variety of reasons. the united states is far from alone in expressing strong opposition to the e.u. proposal. last month 25 other countries joined the united states in signing a joint declaration in india that calls upon the e.u. not to impose the emissions trading system on non-european airlines and they urge e.u. members and countries to instead address aviation emissions through i.k.o. where progress already is being made. the united states and other international partners stand ready and willing to work to address this issue constructively through the proper international framework. we rightfully pects both governments and the airlines to be good stewards of the government. in fact, the federal aviation

administration and the airline industry have invested billions of dollars in nextgen air traffic upgrades and the f.a.a. plans to reduce emissions by 2% through these improvements. further, u.s. improved fuel efficiency by approximately 111% since 1978 from 2000 to 2009, u.s. carriers reduced fuel burn and carbon emissions by 15% while carrying 7% more passengers and cargo. at a meeting last week, i alone with chairman mica and several other members of the committee met with european union representatives to express our willingness to work with our friends to come to a more equityible solution to this problem, and -- equitable solution to this problem and i believe the meeting was very productive. we made it quite clear that the e.u. my way or the highway approach was totally

unacceptable and we will take every action necessary to prevent the implementation of these unnecessary and dangerous -- and we made it clear that the congress will stand up and defend the sovereignty of the united states. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: mr. speaker, i yield such time as he may consume to our colleague from pennsylvania, mr. bill shuster. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shuster: and i couldn't agree more with my colleague from florida, ms. brown, on her support for h.r. 2594, and to my colleagues watching or listening to this debate tonight, i'd urge you to listen closely because this is a serious situation that's going to occur and it's up to congress to send a message to the european capitals of the world that the united states will not stand for this. this will be a terrible burden

for not only our carriers but for aviation airlines, air travel, commercial travel around the world. there's never been a more ill-conceived program than what the european union is putting forth in this emissions trading scream. they're going forth with this, first of all, i believe it's violating international law, the chicago convention which was signed in the mid 1940's which signed up i.k.o., which is a civil organization, which coordinates and allows for transportation, commercial transportation, aviation transportation around the world to go forth in a way that is orderly. we come together at this international conference -- this international organization and build on consensus with rule makings and regulations that help us to not only build our airplanes but to fly them around the world.

and what the europeans are doing is want to impose a tax on american air carriers, on all air carriers from their points of departure so in our sovereign nation and sovereign nations around the world they're going to tax us to fly from, for instance, los angeles to paris, which i believe, again, is a violation of the international agreement. and i believe it's going to throw the aviation, international aviation into an uncertain time period and may cause tremendous disruption in the flow of commerce through the air. the air transportation industry worldwide accounts for 8% of global g.d.p. but only accounts for 2% of the co-2 emissions and aviation industry, the airline industry has a great incentive to decrease the amount of fuel it has. it's not one but maybe the largest expense. the airliners we build today

with the way we control our air traffic control patterns today, we were able to reduce co-2 emissions over the past 10 years significantly and we will continue to do that because it's an incentive -- the incentive is there for the airline industry in america to use less fuel, not more fuel. it's better for their bottom lines. once again, this trading scream, this emission trading -- scheme, this emission trading scheme is going to impose a tax on our carriers. they estimate it's $2 a ticket. our airline industry believes it will be somewhere between $2.50 and $4 a ticket. it's not certain. if you look at the last 10 years at the aviation industry in this country we have lost $2.80 per ticket sold. so you're talking about an industry that's now recovering, an industry that seems to be making profits. if the europeans are allowed to impose a $2 tax, it will

probably wipe out the entire profits of our airline industry. so we can't let it stand. also, it's a counterproductive measure. the europeans say they will reduce emissions by this. i believe it will do the opposite. what's going to happen is these planes, not the new planes but the old ones, refurbished ones, will go through other parts of the world and these planes do produce co-2. africa, the ones that can't afford the boeing rebust planes will be spewing more co-2 emissions in the air. it's counterproductive. if you want them to invest in fuel-efficient airliners, you have to make a profit. they need ways to reduce emissions coming from these airliners so it's counterproductive.

it also -- if the europeans want to reduce emissions, which they have not in their airline industry over the last 10 years, one of the things they could do, a huge step in the right direction, is to create a single european airspace. and they've been unable to do that. and today when you fly into the united states, because we're so much more efficient than the europeans, our planes land quicker. that means they are not up in the atmosphere putting out co-2 emissions. in the european theater, what you have are 25 or 30 different airspaces so what you tend to do, is planes circle around the airport for longer period of times emitting more co-2. so if the europeans are really serious about this, instead of just doing the easy thing and tax the americans or tax the chinese or tax the russians, they should look at seriously turning their 30 different airspaces into a single european airspace. that would have tremendous improvement, tremendous

improvement on the amount -- have tremendous reduction in the co-2 that they're putting off into the air. so my colleagues, if you're listening to this tonight, i urge you -- i urge you strongly to support the gentlelady from florida and myself and others in a bipartisan way to send a strong vote, a strong message to the europeans to don't go down this path. let's sit down at the table, let's work together. we can do something that reduces co-2 without taxing american carriers and disrupting an international organization that's been so positive and so vital to commerce in this world. so with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania yields back. the gentleman from wisconsin reserves. the gentlelady from florida is recognized. ms. brown: i yield two minutes to mr. holden from philadelphia. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. ms. holden: i rise in support of this bipartisan legislation.

of that organization commission there are 36 votes, 26 of the voting nations have in writing expressed their disapproval of what the europeans are approving. the only 10 countries in approval are eight european countries and australia and canada. we believe that this clearly violates article 1 of chicago convention of 1944. article 1 states that all signature countries to this agreement shall have control over their own airspace. if the european union wants to put this scheme into place in the european union they're welcomed to do that but they can't tell aircraft leaving o'hare or logan or dulles that they have to start paying taxes there. and the explanations from the european union doesn't pass the last test. they say the european union member states are not responsible for 1944 agreement because the european union was not in existent in 1944.

well, their member states were nextistens and they are signatures to the agreement and they are bound by it. and if the european union continues to move down this path they know in i.k.o. there are remedies and remedies that will be sought. i urge this body to pass this legislation today and i even more urge the europeans to put this aside, come back to the i.k.o. organization, a vision that f.d.r. had in 1944 to control international aviation to have a global solution to the problem that we face. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida. ms. brown: mr. speaker, how much time is left on both sides, please? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady has 14 minutes remaining. and the gentleman from wisconsin has nine. ms. brown: yes, sir, i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: we'd reserve at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from florida. ms. brown: yes, i yield five minutes to mr. markey from massachusetts. mr. markey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mark -- for five minutes. mr. markey: i thank the gentlelady. i rise in opposition to this legislation. if it were to pass the house, we lawmakers would be directing the secretary of transportation to tell u.s. airlines not to follow the law. if we prohibit our companies from complying with laws in other countries we should expect other countries to do the same when it comes to their companies complying with u.s. law. if an effort to protect u.s. airlines, this bill might actually undermine airline security. the u.s. currently requires

international airlines to comply with a wide range of u.s. laws when it comes to passenger, baggage and cargo security in order to do business in our country. if we legislate our companies out of europe's environmental laws, our homeland security could be adversely impacted. if european countries decide to withhold their cooperation in response with regard to screening of baggage for bombs on planes flying into the united states. when it comes to pollution from the transportation sector, the united states was the first to pass a law requiring anyone in the world interested in coming to our shores to follow our environmental regulations. in 1990, congress passed the oil pollution act in the aftermath of the exxon valdez oil spill. in order to reduce the risk of an oil spill it required all tankers operating in u.s. waters to be double hulled by

2015 no matter what country's flag a tanker is flying, it will have to double hull to sail into the united states of america to protect us from their pollution. we acted unilaterally to protect our country from the carbon pollution associated with an oil spill 21 years ago. now, after years of trying to forge an international aviation agreement, the european union is acting to protect itself from the carbon pollution associated from airline travel. last week, an independent team of scientists at berkley released their -- berkeley released their analysis of surface records going back to 1900. their counterparts in noaa and nasa had previously shown that temperatures were increasing. once again, scientists have confirmed that global warming is real. now, that independent

scientists have validated this dead rock fact, perhaps my colleagues who have questioned the science of climate change will be willing to give climate scientists the benefit of the doubt that the rest of their findings are accurate. and those findings have sobering consequences for the united states. more heat waves, rising sea levels, declining snow pact or frequent drought, more frequent prescription when it does rain, to name just a few. 2011 has been a record-breaking year for extreme weather in the united states. it left unchecked -- if left unchecked, climate change could make a year like this seem normal. the europeans are taking climate change seriously. we shouldn't undermine their efforts by legislating that our airlines break the law. i would urge a no vote on h.r. 2954, and just remember that all of the other laws that we

expect them to abide in terms of the protection of american environment and american security become jeopardized when we question legitimate laws that the europeans put on the books in order to protect our planet. and so i urge a no vote on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from florida. . ms. moore: i -- no -- i have additional speakers. do you have a speaker at this time? mr. young: if you have the time, you may have your -- mr. petri: if you have the time you may have your speakers. ms. moore: yes, i yield two minutes to mr. waxman, please. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. waxman: i thank the gentlelady for yielding to me and, mr. chairman, i also rise in opposition to this legislation. i think mr. markey made an articulate case and a compelling case. if we expect european companies to comply with u.s. laws when they do business in our country

, whether the e.u. countries agree with our laws or not, we have to respect their laws. but this bill, h.r. 2594, prohibits u.s. airlines from complying with the laws of the european union. worldwide aviation is estimated to produce about 3% of the total manmade greenhouse gas emissions and these emissions are rising rapidly. in an effort to address aviation's uncontrolled contribution to climate change, the e.u. has adopted a cap on greenhouse gas emissions from the aviation sector. the e.u. program sets modest and achievable emission limits. it is flexible and market oriented and there is no viable alternative approach based on regulating only those emissions that occur in a country's own air space. the e.u. program also should

benefit u.s. aircraft and engine manufacturers such as boeing which are building more efficient engines today. the program will encourage airlines to purchase new aircraft with lower fuel costs, boosting the economy and potentially saving consumers money. i just got off a plane, as a matter of fact, today from the european union and i would hate to think that when i travel on an american airline they will not respect the laws in the european union or the european union might decide they don't have to respect our laws. i urge a no vote on this bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from florida. brown brown -- ms. brown: yes, sir. i used to like this program, sergeant joe friday, and he would say the facts, madam chairman, just the facts. and i have a few facts about the european union emissions trade scheme or scam or however

you want to call it. the u.s. airline would be required to pay for a carbon alliance for all segments of flights between the united states and europe. for example, a flight from los angeles to a european city, airlines would be liable for emissions over the u.s., canada and international waters. two, fees for carbon alliance under the system would be paid directly to e.u.'s member states without obligations to be used for aviation emission impact. the e.u. tax rye slates u.s. sovereignty -- tax violates u.s. sovereignty by imposing liability on u.s. airlines for operating in the u.s. national air space system, additional the president obama's administration testified before the house committee on transportation and infrastructure that the e.u.'s

tax is inconsistent with international aviation law. and in closing i want to thank chairman mica, all of the members that went with us to talk to our partners across the water in canada, ranking member rahallle for bringing this bill -- rahall, for binging this bill to the floor. and i would encourage my colleagues to protect the urs airlines, u.s. customers and u.s. jobs and support this legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: yes, mr. speaker. i would remind both previous speakers from massachusetts and california that we're not in any way talking about e.u. passing laws governing the behavior of our planes or anybodience -- anyone else in e.u. territory. we are talking about e.u. attempting to exercise extra territorial jurisdiction over

flights over the united states or international waters, in violation of the agreement reached by each of the e.u. countries separately with i.k.o. as well as every other country, 190 in the world, that belong to that international order that allows for the peaceful movement of aviation throughout our globe. to deny that will be -- would be very disruptive, set a precedent that cannot be accepted. that's why not only our administration but the administrations of over 21 other countries joined recently in new delhi, india, to condemn this. other countries are in the process of adopting legislation similar to that which we are adopting here today. we're not talking about emission trading schemes or anything else, we're talking about the principle of terer to -- territories, countries attempting to exercise that beyond the legitimate and recognized bounds that have been accepted by international

law and i yield a minute to mr. shuster, if he'd care to rebut. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. shuster: thank you, mr. speaker. i just want to again stand up in support of what my colleague from wisconsin and from florida have said over and over again. this is about sovereignty, as well as doing what's right for american traveling public. mr. markey from california, his -- he represents los angeles, or no, excuse me, mr. waxman. folks from that part of the country, as my colleague from florida said, will probably see direct flights no longer exist because if you start off from los angeles and fly to paris, it's going to cost you more money. so i con seed -- can see the airlines trying to save money by stopping in philadelphia or stopping in new york so they can decrease the tax that's going to be imposed upon them. and as mr. petri has said,

they're imposing it on the air sky -- the air over america. if they want to impose a tax in europe on people doing business in europe, they have the ability to do that. but to do it and start it over american air space, over american departure, it's a wrong thing to do. and europeans know it, you already have the italians and the dutch are already saying they're questioning the wisdom of doing this so i think you're going to see people in europe starting to change their attitude and tonight is going to send a very, very strong signal to europe that america's not going to allow the europeans to impose a tax on us on our sovereign air space. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: i yield such time as he may consume to the chairman of the transportation and infrastructure committee, mr. mica. oh, ok. we'll reserve at this point and -- so that mr. mica can close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin reserves. the gentlelady from florida. is recognized. ms. brown: i reserve the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: may i inquire of the gentlelady from florida whether you have additional speakers? ms. brown: i yield back the balance of my time. i have no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: i yield for the purpose of closing to mr. mica, the chairman of the full transportation committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. mica: thank you both, ranking member brown of the rail subcommittee who's leading this legislation on the floor tonight, and chairman petri, the chairman of the aviation subcommittee, for your leadership. and also directing in a bipartisan manner this legislation that we brought forth from our committee, with very, very strong support, members again from both sides of the aisle. i know that there are some folks that have raised some concerns and i'll address them. but very simply what this -- what is taking place here is

that the european union is trying to impose in january an emissions tax, air emissions tax, and they're going to start the clock running, they want to start it running january 1. the meter will start and american airlines will get the bill and -- in 2013. now, you heard some comments here that we don't want folks to follow the law or operating -- there was an example of double hull ships operating in u.s. waters. well, we're not talking about, again, anything that's even similar to what's being proposed here. what they're proposing is say from los angeles or chicago or

new york, anywhere in the united states, to anywhere in the european union, the tax and the meter starts running the minute the plane departs from any point in the united states, until it reaches europe. and the same thing when it departs europe back to the united states. not only does this violate international treaties, the chicago convention, we've never had anything like this imposed or proposed before. it is not flexible, we heard the term used it's flexible. it's not flexible. the other thing, too, is we're trying to work with others and work with the european union and many states have now joined the united states, in fact they've taken the lead on some of this, both in conference in new delhi and in meetings in

oslo. and they said this is unfair. so it's not just the united states that's saying this, this is unfair. now, if the european union chooses to impose a tax within its boundaries or like we say within our waters you do certain things like double haul if you want that ship to go there, that's fine with us. if they want to improve emissions in their air space, that's fine with us. but that's not what they're doing here and that's why we have this opposition. the second point is, if you really care and i don't want to get into the climate debate, but if you really care about eliminating emissions, and i know the airlines do because the more emissions they eliminate and the more they can conserve fuel, that's their bottom line and it's very important to them. but that being said, again, one

of the most important points of all of this is that, again, this money that they're collecting, and it's a tax grab by the european union, that this money that they're getting doesn't necessarily have to go into -- there's no requirement that it goes into eliminating emissions from aircraft. in fact, they told us that you can buy your way out or you can buy some other trade for some other industry. so it doesn't set up to do what , again, is being forecast or demonstrated. in fact, they're very unclear as to how this would be totally instituted. it's what's called an article 25 provision within their current law. and this is, as i've checked,

october, almost the end of october this goes into effect in january, and they can't tell us, they couldn't tell us on friday and they couldn't tell us here in the united states or in brussels what the provisions of article 25 and exactly how they will implement this. so i think that what will happen here is we send a strong message. yes, we're for protecting the environment. we have no problems with the european union taking measures within their borders. our airlines should comply and other carriers should comply. both departing and arriving, they can do that. but when you stop and think that this would impose the european tax over the skies of the united states, never heard of anything like that before. so, again, we are willing to work with our european counterparts. we believe that november 2 we were informed when we were in

montreal meeting with i.k.o. representatives that this will be brought up before that international body, that's the international civil aviation organization. it sets all the protocols, the standards, security safety provisions. and we will win in that body a legitimate vote by a very wide margin. the europeans will be left behind on this issue. but we annapolis all want to work with them -- but we all want to work with them. they're our friends. this shouldn't lead to a trade war. it should lead to a resolution that does improve our environment, that does allow the european union to do what they need to do and also then if year going to impose this, that we have some -- that if we're going to impose this then we have some understanding of how we can do better in reducing air emissions. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time has expired. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r.

2594. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. pursuant to clause 12-a rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until

>> the finding of a released the gao report. find out more from greg wi lshusen, tonight at 8:00 p.m. -- thiser than week's week on "the contenders," thomas dewey. live from the roosevelt hotel in new york city, friday, 8:00 p.m.

eastern, on c-span. >> nato's secretary general said military operations will wind down on october 31. a press briefing today in brussels, the head of nato's operations in libya answered questions and a possible threat of violence last lists. this is a half-hour. >> good afternoon. i'm glad to see that some of you have recovered. good afternoon that everybody here in brussels, and in naples. we have just been joined by a lieutenant general, the commander of the operation unified protector, who has taken time to give us a preliminary assessment of our nato-led mission for libya and the details of the over watched.

. let me say a few words before i give the floor to the general. unfortunately, the death toll of yesterday's terrible earthquake in turkey is rising. the secretary-general issued a statement expressing his sadness on behalf of nato. he conveyed his sympathy and solidarity to those who are affected by the earthquake, to the turkish people, and the turkish government. nato stands ready to assist turkey if necessary. we will allent note, mr. d have seen the celebrations across libya as the national transitional council declared the full liberation of libya. a momentous day for libyans and for the whole region. the chairman of the national transition council and -- in

his address singled out nato for what he called the effectiveness and great professionalism which we implemented the resolution in 1973 to protect civilians and libya. the secretary general warmly welcome the announcement of the liberation as a great victory for the people of libya. our nato-led operation to protect the people of libya is very close to completion. as you know, the north atlantic council took a preliminary decision to end operations unified protector on october 31, and will take a formal -- will make a formal decision in the next few days. the secretary general is closely consulted with the united

nations and the national transitional council. as we wind out, together with partners, we will monitor the situation, claimed the capacity to respond if needed. that remains an important mission led by a general in naples. general, the floor is yours. >> good afternoon. as we near the end of our mission of operation unified protector, it is important from my perspective to put things in perspective and to provide an overview of how we have done the last seven months. looking back to march, at the onset of the mission, there were gross and systematic violations of human rights, the impressment of peaceful demonstrators come out and torture and in some areas executions. we have seen over and over

again remnants and remains of such actions. finally, a fraction was so strong from the international community led by the united nations resolution 1970 and 1973, authorizing member states to take measures to protect civilians populated areas under threat of attack, enforce a no- fly zone, and element and our bill -- and a bar. nato response was rapid. six days from the time we were given the order to take on the mission to the time we began operations. this could not have been done without the great work of the air and land -- air and maritime components as well as other participating organizations. the operational concept was a simple one. protecting the civilian population from gaddafi forces

and ensuring no civilian casualties. we did a careful targeting process and precision -- and courageous restraint to ensure that only when we had a clear shot which we take it. it showed the professionalism of the air crew the men and women at sea. we focus on stopping direct and indirect attacks against the civilian population and also by removing the capabilities of military concentrations, logistics and ammunition facilities, and finally command and control. throughout we stayed focused on the mandate, to protect the population, to ensure a no-fly zone, to conduct the embargo. we did not get involved in anything beyond what was our legal mandate, and we remained

well within the mandate assigned to us by the north atlantic council. the no-fly zone was a balance between deterrents and actions. we ensured that the non-nato .ctivities remain unimpeded an for an embargo perspective, we interdicted maritime shipping to ensure that only approved and authorized aid and the sense of commodities would continue. that never once did we impede or stop the movement or flow of humanitarian assistance, but rather our maritime component ensured the avenues of communication remain open and we remain open to ensure that assistance would flow into the country. in it generality of the concept

of the mission, in april, the situation was dire, and for us, the mission was to stop the movement of forces of gaddafi forces. benghazi was stable. times were very stressful in the area of misrata, we made sure the situation would not worsen in that place. likewise, in another area, we make sure that attacks against civilians were stopped or attempted to stop. in may and june, where gaddafi forces were no longer able to advance, this became our first objective, and then we witnessed the anti-gaddafi forces come together and we watched them from the air and

the sikh come together and show some signs of movement for. in july, the general rose and pushed gaddafi forces. we saw the same in misrata, which was out of danger and the daily shelling stopped. in august, tripoli was free. it took very few days surprisingly. we still saw toward the end aggressive scud launches and inflammatory speeches from gaddafi. in september remaining pockets of resistance were taking, especially in the saba yet, and finally toward the end of september and early october, sirte was freed. today all areas have been freed

and the coastal areas of libya are under the control of the ntc. the threat of organized attacks from gaddafi regime remnants is gone. at this time there are no remaining command and control capability which would lead to the return of the regime, and finally, libya has been declared liberated by the ntc the issue. our objectives that were assigned as unified protector have been met. at the end of the day it is a success for nato, but more importantly it is a libyan victory. for us, it has been a team effort, and i think -- i extend my appreciation to the 28 nations who took part. the three arab partners, qatar,

amongst them, and the scandinavian partners agreed all played a role in this mission. to supporting, provide be seen, or to provide nato personnel. indeed, i have mentioned basing, and i want to think italy and greece have provided basing. i would like to thank the nato leadership for trusting the members of oup to get on with this multinational command car. the unified protector was launched to protect civilian publishes. many nations joined together with this mission to provide personnel, assets, and a directive to get on with it i believe we were able to make a difference in the life of libyans, and in the end, as i have stated in my first news

conference, we shall eat an environment where the people of libya can now decide for themselves their future. this completes my formal portion. thank you very much. >> if there are any questions in english or in french -- kuwaiti news agency. ap. >> you are aware of the controversy surrounding the circumstances of gaddafi's death. have been told nato planes struck the connolly in which he was fleeing twice and the reason for that was because it presented a threat to civilians. a colonel told us this.

could you explain the exact threat of that convoy was posing, because when we saw the vehicles, they did not seem to be armed. they were not carrying anti- aircraft guns or anything like that. what was the exact nature of the threat that the vehicles fleeing from sirte have imposed? >> that me make it perfectly clear that we saw a convoy and in fact we had no idea that gaddafi on board. in fact, i was surprised he was in the sirte area. second, the preparation of the convoy it started with 175 vehicles in the area been lined up and ready to go. they started to make their way out, and one of the potential outcomes of this was a concern that forces concernsirte would

join up with remnants from other forces and we could see movement into another area where we would see another group of civilian populations held hostage while efforts were made to build up and the continued to disrupt. this was a judgment, and then we went on from there to first of all attempt to break down the convoy, to break it into manageable chunks, and to slow it down, and that is what we did. we put our weapons systems on, on the convoy it twice, and with the aim of slowing the convoy down. their rockets and machine guns on some of the trucks, and it was for us in our assessment a potential for a threat to the population. >> kurwait news agency.

general, how significant or decisive was the contribution of the arab countries in achieving this victory? thank you. >> thank you very much for your question. the contribution of every nation was critical to the success of this mission. for the arab countries, they helped us understand the culture. they helped us understand what was going on on the ground. they provided assistance and plants and targeting and in various other air activities, be it air patrolling or provision or bombing missions in the area. throughout was the knowledge of the culture and their advice to me as to how to continue with this mission and how to interpret what we saw on the

ground. most helpful. all nations played a role together, and this is what makes this mission a success, the fact that all the nations came together with their partners, with one goal in mind. that is all. >> one question dealing with threats to people. he said the pro-gaddafi forces have no command and control capacity now, but is there any chance that there could be some pockets of resistance in the country? we do not know yet in which areas. since nato asks to has planned to leave next month, the first of november, is it for the ntc

to keep order and attack these forces to ensure they produce in the attacks if they intend to do anything? thank you. >> it is a very good question. thank you very much. this goes back to our mission, which is protection of the civilian population. our assessment is that the threat of organized attacks against the population has been stopped. this is a very large country, 1,300 kilometers frontage, it is very likely that there will be individuals left out there. from our perspective, what we are considering here is the threat such that it can be handled by a ntc says. our assessment at this point is that it is so, and, therefore, as we considered that libya is now liberated as declared by the ntc, are witnessing police force

is being created, graduation of the first course of recruitment for the army, the command and control structure is in existence for the ntc forces. we are seeing they are able to deal with these problems, and the combination of our assessment that these problems can be dealt with by the ntc have the capabilities to do so lead us to the reflection that for us it is quite appropriate to terminate the mission. >> general, we can go to naples, if there any questions there. if not, we have quite a few others in brussels. >> thank you, general. in the past, nato has been criticized as a two-tired organization where only certain member states do the heavy

lifting. the you see the operation in libya as confirming that perception or has this change the internal dynamics and reference to the states who have taken the lead, so to speak, or are there still -- is there still an imbalance with a nato member states in terms of what they can and will do in operations? in the first of all, -- >> i will limit my comments to our own mission, and the first point i will say is that everybody played a role, and in this case, some people played a kinetic activity, like bombing, and others helped in the system, like being on the staff, and others made some actions that on other fronts in other theaters, which enabled the freeing of individuals for the mission itself. to me, everybody played a role.

second, i think when we look at nato which should not look at nato for seven months. we should look at nato for the last 20 years and the next 20 years, and what we are seeing is the capabilities continue to improve, and each nation has a sovereign right to decide what it needs to bring to this alliance, but from my perspective right now, all nations played a role in both at different levels. others played an increasing more important role in other theaters. it is a matter of balancing and looking at the whole spectrum of operations of nato over a long period of time, not just seven months. >> good morning. you and the secretary general wish a peaceful coexistence to the people of libya, according to your information, what are

the risks of tribal war libya after the end of this part of the conflict? which are the risks and the weapons that were left by loyalists in the hands of terrorists which may go out of control? thank you. >> thank you for your question. with regard to the internal relationships within the nation's, i believe this question should be best answered by the ntc, from a perspective, and it was clear from the announcement by mr. jalil city, that one libya what they want. we have seen them unite under the goal of seeking their freedom, and i'm confident they will find their way as well to find a unified libya as they developed their cells and find them white. there will be challenged along the way, but obviously it

certainly has worked in my opinion. second point with regard to weapons, there are a great deal of weapons out there. i am confident that very few of those weapons, if any, left by a sea or air, our mission. with regard to movement on the ground, there is over 3,000 kilometers of border along this country, which borders nations that are not necessarily the most supportive of reducing the movement of the legal weapons. there will be challenges in the future, and here again, we count on me ntc established as soon as possible secure border areas to minimize the movement of them. regrettably, from our perspective, which continued to ensure that no such weapons are removed from because air and at

sea, but the situation on the ground will remain a natural response of the ntc as a sovereign nation. i will return back to brussels. >> belgian news agency. [speaking in french] aking in french]

>> hold on. [speaking in french]

>> mr. rasmussen said nato will leave at 31 october, but he is talking with the end, and is it possible it will be later? considering the problems you mentioned, is it possible that some nato troops will stay on ?he ground >> as i said, and as you know, last friday the north atlantic

council took a preliminary decision regarding operations unified protector. the decision is standing that it should end on october 31. the formal decision remains to be taken by the north atlantic council in the next few days. that is a political decision, and i will not prejudge that decision. but clearly, an operation, a very complex operation, such as operation unified protector, which has three different mandates, enforcing the no-fly zone, the arms embargo, and the protection of civilians, cannot be turned on or off like a switch. this takes some time. there is no intention of keeping our forces in the neighborhood of libya after the

end of the operation, which the north atlantic council has decided in a preliminary fashion that it should and on the 31st of october. general, i do not know if you want to add to that. guest: i could not have said it better myself. i await the north atlantic council's direction this week. >> good afternoon, general. there are some comments now saying that libya could be the next somalia. what do you think about that? >> i disagree, it is that simple. there is the infrastructure that is still a place.

the country has the capability to bring back revenues. there is a great deal of potential in that country beyond oil, and we have people who want peace, prosperity, and stability. all these combined together, i do not think the comparison of libya to the next somalia is an appropriate comment at this time. >> i think these are all the questions we have for brussels, general. i do not know if there any more questions in naples. >> and more questions here? no. this completes its. thank you very much for your support. >> once again, at the end of the

day, this was 28 nations, four partners, who got involved to fulfill and to complete the task in the wishes of the north atlantic council. we have met the objectives, and today the people of libya will benefit from it. thank you very much. >> thank you very much, general bouchart, and for your dedicated and hard-working team to get your job done. we're almost there. thank you very much. >> our review which we issued last week in our report identified that weaknesses existed in key security controls in each of the 24 federal agencies. >> sensitive, personal and classified data stored by the federal government is at high risk of cyber attack, the

finding of a released g.a.o. report. find out more tonight on "the communicators" on c span 2. >> the house is coming back in at 6:30 for votes on measures debated earlier today. social security benefits be included when calculating eligibility for medicaid and subsidies for health care. today republican presidential candidate mitt romney formally became a candidate in the new hampshire primary as he filed paperwork in the state house in concord. the former massachusetts governor held a rally with supporters on the steps of the state house.

[crowd talking]

[crowd talking] >> good morning. how are you? >> nice to see you. good morning. how are you doing? long time no see. whoa! >> wow! can we get a few more people in here? good morning. good morning. nice to see you. how are you? >> wow! look at this. >> nice to see you.

>> there he is! >> a few of my friends coming into your office. [laughter] >> thanks so much. appreciate it. thank you. >> looks like we are getting the job done here. i'm honored to be here with a few friends. and i won't mention all the names here, but certainly great to have the governor here. this used to be his home. >> whoo! >> well, you have a great secretary of state. you got a great job and you will for the next 40, 50 years, bill. we appreciate your leadership and new hampshire will remain

first in the nation. it's a responsibility and an honor that new hampshire richly deserves and i'm happy to be part of that process and putting my name on this paper hoping this time it will take and bm the nominee for the party and hopefully the next president of the united states. [cheers and applause] >> where do you want me to sign here? right down there? there it is. signature. everything else is filled out. >> i'm mitt romney. signature right there. ok. great. there it is. that's the oldest of my -- >> you just signed it away. [laughter] >> not the first time. >> and let's see, sign this?

just autograph there? in the top there? ok. >> new hampshire is number one. there we go. yay! >> john, do you want to sign this, too, you think? [laughter] >> is that right? that works. >> here we go. >> you got it. >> what does it say on here? >> president of the senate. there we go. thank you. this is a family affair. >> i'm stuck back here. >> i don't know why we can't fit

in a few more people in here, bill. [laughter] >> let's go up front. >> thanks, guys. >> good job! >> whoo! >> go to the white house and we'll all meet you. >> great inauguration. >> thanks. >> speaker. leader here. >> thank you so much. appreciate it guys. [laughter] >> whoo! [cheers and applause] >> hit! hit! hit! -- mitt!

mitt! mitt! [cheers and applause] >> whoo! >> whoo! >> i want to thank you all for taking the time to come out this morning. and since i like to be as efficient as possible, let me introduce the gentleman that i believe will be the next president of the united states and the man that i'm endorsing in that endeavor, governor mitt romney. >> whoo!

>> it's good to be on these steps and accompanied by john sue knew you and the best person to be endorsed and thanks for your support. it's a great honor to be here. [cheers and applause] >> and this team of people around me, this is a volunteer team that is going to turn out voters on primary day, which is the first primary in the nation, which it ought to be. [cheers and applause] >> and i think you will find the american people recognize that it's time for real change in washington. they recognize that president obama has not done the job that they thought they elected him to do. the president came into office and had one job to do immediately and that was to turn around the economy. and he is talking about a sthrust plan.

did his first stimulus work? >> no. >> did obamacare work? >> did the president's plan to raise the costs of energy work? >> no. >> did promises to raise taxes work for the american people? >> no. rir has president obama been able to turn around the american economy? >> no. >> president obama has not worked and individuals recognize that. 25 million americans are out of work or just in part-time jobs are evidence of the fact that president obama has not worked for america and if we want to get america working again, we have to bring in an entirely different philosophy, a very different approach to washington. president obama and his friends believe that america should be a nation led by government. they're wrong. america should be a nation led by free people choosing their course in life. [cheers and applause]

>> this is not a nation by government. this is a nation by people. and government has become too intrusive, too big, too fast. and that's why it has been difficult for this economy to turn around. when i say too intrusive, when they tell us what kind of health care we have, or join a union and government has become too intrusive and we are going to stop the intrue siffness of the federal government and not be directed by the bureaucrats in washington. when the federal government consumes 25% of our total economy, we are going to say no more and cut it back to 20% and time to cut back the size of the federal government and to a size that is manageable and it's within the course of america's greatness, which is keep government small and let people have greater rights. >> yeah!

>> i'm afraid that president obama for far too many years has taken his guidance from the social democrats of europe that thought government placing a heavier and heavier hand on people and free enterprise would make things better. that hasn't worked. the right course is not to believe in europe but believe in america and believe in the freedom of the american people. [cheers and applause] >> i believe in america. i believe in free enterprise. i believe in opportunity and freedom and the founders crafted this country, they gave us not only political freedom, the right to choose who would represent us, but gave us the freedom to choose our course in life, and this became the place where people from all over the world came seeking freedom, opportunity. this was the land of pioneers. it has made america the nation we are. and as government continues to grow and expand and become

heavier, it changes the nature of this country. we will not let it happen and keep america by believing in the american people and not believing in big government. [cheers and applause] >> i love this country. i love this country. >> we love you mitt. >> i love the principles on which this country was founded, freedom and opportunity. we face real challenges in the world. we are a patriotic people. these patriotic people are going to come together to do what's necessary to keep america great. as i go across the country, i see people who love america and recognize that we aren't another place on the planet with a flag but an exceptional nation and founded upon an exceptional premise that god endowed our people with certain unalienable

rights and among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. [cheers and applause] >> this exceptional nation will not be stopped by anything other than government becoming too big and too intrusive and too fat. we are going to scale back government and increase the freedom of the american people so we can be the most powerful economy in the world, create jobs that americans need and we can remain as we have always been, the hope of the earth. thank you, guys. great to be with you. [cheers and applause] >> great to see you again. thank you.

>> thank you. >> thank you. [crowd talking] >> thanks guys. >> thank you. appreciate it. >> how are you? >> very excited. we've growth great volunteers and will come together and turn out the vote on primary date. and the date is the first in the nation and very exciting and hopefully do real well here in new hampshire.

[unintell i believe -- unintelling i believe] >> president obama is under a lot of stress right now regarding the economy. and i think the american people recognize he is a nice guy but he is over his head. >> mitt! mitt! whoo! whoo!

[crowd talking] >> way to reduce taxes on middle-income americans. very simple approach. i want want to make any tax system put in place as long as it reduces the burden on middle america caps and i describe it in my 59-point plan. flatten the tax code and do our best to reduce the burden on middle-income americans. they are the ones who have been most hurt by the obama economy and we have to fashion our tax system to help middle-income americans.

>> governor romney, i'm here all the way from new jersey. >> was it worth it? >> it's worth it. >> got another pen here? >> here's a sharpie. >> thank you. >> thanks so much. [crowd talking] >> governor romney -- >> thanks guys. >> thank you. good to see you this morning. american legion. >> what do you think about the --

[crowd talking] >> does that work for you? [laughter] >> governor, good to see you. >> good to see you. appreciate it very much. >> you're taking off? >> good to see you. >> good to see you. thanks so much. >> hey, buddy. thanks so much. got a picture here? got that camera to work? thank you. >> governor, you're on your own, don't blow it. [laughter] >> thank you. appreciate your help. >> well done. >> whoo!

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> we are 10 minutes away from the house coming back in on votes on measures debated earlier. we will have those votes live on c-span. the house armed services defense business panel held a hearing to identify issues to prevent companies with moving forward with new defense technology. we'll watch as much as we can until the house. >> thank you very much. could you talk a little bit more about the technology, the emerging companies and the technology keeping it out of d.o.d. we heard in one of our hearings about the regulations that it's very difficult that once you have the technology that's now open, in the open market that our folks are providing to

d.o.d. can't sell commercially and it constrains them. what you are suggestsing people are saying i'm not going to sell to the united states government because they are going to capture us? >> it's one of the thorniest topics on the landscape. i know this committee and congress and the administration had been looking at this topic. we have the beginnings of a lot strange unintended consequences because of the policies that have been put in place to prevent core technology leaking out. having the uninteppeded consequences where companies are afraid to put the technology in the u.s. and keeping it outside. you are seeing it mostly in cutting-edge telecommunications technology. global companies have decided to sell off their u.s.-related

businesses in order to compete globally because it was too difficult. you are beginning to hear other countries about developing products that are icar-free and when you talk to those companies who did a big study on this, they said we would have gladly built american. so we had to figure out to make sure they aren't going out and mitigating the unintended consequences and it's getting to crisis levels where addressing this issue is going to be critical. you talk about cutting off competition. how is that occurring? >> it's not occurring yet but as we go into a tighter budget environment, it will be easy to look at that list and say, boy, i'm running 10 u.a.v.

competitions and maybe i should go to one. 10-8 would be ok. 10-1 would be disastrous because we are trying to figure out that technology. and others where the answer is becoming more evident, like the aircraft industry where we settled on a single-wing solution. >> the department of defense came out with a report talking about long-term investments, short-term strategic -- could you talk about that, the report is schizophrenic and those things being important and allowing the market to drive our needs or provide for our needs and you say we need some kind of strategic plan moving forward to keep some of our leg asies, some

of our other core competencies. did you see the report at all? >> yes, i have. >> your assessment. >> well, it seems to continue to assume that this industry operates like consumer electronics or the automobile industry. and if that's not the case, then trying to develop the strategy based on an incorrect assumption, incorrect understanding of the nature of what they are trying to manage and develop a strategy for is probably not going to succeed. going all the way back to 1980, because of the acceptance of that incorrect assumption that it's a normal free market and competition will work the same as it does in consumer electronics or flat-screen tv's, the policies based on that assumption have been more harmful than good. now, in fairness to that report,

they did talk about the service aspects of defense acquisition as opposed to major weapons systems. and the use of competition may be more useful in the services in the defense procurement. so there's a point to be made there in the way they structured the report, but the assumption of the nature of the industry, as far as i can tell has been wrong since the 1950's. >> you concur with that for the most part? >> i do entirely. i think competition certainly ought to be used for those sectors of the industry where it may be effective. electronics is a key area, but there's not going to be much competition for a nuclear submarine or a long-range bomber. there aren't just enough companies in the market.

you can't have classic competition in some core capabilities and the challenge for the pentagon is to construct a strategy that is adequate to deal with the differences. >> and i fully intend to ask why they believe this can be market-driven. and when you look at it, it's common sense, d.o.d. is the regulator, there is a procurer, one u.s. department of defense. why do you think -- are they just kicking the can down the road because they have fiscal, financial restraints? >> i'm just puzzled by why that has persisted as long as it has, is all i can say. seems to be a myth at best. perhaps it's just -- we look at

the really normal market, commercial parts of our industry. we think competition and innovation are very important and we sort of assume that it's pretty much the same in the defense industry. on the one hand. on the other hand if you look at down select from an r.f.p. to move into development of a program, most of the competition ends at that point, notwithstanding the direction and law from that 2009 reform act which suggested that the secretary of defense should try to maintain competition through the life of programs. it just hasn't been happening and the best examples, the second engine for the joint strike fighter, if you go back and review the reasons that secretary gates gave for not going ahead with that, it was the tradeoff between the real upfront $2.7 billion of real cost to develop the engine and

theoretical benefits of the long-term -- actually being able to compete two engines over the life span of that airplane, which they judged is more theoretical and wasn't worth the $2.7 billion. >> our review which we issued last week in our report identified that weaknesses existed in key security controls of each of the 24 federal agencies and departments. >> sensitive, personal and classified data by the federal government is at high risk of a cyber attack. find out more with the g.a.o. tonight on "the communicators" at 8:00 eastern on c spanch 2. >> d emp wey's defeat was iconic and continued to impact

politics. follow dewey as three-time governor and influencing national politics in the elections of dwight eisenhower and richard nixon. live from the roosevelt hotel in new york city, friday, on c-span. >> middle and high school students, time to get the cameras rolling for this year's student cam video competition. make a five to eight-minute review on this year's theme "the constitution and you" and you could win $5,000. for complete details, go to studentcam.org. >> earlier today -- the house is coming back in now for votes on measures. two votes are scheduled. earlier today, the house passed

by voice vote a bill that would direct the transportation department to prohibit operators of u.s. civil aircraft from taking part in any emissions trading scheme unilaterally established by the european union. u.s. airlines flying into or out of europe i will either have to cut their carbon dioxide emissions or pay a fine. the obama administration has expressed opposition to the program saying it violates international agreements and infringes on u.s. sovreignty. and coming up in the house tomorrow, we expect debate on land exchange bill for southeast arizona. live now to the house. to accompany house resolution 444

for extraction of mineral resources in southeast arizona and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred toll house calendar and order printed. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, votes will be taken in the following order. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote, remaining votes will be conducted as five-minute votes. the first vote is on the motion of the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 220. the clerk: house calendar 55, a bill to designate a distinguished flying cross memorial in riverside, california. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote.

[captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 392, the nays are one. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the bill is -- the rules are suspended and the bill is passed. without objection the to bill is passed, without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table, without objection the title is amended. the vote is on the motion of the gentleman on this the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk: h.r. 1160 a bill to

require the secretary of interior to assign the fish hatchery to north carolina and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 395, the nays are zero. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous

consent to be removed as a co-sponsor from h.r. 2966. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. members please clear the well of the house. the speaker pro tempore: the chair is prepared to entertain one-minute requests. members will please take their conversations from the floor and clear the well of the house.

for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. thompson: request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. it was reported today that president obama is turning out a new slogan on his road trip. the slogan is we can't wait. this slogan is an odd choice especially coming from the president and his party. 15 different house-passed jobs bill is hindering small businesses and stuck in the senate awaiting action. mr. speaker, the president is right. we can't wait. we can't wait for the president and the democrats to join us in eliminating excessive government regulations, stopping washington from spending money it doesn't have and fixing the tax code for families and job creators. we captain wait for the obama administration to end the delays

to create domestic energy regulation and await for the senate to pass jobs bills. americans shouldn't have to wait for washington to get out of the way. time for president obama to put aside politics and work with the house on these commonsense ideas. we can't wait. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? the gentleman will suspend. members, please take your conversations from the floor of the house. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise to honor the memory of a distinguished member of the western new york community. dr. huptmann worked for the medical foundation and awarded the nobody ell prize in chemistry in 1985 for his work

in the determining the structures of crystalized materials. his studies this area provided a new way to look at chemistry that benefits science in society today. after earning the prize, the medical foundation was renamed in his honor. today, the lobby of the medical research institute shows the structures hauptma nmp n introduced to the world. his contributions help lay the groundwork for the community in buffalo and western new york. i invite my colleagues to join me in celebrating the life of a scholar. i yield back. >> for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: permission to address the house for one minute. the house passed five energy

bills months ago and they will create american-energy jobs right here in america and will allow more development in gulf of mexico and alaska. one bill requires the administration to make a decision about the keystone pipeline which will put more citizens to work. what's the delay? these five bipartisan bills are in the senate with no vote in sight. the senate just won't vote. to my friends down the hallway in the senate, how about voting on these bills? doing nothing doesn't create energy or jobs. doing nothing maintains unemployment and shows inability to make a decision. time for the senate to pick a horse and ride it, but pick something. get in the race, being a spectator is not an option. the american people need the jobs and we need the energy. we just can't wait. and that's just the way it is.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york seek recognition? . without objection. the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. our nation is facing a crisis with respect to public safety. over 1,100 bridges in new york state, my state alone, are considered critical. fracture critical bridges can collapse if one of their functions fails and there are 82 bridges. 21 million cars in my state cross structurally deficient bridges.

as a former county clerk responsible for putting vehicles and people on the roads, this is personal to me. i feel come meld to fight for money from washington to fix our bridges and roads and bring them up to par. there is a solution, mr. speaker, and that is the american jobs act which includes money for critically necessary infrastructure to repair these bridges so our driving public can travel safely. i urge my colleagues to support me in supporting the american jobs act and getting our country back to work in making the public safer. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker, i had the privilege of meeting with job creators and workers across illinois' 10 congressional

district. as i listened to the ideas they had to bring jobs to the region, i was encouraged. together we can and must find common ground that allows small business owners to create jobs. i joined with lake county partners and announced a new innovation in north chicago. they are experiencing high unemployment and the creation will bring the community together so we can find ways to re-invest in the area and create new opportunities for workers. i was also able to work with local labor leaders to move forward on the repairs that are needed so desperately in waukegan harbor. we must move forward. this harbor is key to bolstering the economy. when we work to preserve our precious resources, we will

encourage businesses to expand and create additional jobs here at home. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? >> i would like to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. and god bless america and today i would like to say a special thanks to the many branches of government for their service in the military, but particularly to the marines and the market point marines are visiting with us in the capitol. and many years before jackie robinson and before rosa parks, these heroes joined the marines did their jobs. i applaud them for their commitment. tomorrow the house will debate and vote to send a resolution to the senate and time for the marines 236th birthday on november 10. when the commander and i

discussed what do you do when failure is not an option, we agree you get it done. we will pass this bill in the house. i want to thank all of my colleagues. you can still sign onto the bill. you have until the end of tomorrow. you want to be a part of making history. i want to once again thank the marines for their service. and god bless america. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> i request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> ladies and gentlemen of the house, i rise today with concern, concern about an incident that occurred at the united states penitentiary in lee county, virginia, ninth district. this incident occurred friday night and the only good news is,

no one was killed. an officer there was assaulted by an inmate who was carrying a sh inch ve and he was able to kick off a phone that sent off a silent alarm. and it was responded to by sean jones who was injured in the assault. both of these men acted properly and bravely. what did they have to defend themselves with? nothing, absolutely nothing. our regulations and rules do not allow them to have pepper spray or a baton to defend themselves. h.r. 1175 introduced by congressman cardoza, would get us a pilot project to fix this problem. i urge that we pass this. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does gentlelady from texas seek recognition?

without objection. ms. jackson lee: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i rise today to talk about something happy, and that is the happy-sad pillow that is made by the parents of avonce. they can teach numbers, emotions, social skills, motor skills and textures. i was with them today. they have a very healthy head start program and we were able to give them $8 million in stimulus to build a new building and $3.2 million grant for a program that helps parents and grandparents to raise our children who are pre-schooled. the children that go to this program test higher scores than those who do not. and it evidence denses that the

government can be a private-public partnership. we can create jobs and improve the education and lay out a pathway for our children. nothing wrong with the government being productive and forceful and working on behalf of the american people. to the congress here, and my colleagues, let's work together. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: i ask permission to address the house. i'm grateful to congratulate 2011 u.n. international volunteer award recipient, who is a native of south carolina. the doctor is a general practitioner in figi and founder and medical director. he provides medical care and access to the most underserved populations of fiji and

providing tables, chairs and free medication. due to his leadership, 200 to 400 patients a week are being treated in the most remote communities. congratulations to my lifelong friend, his parents who are community leaders of the mid-state of south carolina. indian americans are making a difference around the globe, encouraged by the american association of physicians of indian origin. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. are there any further requests for one-minute speeches? the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. >> the clerk: leaves of absence

requested for ms. burkle, mr. davis of illinois for today, mr. royce of california for today, mr. sessions of texas for today and ms. sewell of alabama for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the requests are granted. . the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentlewoman from is the the vir judge islands, ms. kristenson, is recognized for 60 minutes. mrs. christensen: thank you, mr. speaker. i expect to be joined by a few colleagues, but i want to take this opportunity to thank the democratic leader for allowing the congressional black caucus to control this hour of special orders. here we are again, mr. speaker, 10 months into this congress and not one job-creating bill has

been brought to the floor. i know the people in my district are suffering as are constituents in all of our districts and we need to do something significant to help them, not next year, but now. as a physician, it amazes me that it's even affecting people's health. it's increasing violence and crime in some of the hardest hit communities. when we were here a few -- a few weeks ago, i was remarking on an article that showed how the mortgage crisis was affecting people's health adversely. but of course joblessness is. people don't have insurance they don't have money to buy their medications, they're putting off needed health care to try to save money for other things to provide a roof over their fam lip's head and food on the table for their families and so this long-term unemployment is affecting people's health. it's especially hard --

especially hard in those communities that have been distressed for long periods of time before this recession. with no movement from the leadership of the body to bring the american jobs act to the floor where we can have it debated and voted on, the people are beginning to lose hope, to the extent that some have not yet lost hope it's because they see president obama, the congressional black caucus, and the occupy wall street and occupy other areas where those protests are being held working on their behalf. today the president is rolling out new proposals to address the crisis. the crisis that addressed this in the first place. i understand the theme is, we can't wait. what we can't wait here in this house either pause the american people have been waiting on us for help and they can't and

should not have to wait any longer. i hope that my colleagues across the aisle would also add a strong dose of compassion to their passion for reducing the deficit. at this time, in addition to reducing come -- in addition to compassion, getting jobs for our community is what needs to happen. it's not cut accounts, it's not repealing the health care reform bill, the affordable care act. it's not stopping regulation to protect the health and welt of the people in this crunt an it's not destroying the safety nets that allow the poor to survive and thrive with a chance to lift the poor and their families out of poverty. we should be ashamed that this couldn't i-- country's wealth is concentrated in the top 1% while others are going homeless and hungry. i want to focus for a moment on health care jobs, especially

since the affordable care act, a job creator, is on the republican chopping block. if it was repealed, it would not only set health care back but place a heavy burden on an already hard-hit economy. we know that the health care sector is the only one where jobs are being created and according to the bureau of labor statistics over the next decade, the 30 fastest growing jobs, 17 of them, more than half of them, will be health care related. they also report that during the recession, while most industries lost jobs, health care added over 600,000 jobs. with an anticipated coverage of over -- over 30 million new individuals, it isn't rocket science to see how the affordable care act doesn't kill jobs, but will be the sector to bring this economy back to life.

the provisions in that act are expected to create more than four million jobs over the next 10 years. what we need to be doing now is what the president called for, improving math and science in our schools, then we should be providing education and training for those jobs on all levels from the community health workers to doctors, nurses and allied health to the most technical jobs in research and technology and many of those jobs are available right now. they will just increase over the next 10 years. i want to read from health care employment -- from "health care employment set to explode" published in "health care" on october 20 of this year. i'm quoting here. it reads, amid health care reform changes to promote health care integration an national deficit reduction to save health care jobs, our f are projected to soar according to a report by

bipartisan policy center, health professional work force initiative, with the deloit work force initiative released on tuesday of that week. health care employment is expected to rise to 11.9% in 2018 and that means the total health care employment will jump from 15.8 million, where it was in 2008 to 19. million in 2018, according to that report -- to to 19.8 million in 2018 according to that report. during that time, health care professionals will see the following changes in jobs growth. registered nurses will grow by 22.2%. licensed practical and licensed

vocational nurses will grow by 20.7%. home health aides will grow by 50%. nursing aides, orderlies, and attendants will grow by 28%. personal and home care aides will grow by 28% and physicians and surgeons by 21.8%. there have been so many misrepresentations about the bill from its opponents both inside of congress and out. it's not fair to the american public who at the least, very least, ought to be able to depend on their elected representatives for accurate information and then they ought to be able to expect us to act on that accurate information. there are someage cease that suggest that the effect on the economy will be minimal. even though i do not agree, i want to read from the conclusion of one such paper and that paper is entitled how will the affordable care act affect jobs a timely analysis of immediate health policy issues, written by

john hollohan and a bowen garrett. i think it helps to dispel erroneous representations about what the affordable care act would or would not do. in its conclusion they write, the affordable care act is unlikely to have major aggregate affects on the u.s. economy, but they also say the increased spending because of the affordable care act will increase demand for health services and demand for labor in the health sector. cuts in medicare and various cost containment provision, successful, as proposed by the ryan plan, would have just the opposite effect. it would kill jobs. the new taxes on medical devices could have adverse effects on those industries, except for the fact that coverage expansion would provide new revenues well in excess of any new tax

obligation. cost containment efforts, if successful, will have the opposite effect. reducing growth and spending on medicare and medicaid for cost containment efforts if successful will have somewhat opposite effects, reducing growth in spending on medicare and medicaid, reducing taxes or borrowing the federal government would have to undertake. cost containment then that reduces the federal budget deficit would result in faster economic growth, more employment and higher family incomes. cost containment would also free up private dollars to be spent in nonhealth areas of the economy. thus stimulating the economy in many ways. they also go on to say that concern over the impact of the affordable care act and small businesses is misplaced. small businesses with fewer than 50 workers will be exempt from

the assessment. most larger firms already provide insurance to their workers and are unlikely to face assessments under the new law. small business they go on to say, should benefit from the availability of lower cost plans and the efforts to increase competition and contain costs within the exchange. i hope that begins to clear some of the misrepresentations up about how that bill would hurt the economy because it would not kill jobs, it would not hurt small businesses and it's not likely to have a great impact on the larger businesses either. the congressional black caucus coming to the floor every monday night that we're in session is to call attention to the issues we know are important to our constituents and important to americans across this country. the primary one is -- one is jobs but access to health care is not far behind an we ought to support rather misrepresent and try to appeal, we should support

the affordable care act, a good bill that's good for the american people, good for the economy and good for our country and we're once again calling on this body to pass the american jobs act. the fact that it comes from president obama should not be a reason to dismiss it and declare it dead on arrival as some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have said. many proposals come directly out of bills they themselves have proposed. i would say to my colleagues, please, the american people are soisk the politics, they're sick of the bickersering -- bickering, they immediate jobs now, they can't wait, we should not wait, let's pass the jobs act now. i don't see that i have any of my other colleagues joining me this evening. so i am ready to yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from the virgin islands rise? mrs. christensen: i move that the house do now ad journ, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the house stand

host: explain this new initiative. guest: we have partnered with a company to help job creation across the united states. the way it works is anyone who wants to make a donation of $5

or more can do that, either on the web or they can do that by going into a starbucks store. those who do will receive a red, white, and to wristband, but the money will come to the opportunity finance network which will put that money back into communities through a network of things called community development finance institution, which is in the business of financing businesses, including retail, manufacturing, nonprofit, affordable housing developers, commercial real estate developers. that money will go out quickly in the form of loans primarily to support businesses either in growth phase or in job retention phase, or in startup phase is. host: our guest will be with us for 40 minutes.

create jobs for usa is their initiative with starbucks. we will put the phone numbers at the bottom of the screen as we talk about the best way to res jobs in this country. we will get to your calls and a couple minutes. first of all, what is the opportunity finis network? how did you come into being? guest: they are financial institutions which lend to create benefits for low-income, and other disadvantaged communities, which is what we have done for 30 years. opportunity finance network is a financial intermediary at, which finances some of the cfos s. -- we are all about cdfi's. host: explain how the

partnership with starbucks came into being. guest: it was a fairly quick story. opportunity finance network has been in communities in our urban and rural places, and we keep hearing from folks is they want to be able to do something, to be able to help, and we recognize there are people who need help. when we connected with starbucks, we heard from the chairman and ceo of that company, that he was hearing the same thing in stores, that people do something. starbucks approached us. we had conversations with them over the years, and they asked if we can do something together? can we raise money a little at a time and have a significant impact on job creation and retention? that is what our cdfi's were doing. they have continued lending

successfully for commodity businesses. they're getting repaid. it was an easy connection to make. it started in late august. it happened fairly quickly when we started conversations, and it was clear to both of us from the beginning that it made a lot of sense. starbucks wanted to use its scale for good and that meant it can connect with a lot people, through its stores, but also through its ability to communicate what we are trying to do. we had that money to work quickly. if we could find a way for anybody who had $5, it was worth doing. we launched on november 01, a week from tomorrow. we will go live on the web site and in the starbucks stores, and people will be able to make the nation's, and we will turn that money around judy cdfi's is

getting deployed into communities. host: here is a quotation, the head of starbucks. i found myself growing more and more frustrated at the lack of cooperation and irresponsibility, elected officials as they have put partisan agendas before. thet: we're focused less on top, but more on what we can do. that is with the partnership is about. it came out from howard's frustration on the issues he described. no question we are stuck in some of our policies and our politics, in our lending, and we need to move forward. what we are trying to do it cannot be the whole solution, but it can be part, and may

jump-start the solution. we're trying to worry less about what is not happening and what can happen. from our experience we know that 95%, 98%, 99% of the american people want an opportunity to get a job a lot to do something, and we are trying to respond to that. caller: host: -- caller: i have to statements to make. for the host, i thought the host was supposed to stay neutral. you made a statement earlier about obama being desperate. i thought those were supposed to be neutral. host: i was referring to an

earlier caller who had said that. that was the moment there. keep going. caller: it may use sound like a tea bagger, and that annoyed me. for the guest, i appreciate everything you guys are doing. i could starbucks anyway, i would go there even if he did not permit this. trust me, me and my girl friends will put in our $5. thank you very much. host: explain how a $5 donation will turn into something significant. explain how this all works. guest: sure, i am happy to do that. thank you, amanda. i am glad you like starbucks, but people can go online. what happens is this money,

because it is a donation, it means that it passes through my organization 100% of the money into the community. there is no money taken off for overhead on our end. it goes into the cdfi as a capital grant, and that means the cdfi can take that money and borrow money against that and loan that total money. on average, the $5 that comes and will support $35 of lending. a $5 the nation, whether at starbucks or online, amanda and her friends come anybody else, each $5 will support $35 of new lending that will happen as a result of that. at $35, coupled with other $35, all together will support financing of all types and will support micro enterprises, small businesses, and also larger manufacturing companies, and we will do that based on what is happening in markets where we

are. in every part of the country, and they know best where to create and retain jobs. host: what are the goals? west: we're fortunate when started the starbucks financial -- foundation, right from the beginning we had $5 million to start with. it is hard for us to know what is going to happen. if my experience is right, we think we will raise tens of millions of dollars for sure, and that money, every $10 million, will support about $70 million worth of financing. our hope is we can produce hundreds of millions of dollars of new financing to create and retain jobs. host: lake placid, florida. caller: have a question about

the opportunity fineness network. what is the contact number for someone to call about securing funding for these projects? guest: thank you for asking. you can call us by phone, but the easiest ways to go online to opportunityfinancy.net, and at the bottom of the page, there is a cdfi locator. it will pop up all the cdfi's working in florida right now. you can reach out to them. you can also call at -- and we will try to make a connection for you. you have to work with the individual cdfi in your community to arrange financing, but that is what we are in the business of doing, and we hope we can help you.

host: our guest, mark pei nsky. in 2002, george bush appointed mr. pinsky to the cdfi advisory board. caller: i am wondering that and organization, the financial statements open for viewing, and what the average salary of the people that are administering this office, what they make. thank you. guest: thank you, and we welcome your question. the financial statements are available. our irs form 990 is publicly

available. i could not tell you -- it is a great question about average salary, and i could not tell you off the top of my head what the average severally -- salary of folks are. our books are open. if you contact us you e-mail us, and you can e-mail me at mpinsky@opportunityfinance.net. host: this program will start in about a week. aside programs like this, how are you getting the word out guest? guest: we announced on october 3 to let media folks know about it. we received widespread attention that it is coming. around november 01 there will be a concerted effort to spread the

word through advertising on tv and in print, online, and we are using social media to spread the word about this. there has been significant interest as well. we think there will be a pretty broad awareness of what we are trying to do with create jobs for usa, and we hope that not -- that results in not only the nation's, but also in businesses that are looking for financing. our experience and then that there are a lot of businesses that are deserving of financing and are having a tough time getting it. we want to hear from businesses and match them up with cdfi financing. host: was going to ask you about the current climate for financial lending? guest: question there's been a credit crunch that has gone on

for several years now. it is a product of a lot of things. the question that small business finance is covered, by now than it was a few years ago. there are indications from some of the big banks at least that they are trying to step up their small business lending, and we encourage that. we are pleased to see that and .e hope that is right trick there has been a back lot of the man, and we have lost businesses. we hear from one of the things happening to cdfi's is restarted caring for businesses that were previously banked, but no longer able to get credit from banks. we try to step up where we could. it is not always possible, but we know there is significant demand out there. we do a quarterly survey out there, and we see strong and steady and a high level of

demand far exceeding our ability to supply it today. we who create jobs u.s. aid will be able to respond to were businesses, but there is no question that the is the man did this there. anybody out there trying to land, it will take us several years at least to get the small business credit flow back to where it needs to be. host: do you have a position about the president's jobs proposal with any thoughts? guest: without going into the individual components of what the president has proposed, we see it as a both/and situation. we need the government to move aggressively to try to force job creation and retention. we need the private sector to be doing all it can.

is one of the points that howard has rate, that corporations should be using resources to create and retain jobs trade hawk and retain jobs. we need corporations that had a philanthropic and who can contribute to this effort. i am not the person to tell you whether certain tax incentives are the best way to do it. it is a complicated problem. we are not going to be able to do with the loan, and government cannot, and the private sector cannot. we want everybody to put their aors in the water -- oars in the water on this.

caller: my concern is with starbucks, that we did not end up with the focus -- hopefully with the focus will be with the returning troops and trading jobs for these men and women. honestly i hope we do not end up seeing a lot more -- returning that's serving coffee. that would be the thing i hope we come off with something a little more creative. there is the old louis black -- star bucs in houston was the cause of the end of the universe. you turn around, there is another starbucks. we have a few too many starbucks running around. hey, get the coffe for me. host: to the main point from the

collar about jobs for veterans. that is a comment we have heard several times. guest: i could not agree more. i hope we are creating jobs for veterans who served our country and who can do that appropriate that. no question that veterans come back from service at the skill set that is incredibly viable, and i hope we can put it to work in an appropriately. i do not think and i do not think the folks at starbucks think everybody should be serving coffee. that is not our goal here. the financing that will happen through this program is not into financing starbucks. the goal of the financing is to create jobs in places where they are appropriately local market conditions, to create and retain jobs in those places, and that will affect veterans and service members wherever they are and whenever they come home. there are cdfi's have a greater

focus on returning veterans and veterans from prior service, so is this something we care about, and we care about quality of the jobs. we want good jobs that will help people support their families, help them pay for education, get ahead, start a business. it is a valid point, and it is part of what we care about. host: a tweet -- someone says it is just a business welfare program. what do you think? guest: we support businesses that are owned or start by low- income folks, give them the opportunity to build their own wealth. that is a lot of what we are doing, what we are expert at.

we're not in the money of giving money to individuals for themselves. we are supporting community businesses. what the tweeter suggests is more what government can do or should do, perhaps, but that is not what we do. we are not going to be the whole solution. no question that demand is what this is about. our hope is by creating jobs we give more people the ability and confidence to spend money in supporting their family, whether on housing or food or anything like that. that will be what drives the economy. host: david on the republican line. go right ahead. caller: i am a small business owner. i have struggled for quite a few years without the help of any banks or financial institutions, and they are not there to help us at this point. my problem is the word "job

creation." is used very loosely all through washington. you do not create a job. if you have a new product, a demand for a new product, and submitted to make it, that is creating a new job. increasing starbucks kentucky fried is not creating jobs. host: what kind of business are you in? caller: polyurethane molting. host: how many folks do a play? caller: two. host: and business has not been so great? caller: i have had to move from upper-middle-class the lower middle class, borderline. host: what do you think your prospects are? caller: myself, just to tread

water. nafta the downfall of the u.s., and everybody talks about how president clinton had a balanced budget, surplus. he is the one who signed us away, when he jumped the gun and signed a free-trade agreement with china, even though they had no child labor laws, no slave labor laws, no osha, they just have no regulations and all. and then they get a 25% tariff. it is totally unfair trade. host: what would you say to david in ohio who says he is trudging along without the help of any government? what would you say to him? guest: david, your story is one

we hear a lot of small businesses that are struggling, and demand is low, and it makes it hard. i would not disagree with you. i agree that it is the demand for products, had a good products and the demand for it, that creates jobs. we can provide the financing so a business could be positioned to take advantage of that, whether a labor force question or a supply chain question or a market question. there may be demand out there that businesses need help finding. you are absolutely right about that. i want to touch on that. this is a tough business environment in general. i do not know your industry well enough to know the challenges that were created by the competition with china. there's no question that there are in balance is about how we manage business here and what the government does and what happens in other countries.

having said that, what our experience is is that most small business owners, they may have their frustrations, they may have things that have caused them problems in the past. what they want to do is be successful at what they do. they want to produce the best products or services they can, and i am sure you do. they want to find a market for them. we try to find as pragmatic as we can, of its all the all enges -- amidst distractions for small business owners. if you want to get in touch with us, i would like to know more about your business. i do not know if you want help from a financial institution or do not. you say you have not in the past, and maybe that is by choice. if it is something that a cdfi could help

you, we would like to speak to you. host: talking to us about partnerships with starbucks beginning next week's to launch the create jobs for u.s. aid program, and here's a look at the opportunity finance website. this organization, we are -- can see that. we have jackson, tennessee, on the line, independence. caller: good morning, and good morning, gentlemen. mr. pinsky, i have often wondered, i hear often the politicians say in that the small -- saying small businesses are the ones who create the jobs. i have heard on c-span callers

stating theytwo people, three people, and then there was one gentleman a couple of months ago and said he did not hire anybody, he just runs his business himself. are there any guidelines on the qualifications of how many people -- how many jobs this company might have to hire, and also, what do you think about that statement that the small businesses create the jobs? host: two points. caller: great questions, thank you. the second point first, small businesses are significant job creators, no question about it. what happens is you can have a lot of small businesses hiring a few people, which creates a significant number, but when small businesses get it right

and hit on an idea or a product or are producing something there is a demand for, they can grow significantly. the pace of growth can be great, and that is where you get significant job creation as before. we also have to look broadly at where jobs come from, so one of the things we do at create jobs usa, a nonprofit business, because they are a large percentages of jobs in this country. might be a social service provider or a charter school, a child care facility, and arts facility. we took a broad view of what it means to do that. having said that to your first question, there is no requirement for what our financing -- there is no number on the number of jobs that need to exist in a business or be created in a business.

having said that, we prioritize in the way we're going to fund the cdfi and how they finance businesses. we've prioritize those who have greater job creation or retention potential. we look at closely in order to get funding from the create jobs usa funds, a need to demonstrate the demand for financing and see if it is likely to create fewer or more jobs and we want the money to be as productive as possible. we are going to make sure that money goes to the places where it will have the greatest potential to create or retain jobs. host: another tweet. the second part i want to get your take on. will create jobs for usa be low paying jobs or living wage jobs to of our regulations in place to prevent carlyn -- borrowing fraud?

guest: we ask meyer to create living wage jobs, which is the mission which iscdfi's, to create good job opportunities, not opportunities that get people stop. there are a range of provisions in place that are for some cdfi's, regulations and terms of the lending, and some there are not. some are determined by the marketplace, in the sense that we have investors in a whole range of different types. we have investors that range from banks or other financial institutions who are lending to us, and they will put requirements on what the lending can and cannot be, and in that sense it is a marketplace solution. different cdfi's work in different places for i.

there is a program and the department of the treasury called the cdfi fund provides support to cdfi's that help butre what cdfi's do, participants too, is that public scrutiny, but the participation varies. host: greensboro, north carolina. caller: how many jobs before see to be created? are you talking about 1 million or 2 million to some of the figure. have you received any push back from republican party regarding this? have you gotten any pushback from that about trying to create some jobs? guest: