obama as energy secretary, announced his department did not feel yucca mountain was a workable option. the department of energy terminated the jobs of several

thousand federal workers and contractors while hastily abandoned offices in las vegas and transferring dozens of truckloads of furniture, computers, and other equipment to local schools. the article states the project dates back three decades. it goes on. it has not solved the problem of nuclear waste, but has succeeded in keeping fully employed large numbers of litigators. is that the administration's idea of job creation? the end result of this sock that is a 5 mile long, 25 foot wide, all in the nevada desert. it was meant to restore america's nuclear waste. instead, it stands as a monument to bureaucratic waste of taxpayer dollars. the nuclear regulatory commission before us today has not officially resolved this issue. at the meeting of the nrc's japan task force, the chairman

stated, "i believe it is important our safety review proceed systematically and methodically, but with the appropriate sense of urgency given the important issues being examined." i do not believe the actions of this administration or the chairman have demonstrated the sense of urgency with regard to the issue of storing spent nuclear fuel. thank you, madam chairman. i look forward to the testimony. i am going to call on the senator who chairs the subcommittee that oversees the nrc. >> thank you very much. thank you, madam chair. i want to come back to something that colleagues of mine have said. you have heard me say everything i do i know i can do better. i think that is true of all of us. i was not in the congress in

1982 when congress voted to have a repository. i was a member of congress when the vote was taken to designate yucca mountain, in nevada. even the county in which you come mountain was located -- yucca mountain was located was chosen as the repository. the congressional delegation have opposed it. the democrats and republicans have strongly opposed the establishment of the repository. if we had to do this over again , we should be smart enough to do what they have done in france. what they have done is incentivize communities in that program to be repositories and to provide really terrific job

opportunities for the people who live there. we have states standing in line to be sites for prisons, to take prisoners from delaware or tennessee or any other state. we could do that and get communities to be willing to host inmates from all over the country. we should be able to provide an incentive system so that states would willingly, unlike nevada, say, "please put your nuclear spent fuel here in our state." meanwhile, we have, as you may recall, a commission that has a lot of smart people. some of them are commissioners. they have been working. they are reprocessing and recycling spent fuel. this is what we think we should do, going forward. in the meantime, if you take the spent fuel rods, in all of the

power plants across the country, they would fit on a football field maybe 20 feet high. that is about right. it is 104 plants. it is not a small amount of spent fuel. but we can safely store for 30 or 60 years on site the spent fuel. does that mean we never need a repository? and i think we are smarter in setting those places than we were in yucca mountain. having said that, let me find my place here. i say to all of you today think a lot for coming. thank you for your service. we are anxious to hear what you have to share with us. we have a great opportunity, you have all heard me say before,

"albert einstein. adversity births opportunity. a great opportunity for us and for the rest of the world to learn what they did wrong so we will not make the same mistake in this instance. we have worked, as a bunch of you know, on this committee. we worked a lot of years before that to try to establish what we call a cultural -- a culture of safety. we want to not only establish the culture of safety. we want to strengthen it. we want to make sure that it is not perfect we make it better. this but all the protections we have in place for nuclear reactors, the tragedy in fukushima is a clear warning we cannot get complacent it when it comes to nuclear safety. a disaster could happen here as well. we have asked for a

comprehensive review, senator boxer and i. i am glad we are getting that. we need to safeguard our people from nuclear incidents similar to that of japan. i am anxious to hear the first readouts from the commission on this review. we look forward with working with you to find the right lessons across this country. >> thank you so much. now it is senator alexander. >> let me first welcome the commissioners and thank the chairman and a senator for having this hearing. i think the more oversight hearings we have with the commissioners, the better. the more americans know about nuclear power, the better. both from a safety point of view and how important it is to our future. the subject in america today is

jobs. we want jobs. we have to have large amounts of reliable, low-cost electricity. we now have to add clean to that. it is important to have a hearing on that so americans can know that 20% of our electricity comes from 104 nuclear plants. it is important for americans to know that 70% of our carbon free, mercury free electricity comes from nuclear plants. it is important to have these hearings. it is important for america to know there has never been a death at a civilian reactor at united states. there has never been a death in connection with one of our navy reactors. it is important for americans to know that even though three mile island was our worst nuclear accident in the united states at a civilian reactor, no one was hurt at three mile island. it is important for americans to

know this is complex, these big operations, these nuclear plants. it is important for them to know that we are taking very seriously, especially those of us who cannot imagine a future for the united states without many more nuclear reactors then we have today -- that we are taking very seriously the importance of making their operation safer and safer. we have learned a lot from three mile island, even though no one was hurt there. the safety record is even better as a result of those lessons. it will take months and years to learn from what happened at fukushima. but we ought to do our best to do that. the comments on the repository are important. we both were former governors. i had the problem of locating prisons. we were stuck on prisons in tennessee when i came in. nobody would take any until i announced there would only be one and there would be a competition for it.

then there was a line. we need to recycle and used nuclear fuel. that means there will be even less of it. then will need to either reopen yucca mountain or find some other ones. we should not keep charging billions of dollars to ratepayers and not using it for its independent -- its intended purpose. we need to know more. we have heard from secretary to, our secretary, a nuclear physicist, that spent fuel can be stored safely on site for up to 100 years. it is important for americans to hear that from the top officials in our country, who know about such things. but we need to bring to a close a discussion about whether spent fuel pools or dry cask storage or a long-term repository is the right way to deal with the fuel that we have.

we need to take advantage of this panel. the president was appointed to recycle used nuclear fuel in an even better way. we need to explore and learn from our commissioners how the next generation of reactors can improve safe passive technologies. we need to learn how the small nuclear reactors, the ones that might be 125 megawatts instead of 1140 -- how they might be a way for the united states to get back in the business of leading the world in developing a technology we invented, the peaceful use of atomic energy. the peaceful use of the nuclear process. i would like to know more about how the commission itself functions, the germans used of the emergency power, the -- v

general use of emergency power. it is important to have this meeting. every so often, the subcommittee ought to hear from the commissioners. the american people ought to listen and be assured not just of the safety of our 104 civilian reactors, but the we are on the track to begin to build more and to provide the low-cost, clean, reliable electricity the nuclear power does for this country. thank you. >> thank you, senator. senator sanders. >> thank you, madam chair, and thank you commissioners. i want to spend a moment discussing an issue of great concern to the people of the state of vermont. that is the vermont yankee nuclear power plant, located in the southern part of our state. vermont yankee is one of 23 plants in our country with the

same design as the fukushima plant that experienced a partial meltdown in japan. the state of vermont has a unique position in this country with regard to nuclear power. as a result of an agreement signed between the state and the owner of the nuclear power plant in vermont, the agreement went -- and this agreement was signed when they purchased vermont yankee in 2002. our state legislature and public utility commission have a legal say over whether the vermont yankee plant is re-licensed for operation beyond 2012, when its license expires. that is unique in the country. the plant is nearing 40 years of

age. it is my firm view that 40 years is enough. but that is not just my view. far more importantly, the vermont state senate, representing the people of the state of vermont, and voted on a bipartisan basis, 26-4, not to grant an extension to vermont yankee. in my view, that vote represented the wishes of the vast majority of the people in our state. we know vermont yankee has had serious problems in the last number of years, including a collapse of its cooling towers in 2007 and radioactive tritium leaks in 2005 and 2010. the tritium leaks came from pipes. plant officials claimed under oath they did not exist. that did not further the confidence of the people of the state of vermont in the company.

in support of the vermont legislature, the vermont congressional delegation has been clear they should respect vermonts laws. we understand they're well paid corporate lawyers have been pushing for the federal government to get involved in the lawsuit filed against vermont. we have seen the letter from the ceo, who is among the best compensated electric industry ceos at $18 million a year, saying that if vermont successfully defend its right to decide whether vermont yankee is real licensed that we will see states opting out of the voting rights act. he could not be more wrong or out of touch. that is why the vermont congressional delegation was heartened to learn that the chairman, who i believe is a diligent public servant, even if we occasionally disagree, told

vermont publicly that the nrc should not intervene in any legislation between that company and vermont. i believe his position is the right one. the nrc regulates safety. that is what your job is. it is a difficult job. it is an important job. many people in vermont think you are not doing that job very well. but the nrc is not an arbiter of political disputes between a huge energy company and the state of vermont. that is not your business. it is not on your plate to do with a complicated issue of maintaining safety. there is a story in the new york times today raising issues that maybe we are not doing a good job in this country in protecting people in the event of the shutdown of all electric power. pay attention to that.

do not get involved in telling the people of the state of vermont what they should be doing or should not be doing. in that regard, i was extremely disappointed to learn the nrc voted yesterday on whether to recommend to the justice department that the nrc take the energy company's side. the result of that vote was the public. i want to know today that you will make the result of that public. if you have the department of justice involved, you should tell the people of the state of vermont that you voted and halt the vote was, and we would like the relevant materials associated with that vote. thank you very much. >> thank you, senator. >> i am going to apologize in advance to this committee.

this is a very significant hearing we are having right now. i am also on the senate armed services committee, so i apologize for being late. i thank you for honoring a commitment to act on the renomination of the commissioner for a five-year term. we have a complete commission. i hope this will happen soon. thank you for this hearing. it has been over three weeks since the earthquake and tsunami devastated japan and resulted in the second largest nuclear action in history. i hope you will help ensure the safety of our nuclear plants based on lessons learned from fukushima. but first i want to take a moment to acknowledge a report by the nrc inspector general into the yucca mountain license

application. i was concerned about this situation in 2005, when the commissioner appeared before the committee for the first time. there was a worry it would impair his ability to act early as the commissioner. i asked him to recuse himself. his conduct has damaged the credibility of the agency and warrants oversight hearings by this committee. however what i find most disconcerting in the report is the image of the chairman who withholds information from his colleagues, act unilaterally, and rules by intimidation. while i focus on the involvement with yucca mountain, i believe his conduct extends beyond that. this first became apparent when preparing for a last hearing april 12, when i heard the majority was breaking with the committee.

i was surprised to learn we would only here from the chairman, because he was exercising a privilege. even more believable was that he had not only failed to inform me of his decision on the last two occasions, but had failed to inform his colleagues. he acted unilaterally without a firm legal basis, failed to keep his colleagues fully informed, and prohibited them from entering the operations center where much of the agency's work was conducted. these actions are strikingly similar to some of the conclusions regarding the chairman's conduct on the yet the mountain. he chose not to utilize the expertise of his fellow commissioners when confronted with the nuclear accident. a true leader would marshall all resources at his disposal and

seek out the best expertise that he can. that would be my expectation of any chairman responsible for insuring nuclear safety. instead, we have a family that shall be governed by general policies of the commission. that selectively ignores procedures, discounting them as merely guidelines. in the nuclear industry, procedures exist to ensure safety. the chairman should show the same respect for procedures governing his actions that he would expect from licensees. the public deserves nothing less. i think you, madam chair. >> if i could just say, i am going to put into the record the statement made by the chairman on the report. there is a disagreement between the ranking member and myself in

the characterization he has put forward. my understanding clearly is that the ig found the actions the german took were consistent with law and his authority. there is a difference here. i have to put that on the record, because i want to feel -- >> that is the first time we have ever had a difference. >> i know. and it will be the last. i just feel it is important. i was a little taken aback by it. >> i would like to yield my time to senator sanders to complete his comments. >> senator sanders has an additional five minutes. >> i am not want to take people five minutes and i think my friend from oregon for yielding. the point i am going to stay on this morning is an enormous important issue for up my state.

in vermont, people have been extremely dissatisfied with the role the energy company has been playing. they do not kill, but and for many reasons. when the company purchased vermont yankee, an agreement was reached with the state that the state could be involved and would be involved as to whether or not a 40-year-old plant would be real licensed. that was the agreement. that is unique in america. the same legislature recently voted by a 26-4 vote to say we do not think it is in the best interest of the people of vermont to extend that contract. we want vermont yankee to shut down. in doing that, i believe they were reflecting the wishes of the people of our state. vermont wants to move in a new way in terms of energy. we are number one in terms of energy -- energy efficiency.

we are moving aggressively towards sustainable energy. you may disagree, but that is the direction the state wants to go. what is the role of the nrc in that discussion? is it appropriate for the nrc to get involved in one of the largest utility companies in the united states of america, a $14 billion company that pays its ceo $18 million a year? to get involved in a legal case between the state of vermont and this company? they want to stay open and make more money. i understand that. people in vermont want to shut it down. i agree with that. why should you be involved in that? what concerns me very much is my understanding is that yesterday, by a 3-2 vote, this commission decided to urge the department of justice to get involved in that fight. i do not care what your view